Heavy is the Head that wears the AirPods Max | Hacker News Reader

Heavy is the Head that wears the AirPods Max

daringfireball.net

328 pointsch_sm688 comments

I don't understand how anyone could buy these, when the battery is not user-replaceable and they don't work passively without power. After ~5 years max, these will be unusable.

I purchased the regular AirPods and this point was reached even sooner, after ~2 years of heavy usage they don't work longer than 15 minutes.

With almost all other wireless over-ear headphones you can at least keep using them passively with a headphone jack when the battery inevitably degrades. Some even have user-replaceable batteries. I have been using old AKG headphones for > 15 years.

Yet another throw-away product from a self-proclaimed environmentally friendly company.

My question is how someone can justify paying $550 dollars for headphones from Apple. I can get mid-range studio quality headphones for that price, from a company that is actually focused on producing the best headphones.

Apple has a huge R&D budget and I'm sure that they could make some very nice headphones if they wanted to, but up against a company that's been making really good stuff for 40+ years, I'm skeptical. If it were an innovation thing, I'd be down to get the hot new headphone experience, but these are just wireless can headphones with some noise cancelling, a product that's been around for quite a while now.

(I've had Bose QCs for ~8 years now (the same set, mind you), I'm pretty happy with them. I'm also pretty happy with the earbuds that came with my phone. so it's not like I'm allergic to spending money on stuff I think will be worth it or I'm some audio snob).

Mid range studio quality with active noise cancelation, great build quality, good BL codecs (aptx HD+ || LDAC)? Name that pair please. Those 8y Bose QCs are not even close to being a mid-range studio quality and are worst than a sony xm2 or xm3 in terms of ANC, built entirely of plastic also.

You people are so quick to bash on this company for no reason.

The only headset that I consider on par with this one is the recently released (at 800 euro) bang and Olufsen n95. The price is not always the sum of parts.

That’s not even true. Bose QC35 ii measure objectively very well for headphones. They, like other high quality ANC headphones, use the ANC mic to EQ themselves to a good reference target.

Also no one uses closed back headphones for studio work. What does “mid range studio quality” even mean.

The vast majority of professionals use speakers in a sound treated room for mixing. Those that use headphones do so very carefully, using EQ to get them to sound right (or getting used to the sound profile of the headphones). The most commonly used are Sennheiser open backs in this area - a pair of HD650 is probably most common. In general it’s fairly challenging to mix with headphones accurately though.

> but up against a company that's been making really good stuff for 40+ years, I'm skeptical.

IPhone was up against some groups with decades of making phones. Tesla is up against companies with literally a century of experience. SpaceX is up against companies that have made rockets for decades. Etc etc etc. I am surprised anyone on HN would be skeptical that a company with billions of dollars of cash at its disposal and world class engineering talent could do a passable job here all because an incumbent has experience. Also, are you suggesting that experience of one set of engineers with mastery of obsolete technologies 40 years ago is somehow a gate that a current company needs to pass through and excel at before they can compete with that company’s current engineers on current technology?

My question is how someone can justify paying $550 dollars for headphones from Apple.

Like most luxury goods, it's a status symbol, and thus the price justifies itself.

> My question is how someone can justify paying $550 dollars for headphones from Apple. I can get mid-range studio quality headphones for that price, from a company that is actually focused on producing the best headphones.

The exact same people that buy Beats headphones instead of AKG or Beyerdynamic prior to Beats getting acquired by Apple. In other words people who buy them as a status symbol, not for their function, because they themselves are not informed consumers.

Their target market has never heard of Grado, this comes up every post. Gruber makes a good comparison to the Macbook, incredibly expensive but the nicest industrial design on the market at the time.

Counter-example: Anker's bluetooth speakers are widely viewed to sound better than those from JBL, Sony & Bose and they have fewer years in the audio industry.

There are a many technologies present in products like this that a company that is purely "focused on producing the best headphones" wouldn't normally concern themselves with such as a DAC, amp, DSP, microphone & wireless protocols. When these components are tightly designed together, Apple can disrupt much in the same way they're doing with their M1 line.

These headphones are meant to be used in noisy environments where the benefit of studio quality headphones is minimal, and where a cord is annoying.

This luxury product looks cool. Paying a lot extra for that is not new. The price premium over competing products is just not that much for many Apple customers.

In case the noise cancellation when on a plane turns out to be head and shoulders above Bose and Sony...that extra 200 USD now does not seem so bad.

> My question is how someone can justify paying $550 dollars for headphones from Apple.

I think Apple may also be finding out the same thing. These are clearly awesome headphones, but it remains to be seen for whom these are not just cool, but indispensable.

Finding that out will help them continue to target the right customers when (I assume) they lower the price in the future and improve its capabilities.

> can get mid-range studio quality headphones for that price

Where are you seeing reviews that show that they're not of this quality?

> Yet another throw-away product from a self-proclaimed environmentally friendly company.

$79 for airpods max battery service [0]. user-replaceable battery certainly would be nicer. but to describe as "throw-away" seems extreme.

[0] https://support.apple.com/airpods/repair/service#battery

$69 to replace the earpads, which is the most consumable part for me on cans.

I have a pair of Audio Technica A700s, about $150 new that are now 12 years old; I'm on my 3rd set of earpads. AT gave me a new set free the first time I asked, and it cost me $10 with shipping to get new ones out of warranty. The current ones are 3rd party that are much better than the OEM pads and cost me ~$20.

Same - my Audio Technicas are over 10 years old and when the earpads started to wear, they dug up some new earpads from the archives and it was definitely under $30 total.

I'm sure there will be 3rd party knockoff pads. Just look at the "fancy" Apple Watch wristbands with clasps that are IMO way more expensive than they have any business being. A plethora of 3rd party replacements exist, many much cheaper than Apple.

> I have a pair of Audio Technica A700s, about $150 new that are now 12 years old; I'm on my 3rd set of earpads.

So you buy a new set of earpads on those every 4 years. But we can also compare with the same-market-segment-as-AirPod-Max (wireless+ANC+mic) Bose QC35, where many people have to replace their earpads _every_ _year_⁰ at $35 a pair (or $20 for third party ones that might last longer but definitely feel worse). So the question I think will be how long the pads last on these. Do you have to replace them every year like with the Bose ones or only every 4 years?

⁰ - QC35 ear pad extreme comfort but lack of durability is basically a meme among owners now.

Could you share the link to these 3rd party earpads please? Maybe they have earpads for my K702's as well, I couldn't find anything with good reviews on Amazon.

Pretty sure 3rd party will step in here.

I'd bet that Apple will stop servicing them after a few years though, as they do with all their products.

And regular AirPods are definitely a throw-away product, since the 'battery service' is really just a full replacement. You'd have to physically destroy them to remove the battery.

> I'd bet that Apple will stop servicing them after a few years though, as they do with all their products.

Apple's "few years" is "seven years after Apple stops selling them", for most countries: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201624

A few years? They still repair the iPhone 6, a phone thats 6 years old now. If that gives you another 2 years of use, thats a total of 8 years.

What are you talking about?

Apple supports devices longer than any other manufacturer. Case in point is iOS 14, which came out a few months ago and still supports the iPhone 6s, which came out in 2015.

> And regular AirPods are definitely a throw-away product…

Please don't — they're recyclable[1]. Recyclers wouldn't normally make money from recovering recyclable materials, but Apple pays[2] to make up the difference.

[1] https://www.apple.com/shop/trade-in

[2] https://onezero.medium.com/what-really-happens-to-airpods-wh...

they don't replace the battery when they perform battery service, they just replace the airpod entirely.

Apple's just trying to convince headphone buyers to pay more for less. Even if they can't compete on quality with existing headphone makers, they'll undoubtedly make more money.

Some people are going to buy a new pair of AirPods Max every year for $550. It hurts me deep down to know this fact, and it offends me on a level that's hard to describe with words.

But as long as other headphone manufacturers continue to sell quality and serviceable products, I won't be directly affected by it. I just hope Sony, Sennheiser, etc. don't follow Apple's lead. If they do, maybe I'll have to start looking at cheap Chinese brands.

> I just hope Sony, Sennheiser, etc. don't follow Apple's lead.

I don't see this happening because those brands undoubtedly have a much larger share of the high-end headphones market, whereas Apple seems to focus more on a smaller niche with even more disposable income. The fact that AirPods max can only be turned off by placing them in the case is such a weird design decision beyond the other absurdities of the product design. Hopefully Sony and others adopt the good ideas (like replaceable ear cups) while staying true to their customers.

What the heck are you talking about? The most popular noise canceling headphones are the Bose QC35 and Sony WH1000XM4.

Neither of those have user-replaceable batteries. They haven't for years.

And if you wanted to replace the batteries on the AirPods Max, it's only $79. If you can't afford it, don't buy them.

> Some people are going to buy a new pair of AirPods Max every year for $550. It hurts me deep down to know this fact, and it offends me on a level that's hard to describe with words.

Is this a reflection on Apple's product strategy or that there are inequalities in the world?

This is what really offends you?

Not the $10,000 Louis Vuitton handbag or the $80,000 bottle of wine or the other myriad of consumables and products that are clearly priced by what people can pay, rather than purely for their utility value?

You're going to be offended by a lot in this timeline my friend.

Sony smartphones still have a headphone jack, so this should be less of a concern for them, I think.

It is simply not true that Apple products with sealed batteries have zero value, and therefore can only be thrown out, when they expire. The market for Apple devices with dying batteries is quite strong: just browse eBay if you need proof. There’s an industry of buyers who refurbish these devices at a profit, and the purchase price for these used devices remains impressively high.

Heck, I just sold a three-year-old iPhone X with a “service battery” warning for nearly $400.

As a repair shop owner, I can shed some light on this. The iPhone X battery is relatively simple to replace as a third party. The only negative is that the phone won’t be as water-resistant as before; though we do replace seals, it won’t be sealed like the factory did. (I just had one of our stores replace the battery on my iPhone XS with an extended capacity battery, which was well worth the tradeoffs since my phone lasts an additional 3 hours now.) So your iPhone that just needs a new battery will sell for a lot.

AirPods batteries, on the other hand, are completely unreplaceable, and believe me when I say we’d love to repair them. They’re small and Apple has filled the cavity around them with glue, meaning even if we had a replacement battery they’d be impossible to replace without damaging the AirPod itself. This is extremely upsetting to me, as someone who invests in and runs third-party repair shops at least in part for environmental reasons. Apple needs to do better on their smaller devices, AirPods included.

Not sure if your argument is strong in the context of their headphone products - which this thread is about.

You are absolutely right in the iPhone & Mac space, but AirPods are famously unrepairable [0].

iFixit's verdict:

- AirPods are not designed to be serviced. No hardware components can be accessed without damage to the device.

- Sealed-in batteries limit the AirPods' lifespan, making them a consumable/disposable item.

[0]: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/AirPods+2+Teardown/121471

Counterpoint: My iPhone that was out of warranty and had the screen cracked after taking it in for third-party battery replacement. The official battery replacement was more than the resale value of the phone. Unlike a phone, high-end headphones are not inherently disposable. They can last many decades of regular use. This is a disposable product in a product category that is not usually disposable.

Ok, that is a good counter example, but what about the example I gave in my original post? These very expensive headphones I bought (AirPods 1) only two years ago are now basically worthless.

> "I don't understand how anyone could buy these, when the battery is not user-replaceable"

How many wireless headphones have "user replaceable" batteries? Certainly not any I have bought in recent years. If these last long enough to need a $79 professional battery replacement[1] in 5 years, then I'd say they're money well spent!

[1] https://support.apple.com/airpods/repair/service#battery

Why buy wireless headphones to begin with? I've had a pair of wired Audio Technica headphones for the past 5 years and have had no issues at all. Ear pads are user replaceable, headphone cable is detachable and standard, and I can use whatever DAC/amp I want (or just plug it straight into a device). Wireless just seems like a downgrade in every way

You surely must understand why some people like the convenience of wireless headphones?

I have a nice akgs wired headphones, but every time I stand up or move i pull on the cable or have to remove them. with my Bluetooth headphones I can go to kitchen grab something and go back quickly.

> I don't understand how anyone could buy these

Because Apple offers luxury products. People who buy luxury products are willing to pay a premium for it. Not understanding that different people value different things from you is a very weird stance to take. I personally wouldn't pay the premium price to lease a luxury automobile, but I understand why other people do it.

> I purchased the regular AirPods and this point was reached even sooner, after ~2 years of heavy usage they don't work longer than 15 minutes.

That's not been my experience, mine have a few hours of lifespan after two years, but for earbuds that's not too bad. I regularly killed wired earbuds faster than that due to wear and tear.

Everything else on this design seems to me like they'll be longer lived than their competitors. Steel headbands and magnet attached earcups sound much more durable than plastic and plastic. I'd be willing to bet that more headphones meet an early demise due to worn out earcups and broken headbands than batteries reaching EOL, so this might not be a bad trade-off for users willing to pay $500 for headphones anyways.

> Because Apple offers luxury products. People who buy luxury products are willing to pay a premium for it. Not understanding that different people value different things from you is a very weird stance to take. I personally wouldn't pay the premium price to lease a luxury automobile, but I understand why other people do it.

But understanding it doesn’t mean you cannot criticize it?

My Bose QC35 are now seven years old or so, and they still charge up fast and hold it for a good long while. I don't know if they're as good as new, but they're close enough that I can't tell the difference. I don't see why the airpods max should be notably worse.

That's great to hear! I got a pair a year and a half ago and consider them one of the best purchases I've made for productivity at work. They fit over my behind-the-ear hearing aids, they are great for concentration when the kids are being kids, and the mic is fantastic for zoom calls. It's also the first time I've seriously used a bluetooth device and the novelty of being able to seamlessly switch between music on my phone, youtube on the computer, and work calls still hasn't worn off.

I wear headphones for about 5 hours every work day. If these are more comfortable than the alternative, I’m very ok with amortizing the added ~$300 over the ~1000 hours of extra comfort just in year one.

This is a fancy way of saying "I'll pay more for nicer headphones because I use them a lot". Sadly the point above is that you'll be forced to pay more again and again thanks to the fact they are wireless only so you'll need to replace the batteries.

It is a shame. My living room speakers, which I use for my hi-fi and home cinema setup, were manufactured in 1972. My amplifier was manufactured some time in the 90s. Things break eventually and some won't last as long as my speakers. That's fine. But we should reject things intentionally designed to break after only a few years. Reject convenience. Aim to reduce your footprint. This is especially important if you plan to reproduce.

Same! I love my 70's bookshelf speakers and the amp is perfection. My sub is newer, but only early 2000's new (and I lucked into it)

I wonder what you define as heavy usage for AirPods. I have 2 pairs, one of which is the first generation and I use only for running. I run almost every day for around an hour. I've had them for around 2 years, probably a bit longer. They still last more than 3 hours per charge. Maybe even 4. Are you using them for 4+ hours a day? Also, is there a way to interrogate them to see how many hours of usage they have or what the remaining battery life is?

Edit: I've had a much tougher time with the Apple Watch I pair with the AirPods while I run. My first one only lasted about 1.5 years before its battery became unusable for running.

I used my AirPods for roughly 8 hours a day, probably half of it on the phone. They were done after less than a year. Battery empty after 45min and one side running on like 35% volume only.

My AirPods are going on 2 years, get used a lot and they still last for a typical 2 hour+ ride.

I'm doubt you could get replaceable batteries into something the size of the AirPods and have them light enough to stay in my ears as well as they do.

These beasts are obviously different.

The color and composition of these headphones makes me think that after one year of use the headband will look yellow and grimey and the fabric will get snags and runs in it. The build quality looks sturdy, but not meant to last.

People buy the dream. They know it's overpriced or premium. They don't care about a value proposition it's an opportunity to be on the leading front of the dream. When the product dies, the loss of functionality is less important than being dropped from the dream.

Apple gives people a dreamscape where they can transform their homes and workplaces into a creative paradise and share in a world without material tech problems. 'It just works'.

Replacing the current iphone with the next one is always attractive for the customer as long as it keeps everybody dreaming.

I had for around 5 years a pair of in-ear wireless PowerBeats headphones... the battery life slowly degraded until I had to recharge it every couple of days listening to them for just an hour each day... and one day, just out of nowhere, the battery started lasting only 15 minutes, making them unusable.

I thought it was ridiculous that an expensive headphone needs to be thrown away after only 5 years of light usage, but there you go... if you only had your AirPods for 2 years, sounds like I had a decent run myself :)

I still bought the newer Powerbeats model because they're quite nice and I couldn't find anything similar with as good quality. The newer model's battery lasts forever (well, a couple of weeks of light usage took them to around 25%) but I know that, in a few years, it'll get to a couple of days maximum between recharges again... hopefully a bit more than the previous one with better and newer technology.

> I don't understand how anyone could buy these, when the battery is not user-replaceable

Well, the battery is replaceable in a straight-forward way.

The exact process isn't really that important a buying factor considering you'll do it once in every 1000 days (or something on that order).

> when the battery is not user-replaceable and they don't work passively without power

Sony’s XM3 is arguably the most successful noise cancelling headphone in the market and doesn’t do either (it does play unpowered but sound quality is significantly worse).

This viewpoint doesn't hold true far outside of forums like this one and certain subreddits. People just don't care about any of the things you noted, and if they see everyone wearing Airpods Maxes, they'll want Airpods Maxes. They'll see AKG as inferior, even though that's objectively untrue.

According to Gruber's article, you can use these as wired headphones by plugging in a "Lightning to 3.5mm headphone jack cable," but otherwise I agree with you. "Built to last" means more than the material choices (metal vs plastic), but also whether or not you can swap out the batteries.

They work via cable, but only actively (with power).

Source: https://www.slashgear.com/apple-airpods-max-water-resistance...

> Lightning to 3.5mm headphone jack cable

...without power?

The Max marketing launch really made me think of the opportunity benefits associated with integrated voice commands, taking calls, Siri messages.

I would try these on the premise that my remote workflow might be improved.

What does it mean to use wireless headphones passively? Without power wireless headphones aren't going to make any sound, no?

I meant with a cable. Sorry if it wasn't clear, I updated my post.

A lot of wireless headphones have a small wired jack you can use in the event of no power.

if you take headphone jack away from the earphones then you can take the jack away from the player device, [viceversa] then you can lockout any non apple earphones and perhaps blacklist nonvetted media

People would buy a bag of poop if Apple made it and Samsung would copy it when they see the sales numbers.

Just watch as others copy these overpriced headphones.

It's a veblen good. Quality is secondary to cost.

The entire point is to be impractical.

I assume, barring some kind of cataclysm and reversion to barbarism (admittedly looking increasingly plausible of late), that there is no chance whatsoever that I am going to want to be using the same audio headphones in 2026 that I will be using in 2021.

Not because the old ones will SOUND horribly worse than the five year newer ones, but because tech is tech — the new ones will work with all my 2026 devices, connect using the 2026 wireless standard, work with the 2026 cable (if any, besides the 3.5mm analog).

The 2026 models will hopefully be able to download my voice profile and predefined commands and maybe will even unlock my front door when I approach, plus _____________ ????¿¿¿¿

Don't get me wrong — I love shit that will last a long time with finality, and I buy lots of things for that reason: knives and cookware and even furniture that I will hand down to my sons.

But headphones? Not in that category any more than smartphones or computers.

How much of that is natural evolution of technology vs planned obsolescence?

>I don't understand how anyone could buy these, when the battery is not user-replaceable and they don't work passively without power. After ~5 years max, these will be unusable.

First, why would it have to be "user-replacable"? You could take it to Apple, and they'd replace it. Or you could take it to any third-party repair shop (after 5 years you wouldn't have a warranty to care about invalidating this way anyway).

Second, so? People buy all kinds of perishable products... Especially in technology, when after 5 years there will be better wireless headphones out there.

>Yet another throw-away product from a self-proclaimed environmentally friendly company.

Youn don't really believe company's sociatal/enviromental concerns, right? This is empty talk. If a company was "environmentally friendly" they would just close.

Nobody really needs AirPods or whatever Apple and others sell else over the environment, even if they were user replacable. Even more so when the first imperative of any company is "sell ever more stuff to ever more people"...

Even if we accepted the first imperative for a company, there is no imperative for people to keep buying. Much less so when people have choices that are cheaper and more sustainable at the same time.

So aside from irrational consumerism, I am also in the camp of people that don't understand why one would buy this. It is not portable like earpads, it is made to last like a "normal" headphone and all of the software (ahem, computational audio) stuff can be achieved with any normal computer or smartphone where most people already have and use it as the audio source.

>Second, so? People buy all kinds of perishable products...

That is exactly what I'm criticising.

Do you really believe this so strongly that you write this strongly-worded comment?

Plenty of reasons why people would convince themselves to buy them:

- I can easily return it if I don't like it (most never do)

- the OS X/iOS integration will be way better than my current headphones (my poison)

- I love Apple

- 2020 sucked, if I can't even go to Thailand this year, I'll at least treat myself to these. I deserve it.

So other than your second point (which is in part a side effect of Apple locking down their platform so much) none of those have to do with the quality of the product. And none of them address the underlying issue that you'll be paying $550 for something that will be non-functional in a few years, while headphones with comparable sound quality and capabilities can be had for cheaper.

> - 2020 sucked, if I can't even go to Thailand this year, I'll at least treat myself to these. I deserve it.

You deserve better than this

> I’m tempted to preface everything with “Look, I’m not an audiophile…”, but screw that. I’m not an audio expert, but I do know what I like, and I love the way these headphones sound. They make music sound rich and make movies sound very real.

It is almost impossible to wear a $550 device on your ears and not become immediately biased about how "real" the sounds are.

The better way would be with a double blind test. Would require some sort of device to conceal both the brand and the weight of the damn thing hah.

I wouldn't be surprised if the headphones end up being in line with the rest of the existing offer from other brands.

> It is almost impossible to wear a $550 device on your ears and not become immediately biased

Not saying I disagree about confirmation bias at play - especially given that TFA states at the beginning that they received a pair for review purposes - however I've personally become upset by dropping large amounts of cash on lackluster products before. Not everyone is necessarily susceptible. Some might ask for their money back. In this case, the author didn't even pay the $550 though.

> Not saying I disagree about confirmation bias at play - especially given that TFA states at the beginning that they received a pair for review purposes

You will find it quite difficult to locate any instances of John Gruber saying anything negative about Apple on Daring Fireball.

He's basically like an unofficial arm of Apple PR, and he seems to know that his access is likely dependent upon his continued service in furtherance of Apple's marketing agenda.

But do they get to keep the $550 headphones? That's still a strong motivator. "I just got this really expensive thing - it must be good!"

If they have to send them back then I'd say it is fair, but I doubt that is the case.

I believe Apple does require their review units back.

Every single review called out the fact that these are very expensive. Gruber even made light of it commenting about whether the button quality was worth the price. I suspect the price (rightly so) would give the reviewers extremely high expectations coming into this and they would be looking for the smallest flaws.

That is literally their job, indiscriminate reviewers aren't worth a damn. Gruber isn't a reviewer primarily, but other reviewers have said these sound great too.

I have a fairly nice headphone setup at my desk (HD650+Schiit Magni/Modi2). I am willing to admit I am biased against other headphones, especially ones that are cheaper than my setup. I am interested to try out Apple's new cans and see how they hold up. They probably won't survive my own biases.

Well if it makes everyone who wears them think it sounds better than the alternatives, that's really just as well. There's not any utility to better sounding headphones other than enjoyment, and you'll enjoy it the same whether it actually sounds amazing or you just think it does.

That's why we use metrology to measure its capabilities. Not human opinions.

Sound can be analyzed extremely objectively.

I'll stick to my wired Sennheisers. They sound absolutely excellent, cost less than half the price, look sexy, and will work essentially forever.

Are they noise canceling? If they're not, then it's not an apt comparison. These compete with Bose QC35 and Sony WH1000XM4.

I am somewhat disappointed that we associate weight with quality. I assume this came from early plastics that were brittle and started to replace metal parts. But the science of plastics have come so far, we have plastics that are incredibly durable while still being lightweight. However many manufacturers are sticking to metal and glass for that "premium look and feed" even if it is heavier and less durable.

Another issue might be the variety of plastic qualities that are hard to tell apart from a quick impression. Something that our launch followed by rush to quick reviews society can't adequately test. Glass and especially metals tend to have more predictable durability profiles.

I think the main problem that we haven't solved in plastics is hardness, so glass screens are here to stay, but I wish we could move away from this plastic == low quality perception. I think it would result in better products at then end of the day.

> I am somewhat disappointed that we associate weight with quality.

To the point that Beats headphones seemed to have random bits of decorative metal added to it simply to increase the weight and make it feel more "premium":

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/we-took-apart-some-beats-head...

https://medium.com/@BenEinstein/how-it-s-made-series-yup-our...

I often wonder this about my Bose Soundlink Mini II. That thing is a shocking little brick when you pick it up. Like, it's roughly the size of a hotdog bun, and you could probably kill someone with it. Great sound though.

I think another aspect of heavy > light is it's (perceived) as a gauge of how much "stuff" is in a product.

If I picked up some very light electronic, I may suspect that it's simply not very dense, and it was made bigger to (try) and fool another "quality signal", size. You know, knock-off products made to look like something bigger/higher quality but containing mostly air.

It is a shame though, since light can be very strong and high value. I personally wouldn't want almost half a kilo of headphones on my noggin, and this article's emphasis on weight is ... disappointing.

I'm definitely guilty of using metal and weight as signals for quality. And heavier metal objects do feel nicer but that's not really my reasoning. If a manufacturer is willing to self-flagellate by making their products out a mode expensive material, using a more expensive manufacturing process, and pony up the shipping costs to transport the heavier goods then I can be reasonably sure that they're not obsessively cost-cutting.

The same mentality is widespread in photography, heavier metal construction (even though often just exterior shell and interior is polycarbonate) and weight are associated with quality and longevity. But it's starting to change as more lenses are exclusively made from "engineered plastics" - a marketing term to make these new lenses sound better.

OTOH, those robust lenses from the 50s to early 80s survived until today and are often still used and adapted on modern mirrorless cameras.

Oddly, for a camera, I prefer some weight. Not so much I will get fatigued, but it is easier to hold steady if it is not feather weight. And having it balance away from the lens is nice.

Overall, agreed, though.

The oldest lenses I have that I still sometimes use are from the late 1940s, though they are both large-format lenses in shutters (that have been serviced). The main issue with those is that parts are scarce.

I wouldn't expect any gear made today to have that much of a lifetime.

At least this mentality is rooted in reality, as we now have a pretty good data on longevity of plastic cameras from the 80s and 90s that routinely outlast their metal+leather counterparts from the 60s. Here's a very typical "plastic in cameras" horror story:

http://jaredlichtenbergerphoto.com/blog/mamiya-645-pro-mirro...

Another simple example. I bought a zojirushi water bottle 5 years ago, it is still going strong, still keeps water cold for a hours and hours. I bought another bottle 3 months ago, which is much heavier/sturdier than zojirushi. It sucks (it is so strong that it can be used as a weapon though).

I'm not a photography expert, but won't plastics subtly deform over time (especially when exposed to sunlight)?

The ski boot industry has been focused on reducing plastic weight / thickness while remaining sturdy. People very much appreciate the innovations there.

Camping and backpacking, too. I think everyone in the outdoorsing space has been hard at working shaving weight. My back appreciates it.

While certainly some high quality expensive products focus on weight reduction (e.g. carbon fiber in camera tripods or hiking gear), many customers still have a subconscious association between weight an quality. After you’ve removed all the unnecessary parts or features and really optimized high volume manufacturing, at some point product cost is highly associated with part weight. More material costs more money. If a designer or manufacturer goes too far optimizing for cost by removing material, the product is more likely to be damaged under normal use or misuse.

Even if many consumers can’t tell you directly that something feels cheap to them or why, they are subconsciously aware of it. There’s a classic story from the history of industrial design where in the development of a desk clock, the designer, Henry Dreyfus observed consumers in a store evaluating competitive models of clocks. They picked them up and sensed the weight. By adding mass the product became much more successful. [1]

In the course of my work as a product engineer, I’ve designed many docks and stands for devices, and torn down competitive products. These kinds of things often have added weight in the form of stamped steel plates or die cast zinc. The weight helps keep the dock stable so it doesn’t tip when the user puts in the device, and it also adds to the feeling of quality and security.

[1] “In 1939, he designed the Big Ben Alarm clock for Westclock. After a year of development, it was ready to market. The first customer was the John Wanamaker department store in New York City. Henry Dreyfus, in what is considered to be the first live ‘user testing,’ observed potential customers pick up the clock, examine it and put it down without buying it or asking any questions. Eventually, he questioned customers. Why were they putting it down after examining it? What was wrong?

Their response: it felt too light. Something so light couldn’t be substantive. Whether they were right or wrong, Dreyfus realized that people were associating weight with value even though he knew there was no connection. In a radical departure from the notion that ‘less is more,’ he added a 3 oz. weight, serving no function whatsoever, but to create the perception of greater substance. In this case, more weight equated to more value. He said, ‘people want the experience of knowing that their alarm clock had something inside.’ Weight was an attribute that had meaning and relevance… it created a cue that led to a perception of value and substance.”

From https://drozmarketing.com/designers-role/

You seem to be saying both "weight made them more stable and less likely to tip" and "people were associating weight with value even though there's no connection".

I have an internet router, I don't routinely lift it, its weight is immaterial, except ... it has a power lead, internet lead, and some RJ45 leads connected to it, and if they move slightly, it falls over. I approximately never go near it or think about it, but the only times I do when I have to check something or connect/disconnect something, I'm annoyed by how it's designed to stand up precariously, and does so poorly because it's too flimsy cheap and plasticky.

This reminds me of the "I'm clever because I see the lottery is a tax on fools" sayings. Well, gambling is fun and mass is useful and stable clocks don't get knocked over when you dust the bedside table in their vicinity.

I think this is part of the problem why we subconsciously think of weight == quality. In many cases these things are correlated. In fact this use case may be a reasonable time for aluminum and steel.

However the metric is too simple, and easy to game, and it seems that this simplistic weight == quality is emphasized by many reviewers.

Plastics do not have good heat conductivity. I can't stand plastic over-year headphones because my ears get too warm. Apple seems to have solved this problem with fabrics and metal construction.

How about open over-ear headphones such as the Sennheiser HD 558?

If you care about waste and renewability, this is kind of a good thing. I can't buy anything made of plastic without feeling shitty about the fact that it's almost certainly going to end up in a landfill within my lifetime, if not within 2-5 years.

I think some of this mentality is partially an effect of the flood of cheap black glossy plastic electronics that came in the 00s and 10s. I'm not an expert on plastic formulations, but the variety used for these products is not pleasant to touch, shows fingerprints like crazy, scratches easily, and breaks easily on top of sounding hollow.

The plastics used for electronics in the 90s didn't exhibit these problems as much, generally being thicker with a nice matte textured finish. Perhaps the key to winning the public mind back over to plastic would be to mimic those 90s plastics.

My issue with plastic for construction of bodies for higher-end products (be it synths, headphones, computers, etc.) is that they are... Soft, they get scratched easily (most of them at least, I know a few types that are scratch-resistant), they show wear and tear in a much more unpleasant way than metal, glass or wood.

It's a hugely important material but I can't imagine ever perceiving plastics, even the higher grade and durable ones, to a premium feeling. I don't associate that with brittleness but more with aesthetics and touch feel.

> My issue with plastic for construction of bodies for higher-end products (be it synths, headphones, computers, etc.) is that they are... Soft, they get scratched easily (most of them at least, I know a few types that are scratch-resistant), they show wear and tear in a much more unpleasant way than metal, glass or wood.

Most of the visible metal bits in any consumer electronic will be aluminum, which is notoriously soft (softer than gold) and scratches easily. Likewise, most any product made of wood (moving beyond electronics now) will be made of a wood that's soft enough to scratch easily. I'm not convinced that scratch-resistance is the metric for instinctively classifying the cheapness of a material.

I have to say that I am very happy with my pixel 4a. It is plastic, but looks and feels very nice.

The weight equals quality thing is probably related to the use of dense metals as money since the dawn of history. Maybe it's a quirk of human psychology that caused us to choose dense metals or maybe it's the choice of dense metals that persists as the weight/quality association.

With plastics, I think there are subtle differences in flex & texture that can clue you in you quality.

Reminds me of the crazy lightweight Richard Mille watches that are absurdly expensive but undeniably high-quality.

This was a fairly hot topic when SLR cameras started switching over to incorporating more and more plastic. This was quite a while ago but there was definitely a class of buyer who associated metal with solidity.

The blue microphone is guilty of this. They are needlessly bulky and the stands they come with are unnecessarily heavy.

It's consumer theatrics

I still tip mine over though, so maybe it isn't heavy enough?

But I think I agree that it's overkill, as the weak spot is definitely going to be the usb port.

Which Blue microphone? The Yeti? Or do you just mean Blue microphones tend to do this in general?

> In some ways, AirPods Max feel quite a bit like a premium Aeron-style modern desk chair — the mesh canopy atop the headband, the telescoping steel stems, the general sturdiness.

In some ways, possibly.

Here's what's nice about Aeron chairs: they last essentially forever. I got a second hand one for cheap. It's easily a decade old, possibly more, judging by the armrest mechanism (which had a redesign, mine is old). Using it every day for two years, on top of what it already had. Still looks brand spanking new.

In case something breaks, I can easily replace any component. There is a healthy replacement parts market. In fact, the person that sold it to me was essentially living off "flipping" Aerons - they would get them wholesale from companies, and then refurbish them.

If you are buying them new, they are covered by a 12 YEAR WARRANTY. Parts and labor.

The AirPods price would be totally justified if they were even remotely like this. Make the battery user-replaceable (even better if they are swappable, for more run-time) and provide user-replaceable parts, plus a healthy warranty, and this could be potentially the Aeron of the headset world.

It isn't, though. The battery is the most egregious issue. Sure, we can understand why Airpods don't have replaceable batteries. Not that it's impossible, but at least it's understandable - they are tiny. It's also possible to understand why Macbook batteries are not easily replaceable - they occupy most of the internal space and are rather fragile.

I don't know what Apple's excuse is, this time.

Batteries inside a laptop have no reason to be glued in. Look at the sleek laptops from Dell or Lenovo. Somehow they managed to put an easily replaceable battery into all of them - even tablets - without sacrificing weight or thickness.

Glued-in batteries are not a necessity contrary to what Apple wants you to believe.

Similarly, Samsung somehow managed to make their Galaxy Buds Live (small airpods pro competitor) very user-serviceable with standard replaceable battery without making them much bigger.

> It's also possible to understand why Macbook batteries are not easily replaceable - they occupy most of the internal space and are rather fragile.

I would guess that the batteries on the AirPods Max are not user-replaceable for the same reason. We'll know more once the iFixit teardown is out.

But stepping back: it seems that the parts most susceptible to long-term wear are replaceable. That is the ear cups (user-replaceable) and batteries. Hopefully the headstrap is more durable than it looks.

Indeed. I bought a secondhand Aeron - with the old armrest design, like yours - and it needed new wheels. I called Herman Miller attempting to buy replacement wheels, and they just sent them to me for free. Other than the wheels, it is in perfect mechanical condition.

Aereon chairs last forever?

The arm rests got janky in mine after 2 years. Maybe they are replaceable...?

I'm a bit spoiled since most of jobs use the Aeron chairs, but I definitely used and sat in Aeron chairs that were at least 6 years old with no issues. I had a coworker that had one he bought for like a $100 during the dotcom bust and he still used it 12 years later with no issues (he ran his own business/contractor and WFH for a long time).

You mean the pads? Those definitely are - that's one of the items you can get from Herman Miller themselves in their online store (vinyl or leather), and there are third party options too.

Even if you mean the arm rest mechanism, that's replaceable as well. As are cables, the seat, lumbar support, gas cylinder, you name it.

> Every other pair of over-the-ear headphones I’ve ever used feel a bit cheap in comparison

This has always surprised my as someone who's owned a couple of pairs of B&W P-series headphones (P5 then PX). Portable headphones should be built to last, not just flimsy plastic. B&W got it right with metal construction (and with the newest PX models forged carbon fibre), no surprises Apple is building robust headphones too.

What B&W provide though, is a really solid benchmark (of many) (with the exception of spatial audio - which from Gruber sounds like it still has some shortcomings to overcome). They're £200 cheaper, really substantial and solid construction (with a proper hard carrying case - although similar limited folding), the newest carbon models will be noticeably lighter (if still a substantial 310g).

Obviously the Sony XM4s and Bose 700s are well in view too (although plastic construction can make them seem a less premium alternative).

I expect these will sell relatively well, but I can't see them flying off the shelves like their in-ear namesakes in such a crowded and competitive market, even with Apple's software bonuses.

> Portable headphones should be built to last, not just flimsy plastic.

Good plastic is not flimsy.

Polycarbonate, an almost commodity plastic, is really strong and light. The next step: composites are way better than any metal if you want a good strength-to-weight ratio. The best, most expensive bikes are made out of carbon fiber composite for a reason.

Plastic is commonly used as casing material for stuff designed for rough environments. Portable power tools, PA speakers, even guns. So if something designed to be used on the battlefield can be made of plastic, there is no problem for headphones worn, at worst, in the subway.

The only problem with plastic is that it suffers from being cheap, as in, not expensive enough. People want expensive products to be made of expensive materials. Also, subconsciously we associate weight with quality, so much that cheap manufacturers sometimes add metal inserts to their otherwise low quality products to trick people into thinking they are better than they really are.

That it to say, unless you put a premium on look and feel (nothing wrong with that), don't hesitate to buy plastic headphones, they can last you a lifetime as long as the right plastic is used at the right place.

You can also have long-term durability issues. But this is long-term as in probably decades which isn't really generally relevant for consumer electronics. I have a few older kitchen appliances that have started spontaneously developing cracks. I've patched things up and bought a couple of (ill-fitting) replacement parts. But I'll probably end up having to replace them even though they're otherwise functional. (Of course, the materials may well have improved by now.)

Polycarbonate stops bullets, but it's also notoriously soft, scratches easily, it's a thermoplastic (so it melts with heat), and it's soluble in ammonia or acetone (so it's vulnerable to nail polish remover). Other than all that, polycarbonate is a perfect plastic.

Exactly, plastic lasts 10000s years. I'm a believer now - I've rebuilt a lego set from my childhood and all the bricks fit and look pretty much exactly the same, 30 years later

I wish that someone made headphones built with BPA-free plastic like my Aeropress (https://prima-coffee.com/equipment/aeropress/aeropress) or even my Lido 3 coffee grinder (https://prima-coffee.com/equipment/orphan-espresso/lido-3), which also uses stainless steel and aluminum. Considering how durable both of these tools are (and how good they feel in hand) I wonder why they haven't caught on in the tech industry.

The most durable headphones I've ever owned are Sennheiser HD 25 and made from plastic and super light. It was ~£100, sounds amazing and lasted me 15 years of being dragged to clubs, house parties and getting a fair beating. Only this year have I replaced them and that was only because I lost my old pair in a recent house move and figured "it's been 15 years, there's no shame in buying a new pair even though the old pair might turn up in a random box later".

However those cans don't have bluetooth, noise cancelling, a microphone nor adaptive EQing. They're literally just a high quality speaker, headband and copper wiring.

HD 25s are amazing, especially because every part is replaceable and can be easily ordered.

serious question, why would you take headphones to clubs and house parties?

In terms of build quality, I've always thought Bang & Olufsen made the best headphones. The H9 series is made with aluminum and leather, and costs just slightly less than AirPods Max.

Reading this I immediately thought of the B&W PX. Really nicely made headphones which felt like they would last a long time. The battery would probably be the first thing to go. I really wanted to like them, but alas I just couldn't wear them comfortably for very long. They were too heavy for me.

By contrast, the Bose and Sony headphones, which feel more flimsy in comparison, I can wear for hours without issue.

I have the Sony WH1000 XM3. I disagree they feel more flimsy. The most critique I can come up with is that the clickiness of the buttons isn’t up to Apple standards. And they lack multipoint.

Also to consider, AirPods Max can be extremely well built but you still cannot pack them in a suitcase like you can the Sony or Bose, due to the shitty pouch that’s included...

They seem to be selling pretty well depending on how many Apple manufactured. If you want them you are going to have to wait until March already.

https://www.macrumors.com/2020/12/08/airpods-max-shipping-es...

Seconding the PX series high build quality. After losing my beloved a Sennheiser PXC 550s, I got the PX7 and it's very nicely made. The buttons and the embossed logos on the cups are the only at all cheap-feeling parts.

That said, the B&W v-shaped sound is not my favorite. Not unlistenable, but maybe not what I'd choose again.

I'm surprised he didn't mention anything about bluetooth pairing and general ease of use. I have a Sony MDR-100 which is a great middle of the road (price/quality) wireless headset. The biggest gripe I have with it is pairing/connecting to my web of devices and music quality. This is one area that Apple routinely gets right. Bluetooth just works better on Apple devices. I can connect the headset to my windows laptop, play some music, and it will come through muddled. I then switch over to my Macbook Pro and the same music will come through noticeably better. I'm not sure if the Apple Bluetooth drivers are just that much better or if the built in Windows ones are that much worse?

This is probably a result of the headphones being connected in headset mode, meaning the microphone is enabled. On Windows when you pair headphones which have a built in microphone you'll usually see two devices connected in the audio switcher, one for the headphones in headset mode and another for the headphones in listening mode only. Headset mode switches to the highly compressed SBC codec so it can transmit both input and output, but listening mode will usually switch to a less compressed codec like AptX, depending on your Windows device. Try pairing again and clicking on the volume button in the systray and see if you have another option for the headphones to switch to.

I've had this problem on Mac. In my case a pair of AirPods sounded really muddy and low quality. macOS was setting them up as the output AND input audio device. The two-way Bluetooth communication eats more bandwidth, hence the lower quality. The solution was to set the audio input to something other than the AirPods.

Try setting your audio input to something other than the headset on the Windows machine.

> I'm surprised he didn't mention anything about bluetooth pairing and general ease of use.

Gruber is writing primarily for people who are familiar with Apple's products. That they pair easily with multiple Apple devices is assumed based on the original AirPods. I suspect if there was any regression he'd have mentioned it.

Yea honestly to me the only reason to get these is seamless bluetooth integration Apple gives.

As long as sound quality is top of class (which they appear to be) then to some extent the thing comes out to "is better pairing experience worth a $200-300 premium over something like Sony MX4s?" For now, I will stick to my MX4s ($280) until maybe Max's come down in price.

> This is one area that Apple routinely gets right. Bluetooth just works better on Apple devices.

that really is not accurate. macbooks are notoriously terrible with bluetooth. with my macbook pro, it is impossible to play music on a bluetooth speaker, as it starts stuttering within seconds of use. this is a common problem over many years, and there's a litany of solutions on the forums, most of which don't work. another common problem is iTunes automatically opening and even playing when bluetooth headphones connect. in many cases, there's no way to prevent it. in my case, the only thing that stopped it was renaming iTunes, which required a lot of ceremony to even do. it seems in zoom meetings, it's always the people with airpods that are having audio trouble. i thought it was well known that apple has terrible bluetooth, at least on their macbooks.

> Bluetooth just works better on Apple devices

My experience with Bluetooth headphones are Airpods 1, 2, and my Senneheiser Momentums.

I think I can count on one hand how many times the Sennheisers needed a re-pairing, and that's using them pretty much every work day. The Airpods are far from reliable. I use them for running 3x a week, and I probably have to re-pair them once a month. This has been consistent with the 1 and 2.

However, this is due to what Apple is trying to do. The Sennheisers just pairs and plays music. The AirPods are detecting what ear they're in, connecting when in the ear, tapping, Siri, etc. There are much more opportunities for failure with the AirPods.

I'm totally uninformed when it comes to Bluetooth audio. Is BT transmitting full "resolution" audio, or is undesireable compression being done? Does Apple have better control over that? Is it generally just better to use a wired connection?

Oof they're not water resistant? But they're headphones.. on your head.. outside!

I missed that one. I'll revisit them when they release the S/Pro/Max version.

Just saved future me a cool 500 quid, cheers John!

I'd care more about sweat resistant to be honest.

Sweat corrodes stuff.

I may be getting old but over-ear headphones still look weird to me outside. Besides the look I do not like not be be aware about the world around me.

I know it’s popular in a lot of Japanese animes, but I’ve never seen anyone walking around with over ear headphones in real life. I see them mostly in open offices worn by developers trying to get some quiet while they are coding.

To be fair all Apple products do come with the handy caption "Designed by Apple [for] California"

I have a pair of Parrot Zik Noise Canceling Bluetooth headphones. At 326g they are undeniably and uncomfortably heavy. It's not about the headband or earcups, it's the mass it gives your head when turning, leaning, moving. I don't use them because of the weight. At 384g, the Airpod max is about 15% heavier. I currently have a pulled neck as a result of too many hours sitting at my desk. I cannot fathom wearing such a heavy headphone for long stretches. It would be injurious. That Apple would release such a heavy headphone for mass consumption is truly bonkers to me, much crazier than the price.

My motorcycle helmet weighs 1.6kg and I can wear it all day in gale force winds without experiencing painful neck strain. Not to try to be yours or any one else's doctor, but I think there might be other things at play here than weight -- maybe posture, movement (or lack thereof), or something else entirely should be given more consideration.

> I currently have a pulled neck as a result of too many hours sitting at my desk.

I've found doing face pulls at the gym significantly helped build up all the supporting back/neck musculature that I was beating up sitting at a desk all day. Rows also were pretty helpful for my lower back.

I'm curious if you have a multimonitor setup? The times I've dabbled with it I got neck/eye strain pretty quick from not only moving from left to right screens, but also just never being able to look straight ahead.

What a bunch of bad takes.

He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.

He also puts down using it wired, even though it seems like a product to use at your desk (since it's heavy and doesn't have water resistance). Keep in mind, an audio cable is not included in the box, so maybe Apple is sending a signal to use it wirelessly.

Also, he doesn't think this device needs an off switch. This means you get to carry around the case just to put your device in standby. The case is an elaborate off button since it doesn't offer much protection.

> He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.

it's almost like he's describing various pros and cons so that the reader can decide which of those things matter to them.

You can say something is heavier than something else, and feels more premium without contradicting yourself.

He says they are not meant for use as wired headphones primarily, so recommends against them if thats what you want. Seems reasonable.

Regarding the Switch he says: "I’m not saying they should, but it’s very Apple-like that they don’t." To me it seems like he is staying neutral on the need for an off Switch right now - just commenting that he's not surprised.

I don't think they are bad takes. They are tepid takes at worst!

At this point I'm quite convinced that Apple includes controversial design decisions just to stand out and cause controversy, which is free marketing.

And it's working.

> He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.

Well, yeah? That makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Metal ones are going to feel more solid and reliable than plastic, but will be heavier.

>He complains it's too heavy, but then puts down other, lighter products made out of plastic.

It's in fact possible to list the pros and cons of something so the reader can decide for themselves which matter to them without forcing a specific opinion onto the reader.

I wonder if it is genuine weight, or just non-functional weight packed into the headphones to give the appearance of quality like that which was found on a Dr Dre Beats teardown. Be interesting to see a teardown of these.

I'm going to point something out that MKBHD mentioned in his first impressions I don't see anyone talking about: the "smart case" is the only way to turn the headphones off If you walk away from your desk or whatever without putting them into the case, they'll die after a few hours. There's no of button, they don't turn off when you disconnect from bluetooth, they don't turn off after a certain amount of inactivity.

This'd be an instant killer for me.

> If you walk away from your desk or whatever without putting them into the case, they'll die after a few hours.

No, that's not what he said. They do enter "deep sleep" mode after a while, even without the case. Source in his video: https://youtu.be/UdfSrJvqY_E?t=458

It seems to me that it's a bit more nuanced than that and likely that Apple has more smarts in there than you describe.

They have on-head/off-head detection and pause playback when you take them off, so that immediately reduces power draw. Presumably they also have an accelerometer and can go to sleep when they don't move for a few minutes.

The case induces a deeper sleep mode that preserves more power, turning off bluetooth, and the processor that's monitoring movement detection.

So my takeaway from this article is more or less these are expensive, heavy, great quality, and have great sound. We already know Apple's noise cancellation and transparency mode are pretty damned good from the AirPods Pro.

If these were about $200 less, I'd probably have pulled the trigger on these already. At $550, it's a pretty tough pill to swallow when fundamentally there are some damned good ANC headphones for quite a bit less.

For the moment anyhow, I don't watch TV on my iPad or phone enough for spatial audio to matter. So the only big features which make it stand above much more affordable competitors is: transparency mode, easy source switching, and overall niceness. Worth $200?? I kind of think no. Maybe I'll revisit this when more reviews are in and the wait time is less than 3 months to order them.

Edit: Gruber also mentioned this, but worth noting. They would be a lot more appealing if the Apple TV supported spatial audio.

I imagine transparency mode could be really nice in an office setting, or at an airport or something. Not particularly relevant these days, but I can see that changing over the lifespan of the product.

> But: spatial audio only works (for now at least) when the video source is an iPhone or iPad. The AirPods (Pro or Max) know when your head is moving, but the source device needs to be location-aware too... it’s natural to want to use AirPods Max to watch a movie with the full spatial audio experience, as loud as you want, on the biggest screen in your house... But you can’t. You can only get this big room-sized audio experience with the small visual experience of an iPad or iPhone screen.

Even with the AirPods Pro, I'm so baffled by this.

Why does the source device need to be location-aware?

Wouldn't it be enough to just orient the spatial audio to something like your "median" head orientation? Obviously, the vast majority of the time you're watching something, you're looking at the screen.

Or for something fixed (like a TV), just click a button during setup while wearing your headphones saying "I'm looking directly at the center of the screen now."

I'm curious what I might be missing that makes it so critical for the source device to have an accelerometer and gyroscope.

(As a side note, I guess I also don't actually understand how your AirPods know how to orient themselves towards the direction of your device in the first place -- I don't believe they have an internal compass component.)

Accelerometer drift is a hard problem. You can experience it with VR headsets that have no base station, like Playstation VR. They require re-calibration every 10-30 minutes or so.

I assume that the iPhone/iPad is constantly re-calibrating user orientation using the camera and depth mapper.

I imagine two ways that Apple could make AirPods Max work with Apple TV:

1. Add a camera to the Apple TV. Some people would be uncomfortable with this.

2. Add an orientation base station to the Apple TV and add receivers to the headphones. This will increase weight, cost, and power consumption (battery weight).

It's possible that Apple already added the sensors. Has anyone done a teardown to look for orientation signal receiver chips?

I don't think it's essential. The Audeze Mobius is able to do this without the source being location-aware. (In fact, IIRC it appears as a 7.1 speaker in your audio settings.)

Do the AirPods actually orient themselves towards your device, or just assume you're looking at it most of the time? I've noticed that the sound stage seems to recenter if I look away from the device for long enough when listening to some show on my iPad, and doing something else on a computer.

What you need is the location of both, at the same time, in 3D space relative to each other. Just a direction doesn't really work without distance.

What would could do, I suppose, is put the headphones on top of wherever "home" is and use that...

>Once you get used to noise-canceling headphones on an airplane, there’s no going back

I tend to disagree. Most people underestimate good passive isolation and have never tried good closed back headphones.

Just spend $99 on Sennheiser HD280PRO, try them on a flight trip and make your own decision.

I disagree with your disagreement!

I've had good closed headphones before, and they're... okay... but nothing like a good active noise cancelling headphones.

For example, the Sony WH-1000XM3 is already a relatively good closed headphone! If you put one on with the noise cancelling disabled, it still provides a quite decent amount of isolation. But then instant you press that little switch... near total silence.

I used to tell people that first class tickets on planes are a waste of money because: You're still on a plane, it's still noisy, you just get better food.

But now with my Sony headphones, cattle class feels like first class. It's bliss: I can sleep. I can watch movies and actually understand what people are saying. I can read a book without feeling like there's a running hair dryer behind my head the whole time. The cries of babies are completely inaudible.

Perhaps a bit off topic, but I am truly unable to use active noise-cancelling headphones. I'm not sure if it's just me being sensitive or if this is common:

Whenever I tried using noise cancelling headphones, I always felt what I can only describe as a high air pressure in my ears. The best I can describe it is the feeling of needing to pop my ears but popping them providing zero relief.

Is this common at all? Does everyone feel this but somehow are able to ignore it?

Anyway fully agree that good passive isolation goes a long way!

I've literally never heard anyone make this argument before. It's wild.

Nice Sennheiser over-ear cans are okay on a plane, but honestly aren't as good as solid in-ear options (e.g., Etymotic).

Sennheisers (or others) with ANC that are also over ear are FAR AND AWAY superior. It's astonishing how nice it is for the drone of the plane to just VANISH vs. being merely muffled.

I'm not sure what you're aiming for here.

Is your claim that Sennheiser HD280PRO headphones do a better job than these? Because I've got a pair, and I agree 100% with the author: the first time I tried some noise-canceling headphones was the last time I took my HD280PROs on a flight.

If that's not your claim, then it doesn't seem like your statement makes any sense.

Sure, HD280PROs are better than not wearing anything over your ears. But the flying experience is dramatically different once you have active noise-cancelling headphones, so different that, euphemistically speaking, there's no going back.

I honestly have to assume you've never used ANC headphones on a plane if you're making this claim. As someone who does own the HD280PRO and several ANC headphones, there's no comparison at all for environments with a repetitive droning noise like an airplane.

Seconded; I'd also recommend Etymotic Research's line of earbuds, which combine earbuds and earplugs, including replaceable foam inserts.

Passive isolation most noticeably outperforms noise-cancelling for transient noises.

To provide a view from the opposite end of this spectrum, I use noise-canceling headphones over passive custom-fit earplugs on flights.

That is enormously different than my experience and I felt the need to respond because this is not healthy advice for your hearing. I have good closed back headphones and IEMs that isolate very well. My experience is that the airplane noise forces me to turn up the volume to unsafe levels and the audio quality is destroyed as well. Active Noise Canceling is a bit of absolute magic on the plane. The jet noise is almost eliminated and you can listen at safe levels with high fidelity. Plus, sustained loud noise can exacerbate jet lag. Having a quiet environment reduces post-flight fatigue. You're really doing yourself a disservice if you fly regularly without ANC.

For me at least, good noise canceling headphones make flying even quieter than the maximum rated earplugs I could find (because low frequency hum goes through almost any material)

I have a pair of in-ear headphones that isolate sound better than any Bose I've ever tried. It's just a matter of finding the right tip size to create a seal. My tips actually make a popping noise when I pull them out.

I have owned multiple pairs of that exact model. For $99 it's a great deal (they can take a beating... but not several beatings). But come on, the isolation is not even close, even to noise cancelling ear buds.

I own both the Sennheiser HD 280 Pro and the Bose QC35 II. The active noise cancelling Bose headphones are vastly better on a plane trip. The HD 280 Pros are just not very good at reducing ambient noise.

But passive isolation will allways struggle with low-frequency-sounds. Motor-sounds, like the engine on an airplane, is easy for active NC - while passive struggles with it.

I agree that good closed back over the ear headphones work well. The issue for me is that I travel light and never take something that big and heavy to use when flying.

> “Oh, that’s a nice button. It has a good click.”

> “Is it a $550 click?” I asked.

> He clicked it a few more times.

> “It’s not not a $550 click.”

This is the most Gruber line ever. I can just imagine John thinking, 'My work here is done'.

This is another odd product from Apple.

The verbiage makes it sound high end, but they're decidedly not talking to people who already spend a lot of money on headphones. There are some audiophiles using wireless these days, but always lossless. Apple has, to that market's dismay, been using lossy bluetooth. The silence here suggests they still are.

It's too expensive for the 'anything that works' crowd but is definitely not an audiophile product. Noise cancellation? Crowded market. Not sure where else this could fit in.

It's similar to the Apple watch. On the low end it really doesn't have any competition. Other smart watches look awful in comparison and you get a lot for $400 or whatever they cost.

But the high end of their range? I know zero watch people who have swapped their mechanical watch for a high end Apple watch. They might wear a low end one occasionally, but an expensive watch that has to be plugged in daily -- well, that's electronic at all -- is the antithesis of high end watches.

More succinctly: An audiophile AirPods is like an Hermes Apple Watch. Cringey, expensive, but will probably find an audience somewhere in the gap between low income and high taste.

This isn't an audiophile product. It's a status symbol marketed at the same people who own an iPhone and beats. People who have money and would like everyone else to know it.

Put it this way, the weight of these headphones is between that of an iPad Mini and iPad Air

As a motorcyclist the weight of a helmet is a real concern usually rivaling the safety rating but always higher than airflow which itself is high on the list.

I really do not see myself wearing any set of headphones that weigh this much, the XM4s by Sony are noticeable so weighing half again more has to really stand out. That he emphasized their inertia pretty much eliminates them completely.

I still really feel that the team involved here reached a ship it or shelve deadline after four years of development. Even the case looks like a last minute tie in which reveals two other sore points, they don't fold and they don't have a means to turn them off outside the case.

There is something "obscene" about +500 USD headphones. I assume they are very nice, but seeing this kind of news and seeing the heavy suffering in the world right now leaves me with a bad after-taste. Like reading Glamour magazine in a public kitchen.

I don't get this reaction.

You and the average HNer have all sorts of spending excesses in your life from rent to UberEats to your phone to your vehicle to your grocery lists to your hobbies to the things you buy your children to all the crap in your house that dwarf the price of some nice headphones.

Scraping together $500 is not a lot for something you will use daily for years. I think it's a better investment than a TV. The only difference is that you apparently don't want them.

For some reason people will scrutinize the price of something they don't want while being blind to how much they spend on all the things they do want.

e.g. we don't have to go very far back in time to have tallied up $500 you've spent in your life on unneeded food that gave you seconds of pleasure only to be shat out hours later, yet you're disgusted how someone else might choose to spend their $500, and on something like a tech gadget. It's a very weird judgemental reflex and quite a bit obnoxious to see.

Is it obscene to buy a thousand dollar laptop when 500 dollar laptops are fine for most users? $500 for headphones seems like a very arbitrary standard for what is excessive. A billion people live on a dollar a day. They would consider spending $50 -- or even $15 -- on a restaurant meal to be obscene. It's all relative.

Not that I think that the price is right for these Apple headphones, but at $550 they are not on the high end. Just a quick search turns up these Sennheisers that are $1400 on Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-HD-800-Reference-Headphone...

For a consumer oriented product? Maybe. But if you ever look into high-end headphones you'll find that there's a stupidly large amount of models in the $1000-5000 range. $500 is a midrange price bracket.

I think if a device is a professional tool, as in a studio monitoring headphone one would wear while doing music production or mastering, it's not obscene. That said, these have no such use case, the lack of a wire means: a) latency that isn't acceptable, and b) inability to master with high sample rates.

These definitely are in the "gadget" rather than "tool" category, and while there may be worse things to spend money on, or better ways to distribute wealth, I won't disagree that these headphones belong in the same category as Gucci handbags.

Interesting point! Tech has traditionally had the wonderful property of empowering the rich and the poor similarly - the president of the USA uses the same (technologically) TV, phone etc. as most others in the country. The gap in non tech aspects are widely different between the ultra rich and commoners. Apple's obscenely expensive tech adds a weird wedge in tech between the haves and have nots.

I expect the rest of the industry to copy Apple to make affordable versions of this product as has been the case with other products, so it should be a net positive for humanity.

My read with these is that their real purpose is to serve as a compact spatial-audio surround-sound studio monitor setup — i.e. something you buy to use at a DAW, instead of having to outfit an editing booth with a real 7.1 setup.

Making headphones out of metal with magnetically-adhered foam ear-cups makes a lot more sense when several people are going to be sharing them — i.e. a rotation of producers working in the same editing booth, where the headphones belong to the booth, not to the user. Metal is a lot easier to disinfect than plastic, and each user could have their own personal set of earcups, swapped often, without that wearing down any latching hardware. And the weight isn’t a problem if you’re just using them at a desk. High-impedance studio monitors are always heavy!

No current Mac can actually work with these headphones, but I don’t think the idea is that everyone is supposed to DAW on their iPads; rather, I presume that these headphones are meant to presage that the next Apple Silicon pro-level Macs will have the right features to support working in regular desktop DAW software with these headphones. (It's curious, though, that they released them well ahead of announcing those new Macs. They could have just put the announcements together.)

Likewise perhaps the next generation Apple TV.

I've switched out a heavy set of over-ear headphones specifically because they were too heavy for me, and would make my neck feel uncomfortable after some time.

Also, don't knock earbuds as being innately less noise-cancelling than over-ear headphones - in-ear monitors (IEMs) that enter your ear canal and produce a good seal can passively filter a great deal of sound, musicians use them all the time and I used to wear my pair (without any active noise cancellation) on airplanes—they work at least 75% as well as Airpods Pro active cancellation does, while sounding really great.

But after a long period of listening like on a long-haul flight, the physical pressure of those get tiring on my ears... and active noise cancellation also makes my ears tired after a while too... so seems there's no silver bullet. Honestly I've just gone to not using headphones of any kind for extended periods of time and listening with speakers whenever practical.

I think they only feel heavy because the reviewer was wearing them wrong.

I can't tell if you are joking or not : https://www.wired.com/2010/06/iphone-4-holding-it-wrong/

Beats has been accused of adding weight to their headphones in the past that serves no obvious function other than to give them a premium feel.

It will be interesting to see the teardown video.

I get what you're saying, but I'd be very surprised if they added extra weight in these ones. They're made of solid metal and have magnets to hold the ear pads in. I imagine that's enough to account for their weight.

I don't get why Apple haven't added source independent spatial audio. Like Audeze did with Mobius. The headphones use accelerometer and gyroscope (which AirPods have too I presume), and position the center of the audio to where you are looking. You can re-center it with a button press. And it works pretty well!

So, the hardware is all there. Apple could have done the same, bringing spatial audio to whatever place you want.

> You can re-center it with a button press.

Like it or not, there's your answer.

When was the last time you calibrated something from Apple? They don't do that, it either 'just works' or it doesn't.

It's a consistent design philosophy with some stark tradeoffs.

I also have the Audeze Mobius headset and I pair it with my Apple TV to watch movies, and it's a really great experience..

I've had these for 2+ years and I tell people "you forget that you're wearing headphones" and that's exactly how Gruber describes it too..

So I'm also really surprised to hear that the spatial/positional stuff on Apple's headphones only works when paired with a compatible device, and it's just phones and tablets.

That's... lame.

I'm very much the target market for the APMs, so I read this with interest. Well, I mean, I would be, if I still got on planes.

I own a nice pair of Sennheisers with active noise cancellation. They're AMAZING on planes, or other noisy environments, but like any full-sized set of headphones they're not something I'd wear moving around. Since COVID happened, mine have been on a shelf -- if I want headphones in the house, I just use my AirPods or the older set of wired Sennheisers semi-permanently set up next to the couch.

But yeah, I'm interested in these for the post-COVID world. One thing gave me a little pause, though, prior to Gruber's piece, and that was my assumption that Apple wouldn't make it possible to use these in a wired mode at all. My Senns CAN be used that way, and it makes a big difference on a long-haul flight. If you can use your own nice headphones with the seatback system, you'll have a much nicer time, and I just assumed Apple wouldn't do that.

I'm VERY pleased to see they allowed for that: "You can use AirPods Max as wired headphones with a Lightning to 3.5 mm headphone jack cable".

There's lots of stuff I like about my wireless ANC-equipped Sennheisers, but they don't sound as good as the wired set by my couch. (I mean, no surprise; the older wired set is like $300, and the wireless ones were half that.) Additionally, the wireless ones have all the sorts of goofy interface bullshit and dodgy Bluetooth things going on that I associated with basically all non-Apple Bluetooth things.

I'd absolutely pay a premium to have wireless headphones that rival my fancy wired Sennheisers, include ANC, and operate seamlessly. That'd be a no-brainer.

But, as I said, only if travel actually becomes a thing again. ;)

I am traveling (I’m the kind of person you expect to travel in a pandemic, wear a mask!). And I have Gruber’s comparator: the Bose QC35 II. I carry mine in their case hooked to a carabiner hooked to my briefcase, so the APM’s highly exposed wrapper of a case is not my cup of tea. I can also see the utility for movies at home so I appreciate the MacBook/Apple TV problem. Those are 2 of my 3 main use cases (The other of course being VTCs like everybody else). I don’t think that I will be running out to replace my current headphones but when they get long in the tooth I might consider the second generation of this APM design. It’s not a retina MacBook where I would buy it pre-order as soon as the announcement is out. It’s a 2008 unibody MacBook. It has a compelling future but I want to see what version two is.

> Every other pair of over-the-ear headphones I’ve ever used feel a bit cheap in comparison, because my over-the-ear headphones have all been constructed mostly of plastic.

His comment here surprises me, because I'd have assumed Gruber knows the headphone space really well. He should check out a pair of Sennheiser HD800s or Audeze LCD series. At the high end, headphones definitely don't feel cheap. There are also plenty of models in the $500 range that don't feel cheap. In particular: headphones intended for the same use as the AirPods Max apparently are (stationary, high fidelity) usually don't feel cheap, and are also usually heavy!

The rest of the review seems fine. The AirPods Max look nice and probably sound nice; if I didn't already have a pair of LCD-2s I might buy them. But I don't need another pair of headphones unless they're designed for portability. Based on what Gruber's saying here, they are not.

As I understand it, his priorities for headphones are comfort, noise cancellation and good sound, not necessarily in that order, but comfort is a big factor, so I can see why he focused in on the weight.

If you’re looking for a solid AirPods Max review as headphones, not just as an Apple product and where it fits and yadda yadda yadda, this is not the review you want. I haven’t seen the review you want yet, but it should show up somewhere soon.

Weight isn't too much of an issue if it's made up for with lots of padding. I had a corsair void pro and "upgraded" to the corsair virtuoso. The virtuoso is aluminum construction, looks far more professional, sounds a bit better, and has better battery life, but it's much heavier AND has LESS padding. It feels like it's trying to dig into my skull in no time. They would be much better if they sacrificed a little bit of sleekness to pack much more foam in the headband.

> ... definitely feels like they’re intended for stationary use. Their lack of water resistance aside...

> It’d be nice if [spatial audio] worked with MacBooks... But the device that’s just begging for spatial audio support is Apple TV... It’s crazy that Apple sells a premium movie-watching set-top box and very premium movie-listening wireless headphones and they don’t work together for a premium spatial audio movie-listening experience.

So, AirPods Max are not water resistant and are heavy enough to feel intended for stationary use. Yet the two unique selling propositions of these headphones are: seamless transitions between Apple devices and spacial audio.

Seems to me, if you're not going to be using these on-the-go for comfort reasons, you also won't be benefiting from the only two unique features they offer.

Not the most positive review ever. The lack of Apple TV seems like a thing, but presumably an update is in the works.

The weight thing seems like a design decision that gives insight into the job to be don’t by these headphones, which is very much not the job(s) handled by AirPods and AirPods Pro.

Gruber is an “embedded journalist” all the way. I kind of expect him to give random bad reviews to lower priority items to build credibility for when he gushes over the M1 processor.

I’m not saying he takes orders from Cupertino but there’s no need for that. Heck, I was once a fanboy and I didn’t get freebies.

I have no idea what the build is like, but if I were dropping $550 on some headphones, I would want them to not feel loose, rattley, or like they have plastic hinges/joints that are probably going to gradually accumulate "play" or break after a year. I would want shiny stainless steel joints that feel "buttery" yet reasonably tight. A feeling that if you accidentally sat on them or tossed them in a bag and got crushed, something might bend, rather than crack and break.

Btw, I wonder how they will let people try them in the stores. Seems like putting something on your head/ears that others have tried before you feels a little icky.

I don't know about that. My HD25's are 17 years old and it's plastic on plastic on them and they are as good as new.

I mostly use bottom end Airpods though because they are more convenient and sound just as good!

Maybe someone has already pointed it out, but Beats pro over ears are $400, are metal construction, weigh 405 grams (heavier than the AirPods Max), aren’t wireless, and I don’t believe they do any of the clever noise cancelling or contain as much hardware as the AirPods Max.

Sure, the beats pro are aimed at a different type of user but when comparing the two products is $550 really that much of a surprise?

I thought they’d come in cheaper, but on reflection pricing them lower competes with Beats (other than the aforementioned pro model, the Beats Studio3 Wireless Over‑Ears are $350)

Unless I'm missing something, aluminum ear cups seems to be a bad idea for colder weather. I wouldn't want to put cold metal on my ear every time I want to hear music?

From what i gathered from the article they're an indoor proposition, too heavy for outdoor activities according to the author.

It's never going to touch your ears anyway, but your fingers might stay glued to them if it's freezing.

The aluminium part of the ear cups doesn't come into contact with your body while wearing the headphones. There are thick cushions which are in between. Also, their main usage probably isn't for outdoor use, but more towards indoor.

I've got the Beoplay H7 (which are mostly aluminium) and I can report that this is not an issue. Your ears never touch those bits.

> Just how much difference that makes, battery-life wise, compared to just leaving them, unused, out of the case, I can’t say. I’ve only had them a day and I’ve spent a lot of that time wearing them.

I realize that this is going to get buried in the 633+ other comments, but you can not adequately review a product like this in one day/24 hours. Give it a week or two, at least to see if they're really better, or just different/new.

A question I haven’t seen answered anywhere so far is whether it’s possible to connect these to a computer via a Lightning to USB-C cable to transfer the audio signal in addition to charging. If so, how does the audio quality compare to the wireless Bluetooth operation.

Or is that not an option, and the only wired audio support is via the Lightning to 3.5 mm cable, which adds an additional analog conversion into the chain.

I've tested this myself, and unfortunately it doesn't seem to be possible. I tested with macOS 11.1.

I’ve done some binaural recording in the past, hand built stereo speakers, (as well as experienced various surround sound systems), but I am not a serious or dedicated audiophile by any means.

That said, while spatial audio does sound different than stereo, the purported ‘surround sound’ effect is mostly lost on me (even testing just now with G’s recommendation of The Mandalorian).

Am I missing something here?

You can get some really really good headphones for 500 dollars... even some basic custom IEMs for that price.

Somehow I feel like the audio quality and build quality is not going to be as good as the companies that actually make headphones for a living.

Edit: Also, the fact that these don't fold, and that they're supposedly for using in public, make these even less attractive.

I won’t make a claim about this product (might not even if I had heard them), but Apple does make headphones for a living.

https://macdailynews.com/2018/11/05/apple-is-the-worlds-lead... (2018): “When its three headphone brand categories are combined (EarPods, AirPods, Beats – an Apple company) Apple has the leading market share in headphone ownership with 24%. Sony is second with 22%, followed by fellow traditional CE stalwarts Panasonic and Bose”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-27/apple-ced...: “The AirPods have come to define the true wireless (TWS) earphones category, with Apple accounting for nearly half of all sales in 2019 and expected to grow to 82 million units this year, according to Counterpoint Research data. More affordable alternatives from Chinese rivals, however, have eroded Apple’s lead and the Silicon Valley company now finds itself with just over a third of the market, at 35%”

Somehow I feel like the audio quality and build quality is not going to be as good as the companies that actually make headphones for a living

Audio quality? Maybe not. Although it probably depends on how you precisely define audio quality. I’m not aware of any competing headphones that have a feature equivalent to the directional audio that these AirPods have.

But build quality? Apple will give any remotely comparable product a run for its money. Very few companies can match Apple’s expertise when it comes to mass producing hardware products with high-end materials and matching build quality. I think it’s close to a certainty that any headphones that are undeniably nicer than these ones, will also be significantly more expensive.

I don't think Apple is even going try to claim that they can compete with other $500 headphones in pure audio quality. Their pitch is entirely going to focus on design, easy pairing that just works every time, and clever audio processing 'magic' like spatial audio.

Can you expand on build quality? Do you mean that apple does not know how to build quality hardware? Or materials are cheap? Or do you mean something entirely different by the build quality?

When these were announced I was interested to see if Apple solved by biggest qualm about bluetooth headphones: low audio quality when using them in duplex mode for calls. This is a limitation of bandwidth in the bluetooth standard AFAIK. Whenever I jump on a Zoom call with my QC35's, they immediately switch to mono audio, at low quality, because the mic is in use. I am not sure this can really be solved at the hardware level, but if anyone could do it, it would definitely be Apple for a $550 price tag, possibly by including two bluetooth radios (one for talk and one for audio). But I haven't seen any mention of this use case, so it seems like I will just have to wait for a new standard and new generation of BT devices.

So what about Beats? Is that all just chopped liver?

As soon as Apple realizes they can incorporate batteries into the design, and sell different colored batteries so people can have their own custom "look", they'll suddenly be replaceable and marked up 70%.

I can't wait for the $250 AirPod Max hard travel cases to start showing up (with built in charging). But what about expensive charging stands so you don't have to put them in the purse/pouch to turn them off?

On the other hand, at least Apple has figured out how to turn commodity computing into an aspirational luxury good instead of an inevitable race to the bottom and low margins. Their recent moves are all intended to give them more control of their experience and extend that strategy out for as long as possible.

Maybe as an Android user, this is a thing I take for granted that just isn't really in the Apple ecosystem, but I'm used to a Chromecast and seamlessly streaming all my phone content to my TV.

So when I was reading the section about the content having to be played on an iPhone or iPad, and how he can't use it with his Apple TV... I got really confused. Can you really not just stream your mobile content to the Apple TV? Then you'd have the big screen, but you could use your phone or iPad for keeping track of your head's orientation. Or can you stream it, but not, like, configure the location of your TV or something, for the purposes of the spatial audio?

You can airplay almost all content, but I guess it doesn’t have Bluetooth 5.0 or other hardware it needs to work with the Max (there’s also no U1 chip[0], in case that could have been used to have the iphone work as a proxy or something).

0: https://9to5mac.com/2020/12/08/apple-didnt-include-its-u1-ch...

AirPlay exists for that exact purpose, but I haven't seen anything confirming or denying whether spatial audio works with AirPlay.

It's the latter, you can hook the AirPods up to the AppleTV and hear the audio of whatever's playing, but you don't get the spatial audio experience.

I find it interesting that he refuses to wear wireless headphones while podcasting because he can't tolerate the latency. But he's perfectly fine with it when watching a movie? Lip synch latency drives me crazy once I notice it.

I thought modern devices delay the video, so it syncs up with the audio? When I'm using Bluetooth headphones on iOS, pressing play doesn't start the video immediately, but it does when I'm not using headphones. The audio stops after the video if I pause it when using Bluetooth headphones.

I haven't experienced lip-sync latency with bluetooth watching video in years. Appletv, iPhone, iPad, MacBook - all sync video and BT audio up properly to account for latency.

$549 is expensive. £549 is madness

£91.50 in the UK price is VAT. You get expensive vat on expensive products :)

They're $899 AUD, an iPad Air is $899 AUD. Bose 700 is around $470 and I though they were a crazy price when released.

> AirPods Pro noise cancellation is very good, for earbuds, but it’s nowhere near as effective as with over-the-ear headphones — if only for the obvious reason that over-the-ear headphones help block noise even when they’re powered off, because they double as physical ear muffs in addition to the active noise cancellation.

Is this actually true? I’ve always intuitively thought it was the other way around since the Airpods plug your ears (they’re not actually earbuds).

I also subjectively tested both in an Apple store and the AirPods blocked out sounds better.

I can't help but feel that this is an explicit strategic design decision for Apple. It lets them position the AirPods Max as having (sound and build) Quality over (quiet) Comfort. It creates a market position for them without having to try very hard, and allows them years of incremental (yet revolutionary) weight saving improvements for future generations of the product.

(note that I'm not implying the QCs have poor build quality, just that a heavier product implies better BQ. I am implying that the QCs aren't difficult to beat on sound quality though)

where does the heaviness come from?

The fact they don't have spatial audio with the latest Apple TV highlights the problem Apple has without Steve: product consistency.

This is not the only example: bought a 2020 Macbook Pro, an external Magic keyboard and trackpad and couldn't even connect them because they came with USB-A cables. We had to wait until iPhone 12 (correct me if wrong) to get a phone that charges on the same manufacturer's laptop. It is a mess.

> I get it. If spatial audio needs hardware support on the playback

Does it? If you assume that 99% of the time I am looking at the screen and just do that doesn't it provide basically perfect audio? Until very wide-FOV screens become common place it doesn't seem like you need to know where I am looking, it is within a couple of degrees from the center of the screen.

I'm not sure entirely, but IIRC it uses a chip to position the headphones spatially. Without the chip, the headphones wouldn't know which direction to set as "north" even with a gyroscope. Found link: https://locatify.com/blog/what-is-the-new-apple-u1-chip-and-...

The point is to make it sound like you're in a 5.1 home theater so if you turn your head you should hear different things.

It is a funny thing with these headphones. For a long time, I had planned to buy another set of headphones - ironically because Apple refuses to exchange the worn-out earpads of my older beats. It is quite bad for the environment, if you have to dispose a product because a part like earpads, which has a very obvious wear limiting its lifespan, cannot be exchanged. Same of course applies for the battery, but that is still ok.

Hearing about the rumors of Apple headphones I postponed any purchase, as I was curious to see first what these headphones would be like and quite willing to buy them, even if more expensive than what I had before. So why arent the AirPods Max not an instant buy for me now?

First of all, the release 2 weeks before Christmas is odd timing, but that probably was beyond the control by Apple, they were not ready for production early enough, also this means limited stock. Basically the question was already decided as there was no chance to get them with the initial run and now are out of stock till spring.

A rather big gripe of mine are the colors. It is great to have different colors, buy why are they all so toned down? For the same reason I don't like the identical colors of the iPad Air. For some things I really like the colors to be ff0000 or 0000ff, alternatively at least 000000. I would like to see whether the "space gray" is dark enough, in the video by iJustine they looked nice, would like to check that out in a store before ordering.

The other one would be the rather weird case. Not only is it odd and I really don't need a case for my headphones in the first place, it is also mandatory to use to be able to switch them off. Which is probably the reason I won't get them. I don't want to have to put my headphones in a case every time I put them off for more than a very short while. Especially not in a goofy one. There needs to be an off switch on the device. Shouldn't be difficult to reprogram one of the two switches to work that way.

The other one is of course the issue with the device compatibility. As Gruber points it out: the spatial audio is great, but there seems no way to actually use this. I am not going to watch movies on my iPhone (I actually did this once to test my Homepods as a movie sound stage, which worked great. But I did it exactly once for satisfying the curiosity, watching a movie on the iPhone is no experience I want to replicate). This is a huge stinker and I don't know what Apple is thinking. It is already more than aggravating, that you cannot (reasonably) use Homepods as your Mac speakers. I just set up a new MacBook Pro, and indeed, my Homepods appear als sound output devices in the audio control, but as separate devices. How is it possible, that they don't communicate their pairing to Macs? Again, what is Apple thinking?

As a consequence, I am quite undecided yet. They do tick quite a few boxes, good build quality, probably great sound, Apple certainly has used all their vast acoustic skills on those. Battery and earpads are exchangeable, they should have a good life time. The price certainly gave me a short pause, this is not impulse by territory. I would be willing to pay it though for a product I am convinced about.

Ear buds are an area where some products are incredibly cheap to produce and can be treated like products that wear out (like underwear). They are insubstantial and easy to throw out. But there is a cycle where more premium products are made which then get copied and lose value. There will always be some people who want the best, but in a few years time the cheaper alternatives will probably sell more and be treated as disposable. They are fundamentally different products.

How can you get a spatial audio effect from a screen the size of an iPhone?

Is it that objects off screen and to the left can be heard before they enter the viewing area?

I wish these had the Ultra Wideband antenna for spatial location applications. That would have been a fun API to mess with. That, and like the reviewer said, this has to happen with the next Apple TV.

> How can you get a spatial audio effect from a screen the size of an iPhone?

The idea is that if you move your head with 5.1 surround sound the headphones will 'maintain the position' of the 5 speakers relative to the screen, which is supposed to stop breaking the immersion and makes your brain think the audio is more 3d than it is.

Spatial audio comes from 5.1 surround sound and I am guessing that the sound source aware orientation comes from Ultra Wideband.

I don’t know if Bluetooth has a profile that supports surround sound. Maybe the spatial audio only works on devices with the U1 chip.

LSTN makes headphones and gives hearing aids to people when you buy some of their cans. Pretty cool. Would like more ethical action paired with luxury products. https://lstnsound.com/

Does anyone else have a problem with the headband breaking or cracking after a year or two? That's my major concern about buying this style of headphones now. The old-school Walkman headphones were pretty great in comparison - flex all day and they wouldn't break.

>>> I almost never wear headphones while working at my desk, and for recording podcasts, I want wired headphones, to eliminate all latency.

This actually had me dying. That bluetooth latency is just a killer.

Aluminum is not better than plastic. Neither is plastic better than Aluminum. What matters quality and usage.

Planes[1] without aluminum? Ouch.

Cars[2] without plastic? Ouch.

I prefer ThinkPads because the use high quality plastic chassis and keyboards. Polycarbonate, ABS or whatever doesn't matter to me. Inside the use also magnesium and aluminum. High quality plastics are better when used with skin contact, especially regarding the keyboard and mouse. I regret that phones made with polycarbonate are gone, removable back cover, Qi without glass at back and they don't shatter when you drop them like the 800 $/€ stuff from Apple or Samsung. What I don't want on my lap is a MacBook. When it get hot, that not comfortable.

TLDR What looks good in first sight isn't good to use or in long term durability.

[1] Actually they use a lot composite material within modern planes like the B747-8, B787, A350 and so on :)

[2] Excepting the original Audi A2, a great piece of aluminum :)

PS: I've seen people buying keyboards and mice made of aluminium. I cannot imagine something more uncomfortable.

Plastic does have issues though - my wife's ThinkPad had a small piece of plastic holding the battery break. If the battery moved a little too much, the computer would shut down.

So she sent it in for service. When she got the computer back, they had replaced the entire bottom of the computer, plus replaced the battery. Great, right? Except now the bottom of the computer is a different color than the top of the computer, and the battery is a 3rd color!

It's ridiculous, but that's the thing you get with plastic. UV light changes the color over time.

I bet everyone who will get Airpods Max for free is going to say - oh sure, they are worth 550 and are so nice... But it wont be 100% case when person would pay for them.

I really do not understand buying these when you can get a similarly priced pair of Sennheisers that will be much better quality.

Gruber won the “first takes” with just his headline.

Referencing Shakespeare or Stormzy I wonder

Hmm, anyone worried about the analog gap closing?

Wait... you can't use these with anything other than an iOS device?!

edit: only the spatial audio feature works only on iOS

I believe you can use them as regular Bluetooth headphones, but you can't enjoy the spatial audio. That's my understanding. As with standard AirPods, the philosophy is "better together" with Apple products but, they are not exclusive.

I never expected them to be that heavy. Is this meant for the Pro content creator market? Seems so.

And light is the wallet.

Let's go see what Head-Fi thinks of them.

A bit off topic, but if you wear those around Stockholm, Sweden where I live, you will probably be robbed.

I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only. I think noise cancellation really shines when out and about in public, like the subway. But I can't imagine anyone using those things on the go, at least not where I live.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only. I think noise cancellation really shines when out and about in public, like the subway. But I can't imagine anyone using those things on the go, at least not where I live.

FYI here are some examples of why I swear by my noise cancellation headphones while working from home during a pandemic in a densely populated city:

- Washing machine and dishwasher running cycles during the day - The fridge vibrating at higher frequencies (don't know much about fridge mechanics but this soemthing fridges to do maintain a certain temperature) - Other people in the household talking, cooking, making coffee, fetching cutlery and plates etc. - The high decible hum of delivery scooters/mopeds usually accelerating much faster than they should in what is supposed to be a quiet road - Road noise from delivery vehicles which are heavier than your typical car

(ps admittedly the last two points are only a problem when I have the windows open but occassionaly someone revs an engine which can be heard through the windows)

- During summer months with the windows open, passers' by can be heard from my desk. I live on just off a "quiet road" in my city, my desk is on the first floor and is on the other side of the room from the road. Yet people's conversations are loud enough to make a noise.

Individually there is little wrong with these sounds (except maybe mopeds which I wish were quieter) but collectively they cause noises during working hours for which I am grateful to have noise cancelling headphones at home.

PS I guess Apple are also targeting people who will take these to the office eventually.

Where in Stockholm do you live? IMO, you're giving an unfair and exaggerated view of Stockholm as a whole. Yes, there are some areas that are more affected by criminal gangs than other areas. But I wouldn't go as far as saying that there's a high risk of getting robbed "around Stockholm".

There’s a personality type that enjoys complaining that their city is just the worst and they would leave if they weren’t just so accommodated etc. I’m not saying that’s you; I don’t think it is.

But when it happens in Sweden, do they call it “Stockholm syndrome”?

It is not the fear of being robbed, but more a general feeling of personal safety, e.g. hearing cars, bicycles or any people around you, is why I don't like to wear any kind of headphones while walking around. I feel deprived of an important sense. This of course would be worse with any kind of noise-cancellation. Only when sitting town in a train I feel reasonably comfortable, but also a bit nerveous about missing an important announcement.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

Open plan office spaces and public transport, including airplanes ;-)

Outside, that's a different story.

I thought Stockholm was ridiculously safe? (I've never been to Sweden)

Maybe not so off-topic if you think about it.

If you recall, the early iPhones were stolen the lot until Apple tied the devices to the Apple ID. This allowed you to lock the device and make it a worthless piece of hardware when the owner wanted it to be.

In principle, with all the electronics on the AirPods, one could imagine a situation where they are locked to an Apple ID and if they are stolen they could be locked down. This would dramatically lower the resale value and prevent future thefts if Apple were to implement this.

Really? I live in Malmo, Sweden (affectionately called "Crime City" by the locals) and I don't get the impression I'd be robbed.

Mostly because criminals know that the resale of apple goods is entirely on the parts, which is not worth much.

I remember people used to say the same thing in early days of Apple mobile devices that shipped with (then) unusual white in-ear headphones. White headphones -> high probability of an expensive gadget in a pocket.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

I never wear headphones when walking/biking etc, but I’ve worn mine pretty much non-srop at home for the past year. The computer fan, neighborhood noices, fridge, all is quieter and the music is better. I focus better.

Where they really have shown themselves to be indispensible though is on my 2h30 roundtrip daily commute by train[1], complete bliss.

[1] On hold since March..

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

WFH kids, dogs etc. AirPods pro help a lot with that situation for me.

I was ambivalent about noise-cancellation until two things happened at home this year…

- With the assistance of a friend, I rebuilt my kitchen. He swore by his AirPod Pros, I dealt with hours of tablesaws and sanding with foam in my ears.

- Then my building owners jackhammered apart the rooftop overhead in an asbestos removal project.

Now I’m thanking my AirPod Pro every time my neighbor’s baby wakes up at night.

I usually refer to my headphones as neighbor cancelling headphones. I live in an apartment and while my neighbors are nice people, inevitably you get some noise from televisions, people moving around, etc. Noise cancellation gets rid of most of that. Also, I like being able to walk around in my place without having to worry about wires.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

Some of us have kids banging around the house all day.

Hmmm, sounds like Stockholm is way more dangerous than NYC? Or is just your neighborhood really dangerous.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

Sadly, you can't (realistically) wear them in bed while you sleep.

I'm central UK and had the exact same thought when I saw these announced — it would be a brave soul who wears these where I grew up!

Try living in a commie block in some Central European city. The walls are incredibly thin.

These are limited to 256kbps low bandwidth Bluetooth. Leave it to Apple to change prices of hifi headphones, but make what amounts to laughable input quality. Expensive toys for rich people that really don’t know any better. Just like the XDR display, which was presented as “competing with industry titans at lower price”, but that ended up as complete bullshit claim by Apple.

Sony’s competitors, however badly named, cost 350$ (before the usual discounts on Amazon and retailers), and have audio in, and support higher audio input fidelity. They still use low quality amp+dac, but still the end result is much better than this.

Just a reminder that 256kbit is A LOT when using modern codecs. http://soundexpert.org/encoders-256-kbps

Where is this info form, btw? I'd love to read more specs. BT5 has a 2Mbit throughput for LE.

I know it’s tempting to believe only the audio specs matter, but would you buy a receiver with great output and only one jack?

There’s more to it, perhaps.

The ecosystem integration, materials are apparently above the plastic-y norm, the just works without fiddling with EQ...

Oh and buying them is not compulsory. Really very little reason to even login to post this, given reality on the whole.

Thanks for sharing I guess. Not sure how salty hot takes make HN “better” than Reddit. The rules mean nothing.

You're probably putting another DAC in the signal path with this, but you can plug in a 3.5mm audio source to the AirPods Max: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MR2C2AM/A/lightning-to-35...

Looks to me that the only market for these headphones are people who travel a lot (flights/trains) and/or want to show a status symbol. For all other use case the design has some significant flaws. E.g. a higher end headphone such as the Hifiman Sundara has the same weight, better sound (bluetooth is anyway questionable for good sound unless you use something like LDAC), much cheaper (350) and is therefore probably better suited for stationary usage. You can also get similarly priced headphones with bluetooth for stationary use. For mobile use (walking, or even running) something with this weight is definitely too heavy.

How come everyone's "how is this any better than $model?" example is a wired pair of headphones? If you're going to name drop a direct competitor, at least make sure it's wireless.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com