My brother bought a pair of the Beats "Solo" for my nephew for Christmas. Mainly because he wanted the lime green color. I was able to listen to them at length. They have a very heavy, boomy, blotted bass response. They were also kind of bright in the highs. The mids were okay, but overall, I thought they sucked. I sure couldn't listen to them for more than a few minutes. For the money, the Audio Technica ATH-M50 are excellent. I also would like to hear the new Woodtone headphones. They look pretty cool. http://www.griffintechnology.com/woodtones-wood-earbuds |
I've heard them and they are not worth the asking price. I'd rate them as a $75 headphone for people who are not serious about their music. WAY too bass heavy with a so-so midrange. For the money, there are lots of better options out there. Check out headphone sites for the skinny. All the best, Nonoise |
I also have no experience with them. I agree with the above posters. They are more of the trendy must have (be seen in) item for the ipod type user. Not really serious headphones. Much better quality can be had at the same price range with a bit of research. I use AKG K1000, but that is a different beast altogether. |
Stephan Mejias reported on the $200 Beats by Dr. Dre in a recent issue of TAS. Even though he liked the hipness and fashion factors of the Beats, he admitted that they were bass-heavy, veiled, and murky sounding. That's inexcusable for a $200 headphone. I suspect that anyone looking for traditional audiophile values such as linearity, dynamics, and realistic tonal balance, the $79 Grado SR60i's would be far more satisfying. For $200 you should be able to get any number of headphones that would knock your socks off by comparison. |
