This web site uses cookies to improve your experience. By viewing our content, you are accepting the use of cookies. To find out more and change your cookie settings, please view our cookie policy. Close

Beats by Dr Dre president on origins, bass and music piracy

IFA 2012

In a few short years, Beats by Dr Dre has become perhaps the most recognisable audio brand on the planet, muscling out long-time heavyweights like Sennheiser, Sony or Bose with apparent ease, and rapidly garnering a level of fame and popularity that rival tech companies can only dream of.

So when I get a sit-down chat with Beats president Luke Wood, who's sipping tea and oven-cooking a pizza in his Berlin hotel room, my first question is, "How the hell did you pull that off?"

"It was really a response to two issues and opportunities," Luke tells me, with the first being the music biz's piracy woes. "We saw a business that went from a $30bn plus business to a $15bn plus business in six years. That's an unbelievable slide."

"Dre said, 'I've had an idea for a company for two years.'"

For Luke -- a former record executive -- and production stars Jimmy Iovine and Dr Dre, it seems that Beats was an opportunity to invest in something other than the ailing music trade. As I start making some tea of my own, Luke says the three asked themselves, "Since the buying of music is voluntary now, what are we really good at?"

Iovine thought of headphones, an idea that he took to Dre. "Dre said, 'I've had an idea for a company for two years. Beats, let's call it Beats'."

The move makes sense. After all, there's currently no way to pirate headphones.

"The second issue was the complete degradation of the sound ecosystem," Luke says, as I accidentally splash tea into the saucer while trying to remove the teabag. "That is a combination of, starting with piracy, 128kbps files with unbelievably dirty metadata, on terabyte drives that people were grabbing from university when they left."

Playback devices were another problem. "Primarily looking at laptops, laptops were never meant to play music back, especially in the mid-90s when they became heavily commodified and prices started coming down on laptops and notebook computers. They were made for Word, Excel, then browsing the Internet, they weren't meant to be sound playback devices."

Naff earbuds bundled with iPods and feature phones were yet another -- as Luke diplomatically phrases it -- 'issue and opportunity'. "They were put in with the iPod really just for immediate gratification, so you could see how it worked."

The result? "Between the files, playback instrument and headphones, you lost a whole generation that never learned about audio," Luke says. "We were still in the studio making records that were only sounding better because of digital technology, suddenly we were using 96KHz, you know, 24 bits, these really rich -- we were capturing the bottom end the way we never really could because of digital sampling... but the user wasn't hearing any of what we were hearing."

Despite the enormous marketing push and associated glitz, Luke insists that Beats wasn't dreamed up as a corporate ploy to pry people away from their money. "We didn't have a think-tank to think, 'Where can we make a lot of money?' -- it was like, wow we gotta fix sound," he says.

Ex-Apple designer

Despite omnipresent advertising and the faces of music superstars like Lady Gaga, David Guetta and Justin Bieber, Beats is actually a rather small operation. Luke tells me the company employs 130 people, up from 20 last year.

Recognisable design is a big part of the Beats brand -- Olympic sponsor Panasonic must have been fuming when athletes turned up to the games sporting the bulbous red headphones, after Beats reportedly shipped batches of its products to hotels where Olympians were staying. I wanted to know who's responsible for that already-iconic look of the headphones, and the red lowercase 'b'. Luke tells me it's down to ex-Apple designer Robert Brunner.

"He has a company called ammunition. He's an incredible partner of the company and a great asset, and he controls all of our design vocabulary."

Jimmy Iovine, who Luke says along with Dre had a lot of input on the design of the first Beats headphone, used his music biz contacts to get star-studded feedback on the early design.

"He has so many incredible resources and relationships, he showed it to everybody who walked in the room." The Beats Studio was the first product to eventually hit the shelves, having gone through over 200 prototypes.

The studio environment and the music trade becomes more and more of a theme as I chat to the Beats boss, and in my mission to figure out how Beats has dominated the headphone scene so quickly, it occurs to me that its origins in the record business, and the connections that brings, might be the secret sauce. After all, Sennheiser, Panasonic et al probably don't get to run their newest products by Gwen Stefani before putting them on sale.

"I don't know anyone in consumer electronics," Luke tells me. "I know everyone in the music business."

In defence of bass

Beats is perhaps second only to Apple in the way it divides tech fans, with many audiophile types decrying the ostentatious headphones as a crass fashion statement with sub-par sound quality. Those strong feelings are something I've seen flare up in our comments section (Luke tells me he does read them, and that they do in fact drive him crazy), so I offered him the chance to respond to that criticism.

"First and foremost, music's subjective," Luke says. "What's a hit to you is garbage to somebody else."

He continues, "If you look at the tradition of audiophiles, it comes from capturing a live performance. 'How do I transmit that performance to my ears with as little change as humanly possible?'

"We just look at it differently, we think it's okay to have a point of view," Luke intones, as I nervously eye my messy cup of tea, hoping he hasn't noticed and wondering if I could take a sip without the cup dripping all over his hotel table. "People think we have bass-heavy headphones -- our headphones reproduce a lot of bass, I don't consider them bass-heavy, I certainly don't consider them hip-hop. I mostly listen to rock music.

"The truth is that there's a tremendous amount of melodic information in the bottom end, that did not used to exist before digital recording. And it really changed with samples and digital recording."

Getting excited now, Luke continues, "The sub-harmonics that are part of making a song exciting, between 40 and 80Hz, you need to reproduce those! It takes a lot of effort to reproduce those. I'm someone who's much more excited about a remix and a mash-up -- someone else may not like it, but I'm cool, we have a point of view."

The difference, it would seem, lies in trying to reproduce what's created in the studio, rather than the audiophile perfection of a live performance. "It's very different to that pure audiophile concept, they're slightly dislocated. They're actually not far off, because we're trying to recreate what we hear in the studio, but what you hear in the studio is unbelievably processed and changed."

Beats has grown rapidly, now making not just headphones, but audio docks, and has snuck inside HP laptops and HTC smart phones. Love 'em or hate 'em, those were some savvy decisions on behalf of Beats management, so I ask what the company has its eye on next.

"I think wireless is going to continue to be unbelievably important," Luke muses as I realise I could lean all the way over to my cup of tea, thereby only dripping tea onto the already-soiled saucer. "I think distributed network audio in the home, beyond iOS but also with the Android ecosystem and then Windows 8. I think there's still way too much friction in the experience around home theatre, around getting your content from your smart phone to your home system, so I think there's a lot of opportunity there."

"You can never fight piracy hand to hand"

It's not often I get to talk to someone who's had a career within -- and really still relies on -- the recording industry at such a high level, so I take the opportunity to go back to the subject of piracy. With movie and music studios taking a heavy-handed approach that's seen The Pirate Bay blocked by UK Internet providers, what does Luke, an ex-record exec and A&R man have to say on the subject? As you'd expect, he has some strong feelings.

"I think people are overly focused on a perception of greed and inequality from the content companies," Luke says. "Where I live, coming from the artist community I watch in real time the artists and producers, and how their livelihood is dramatically affected every day by this. People should... they can't forget that. I think that's been completely lost in the messaging."

Luke continues, "It's been very easy to project the issue as excessive extravagant media content company, record company, versus the consumer who's freeing content.

"What they're forgetting," the Beats boss says, "is there's an artist in the middle there for who this is their livelihood, and if they knew artists the way I know artists they'd realise those artists are not getting paid.

"More importantly, they don't take the same risks they could take, because they don't have the same economic freedom, they have to make very calculated decisions and think of everything in terms of business as opposed to thinking well, 'I can just be an artist, and what happens happens,' and so I think that's affecting the music."

So much for problems, how about some solutions? I ask Luke what's the right way to battle digital thievery. With little hesitation the answer comes back, "I think flat-fee subscriptions are the way to solve it. I think we just need to educate people, I think you need great flat-fee subscription services."

I ask if he means things like Spotify. "Spotify is an example," he replies, "but I think we have to push to the next level, and focus as much on the actual utility of supplying the world's library, but add onto it a layer of discovery and help people discover and program.

"When I would go to the UK," Luke recalls, "I would listen to Steve Lamacq, and before that it was John Peel, and I would learn about records every time I listened to those shows. That was because they would program for me."

The Beats chief doesn't think piracy will ever go away, but says, "I think it will significantly subside if you give people a better product, as an option."

I mention ISP blocks. "You can never fight piracy hand-to-hand," Luke tells me. "It's not the nature of the web. The web is water rolling down a hill."

Luke goes to the oven to retrieve his pizza, and I realise we're at the end of the interview.

Now it's time for you to have your say. What do you think about Beats headphones? Are you a proud owner, or is there another brand you prefer? If you count yourself as an audiophile, what do you think of Luke Wood's defence of the Beats sound, and what do you think about his views on piracy? Tell me in the comments below, or on our Facebook wall.

Comments 12

Add your comment

billfred's avatar

billfred 2 September, 2012 14:18

"you lost a whole generation that never learned about audio," Maybe you should have learned a little something about audio before making headphones...

"our headphones reproduce a lot of bass, I don't consider them bass-heavy" No? Just incredibly weak across the entire range then. Sounds about right.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 2 September, 2012 19:09

You cant tell people 'No they actually are good believe us' when we can walk into a shop put them on and compare them with other sets. I mean really, the only reason people buy them is because of the design, these people arent audiophiles. They are just common public who want to be cool because the likes of lady gaga, will.i.am and justin beiber all wear them and then they can say to their friends "yeah I really appreciate the music and the actual sounds" No its just not true, its a fashion item, if you can get scientific proof that beats headphones offer greater clarity through a higher range of frequencies and a truer representation of the studio recorded version then I will eat my shoes, my socks, my underwear, every other piece of clothing I own and then several square metres of carpet.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 2 September, 2012 21:49

Pirate bay isn't blocked, just the url. Use a mirror link.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 3 September, 2012 08:58

Zero, zilch and nil about pricing?! Lotsa reviews from lotsa sites/publications consistently relate that there are better cans for the price(s).

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 3 September, 2012 15:23

"The move makes sense. After all, there's currently no way to pirate headphones." You can however counterfeit them, I've seen fake Beats on a number of online free ads/auction sites.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 4 September, 2012 16:43

Ive had nothign but good experience with beats and when my headphones failed sent me a new pair. The new pair were duds though so I contacted them and alas I had a brand new pair of Tours. I wouldnt mind a pair of the bigger ones for tootin around.

billfred's avatar

billfred 4 September, 2012 21:22

"Ive had nothign but good experience with beats" yet you've had two failures.

I don't think you know what "alas" means.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 5 September, 2012 01:25

The target isn't audiophiles. I think that was made pretty clear in the article. The target is people who don't care enough about music to be audiophiles but want something other than the white ear buds that come with their phones. Beats has successfully targeted the middle ground while commanding premium pricing by leveraging the Dre's equity.

It's true that, to most, Beats likely sound "better" (in quotes because of subjectivity) than the cheap headphones they're probably currently using. And thanks to a pretty genius marketing push by Iovine, people buy Beats because brands like Sennhesier, Sony and even Bose have been off the radar for awhile now. Beats is a classic example of some nice design work mixed with being in the right place at the right time. From a business perspective, it's hard to fault them for that.

What perplexes me is all the hate toward the brand. If you know better and you're someone who knows sound...buy your Grados or your Sennheisers and be done with it. I'm trying to understand how Beats is hurting anybody or the market. Yes, they charge a premium for sound that many audiophiles believe to be sub-par. But if the person who buys them believes they sound good, who cares?

HighMile's avatar

HighMile 7 September, 2012 08:33

One of the best guerilla marketing moves was the unobtrusive way that Beats pulled off during the Olympics.

Karl's avatar

Karl 12 September, 2012 14:31

I think that he has some good ideas on how to combat piracy by having 'a layer of discovery and help[ing] people [to] discover and program'. I also agree with the statement that piracy 'will significantly subside if you give people a better product'.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 6 October, 2012 02:45

Hmm... This is interesting. I read this article to learn more about the Beats audio and why they are so popular and now I understand. They were never developed to compete with the audiophile market.

"The target is people who don't care enough about music to be audiophiles but want something other than the white ear buds that come with their phones. Beats has successfully targeted the middle ground while commanding premium pricing by leveraging the Dre's equity." I couldn't agree with that more. In terms of business, you guys have surely dominated and made really smart moves and using Dr Dre's name and power in the music industry has no doubt helped them take flight with consumers.

"What perplexes me is all the hate toward the brand. If you know better and you're someone who knows sound...buy your Grados or your Sennheisers and be done with it." I think the majority of the hate from Beats relies heavily on it's pricing. A few years back, I bought a pair of Denon in-ear earphones for £45 and the Beats are better sound quality than those, although not by much. However, in reality, the Beats cost far more than £45 going into the £100's and £200's (maybe even £300's for the studio range?) and I believe that type of pricing is audiophile territory.

If I were to price the beats on pure sound quality alone, I'd price them no higher than £75, most likely at around the £50-60 range rivaling that of Sony's in-ear range. For that price, I think a good chunk of all the haters would go away since we can all agree that the sound quality isn't the best, but at that price, you can't complain. However, Beats have took advantage over the status of Dr. Dre within the music industry and using his name to gain popularity, which has lead to the Beats becoming more of a fashion icon which is another reason why audiophiles don't take the Beats line seriously.

To Luke Wood (if you are reading this): I want to offer to you an explanation of my opinion in terms of sheer sound quality of the Beats. So here goes. First of all, I've tried 3 of your Beats range; the full size (can) Studio Beats, the Solo Beats and the In-ear Tour's. The best way I can describe them is by visualising it through photography. Imagine this, you take a stunning photo through a DSLR camera, crisp, clear, full of colour and natural, then overlay a default sepia filter on top of it. The result of which is highly disgusting. The 'warm' presence of the yellow intoxicates the picture like smog, which drowns out distinct features of the picture. Blacks are no longer black and white's are no longer white, just a muddy monotone blur remains. This is the Beats audio range.

You say "there's a tremendous amount of melodic information in the bottom end" and I totally agree with you, but the Beats have therefore seemed to neglect the higher end of the frequency spectrum and it's essential to have that balance. While the Beats can hit those low frequencies, they need to be able to hit those high frequencies in a crystal clear manner while maintaining low distortion. Furthermore, the mid-bass is muddy and lacks the detail and consistency that other earphones in a similar price range can provide. This is why you're a laughing stock to audiophiles because anyone who knows anything about audio will be able to pick out a better balanced earphone or headphone in a similar price range or less. Essentially what the Beats boil down to, are an overpriced Skullcandy headphone with Dr Dre's name on it. The only reason why the Beats have become so successful is because of your target market, which is aimed at people who clearly don't know any better and see the Beats as superior over any of the various gummybear and ipod earphones they've ever owned, which is true.

To wrap this up, I'm not trying to all out hate and flame on you guys, I'm trying to provide an honest opinion so that you (Luke Wood) can create a better earphone/headphone. I've owned the Monster Turbine's in the past and have to say they have a far more balanced sound signature than the Beats earphones and they are cheaper too. Since you are working in conjunction with Monster, maybe you should share the same audio technology that the Turbine's use and incorporate that into the Beats. Anyway you choose, to get rid of the haters, you should come up with an earphone/headphone that delivers performance that reflects upon the price range, but I don't think that's likely seeing as it seems you enjoy sucker punching people who don't know better into your expensive products.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 12 October, 2012 00:08

i had a pair of dr dre beats headphone which broke 2 days after use i paid 119 pound for pair headphone which brake on me

Post your comment

Make your comment count. Log in or register to skip the 'Are you human?' question and get an avatar

Your email will not be displayed with your comment

Copy the letters and numbers to prove that you're human. You won't have to do this if you log in or register

Your comment must comply with the Terms of Use

About CBS Interactive

Copyright © 2013 CBS Interactive Limited. All rights reserved.