>"Apple is high quality."

Of course it is. But so is Sennheiser. People pay for the quality of Apple, but it's only part of the equation.

> But so is Sennheiser.

I don't know that. I have Apple stuff already (like most people) and know it's high quality. Trying Sennheiser is taking a risk for me. I'd pay to not take that risk.

I can't help but find this a little funny, because I consider Sennheiser the least risky purchase in the audiospace, but at the end of the day, the market for Senn is very different from the market for Apple. That point just typically falls on deaf ears in the audio crowd.

>"I don't know that. I have Apple stuff already (like most people) and know it's high quality. Trying Sennheiser is taking a risk for me. I'd pay to not take that risk."

Exactly. That's the whole point of a brand.

Sennheiser doesn't integrate seamlessly with the iOS experience, though

That's because Apple had the courage to remove the headphone jack from the 'iOS experience' though.

Just like the other brand cited in the original comment. He was pointing out what's different, and it's not the quality, it's the brand and ecosystem.

Those brands don't have the excellent Bluetooth connectivity. It's not the same quality.

It's not "the brand", it's his experience with the brand: he has a demonstrated trust in it based on his history with it.

If the alternative is a day spent comparison shopping and researching, then an overage of $200 is actually pretty reasonable, as opportunity costs go.