Apple Airpods Pro 3

[Peluvius]

I'm skeptical of this. I haven't seen a lot of evidence that they changed the intended target for their Airpods over time - besides it's a liability issue as well.
I just remeasured my APP2 after two years in a clone coupler, zero change in measured results over this time.

What could have happened though is that they updated over time their algorithms so that (hopefully) the Airpods are more consistently hitting the intended target in a wider range of leakage / impedance / fit scenarios, and that for an individual in particular this resulted in a change in FR at the eardrum, but this is only speculation on my end.

The slightly differently shaped bass region seems to me like a deliberate choice (one I'm not happy about), it's unclear to me what led them to this and since they don't publish anything .
In the treble region, I'm not even sure an EQ option or a firmware change is desirable, my sentiment is that they f*cked something up in between the FR simulations they most likely did in various ear canals, with the earbuds seating in the 3D scanned concha in the intended way, and how the finished product actually manages to fit some people (I've seen a lot of people wear them sticking out quite far from the concha bowl and this is not what Apple's engineers intended, but as someone who can't have them sitting properly in my concha bowl because of the ear tip / nozzle design, regardless of ear tip size, these people may not have any other choice).

I agree. Apple are in the business of selling products and their curve is what their research tells them the most people will like. I am one of this fortunate to be largely within their target audience. I remain hopeful for an EQ option one day but in the "return them" camp.

 

[soundwave76]

I tried the XXS tips and they feel much better. I also ran the seal test and it passed. The difference to Pro 2 is not that big imo so still might return these...

Returned the APP3. Not just comfortable enough and soundwise the differences to APP2 are not that big.

 

[Ste_S]

I'm in the market for new AirPods Pro after my Pro 1 went through the washing machine six months ago. They still sound fine, but the wash seems to have damaged the mics as both ANC and Transparency modes can get a bit noisy.

I was going to pick up the Pro 3, but given some of the online backlash over the V shaped tuning, and in particular, the harsh treble, I'm not so sure. Anyone gone from Pro 1 to Pro 3?

 

[ceedee]

They still sound fine, but the wash seems to have damaged the mics as both ANC and Transparency modes can get a bit noisy.

This happened to me, too. My 2s still sound fine but the call quality seems to have gotten even worse now. I hope they have improved that in the 3s because it’s annoying not to be able to use them for calls. I also notice most people who use them during Zoom/Teams calls don’t sound great either.

 

[scotchrocks]

This happened to me, too. My 2s still sound fine but the call quality seems to have gotten even worse now. I hope they have improved that in the 3s because it’s annoying not to be able to use them for calls. I also notice most people who use them during Zoom/Teams calls don’t sound great either.

Some reviews I've seen say the 3's have better mic quality, both with and without voice isolation mode turned on. Voice isolation when outside in noisy environments seems very useful (sirens, traffic noise, etc.), but in the samples I've heard, it does seem to give users a more robotic tone.

Anyways, I plan to test mine out on some phone and Teams calls and will report back.

 

[meesbaker]

It might be intended to the masses rather than "audiophiles", but there's not really much than can compare to the R&D that goes into Apple's audio products.

On this note I was wondering, how is it that the Max are so bad? I was thinking the same thing - given Apples resources they should be leading the market but then they make 500$ headphones that literally no one likes

And our review here is in line with that impression, a nice headless panther.

 

[MayaTlab]

On this note I was wondering, how is it that the Max are so bad?

The short story is that they're not "so bad", and that measuring a pair of headphones like these on a single fixture against a single target misses quite a lot of crucial information to fully characterise the behaviour of a pair of headphones over a variety of individuals.

The simple presence of a robust feedback mechanism combined with a sensibly shaped response in the range where it operates (up to around 800Hz) already makes them a exceedingly rare breed of headphones, ie closed back headphones that are actually capable of hitting a sensibly shaped bass response over the large majority of heads they'll be put on (look on this website for measurements of the HPTF variance of the DCA Stealth on actual humans and you'll quickly realise that it's one thing to deliver a good FR on a test fixture, it's quite another to actually deliver it on a cohort of individuals). And above this range... Apple's engineers probably did the best they could to reach a decent compromise in terms of HPTF variance given the design constraints they were put under (the design of the APM is where Apple really messed up big time, not the acoustic engineering).

For even more sophisticated devices like the APP3 in the format of an IEM, erroneous interpretation of the graphs can come even thicker and faster. I've already seen a few people compare the APP3 measurements obtained by some sources to Harman's IE target for 711 couplers, and this is a completely erroneous way to properly assess their sound quality.

 

[Axo1989]

On this note I was wondering, how is it that the Max are so bad? I was thinking the same thing - given Apples resources they should be leading the market but then they make 500$ headphones that literally no one likes

And our review here is in line with that impression, a nice headless panther.

They aren't. Our host's frustration measuring adaptive Apple devices doesn't reflect much more than that. My APM certainly aren't 'dark' etc. But headphones are sometimes an ASR weak spot, see the debacle over those worn Senny ear-pads. I somewhat stopped paying attention after that (reading reviews anyway, not sure I was posting then).

 

[Dennis_FL]

Live translation also available with the Pro 2s:

Use Live Translation with your AirPods - Apple Support

Bridge language barriers in person—while traveling or navigating in a foreign country—with AirPods.

support.apple.com

When I traveled a lot, I really could have used on the fly translation - especially for taxis.

 

[IPunchCholla]

they make 500$ headphones that literally no one likes

I mean, they’ve sold an estimated 150 million units. I like mine.

 

[Tom Schneider]

I've had my Airpods Pro 3's for about a week and testing them before we fly to Maui in two weeks. Sound profile is tiled to the bass side with some mid recession. What I'm liking is the ability to seamlessly connect to my mac and iPhone just based on what is playing at the time. The feature I most appreciate is the ANC which is pretty amazing and one that will help with blocking out noise on the air flight.

Overall, they are not replacing my main Hifiman headphones but for on-the-go they will fit the bill.

 

[madFloyd]

I hate how recessed the mids are on the 3’s.

 

[Axo1989]

I lost my APP2 briefly (and they decided not to respond to the FindMy.app "make a sound" function) and was looking forward to APP3. Found the old ones though. I expect I'll get APP3 at some stage, good to have a home pair and a travelling pair perhaps.

I think APP2 are quite decent sonically, and somewhat adequate at noise cancelling. APM are better and much better respectively (no surprise) but obviously less portable and not at all pocketable. While APP2 are a godsend when the local ferry is filled with chattering tourists or local drunks, low frequencies from the diesel engine win the battle. APM manage that quite well, but I'm interested to find out if (and how much) APP3 fare better than their predecessors.

 

[somebodyelse]

iFixIt got hold of a pair for teardown. Still 0/10 for repairability, not seeing the gains made in other Apple products.
https://www.ifixit.com/News/113507/airpods-pro-3-teardown-still-a-tragedy

 

[Tks]

I'm in the market for new AirPods Pro after my Pro 1 went through the washing machine six months ago. They still sound fine, but the wash seems to have damaged the mics as both ANC and Transparency modes can get a bit noisy.

I was going to pick up the Pro 3, but given some of the online backlash over the V shaped tuning, and in particular, the harsh treble, I'm not so sure. Anyone gone from Pro 1 to Pro 3?

I went from the first to the third, the Treble isn't really harsh at all (I can hear up to 16Khz if that matters). The only problem is the mids are just just low in some music. There's virtually zero problems with the sound from my perspective, I just listen to music really low, but their idiotic Adaptive EQ has a policy of just massively boosting treble and bass when the volume level is less. If you (like most people) listen to music loud, then this won't be an issue, as the curve flattens pretty well. But if you listen ultra-low like I do, it's just so annoying with certain tracks.

I hate how recessed the mids are on the 3’s.

Yeah I just don't get any of the reviews or measurements talking about how refined the mids are. They're refined because they're all far below the bass and treble, so of course there won't be any distortion in the mids when their output levels are so low.

 

[d00]

I had AirPods Pro 1, then 2, and now 3.

I can confirm that they are the best of all. I like this refined bass.

Well. These are headphones for everyday, for movement, universal, for different music. It's good that they have a "V" tuning in my opinion. They are really enjoyable to listen to music, but also to watch movies or listen to podcasts/audiobooks.

My opinion is also supported by the fact that I like the "V" sound.

In my case, they have now replaced the DAP HiBy M300 with IEM and I returned to listening via BT. They are really good.

 

[Ste_S]

On this note I was wondering, how is it that the Max are so bad? I was thinking the same thing - given Apples resources they should be leading the market but then they make 500$ headphones that literally no one likes

And our review here is in line with that impression, a nice headless panther.

Well, I like the Max, so not literally everyone. Crinacle's FR graph, with the XM6 for comparison neatly illustrates why - they're not the stupid muddy mid-bass cannons that a large segment of the bluetooth headphone market is. I've tried Bluetooth headphones from Sennheiser, Bowers & Wilkins, Sony, Bang & Olufsen and Sonos, and the Max are comfortably my favourites.

 

[AyeYoYoYO]

Was pleasantly surprised by the AirPodsPro1, given to me as a gift.

Was assuming I would sell the gift, later on, when they wouldn’t notice lol … but genuinely enjoyed the 1st gen’s sound signature almost as much as my Technics AZ-70’s, and was very surprised by such a sensibly curved frequency response.

The sub-bass and bass were plentiful, but not excessive. The upper bass was tapered down slowly and perfectly, bottoming out at 200hz (chef’s kiss) to avoid any muddiness, and give perfect seperation. 1st gen slowly tapered back up into a truly beautifully-neutral midrange, that didn’t shy away from a nearly perfect 1k-3k climb. The 1st gen treble was a little shy/veiled for my taste in places, but great for some Senn HD6__ lovers. On the reserved side of neutral, but still an acceptably tasteful treble presence.

The 2nd gen AirPodsPro, retained the overall shape/impression, but recessed the upper mids, and added a little too much bass, but corrected the treble nicely, other than a small peak. So 2nd gen was slightly more V-Shaped than 1st gen, but not distastefully so.

Was hoping they could mix the FR from 20hz-3kz from the 1st gen, with the improved treble presence of the 2nd gen from 3khz-20khz, while also addressing the slight 2nd gen treble peak. Would have been a perfect “3rd times a charm” case …

…But no.

3rd gen AirPods Pro, is insultingly V-shaped IMHO. It’s following “bad data” low end consumer trends, maybe due to the beats acquisition, IDK.

It’s Apple …. It’s supposed to be a tastefully minimalist, timeless, premium product. Obviously with the limitations of wireless, sound quality has a ceiling. So any “PRO” branding is at least partially in jest. BUT, they should at least have a frequency response professionals can respect somewhat, instead of laugh at dismissivley.

The ANC improvements are great, and translation tech shows promise eventually, but they missed the most important aspect … it should sound universally pleasing, not catering to bad data, low end trends sponsored by energy drinks, aftermarket exhaust systems, and the X-Games.

 

[rirelien]

Disappointing overall consensus. I don't use my first-generations for music, only for podcasts/calls/late-night TV/movie watching, when I can't use loudspeakers; but even so, I'd want the best possible sound within the limitations for that price, and it does look like the tuning's a bit off.

Even taking into account the adaptive technology -- so I'm going here on the subjective impressions as well as measurements that are attempting to take the adaptive EQ into account.

 

[1096bimu]

Just got my APP3, had APP2 for a long time, did not use the APP1 because it didn't fit my ears, relied too much on friction but I have extremely oily skin so that did not work.

Before this I also got a pair of Sony WH1000XM6 which I tried, out of the box it immediately sounded super warm and I had to knock down the low mids in the EQ to sound neutral, delta from neutral is MUCH bigger than any Apple headphone I've ever tried. Also its transparency mode obviously has too much energy in the highs, which you can't adjust. I don't think it's a bad headphone because it can do very well after adjustments, I just think it should be neutral out of the box and not require manual adjustment.

In contrast, the APP3 and APP2 basically just sound neutral and normal, yes the 3 has a bit more bass and slightly more highs, but the delta from neutral is not even close to the XM6. So from my perspective it just seems ridiculous people would even find it worth while to argue over sound quality on any of the APP because these are easily some of the most neutral sounding headphones you could get. Are they perfectly neutral? I don't know because it's very hard to know, my speakers (KEF LSXII) sound slightly warmer but who knows which one is more "correct" because they are all within that very small delta where even small changes to relative position or how you put on your headphones can change the sound just as much or more, so it's meaningless to keep calibrating. But maybe there is an alternative angle...

I believe transparency mode is a very good test for how well the brand has engineered their sound, because if you can make transparency mode sound natural then you must know exactly what the correct frequency response is for the most neutral sound, and who has the best transparency mode? To me the APP3 transparency mode is slightly improved, still a bit of emphasis on highs, but better, and nowhere near as bad as XM6. Of course it is possible for Apple to use a different FR target for transparency and content playback, I can only say if they did do that deliberately, I trust they had good reasons to do it.

The APP3 to me is virtually indistinguishable from the best headphones, plus it is wireless which eliminates cable vibration. There are only some very limited reasons I would ever use another headphone:

• comfort
• battery limitations
• input/host device limitation

BTW Beats headphones after Apple acquisition are also very neutral, check out the FR on the beats studio pro it basically is exactly on the harmon target, the last Beats I had was the solo 3 a while back, it too was pretty neutral and sounded great. The perception that Beats is just mindless bass and hyper V-shape a very outdated look.