
Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine’s School for Innovation - MatthiasP
http://online.wsj.com/articles/dr-dre-and-jimmy-iovines-school-for-innovation-1415238722
======
6stringmerc
So, taking a sub-standard product[1], slathering it with a ton of hype and
celebrity endorsements, then selling it off to an even more practiced entity
in a similar method of business is now heralded as genius?

I've got a better idea for Dre & Iovine: Finish Detox. Then you can talk
about...whatever else...

I do think this quote is rather telling though:

 _Says Iovine: “We want kids who can work at Beats or at Apple.”_

Yeah, that's the kind of herd mentality I'd expect from a record industry
professional. I'm serious. What's popular in music is dictated by the tastes
of 14 year old girls. If you think Iovine is worth following, just keep this
context in mind. You might get rich, but then again, is that your end goal?

[1] As a Monster product, a wide swath of musicians and professionals rightly
dogged on their gimmicky marketing and high price versus their in-the-field
performance. While there are many great headphones on the market (Sennheiser
is my personal favorite), nobody will rate Beats anywhere near the top 5. Just
because Skrillex likes them doesn't mean they're actually good.

~~~
clark-kent
I don't know about Beats headsets, but Dre and Iovine are innovators when it
comes to music production. Dre for example is a perfectionist when it comes to
music infact most artists that work with Dre on his Aftermath label never
release an album, because its not perfect enough by Dre's standards. Sounds
similar to Steve Jobs when it comes to product quality. At least as far as
music production goes.

~~~
6stringmerc
How is that a good thing? So the genius tree falls in the forest and nobody
hears it. Does it really count?

~~~
fyolnish
Most records released on aftermath end up at #1 or #2 on billboard.

------
rickdale
A little bit off topic, but whenever I see the name Jimmy Iovine I immediately
think of the Macklemore song about his meeting with him. And I feel like the
song does a good job representing what Jimmy Iovine stands for and how the
music business works. To quote from the song, "rather be a starving artist
than succeed at getting fucked." Overall this 'school for innovation' seems
like a program developed for people that are wasting time at college, not
rigorous students. There are plenty of entrepreneurial programs at
universities and colleges and this just seems like a light-weight over-hyped
version of those, sorta like the headphones.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RwW6ERgpvo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RwW6ERgpvo)
\--the song.

~~~
josephpmay
Apparently Jimmy actually loves that song and asked Macklemore to be in the
music video.

[0] [http://www.fuse.tv/videos/2012/11/macklemore-ellen-
degeneres...](http://www.fuse.tv/videos/2012/11/macklemore-ellen-degeneres-
jimmy-iovine-star-video)

~~~
rasz_pl
no bad publicity

------
josephpmay
I'm a student at the Iovine and Young Academy, and I would be happy to answer
any questions about what the school is actually like.

~~~
sreyaNotfilc
Awesome Joseph. I'll send you an email later today. It does sound like an
interesting concept. If you don't mind elaborating here, that would be great.

------
loso
I am used to seeing HN crap on Beats headphones. Even though they're great for
playing the target demographics favorite music hip hop and bass heavy pop,
fine if you don't like the product then you don't like the product. But to see
people in tech complain about something being successful because of marketing
is pretty hilarious.

With the "Don't be evil", " we're going to make the world better", and
hundreds of other grand pronouncements that we hear in tech it seems silly to
knock Beats because of marketing. Yeah the tech product may be useful but it
didn't end world hunger.

Jimmy Iovine is right when it comes to Silicon Valley and speaking to culture.
Wearables are a good example. They have been god awful ugly so far. But to
silicon valley the tech is more important so they were pushed to the public.
These are smart fashion accessories but aren't fashionable at all. They are
cool as hell as far as the tech. But look horrible.

~~~
gohrt
You are saying that Google Search+Ads's success is as marketing-driven as
Beats headphones?

------
egeozcan
> They’ve revolutionized headphones.

How exactly running a huge marketing campaign is revolution? There were always
designer headphones. Their headphones also do not bring anything on the
technicalities (40$ headphones, as mentioned before, "beats" them on every
category).

Disclaimer: I'm known as a headphone geek.

~~~
hackinthebochs
> There were always designer headphones.

And they all looked like shit. In fact, the "designer" headphones pre-beats
competed on how ugly they could look. It was a badge of honor.

>Their headphones also do not bring anything on the technicalities

They have a built-in amp. That is technical innovation in headphones.

~~~
egeozcan
Well, a pair of Beats also look and feel like plastic toys (I know because I
owned 3 different pairs - I'm obsessed with headphones and won't talk about
any pair of headphones until I test them personally). Sennheiser HD650 and
HD600 are much better choices in terms of... well, everything. This is a very
subjective thing though. Maybe you are impressed by the packaging? (Sennheiser
puts their "audiophile-grade" headphones in what's basically a cardboard box
so I'd understand)

The built-in amp has been available in all the headphones with noise-
cancellation and the muddy, exaggerated bass isn't something these ears
haven't heard before. I'm not exactly an audiophile so maybe there's something
I'm missing.

~~~
hackinthebochs
What people who dog on beats are missing is that "muddy, exaggerated bass" is
exactly what most people want. The beats are so successful because they gave
people what they wanted--strong bass and good looks, and audiophiles and
technophiles lose their shit over it.

There is a lesson to be learned from the beats phenomenon, and it isn't that
"beats are crap".

~~~
egeozcan
> What people who dog on beats are missing is that "muddy, exaggerated bass"
> is exactly what most people want.

No. Most people who love beats usually ditch them when they hear a proper
headphone. This is my anecdotal evidence, yes, but I hear about it from others
all the time too. People love it because usually they are the first pair of
cans they hear which are more expensive than 20 Dollars. Yes, they are way
better than the crappy IEMs people used buy just because of their color. This
doesn't mean that people love "muddy, exaggerated bass".

People love going to concerts too and muddy, exaggerated treble and bass is
all you get there in terms of sound. People still go to concerts because of
the experience. I love it too. If the same group was having a concert in a
much more acoustic concert hall with also the same great experience for even
less money, I would definitely prefer that instead. This situation is like,
they go to a concert the first time in their life and love it. Does it mean
the extremely distorted sound in a crappy concert hall is their preference? I
don't think so. The crappy concert hall just invested more on marketing so
everybody knows about it.

So, again, what's wrong with some people talking about the disadvantages and
pointing that there are better alternatives? Even, in the end, if someone
still happens to love the "muddy, exaggerated bass", at least now they now
it's not the only option.

Coming back to my argument, I'm 100% confident the phrase "beats
revolutionizing the headphones" has less to do with revolution and more to do
with marketing (and nothing to do with the technicalities).

------
gmisra
Just a little history on what Dre and Jimmy consider "innovation":
[http://gizmodo.com/5981823/beat-by-dre-the-inside-story-
of-h...](http://gizmodo.com/5981823/beat-by-dre-the-inside-story-of-how-
monster-lost-the-world)

