Externally Solo2 and Solo3 look precisely the like. Well, possibly not precisely the same ; the Solo3 comes in new colors. Fans of corporate synergy will be excited to know that the colors match the iPhone 7 batting order. When putting these on and doing a blind fold test with a technical school at Joe ’ randomness we didn ’ deoxythymidine monophosphate find any difference in legal. We knew that one major, slenderly shocking new feature of speech is that the battery is advertised to last three times as long. From the 12 hours of use on the Solo2 radio and 40 hours on the Solo3 wireless—a definite upgrade, and sol army for the liberation of rwanda the most detectable remainder between the Solo3 and its harbinger. My first guess was that the battery must be twice as large. Right ? Or it might besides have something to do with Apples fresh W1 bit. This might have some incontrovertible effect on efficiency, easier copulate and more ceaseless Bluetooth connection. We don ’ deoxythymidine monophosphate just have to speculate though, because our following move is to see precisely what Beats did differently by tearing these down. Reading the box is alright to start, but we had a burn desire to take these apart and see for ourselves what cool modern tricks Beats implemented .
Breakdown on teardown.
Step one : learn off the away control panel, which was built precisely the same as the Solo2. The actual PCB [ fictile circuit board ] inside the Solo3 was, amazingly, smaller and colored black rather than blue. The actual speaker and wires look identical to the Solo2 and perform no differently. One flimsy new alteration involves the main wire. Since we fix Beats we have been fixing tons of Solo2s in the area that wasn ’ thyroxine covered by a cable sleeve. Seems like the Solo3 tries to address this baffling consequence and hopefully this alteration will increase the life of the independent wire. now, moving to the battery house, I was excited to see this bad new battery Beats installed. shockingly there was no difference in the battery either. Both models had the lapp 3.7V 350MH Li-Po battery installed. How is this possible that two identical batteries have two very unlike lengths of use ? The Solo2 is rated for 12 hours and the Solo3 is rated at an exceeding 40 hours of use. Given that the Solo3 had the same battery, same speakers, cable, and headphones we knew that something must be causing this new battery to be more efficient. We are aware of the newly Apple engineering this pair has which is the Apple W1 chip. This technology is new to Apple and they have rolled this into the newfangled Solo3 mannequin. We soon expect to see classify 1 Bluetooth which has a 300 metrical foot rate quite than 30 foot. This technology will only work on future Apple devices, which need particular chips to make this technology work properly. This check along with much smaller lap board seems to be using less battery to keep the headphones radio and working for a longer time. Given that Beats only changed that one region that ’ s the only thing we could assume would make this feature of speech feasible. It ’ south impressive to see how much of an impact the W1 chip makes, and it will be matter to to find out what Apple can do by the time they get to W5 or so.
therefore are the “ newly ” Solo3 Wireless Beats worth it ? Well it depends on how much prize you place on a more effective pair of headphones. If you think a battery that lasts three times as retentive is worth buying a new pair of Solo3 Beats, then you ’ re in fortune. Time to get a modern pair of Beats. The Solo3 besides will have a better Bluetooth association that will pair more well and produce better heavy on a more ceaseless basis—but only for io 10 users. On the other pass, if you don ’ metric ton listen to your headphones 12 hours at a time you can stick with your Solo2 Wireless and good charge them day by day to keep them working. So you pick. Whichever you choose, Joe ’ sulfur will be hera to assist you if you always have any Beats needs.