iDiamond ear: $6,400 earbuds don't come any cheaper
By Paul Miller 
posted December 15th 2007 11:32PM
posted December 15th 2007 11:32PM
We were never too hip with the precious metals, and we can't say we're doing any better with this setup. The iDiamond ear, built by Heyerdahl jewelry, is slicked up with 18 karat gold and 204 diamonds, but we can't help but seeing a pair of cheap headphones with glitter on them -- with a $6,400 pricetag slapped on just for kicks. Good thing we're not filthy rich, we'd be so terrible at frittering away our cash.
Oh please let me know who actually BUYS these, I want to sell them things.
Even if these had the best sound quality in the world, it would still be quite ignorant to spend 6.4K on them. I can understand paying a premium ~$200 - $300 for a pair of great headphones because you're getting excellent audio quality, and some people are willing to put out that much... that's fine. But it's absolutely ignorant to ever buy these. Hell, it probably only took a few cents to manufacture the earphones them selves, and ~$1500 for the minerals (if even that).
You have to realize that these are for people that have more money than common sense . . . like people that bought the H2.
Will they blend? Ooohh, I wanna see them blend so badly... I'm sure they'll be attached to Paris Hilton's ears soon enough, so I guess I can wait to kill two birds with one stone...
It looks like they put the crappy iPod buds in that thing.
ha ha!
I have this policy never to spend more than $20 on a pair of earbuds, because invariably they break. Using them about 4 hours a day while commuting, I can get maybe 3-6 months out of a pair before they get yanked too many times and one ear will suddenly stop working. I hope whoever's buying these doesn't actually try to move while wearing them.
Even if one were to value aesthetics so ridiculously highly, over functionality (assuming the sound quality is nothing special, which might not be the case, but still), I'm not going to lie. Those earbuds are not that good-looking.
Quantity of expensive materials doesn't automatically make things attractive. It's like gluing a Maserati to another Maserati and calling it a much nicer Maserati.
It looks easy to replace the buds from the gold and diamond sheaths, for what it's worth. Still.. fugly.
This should not be worthy of being on engadget. Its simply crap.
Are you saying all I need to do is add diamonds to crap and call it the greatest stink pile ever and It will be on engadget. Adding diamonds to anything and it will not make it more that it is.
Come on engadget, you can do better than this.
and now for the low low price of $100,000 a diamond encrusted turd! Not only does it have over a hundred diamonds on it but it is the first of its kind. only 4-5 are made a week (depending on diet) and weight and size are to be determined. so call now so you can be the first in the world to have this great product.
now i know what to get paris hilton and britney spears for christmas. god knows britney could sure show them to the new child she messes up. hahahahaha.
lol
Probably still sounds like crap. Just like the cheap Apple ones they are modeled after.
I have to say its a pretty smart idea. I like the concept but would never buy anything so tacky