Even measurements can’t agree on what these earbuds actually sound like.
Apple’s latest AirPods Pro 3 have split audio reviewers and buyers right down the middle. Linus says Apple ruined his favorite product, others call them borderline unlistenable, while some argue the changes are barely noticeable.
But to understand why opinions are so far apart, you have to look deeper than first impressions.
Viral Backlash and Reviewer Criticism
Linus Sebastian’s YouTube video went viral after he completely rejected the AirPods Pro 3 during an unboxing.
“They took the one product of theirs that I legitimately don’t just like—that I love,” he said.
“They sound like… why… The Beats acquisition was for the brand name, not the sound signature.”
He then called out audio reviewer DMS (who handles testing for Linus Media Group’s Labs division) directly.
Super Review quickly released a response video pushing back on the negativity, only for DMS to fire back with “Linus was right about AirPods Pro 3.” In it, he defended Sebastian’s reaction as fair and tore into Super Review’s measurement methods, showing why the Pro 3 really do measure (and sound) far removed from the Pro 2.
The Headphone Show followed with focused listening tests and a sharp verdict calling Pro 3 a major letdown next to Pro 2. Resolve even called the new model the “disappointment of the year” and “borderline unlistenable.”
According to them, every track in their reference playlist fell flat as the bass was sluggish and bloated, and the treble was sharp and piercing.
This blatant disagreement between reviewers had audiophiles arguing online on who’s right and put Apple’s tuning choices under the microscope.
What Changed in AirPods Pro 3’s Sound Quality
Apple’s third-generation AirPods Pro might look the same on the outside, but under the hood they’ve shifted to a very different tuning philosophy.
The Pro 2 earned praise for sticking close to the widely liked Harman target. But, the Pro 3 abandon that approach for a much more V-shaped signature, with lifted lows and highs and a dip through the midrange.
Based on careful measurements and corroborated listener reports, AirPods Pro 3 shift the balance in three clear ways:
- Sub-bass (below ~80 Hz): about +2 dB, which adds rumble and low-end weight.
- Mid-bass (~150 Hz): about -3 dB, which can reduce muddiness but also removes some body from male vocals and bass guitars.
- Upper range (4.2–17 kHz): generally +2 to +3 dB on average, with a notable rise near 8 kHz, where many people are most sensitive to sibilance and sharpness.
These are not night-and-day swings, but they are large enough for trained listeners to notice quickly.
Another wrinkle is Adaptive EQ, which boosts bass and treble at lower volumes to make quiet listening feel fuller, then dials them back as you turn the volume up. Because the Pro 3 already emphasize those regions, this behavior can push them into “too much” territory at moderate listening levels for some people.
Others, however, hear added clarity and energy. This split, between “bright and lively” and “shrill and tiring”, defines much of the reaction to the new sound.
Why Some Measurements Disagree
One reason online opinions about the Pro 3 are so polarized is that not all measurement data tells the same story.
Unlike passive in-ears, AirPods actively change their output based on fit and environment. Tiny microphones inside each bud monitor how they seal in your ears and apply real-time DSP corrections, especially below about 2 kHz. Unfortunately, standard test rigs don’t account for this behavior, so raw measurements can look very different from what listeners actually hear.
That’s why some graphs shared online, like those from Super Review, appear fairly normal, suggesting only minor tweaks.
But those plots compare uncompensated data to “semi-raw” targets, which isn’t a valid way to interpret adaptive earphones.
More controlled testing from reviewers like DMS, who compensate their data and align it with population-average targets, shows a much clearer picture.
Based on this, Pro 3’s response is noticeably more V-shaped than Pro 2’s, and in some cases even more so than certain Beats models.
By stepping away from that balance, Apple introduced specific problems:
- Sibilance: “s” and “sh” sounds jump out sharply, like sandpaper in the ear.
- Fatiguing treble: hi-hats and cymbals pierce through the mix instead of blending.
- Masked detail: bass energy buries backing vocals and rhythm instruments.
Why no two graphs are exactly alike
The type of rig and compensation curve also matter. Measurements taken with common GRAS 711 couplers can differ from those made with more advanced B&K 5128 systems designed to mimic the average human ear.
The latter often reveal stronger treble peaks and bigger midrange dips, which is exactly the traits listeners describe.
And, because AirPods tune themselves to your individual ear shape, HRTF (head-related transfer function) variation adds another layer: two people can measure or perceive slightly different results, even with the same gear.
Divided User Response
Reactions to the AirPods Pro 3 out in the wild have been as polarized as the review videos. Some people say they’re a clear step forward. Others couldn’t get them back in the box fast enough.
Reddit user exclus23 fell into the latter camp. They’d carried the Pro 2s everywhere for years, so expectations were sky-high. Within hours of trying the Pro 3, disappointment set in.
They tried every setting Apple and Spotify had to offer (spatial audio, accessibility tweaks, EQ presets) but nothing brought back the balance of the Pro 2. In the end, their solution was simple: return the Pro 3 and hunt down another pair of Pro 2s while they could still be found.
However, not everyone shared that experience. Another user, ShakataGaNai, ran their own A/B tests between Pro 2 and Pro 3. They cycled through playlists spanning electronic, classical, film scores, J-Pop, and podcasts.
The result is a split that isn’t just about taste. Some listeners physically can’t tolerate the Pro 3’s treble spikes, while others enjoy the extra bass and sparkle. The same changes that push one person to return them make another swear they’re the best AirPods yet.
What Could Solve the Issue?
Apple gives AirPods Pro 3 a lot of brains, but not much control.
On iPhone, you can nudge the sound with Headphone Accommodations (Settings > Accessibility > Audio/Visual). Those tweaks apply system-wide to supported AirPods and let you pick Balanced, Vocal Range, or Brightness, set the intensity. And, it can even base the tuning on an audiogram.
It’s helpful, especially if the Pro 3’s mids feel recessed, but it isn’t a real equalizer.
What’s missing is precision. Headphone Accommodations can’t target narrow bands or tame a specific spike (say, around 7–8 kHz) the way a parametric or graphic EQ can. If the treble is what’s bothering you, a broad “brightness” slider won’t surgically fix it.
And while a quick, practical adjustment some listeners like is Vocal Range at Slight or Moderate intensity, others find the effect subtle or a little unnatural. Expectations should be set accordingly.
There’s also a platform caveat: these accommodations live on iOS. Use your AirPods with Android or Windows, and you lose those system-wide adjustments unless you bring your own third-party EQ on the device side.
That’s why the calls for a proper EQ keep getting louder. Apple already measures fit and adjusts output in real time. So, exposing a user EQ, even a simple five-band or a couple of parametric points, would let people dial back treble energy or restore midrange presence without hacks.
Until then, AirPods Pro 3 offer clever automatic tuning but leave the most important knob, the one that matches your ears and taste, out of reach.