Rapha has collaborated with Danish audio brand Bang & Olufsen to introduce new Beoplay E8 Sport earphones intended for indoor training sessions.

Rapha says the Beoplay E8 Sport earphones (£300) are IP57-certified, meaning that they’re protected against dust and water (the test is 30 minutes at a depth of a metre) – so heavy sweat from training hard shouldn’t be a problem.
The variety of ear tips and fins included are said to ensure “a secure fit for uncompromising sound quality and comfort, even when sprinting out of the saddle”.

With the claimed battery life being up to seven hours per charge, Rapha says the “playtime will long outlast your session”. Well, it will as long as you aren’t the average rider completing a virtual Everesting which has been incredibly popular this year. That said, the wireless charging case of the earphones has an extra three charges that can be used before plugging the case in at the socket.

Promising a high-quality audio performance to match your riding efforts, Rapha claims the “Bluetooth 5.1, AAC and aptX codecs ensure perfect connectivity and sound reproduction on all iOS and Android devices.”
Turbo training tips — get the most from your home trainer
Finished off with a nod to cycling culture, Rapha says the earphone connection tone is the sound of cowbell’s ringing to “transport you to the crowds cheering at road races”.

The limited edition Beoplay E8 Sport Rapha edition will be available to Rapha Cycling Club members from today and to everyone else at www.rapha.cc and www.bang-olufsen.com from 16th November. We’ll have a review here on road.cc soon.

























13 thoughts on “Rapha collaborates with Bang & Olufsen on Bluetooth earphones”
Over priced tat.
Over priced tat.
Any reason for you to be so
Any reason for you to be so bitter? Surely it’s up to consumers to decide whether these headphones are over-priced and/or “tat” or do you have some inside knowledge to confirm either claim?
He’s just being “that guy”.
He’s just being “that guy”.
Tat is a bit harsh.
Tat is a bit harsh. Overpriced at £299 – maybe a tad, given the sweetspot is around £200 and the B&O’s dont tend to come top of the reviews, but always tend to be premium priced. (older 2.0 model in link).
https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/best-true-wireless-earbuds-the-best-airpod-alternatives-around
To be fair I’ve had a few B&O
To be fair I’ve had a few B&O products and they’ve always been top notch. The price for these is exactly the same as the normal B&O E8 3rd gen, so no Rapha mark up.
I have some wireless earbuds,
I have some wireless earbuds, with the same style of fitting (albeit nowhere near the quality of these), but cannot for the life of me get them to keep still and secure within my ears, no matter which size bud I use. Not sure what my point is, but if I can’t use £50 earbuds properly, I’m definitely not buying £300 ones! Not that I would spend 300 knicker on earbuds even if they fit well.
Its worth experimenting with
Its worth experimenting with different fittings. I have 2 sets of wireless earbuds – both sit still for a turbo session without the “wings”, though the Jabras are borderline.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
Yeah, tried all the supplied rubber pieces SS, none of them fit that well – either too big so that they won’t go in far enough, or hurt when pushed in, or they are too small and they won’t stay in at all. I must just have strange shaped sensory organs – I can never get swimming goggles to fit either!!
Duct Tape? For the buds, not
Duct Tape? For the buds, not the goggles. Oh wait, try with the goggles as well 😉
A couple of things put me off
A couple of things put me off these earbuds, first is the fact the right bud is the master unit so you can’t use just the left if you want to wear a single ear out on the road, the second problem is the E8s have a significant delay if you’re watching a film or something on the trainer
Why do you prefer to just use
Why do you prefer to just use the left – is it because the drivers will mostly over take on the right?
Define ‘collaborates’
Define ‘collaborates’
ClBO3-3 ?
ClBO3-3 ?