They headphones I referenced are on woot right now for 130.Hmmm planning to buy a headphone also. Is it worth it buying a used M50X then buy the FiiO bluetooth adapter? I'm planning to use mainly for music as to compared to gaming.
They headphones I referenced are on woot right now for 130.Hmmm planning to buy a headphone also. Is it worth it buying a used M50X then buy the FiiO bluetooth adapter? I'm planning to use mainly for music as to compared to gaming.
I've had my Bose QC35iis for a bit now and they're the best headphones I've ever owned. The biggest thing as well is they're the first pair of headphones I'm actively taking care of. I never use them for exercise as I have a pair of Bluetooth ear buds for that.
Is the sound the best there is? No. They're decent and with the additional noise cancelation they do fine. Their biggest draw is the battery life and build quality. I use mine like for 8-10 hours a day while working and they last me anywhere from 2-3 days with decently heavy use. They also come with a headphone jack wire that turns them into a pair of wired headphones when needed, and with a two pronged jack for when you're in a plane and want to listen to their audio. I've had no need to look for the next latest and greatest headphones out there cause I'm happy with these.
I tried the Sony ones in the store and the noise canceling is definitely a bit better. But for some reason this caused a lot of 'pressure' on my ears, making it feel like I'm underwater or like when you are gaining attitude quickly. Wasn't very comfortable to me.
Here's the prod info...
Sony's
No questions about any other pair.
I have the XM1s and they are amazing. I've read nothing but great things about the newer models.
And yet objective measurements disprove this time and time again.If you're into audiophile fidelity I'm not sure why you'd even look at Sony's direct Bose airplane exec competitor (qc35iis actually sound great but broad) since they're always going to shoot for warm rich bass and vocals . Which as you note are extremely popular. With people.
Welcome to the world of headphone audiophiles.OP says they want active noise cancelling headphones. 5+ people go on to recommend open back headphones.
lmaoooo
The importance of DACs and Amps is severely over-stated in headphone communities.If you go wired just make sure you have the proper hardware to connect them to and proper source music. There's no point in buying high-end headphones if you're not able to get the most out of them.
Welcome to the world of headphone audiophiles.
They'll probably recommend a desktop-based DAC and Amp next (probably Schiit gear even though it's objectively bad) even if they person is asking for Bluetooth headphones.
Having "the proper hardware" doesn't necessarily mean buying a high-end DAC/Amp. It just means having something decent, because believe it or not there are such things such as crappy on-board soundcards. Also, something decent to replace your on-board card hasn't cost an arm and a leg for while now. You can get good USB DAC/Amps that you can even use with your smartphone for relatively cheap these days.The importance of DACs and Amps is severely over-stated in headphone communities.
A good amp matters for particularly difficult to drive headphones, but it shouldn't matter for the majority of headphones.
It's the last 2% of audio quality and yet many people think you should spend most of your budget on it.
A good DAC/amp absolutely improves sound quality. Sound coming from my laptop/mobile phone sounds like complete ass compared to my Audioquest Dragonfly DAC/amp, there's not even a contest.And yet objective measurements disprove this time and time again.
The "buy other sound equipment" joke started because Bose headphones were considered to be overpriced; not because they were considered to be bad.
And even then, that's only because audiophiles were comparing these closed-back active noise cancelling headphones at ~$300 to their similarly-priced open-back high fidelity headphones like the Sennheiser HD650 in the lonely silence of their parents' basement.
Having owned both, my preference is for Bose - though it's largely won over by them being smaller headphones, having much better Bluetooth connectivity, and better controls (physical buttons rather than gestures).
Sony's ANC is better in some respects and worse in others. Bose's ANC has never failed on me, but Sony's sounded noticeably distorted at times.
Neither are idea for gaming, as they don't support aptX Low Latency, but are fine if you use them wired.
Welcome to the world of headphone audiophiles.
They'll probably recommend a desktop-based DAC and Amp next (probably Schiit gear even though it's objectively bad) even if they person is asking for Bluetooth headphones.
The importance of DACs and Amps is severely over-stated in headphone communities.
A good amp matters for particularly difficult to drive headphones, but it shouldn't matter for the majority of headphones.
It's the last 2% of audio quality and yet many people think you should spend most of your budget on it.
Having "the proper hardware" doesn't necessarily mean buying a high-end DAC/Amp. It just means having something decent, because believe it or not there are such things such as crappy on-board soundcards. Also, something decent to replace your on-board card hasn't cost an arm and a leg for while now. You can get good USB DAC/Amps that you can even use with your smartphone for relatively cheap these days.
I never said they did nothing, I said that their importance was severely over-stated - with some people spending more money on DACs/Amps than the headphones themselves, or spending a lot of money on a DAC/Amp for some very basic headphones.A good DAC/amp absolutely improves sound quality. Sound coming from my laptop/mobile phone sounds like complete ass compared to my Audioquest Dragonfly DAC/amp, there's not even a contest.
A lot of people get this wrong. High impedance headphones are easy to drive, since they just need enough voltage to play at a good volume level. That's why studio reference headphones were originally designed to be 600 ohms. The main concern with them is just whether a device can drive them loud enough or not (if not, get an amp).[…] those high impedance headphones some people are recommending would sound like shit from the 3.5mm jack on a normal consumer device.
Well, they will sound like shit because no phone/laptop/headphone jack in a controller will be able to drive them at a satisfactory loudness. Which is why I grince at recommendations of super high impedance headphones.I never said they did nothing, I said that their importance was severely over-stated - with some people spending more money on DACs/Amps than the headphones themselves, or spending a lot of money on a DAC/Amp for some very basic headphones.
There is absolutely a level where buying a new DAC or Amp will make a difference, but the threshold between making a difference and entering placebo territory is pretty low.
A lot of people get this wrong. High impedance headphones are easy to drive, since they just need enough voltage to play at a good volume level. That's why studio reference headphones were originally designed to be 600 ohms. The main concern with them is just whether a device can drive them loud enough or not (if not, get an amp).
Low impedance headphones are difficult to drive because they are very sensitive to noise, require a device with a low impedance output for sufficient damping, and require a current-based amplifier rather than a voltage-based one. But low-impedance designs are increasingly common now, because they will play loud from nearly any device, even if they may not sound their best.
And yet objective measurements disprove this time and time again.
The "buy other sound equipment" joke started because Bose headphones were considered to be overpriced; not because they were considered to be bad.
And even then, that's only because audiophiles were comparing these closed-back active noise cancelling headphones at ~$300 to their similarly-priced open-back high fidelity headphones like the Sennheiser HD650 in the lonely silence of their parents' basement.
Having owned both, my preference is for Bose - though it's largely won over by them being smaller headphones, having much better Bluetooth connectivity, and better controls (physical buttons rather than gestures).
Sony's ANC is better in some respects and worse in others. Bose's ANC has never failed on me, but Sony's sounded noticeably distorted at times.
Neither are idea for gaming, as they don't support aptX Low Latency, but are fine if you use them wired.
Welcome to the world of headphone audiophiles.
They'll probably recommend a desktop-based DAC and Amp next (probably Schiit gear even though it's objectively bad) even if they person is asking for Bluetooth headphones.
The importance of DACs and Amps is severely over-stated in headphone communities.
A good amp matters for particularly difficult to drive headphones, but it shouldn't matter for the majority of headphones.
It's the last 2% of audio quality and yet many people think you should spend most of your budget on it.