Bose QuietComfort 35 II Review (Noise Cancelling Headphone)

[nxnje]

The purpose of a for-profit organization is, to make a profit. Bose uses engineering, psychoacoustic and marketing to drive profit. They sell and sell a lot: for many people not versed or interested in the arcana of audiophilia, they sound good and pleasant enough: Such results come from Marketing and Engineering. They are also a force in the professional realm. Their PA systems are no slouch and used in many great-sounding installations.

A mistake that we of the audiophile persuasion tend to make but Bose uses Engineering and marketing. If Harman had 1/10th of Bose Marketing chops, they would entirely dominate the audio field. They have the Engineering and products for that. However good luck trying to find such in the jungle of brands, the labyrinth of distributions and their piss-poor , abject and often downright inane marketing.

I quote this.
The QC35 III don't sound BAD in the real sense of the term itself, they are pleasant to the ears, it's just something you have to like, just like the harman target and other type of signatures.
This is their business model, don't think bashing them for this makes sense, we're here to share opinions, just that.

 

[PeteL]

Audibility of distortion? Note, no bass boost applied in amir's eq either so less of an issue than those cans that need higher eq levels. Also, isn't the NAD something of a low water mark for distortion (high water mark maybe?)?

As for the 3k onwards wonkiness, how many people do you think would discern that without seeing any measurements?

Assuming that people woulnd't discern above 3k wonkiness or suggesting that these levels of distortion may be inaudible, you are stepping foot in a fallacy where it could be argued that all headphone should sound exactly the same with a bit of EQ. This is not the case, because frequency response, because distortion and because other parameters not tested here as well.

 

[Jimbob54]

Assuming that people woulnd't discern above 3k wonkiness or suggesting that these levels of distortion may be inaudible, you are stepping foot in a fallacy where it could be argued that all headphone should sound exactly the same with a bit of EQ. This is not the case, because frequency response, because distortion and because other parameters not tested here as well.

I'm not assuming, I'm asking. I'm not a fan of challenging someone's perception of a headphone based solely on eyeballing the measurements.

By all means use all those factors to determine if a pair are something you personally care to audition, I just think expressing surprise at someone's listening impressions based on viewing a couple of graphs is a little extreme.

 

[nxnje]

Assuming that people woulnd't discern above 3k wonkiness or suggesting that these levels of distortion may be inaudible, you are stepping foot in a fallacy where it could be argued that all headphone should sound exactly the same with a bit of EQ. This is not the case, because frequency response, because distortion and because other parameters not tested here as well.

Thing people don't understand is that two different headphones that can be EQed to get to same signature, will never sound the same, and although you'll still be able to measure them and figure out they look very similar, you'll hear the differences.
At least, this from my own experience (not pointing my fingers towards no one, just a personal statement).

 

[Feelas]

I am speaking about my personal opinion with the headphone.
I look at graph EVERY TIME, but I also have my own impressions.
Every ear is different.
That graph can mean everything and nothing, considering you can read in the upper region "sharp" or similar terms while someone could tell that is just bright and maybe liking it.
We're speaking about pure sound and you keep referring to graphs is if we were speaking about amplifiers' measurement.
I'll repeat for the second time: it's not gonna be interesting both for me and you, different point of view.
To me, QC35 III's bass sounded fat and pretty slow, and this ends for me as it is MY OPINION, and forums are online to share opinions, not only to express comments on graphs that can mean 1000 things or neither 1.

I am the first guy who always look at graphs, and that's why I have checked before picking up both the QC35 II and III, and was disappointed. Is that a crime?

There is nothing that would show slowness on graphs and the slowness is a buzzword, related to lack of treble. It would show up both on CSD and on Group Delay and I'm wondering whether you don't want to understand that it would, or are not interested in getting that.

 

[nxnje]

There is nothing that would show slowness on graphs and the slowness is a buzzword, related to lack of treble. It would show up both on CSD and on Group Delay and I'm wondering whether you don't want to understand that it would, or are not interested in getting that.

I still don't get why are you arguing because someone has different hearing than yours, but you still cannot understand it (or you are not interested in getting that).
I felt it was slow, can I have my own opinion or (I repeat) is that a crime?
I keep repeating that it was my own opinion and you keep stating graph does not show something and that you hear just what the graph is saying. I am happy for you, wasn't happy with my QC35 (both II and III).
Someone else's opinion is not gonna change my mind on that pair of cans which I judge, frankly, way under expectations for the price, for the reasons I have already stated above.
If you wanna keep speaking about the graph and about what you hear, you're welcome, I had my own experience and I don't need hours of explanation to understand what I have liked or not (no hate, I'm just answering).

 

[Jimbob54]

Most of us in this hobby have done similar somewhere down the line, those that don't think they have probably yet to realise it.

I want to see some Beats tested next, see just how accurate their bass heavy garbage reputation is.

I think Beats perhaps shot themselves in the foot (to a very limited degree). By all accounts they have a range of sound signatures but started out pushing the BOOM BOOM message, maybe appealing to many but perhaps turning off others that want a more balanced profile.

I say this knowing Dr Dre and Jimmy Iovine are living the high life partly as a result of this.

 

[PuX]

so turned off is what the hardware really sounds like, and it's very bad,

and when turned on it gets eq'd by software/noise cancelling system?

 

[PeteL]

There is nothing that would show slowness on graphs and the slowness is a buzzword, related to lack of treble. It would show up both on CSD and on Group Delay and I'm wondering whether you don't want to understand that it would, or are not interested in getting that.

debatable, It kinda could show on group delay graphs, but it simply would be much easier to asses with impulse response, square waves and waterfall graphs.

 

[outerspace]

Thing people don't understand is that two different headphones that can be EQed to get to same signature, will never sound the same, and although you'll still be able to measure them and figure out they look very similar, you'll hear the differences.

This is incorrect. If headphones are equalized to the same target at your eardrum, they will sound the same for you (if they don't have audible distortions). Here you can download equalized recordings of 3 different headphones and hidden original track and compare them. What differences can you hear? Are they as big as you expected?

The only problem is sometimes measured frequency response can differ largely from that is perceived at your eardrum due to different reasons.

 

[nxnje]

This is incorrect. If headphones are equalized to the same target at your eardrum, they will sound the same for you (if they don't have audible distortions). Here you can download equalized recordings of 3 different headphones and hidden original track and compare them. What differences can you hear? Are they as big as you expected?

The only problem is sometimes measured frequency response can differ largely from that is perceived at your eardrum due to different reasons.

I was obviously speaking about a "personal eardrum"'s EQ, and this is what I'm trying to say since my first message on this thread: everyone's hearing is different so we cannot compare.

 

[Robbo99999]

Amir listening to headphones probably

Ha, that's a good one, but Amir is not quite as beautiful!

 

[Robbo99999]

Audibility of distortion? Note, no bass boost applied in amir's eq either so less of an issue than those cans that need higher eq levels. Also, isn't the NAD something of a low water mark for distortion (high water mark maybe?)?

As for the 3k onwards wonkiness, how many people do you think would discern that without seeing any measurements?

There are other headphones that don't need a bass boost & have less distortion than the headphone in this review, the NAD HP50 is one example (although Amir did do a massive bass boost on the HP50 but that was because it wasn't sealed properly on the machine combined with how he decided to line up the target on the measurement. But yes, HP50 is one of the lowest distortion headphones that I chose to compare it against. As to audibility, I'm not entirely sure, but I know that small EQ adjustments in those frequency areas (talking the 3kHz+ wonkiness) that I can notice the difference, so I'd say it's significant. Either way, if there are headphones out there with better measurements then I would choose those rather than a lesser measuring headphone.

 

[nxnje]

I think Beats perhaps shot themselves in the foot (to a very limited degree). By all accounts they have a range of sound signatures but started out pushing the BOOM BOOM message, maybe appealing to many but perhaps turning off others that want a more balanced profile.

I say this knowing Dr Dre and Jimmy Iovine are living the high life partly as a result of this.

Money = mass.
I'd never blame them for this.
I owned and used most of Beats products, I have liked just one or two, and not solely because of the sound (solo2 for the nice sound when on-the-move, beats pro for massive isolation during livesets).
Other stuff by beats is "meh" to my ears... The only one I haven't had the chance to try is the BEATS EP, which retailed for like 50$ many times, and maybe that could appeal a wide range of customers looking for cheap, over ear, wired on-the-go headphones (although you can find the K361 by AKG in the same price range which, I think, knowing BEATS' average quality, would have a better sound, but I can be wrong, who knows).

 

[nxnje]

Money = mass.
I'd never blame them for this.
I owned and used most of Beats products, I have liked just one or two, and not solely because of the sound (solo2 for the nice sound when on-the-move, beats pro for massive isolation during livesets).
Other stuff by beats is "meh" to my ears... The only one I haven't had the chance to try is the BEATS EP, which retailed for like 50$ many times, and maybe that could appeal a wide range of customers looking for cheap, over ear, wired on-the-go headphones (although you can find the K361 by AKG in the same price range which, I think, knowing BEATS' average quality, would have a better sound, but I can be wrong, who knows).

I think things have to be evaluated by different points of view.
Let's say you have 2 headphones to choose between:
- Headphone X: it has the signature you like the most, but does not measure very well
- Headphone Y: its signature is way different, but they measure very well

Ok, I can apply EQ and bla bla, but I think i would choose the first one.
Does not measure well? Ok, but if it sounds good and I like it I don't see a reason why should I get something else because of its better measurements + I'll have the need to EQ and hear if they really sound just like I want.
I tried many times EQing stuff that I didn't like and ended up picking the worse product that at least had the signature I liked most.
It really depends on which kind of customer you are.
We're not speaking about amplifier and DACs for which measurements are what really count, headphones' impressions can be VERY different although having similar measurements.

 

[Jimbob54]

There are other headphones that don't need a bass boost & have less distortion than the headphone in this review, the NAD HP50 is one example (although Amir did do a massive bass boost on the HP50 but that was because it wasn't sealed properly on the machine combined with how he decided to line up the target on the measurement. But yes, HP50 is one of the lowest distortion headphones that I chose to compare it against. As to audibility, I'm not entirely sure, but I know that small EQ adjustments in those frequency areas that I can notice the difference, so I'd say it's significant. Either way, if there are headphones out there with better measurements then I would choose those rather than a lesser measuring headphone.

I suppose these are not really comparable to the bulk of the wired/ passive units tested here and elsewhere. Different use case- the real question is how do they stack up vs other NC/wireless offers.

 

[Robbo99999]

I suppose these are not really comparable to the bulk of the wired/ passive units tested here and elsewhere. Different use case- the real question is how do they stack up vs other NC/wireless offers.

I suppose you can look at it like that, afterall if you know you need an NC headphone, then you have to choose one of them.....however I don't think Amir took that into account during listening & panther ratings, so I'm still a bit surprised by the positive listening test & panther given the deficiencies seen in some of the measurements.

 

[Jimbob54]

I suppose you can look at it like that, afterall if you know you need an NC headphone, then you have to choose one of them.....however I don't think Amir took that into account during listening & panther ratings, so I'm still a bit surprised by the positive listening test & panther given the deficiencies seen in some of the measurements.

Minimal eq to get him where he wanted to be (v similar to his k371 profile) and sounded good. What more is there to his opinion?

 

[skyfly]

Ah, another headphone that gets praise for slavish adherence to the trash 'consumer preference' target curve. (And not even good adherence - it's down anywhere from 2.5 to 10 dB from 1kHz to 10kHz, with a few spike swings of 5dB and 10dB.)

I don't think it is particularly bad as a headphone. Headphone frequency responses are jaggier than those of speakers.

 

[Zensō]

Ah, another headphone that gets praise for slavish adherence to the trash 'consumer preference' target curve. (And not even good adherence - it's down anywhere from 2.5 to 10 dB from 1kHz to 10kHz, with a few spike swings of 5dB and 10dB.)

We have to have a target curve of some sort if we’re going to do measurements. Are you saying you prefer not to consider measurements at all, or do you have some other target curve that you prefer as a reference? If so, which curve?