Bose QuietComfort 35 II Review (Noise Cancelling Headphone)

[nxnje]

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?

There is a big difference between just watching graphs, curves and measurements, and listening to them WITH the measurements to look at.
I think many times the Harman Target is taken as benchmark of "good", and this is not a good and fair thing too.

That's why I usually listen to stuff without watching the graph and then (ONLY AFTER MY LISTENING SESSIONS) I watch the graphs.
We're here discussing about harman target but don't forget EVERYONE is biased by a preferred target curve.

 

[Zensō]

There is a big difference between just watching graphs, curves and measurements, and listening to them WITH the measurements to look at.
I think many times the Harman Target is taken as benchmark of "good", and this is not a good and fair thing too.

That's why I usually listen to stuff without watching the graph and then (ONLY AFTER MY LISTENING SESSIONS) I watch the graphs.
We're here discussing about harman target but don't forget EVERYONE is biased by a preferred target curve.

I understand that. Which curve would you use as a reference in place of Harman 2018?

 

[ctakim]

I don't think we need any more evidence that ASR is unafraid of going against audiophile "conventional wisdom" than to note that here is a Bose product that earns a high recommendation. Thank you Amir!!

 

[nxnje]

I understand that. Which curve would you use as a reference in place of Harman 2018?

I use Harman as well when it comes to reference.
What I'm trying to say is that when I write my impression on some products I don't write it based on the target and with measurements.
I usually hear, then I compare with many other products and then write what I hear.
Measurements usually confirm what I hear, when comparing to Harman target, but there are cases (IEMs for example) in which the FR graph taken is pretty different to what I hear.
This is why I am always in the front when I see too much people buying a product based on a graph.

Harman target can be used as a reference for looking at another graph, but we all have ears and gear is just an instrument to enjoy some music, so the personal experience always go above a measurement (at least when it comes to what I think and to headphones/speakers in general).

Coming back to us, and summing up: if I do not know anything about a pair of headphones, then a graph is extremely useful at least to make an idea on how could a product sound, but if I have the chance to try it, watching the graphs and setting a standard to be followed affects the sound perception 99/100.
You can clearly see how can an opinione be biased while looking at people that switch their cables and hear differences, and then if you do a blind test they won't notice anything.

I just say: use your ears, graphs are useful but as a plus, moreover if we consider that everyone's hearing and perception are very different.

 

[Zensō]

I use Harman as well when it comes to reference.
What I'm trying to say is that when I write my impression on some products I don't write it based on the target and with measurements.
I usually hear, then I compare with many other products and then write what I hear.
Measurements usually confirm what I hear, when comparing to Harman target, but there are cases (IEMs for example) in which the FR graph taken is pretty different to what I hear.
This is why I am always in the front when I see too much people buying a product based on a graph.

Harman target can be used as a reference for looking at another graph, but we all have ears and gear is just an instrument to enjoy some music, so the personal experience always go above a measurement (at least when it comes to what I think and to headphones/speakers in general).

Coming back to us, and summing up: if I do not know anything about a pair of headphones, then a graph is extremely useful at least to make an idea on how could a product sound, but if I have the chance to try it, watching the graphs and setting a standard to be followed affects the sound perception 99/100.
You can clearly see how can an opinione be biased while looking at people that switch their cables and hear differences, and then if you do a blind test they won't notice anything.

I just say: use your ears, graphs are useful but as a plus, moreover if we consider that everyone's hearing and perception are very different.

No offense, but I feel like you’re stating the obvious here. Unlike with electronics and speakers, it‘s extremely difficult to reach an unbiased analysis of the SQ of any headphone due to having to wear them on our head. Not looking at graphs doesn’t negate the other issues that influence our perceptions.

 

[wwenze]

This is going to be awkward for people who say Bose headphones are bad and overpriced.

I wonder if we will do Bose speakers someday. Personally, I find them tonally good. Until cone breakup anyway.

 

[nxnje]

No offense, but I feel like you’re stating the obvious here. Unlike with electronics and speakers, it‘s extremely difficult to reach an unbiased analysis of the SQ of any headphone due to having to wear them on our head. Not looking at graphs doesn’t negate the other issues that influence our perceptions.

Yes I'm saying the obvious, but apart from you that are reading and discussing, it seems many people cannot understand the meaning of a personal opinion.
Even amirm's review is HIS PERSONAL OPINION, just like mine and others' opinions.
Many times I agree with him, many times I don't.
Period.

This is going to be awkward for people who say Bose headphones are bad and overpriced.

I wonder if we will do Bose speakers someday. Personally, I find them tonally good. Until cone breakup anyway.

Not gonna be awkward, it's simply gonna be one of the many different opinions.
For example I like the QC20 which many don't like, and that's my own opinion so I don't pretend others to think what I do.

 

[Zensō]

Yes I'm saying the obvious, but apart from you that are reading and discussing, it seems many people cannot understand the meaning of a personal opinion.
Even amirm's review is HIS PERSONAL OPINION, just like mine and others' opinions.
Many times I agree with him, many times I don't.
Period.


Not gonna be awkward, it's simply gonna be one of the many different opinions.
For example I like the QC20 which many don't like, and that's my own opinion so I don't pretend others to think what I do.

I think there may be a bit of a misunderstanding happening. This is a science based forum (at least in intent), so when anyone states their personal opinion, they may get more push back than they would on, say for example, Head-Fi or SBAF. Perhaps as you spend more time here that will become more obvious and intuitive.

Welcome to the forum, BTW.

 

[skyfly]

Some Bose products have volume setting or signal level dependent tone control (bass boost for small signal and bass cut for large signal) built in - not user adjustable, sometimes not even advertised -.

I saw it in my hasty measurement of a Bose computer speaker model - not currently in production, aluminum case, dual opposing passive radiator -.

Such a feature may not be acceptable for audiophiles who are into "pure audio."

I am not blaming Bose for including such a feature. It might be present in many other brand's products, too.

 

[Fernando]

Conclusion: All headphones are good with EQ.

 

[Zensō]

Conclusion: All headphones are good with EQ.

Here, I fixed it for you:

Conclusion: All headphones are good better with EQ.

 

[jhaider]

Some Bose products have volume setting or signal level dependent tone control (bass boost for small signal and bass cut for large signal) built in - not user adjustable, sometimes not even advertised

That's a good point - @amirm curious, did you measure FR at different levels?

Otherwise, one obvious takeaway from this review is single-driver crossoverless transducers need EQ, and they should be powered with EQ out of the box. It is unfortunate that most headphones are passive.

 

[MayaTlab]

One thing I'd be interested in knowing is how Bose ANC headphones behave in terms of seal breach when they are on, but ANC is switched off.
With passive headphones a breach of seal will affect bass response.

Here, for example, the QC35II's behaviour when seal is breached, in passive mode :

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/bose/qc35-ii/

When the headphones are on and ANC is turned on, the ANC feedback mechanism is used to ensure a more or less constant bass response, regardless of seal :

So the correction of the FR curve between passive and active with ANC on isn't just the internal DSP dumbly applying EQ, but also the DSP exploiting the internal mic's feedback circuit to deliver an exact FR curve at your eardrum - at least below 1khz or so. In other words the DSP doesn't just apply a predetermined EQ, but varies the EQ to deliver an exact FR curve.

Now my question would be, what happens when the headphones are on, but ANC is off ? Theoretically you'd think that this would mean that the ANC being turned off would mean that the internal mic and feedback circuit are also off and therefore that the DSP can't know what it exactly outputs. The Sony WH-1000XM3's response when on but with ANC off, for example, doesn't compensate for breach of seal (but just like the QC35 II it can do it when ANC is on) : https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-st-x/wh-1000x-m3/

That being said, Apple does have patents to make their own version of using this feedback mechanism to deliver an exact FR curve (Adaptive EQ) work even when ANC is off. So I'd be quite curious to know whether or not that is the case with the QC35II. In other words, can they still compensate for breach of seal even when the ANC is off ?

 

[soundwave76]

Nice review. I ended up buying the Bose N700. They look cleaner and sound and feel better on my ears. The NC is also 'pleasant' to my tinnitus ears. I just can't stand for example the NC is the Sony models.

 

[Jimbob54]

Here, I fixed it for you:

Conclusion: All headphones are good better with the right EQ.

FIFY

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

O.T.

I may have to limit my numerous ASR visits. Now I find myself defending Bose and even ... The abomination ... thinking about the Bose 700 over the Apple TOL headphones which I had ordered and stopped ...

Those damn measurements and numbers !!!

 

[q3cpma]

>comfort
>on-ear
Otherwise, quite good, especially the incredible bass distortion. But until these get field replaceable batteries sold at a reasonable price (considering their actual OEM price), that's a complete no for me.

 

[Neiios]

Some Bose products have volume setting or signal level dependent tone control (bass boost for small signal and bass cut for large signal) built in - not user adjustable, sometimes not even advertised -.

I saw it in my hasty measurement of a Bose computer speaker model - not currently in production, aluminum case, dual opposing passive radiator -.

Such a feature may not be acceptable for audiophiles who are into "pure audio."

I am not blaming Bose for including such a feature. It might be present in many other brand's products, too.

That's a good point - @amirm curious, did you measure FR at different levels?

Otherwise, one obvious takeaway from this review is single-driver crossoverless transducers need EQ, and they should be powered with EQ out of the box. It is unfortunate that most headphones are passive.

Just measured my pair at different levels. They definitely have volume dependent tone control. Bluetooth and ANC enabled.

 

[Jimbob54]

>comfort
>on-ear
Otherwise, quite good, especially the incredible bass distortion. But until these get field replaceable batteries sold at a reasonable price (considering their actual OEM price), that's a complete no for me.

Ludicrous small oval cups that dont actually fit over ears properly are the bane of my life. see Meze 99's , these, probably the K371 etc etc.

 

[PeteL]

One thing I'd be interested in knowing is how Bose ANC headphones behave in terms of seal breach when they are on, but ANC is switched off.
With passive headphones a breach of seal will affect bass response.

Here, for example, the QC35II's behaviour when seal is breached, in passive mode :
View attachment 113949
https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/bose/qc35-ii/

When the headphones are on and ANC is turned on, the ANC feedback mechanism is used to ensure a more or less constant bass response, regardless of seal :
View attachment 113950
So the correction of the FR curve between passive and active with ANC on isn't just the internal DSP dumbly applying EQ, but also the DSP exploiting the internal mic's feedback circuit to deliver an exact FR curve at your eardrum - at least below 1khz or so. In other words the DSP doesn't just apply a predetermined EQ, but varies the EQ to deliver an exact FR curve.

Now my question would be, what happens when the headphones are on, but ANC is off ? Theoretically you'd think that this would mean that the ANC being turned off would mean that the internal mic and feedback circuit are also off and therefore that the DSP can't know what it exactly outputs. The Sony WH-1000XM3's response when on but with ANC off, for example, doesn't compensate for breach of seal (but just like the QC35 II it can do it when ANC is on) : https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/measurements/brands-st-x/wh-1000x-m3/

That being said, Apple does have patents to make their own version of using this feedback mechanism to deliver an exact FR curve (Adaptive EQ) work even when ANC is off. So I'd be quite curious to know whether or not that is the case with the QC35II. In other words, can they still compensate for breach of seal even when the ANC is off ?

Nice write up, but "exact FR curve at your eardrum" We are not fully there yet, not willing to diminish how great and creative those engineers are.