• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Bose QuietComfort 35 II Review (Noise Cancelling Headphone)

Feargal

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
88
Likes
153
I have a pair of these without noise cancelling, got as a free gift when opening a new bank account. They're a classy-feeling product. Really nice, except for the small cups which are a little weird, and the main issue for me is they're a bit too tight and not very comfortable anything over 5 minutes.
I also have AKG361s which are much more comfortable for me. And yes, they do sound very similar. I prefer the AKGs - probably largely to do with the better fit.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
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.)

You have any better ideas?

Also, 100 Hz to 1 KHz are considered the fundamental bandwidth, and it is the range that is most associated with spatial openness.

A headphone that adheres to the target up to 1KHz, will sound way more neutral than a headphone that adheres to the target from 1 KHz.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
2,407
Location
Sweden
I have the QC25 II, that are cheaper. With cable though and sound similar. A bit recessed treble compared to my reference though, so I use a bit of treble boost when played through my phone. Good travel headphones.
 

m_g_s_g

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
192
Likes
229
Location
Europe. Living in MD, USA.
From the Bose article in the wikipedia: “[...] Amar came to the conclusion that the audio system measurement techniques of the time (such as measuring distortion and frequency response) were not effective ways to evaluate the goal of natural sound reproduction. Amar argued that the best measure of audio quality is the listener's perception.

Somebody changed their mind... :)
 
Last edited:

StevenEleven

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
581
Likes
1,188
I’ve got a pair of these QC 35 IIs and really like them, but I’ve always been a little shy about recommending them. No more!! Thanks for the EQ tips. :)

I also bought a pair for my oldest son when he wore out his old pair of cheap Sony wireless headphones. He seems to like the QC 35 II a lot better. He gave them two thumbs up and didn’t look back.

One thing I really like is the noise cancelling. Often enough it takes the noise level down below what you would find as ambient sound in a lot of rooms, which helps a lot to hear the nuances in the recordings.

Agree the bass is pretty sweet!!
 

boselover61

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Messages
302
Likes
310
Bose uses Genelec for their mixing and audio engineering. I would not be surprise if they've got some really competent engineers testing these headphones. Their speakers are rubbish though
 

Cahudson42

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
1,083
Likes
1,556
Now let's see the AKG N90Q, which occasionally is also $299....

Per Tyll at Innerfidelity:
"I think it makes much more sense to view the N90Q as the next logical step up for enthusiasts looking to improve on the sound from premium noise canceling headphones like the Bose QC35, JBL Everest Elite 700, or Sennheiser PXC 550. In those comparisons, the N90Q is clearly the better sounding headphone, and as such will establish a new high-water mark on the Wall of Fame noise canceler page. This is a terrific headphone for the well-to-do business traveler...and my new favorite for time in the aluminum sky tube."
https://www.stereophile.com/content/akg-n90q-noise-canceling-auto-calibrating-over-ear-headphones
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
From the Bose article in the wikipedia: “[...] Amar came to the conclusion that the audio system measurement techniques of the time (such as measuring distortion and frequency response) were not effective ways to evaluate the goal of natural sound reproduction. Amar argued that the best measure of audio quality is the listener's perception.

Somebody changed their mind... :)

As any company seeking mainstream staying power would. These sorts of people (if they aren't ejected quickly out of a quickly rising company) have their ideas completely ignored once they are gone. Serious shareholders of large companies demand data-driven decision making, which usually entails more reliable data be used (not on the whims of some pre-historic approach to evaluation of devices destined for perhaps thousands or millions of users). Instead using measurement instruments where engineers and project leads don't have to wonder if they've contracted some hard of hearing golden ear who came back from a night of partying next to a speaker taller than him..

Amar had the right idea, but the way such perception is compiled (a preference curve using scientifically established metrics/units) is something perhaps he should have considered instead of assuming someone's "perception" capacity could be individually accounted for at all times.

Reminds me of people who talk about "scientific measurements aren't capturing every aspect of the sound for proper evaluation". As if to indicate science itself doesn't progress and eventually shed light on X phenomena.. So while such a statement may have been true at some point, I think nearly a century of progress has accounted basically all the relevant aspects of consideration (audible aspects), and now all that's left is progress toward implementations and pushing material sciences/geometry of driver setups to conform to new form factors evolving orthogonal to strictly audio (like Bluetooth that has given rise to wireless transmission). And perhaps more simplified/approachable means of HRTF generation for the masses, or things like more binaural recordings.

Can you imagine today, a company like Samsung tossing out their science labs, saying "we need to use people's perception to see how well our SSD's are performing quality-wise".

Sheer lunacy..
 

Feelas

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Messages
390
Likes
315
So darn close! Indeed the Bose could also use that broad light boost in pink filter I had in K371. I wonder if Bose measured the response of the K371 and used that as the target for 35 II. Anyone know which came first?
QC35 II is MUCH, MUCH older.

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.)
Please elaborate why that is trash, thanks.
 

thehun

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2019
Messages
29
Likes
37
From the Bose article in the wikipedia: “[...] Amar came to the conclusion that the audio system measurement techniques of the time (such as measuring distortion and frequency response) were not effective ways to evaluate the goal of natural sound reproduction. Amar argued that the best measure of audio quality is the listener's perception.

Somebody changed their mind... :)
Didn't they have the slogan "Better sound through research" for decades now? To me, Bose has always been about using crappy parts like transducers and try to correct them with a dubious amount of DSP. This is evidenced here, and the same goes for their car audio setups.
 

nxnje

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
41
Likes
45
QC35 III don't have any kind of microdetail and detailing is average. Plus, bass is slow and fat, far from being a "quality" bass.
I still cannot understand why I see you recommending this and the 10$' Sony while bashing the 990 Pro.
It's understandable timbre is the thing that really makes the final decision between buying or skipping a product, but the 990 Pro make a golden shower with the QC35 II if you're on the market for a bright pair of headphones.
 
Last edited:

PeteL

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
3,838
@amirm
Maybe a suggestion, for these amped/DSPed headphones, some sort of noise measurments would be interesting to see, absolute or in the form of SINAD. I don't doubt that it's not that bad, you would have mentioned it if you heard it, but, unfortunately I can't remember the model, but about 5 years ago I remember that the hiss was quite audible on some of those Bose. Interestingly my friend that I consider a good listener also couldn't hear it so maybe subjective assessment may have it's limitations even tough I don't doubt your acuity. For me it was a no go. I don't think I could pull this info on these THD graphs neither. It was full band whitish noise. Just a suggestion.
 

liquidlino

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Messages
20
Likes
49
Bose uses Genelec for their mixing and audio engineering. I would not be surprise if they've got some really competent engineers testing these headphones. Their speakers are rubbish though
Depends what you're looking for in a speaker, i would say. Bose surround systems, yep, totally hot garbage, they don't even sound good in the special store demo rooms. Really zingy and literally painful, tuned to be super trebly, which I guess impresses some people in a store. If having tiny satellites is important, then I guess they're good for that. Portable speakers, pretty amazing for the size and weight, love my Bose revolve+ and haven't yet heard a comparable sized portable speaker that compares. I've had a few pairs of Bose in ear passive headphones. They were ok, nothing special. Sennheiser in ears, at the same price point, are generally much better. I have the Sennheiser 550 which are the competitor to Bose wireless noise cancelling headphones, and they're pretty good, but actually I prefer the Bose headphones, when I've compared them back to back using a colleagues set.
 

filo97s

Active Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
120
Likes
278
Location
Sestri Levante
QC35 III don't have any kind of microdetail and detailing is average. Plus, bass is slow and fat, far from being a "quality" bass.
I still cannot understand why I see you recommending this and the 10$' Sony while bashing the 990 Pro.
It's understandable timbre is the thing that really makes the final decision between buying or skipping a product, but the 990 Pro make a golden shower with the QC35 II if you're on the market for a bright pair of earphones.
I think exactly the same.
I still can't understand why recommend an headphone which its only silver lining is the frequency response and nothing else (because Bose has an utterly bad detail retrieval, boomy bass with no control at all and even the distortion is not that good from an objective point of view, I've tested far better headphones at less than 40$ like Superlux) when Beyerdynamic has the only "fault" of being not an harman-like headphone.
 

tktran303

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 27, 2019
Messages
683
Likes
1,179
I got my Bose QC35 in 2016.

It set the standard for a comfortable, convenient wireless closed headphones- that don’t leak sound in, or out- with very good sound.

When Tyll retired, he left his WoF, and took this as his only ‘I’m riding off into the distance with‘ headphone.

My point is, this is not my desert island headphone, it is my best real world headphone and for most music, most days, either mowing the lawn, doing the dishes, or commuting, and you just want to enjoy a podcast, movie or music, but not obsess over the micro details, the QC35 is it!
 
Last edited:

nxnje

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
41
Likes
45
I think exactly the same.
I still can't understand why recommend an headphone which its only silver lining is the frequency response and nothing else (because Bose has an utterly bad detail retrieval, boomy bass with no control at all and even the distortion is not that good from an objective point of view, I've tested far better headphones at less than 40$ like Superlux) when Beyerdynamic has the only "fault" of being not an harman-like headphone.
Yea. Harman-neutral does not mean "good" while others are timbrically meh, it is something really subjective, and the only things we can judge when reviewing are the performance and technicalities.
We can speak about tonal accuracy, but QC35's only strength (apart from ANC, bluetooth and bla bla) sound-wise is the warm timbre, nothing else, considering everything else is "average" and can be beaten by a good 50-60 headphone.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
2,407
Location
Sweden
It seems BOSE's reputation of a mainstream brand is affecting opinions here. Fact is I find both the QC35 and the QC25, which I have, are excellent but with some recessed highs when I compare it directly to my modified DT150 headphones. This may of course affect detail. As a travel headphone it beats the DT150 with its effective noise cancelling.
 
Top Bottom