Bose QuietComfort 35 II Review (Noise Cancelling Headphone)

[rrr]

i skimmed thru the link, im not gonna lie, i dont understand most of that, but i do know what EQ is and if i can just set a preset PEQ file then that is good enough for me.

the other comment, good god, why would Amir do that? no one uses the WIRELESS headphones as wired, if he made his PEQ settings based on the wired setting then they are garbage and his review is wrong too. i just dont understand this, he takes the time and goes all the way and reviews the product in the way it is not meant to be used.

thank god you told me his review is based on the wired version, it completely changes everything! i guess i will have to delete his PEQ setting and use another site's PEQ setting. i just don't understand why Amir would fuck up a review like this.

 

[Jimbob54]

i skimmed thru the link, im not gonna lie, i dont understand most of that, but i do know what EQ is and if i can just set a preset PEQ file then that is good enough for me.

the other comment, good god, why would Amir do that? no one uses the WIRELESS headphones as wired, if he made his PEQ settings based on the wired setting then they are garbage and his review is wrong too. i just dont understand this, he takes the time and goes all the way and reviews the product in the way it is not meant to be used.

thank god you told me his review is based on the wired version, it completely changes everything! i guess i will have to delete his PEQ setting and use another site's PEQ setting. i just don't understand why Amir would fuck up a review like this.

I think you should read the review and calm down a bit. The response is terrible when switched off. Much better on. What I can't tell you is if wired on is the same as wireless (high) or wireless (low) or neither.

 

[rrr]

I think you should read the review and calm down a bit. The response is terrible when switched off. Much better on. What I can't tell you is if wired on is the same as wireless (high) or wireless (low) or neither.

i just fired off an email to another site, rtings, i wanted to double check if they did their review properly. i am hoping they reviewed a WIRELESS headphones as a wireless headphone, not unlike here possibly.

https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/bose/quietcomfort-35-ii-qc35-ii-wireless-2018

for the above headphones, i wanted to ask, the review was done with the default settings? that means:

1. wireless (NOT using the included wire, as it does change the sound)
2. default noise cancelling (there are 3 noise cancelling modes: high (which is the default), low, and off). as long as you didnt change the noise cancelling setting in the app nor press the side button below the left earcup to cycle thru the noise cancelling settings, then it would stay on the default setting (which is high)

just asking the above 2 questions because the Frequency response curve will change if the above points 1 and 2 are changed and i wanted to confirm and ask which settings did you use while you made that graph.

please let me know, thank you.

 

[solderdude]

the other comment, good god, why would Amir do that? no one uses the WIRELESS headphones as wired, if he made his PEQ settings based on the wired setting then they are garbage and his review is wrong too. i just dont understand this, he takes the time and goes all the way and reviews the product in the way it is not meant to be used.

Wired or wireless only makes a difference above 18kHz so all EQ is just valid.
The BT connection only makes the sound quality objectively 'worse' (when measuring it) but audibly it is about the same quality (lossy codec).
The tonal balance will not change (much). Sometimes it appears as different but that is because the levels are never the same.
Below the FR of a € 15.- BT headphone (wired vs BT) as an example:

What you need to understand is that there is no correct measurement and thus no correct EQ.
When you are happy with EQ someone suggested use it, when you feel bass needs to be more or less or different then change the bass settings to your liking.

Below the Sennheiser HD4.40BT wired vs wireless (even using 2 different methods as sweep sine vs white noise)

No need to worry about the wired vs wireless transmission. When these connections sound different to you either one is louder or some DSP is being used.
Given the analog NoiseCancelling of the Bose you can be pretty certain the wireless and wired connection will be the same tonally.

Also there are fake QC35 on the market which will sound different and for them the EQ will probably be different than the original.

 

[Jimbob54]

Wired or wireless only makes a difference above 18kHz so all EQ is just valid.
The BT connection only makes the sound quality objectively 'worse' (when measuring it) but audibly it is about the same quality (lossy codec).
The tonal balance will not change (much). Sometimes it appears as different but that is because the levels are never the same.
Below the FR of a € 15.- BT headphone (wired vs BT) as an example:

What you need to understand is that there is no correct measurement and thus no correct EQ.
When you are happy with EQ someone suggested use it, when you feel bass needs to be more or less or different then change the bass settings to your liking.

Below the Sennheiser HD4.40BT wired vs wireless (even using 2 different methods as sweep sine vs white noise)

I think the trouble is, the ANC settings also apply some DSP, so its not just wired v wireless (see my post above). Amir has been clear which settings he has tested but we cant be sure Wired on (with ANC high on and no way to defeat) is the same FR as Wireless ANC High. Wireless ANC off is a very different beast tonally to either of those set ups. I cant honestly tell if Wirless ANC low is the same FR as ANC high but doesnt change much from ANC high apart from the cancellation to my ears.

 

[solderdude]

I think the trouble is, the ANC settings also apply some DSP,

There is no DSP in the QC35, the N.C. is analog in this one (or > 48kHz). There are quite a few N.C. headphones that do ADC on the analog in and then do the N.C. digitally and apply some tone control but the Bose is not one of them.

There is only N.C. which (below 2kHz) doubles as MFB making the response flatter, even with a seal loss.

Headphones like the PCX550(II) use an ADC first and they apply some EQ as well (easy to do digitally).
Below the (linear scale) FR response difference between ADC loop and purely wired. The BT will always remain digital.

below in log scale:

Most HP measurements end at 22kHz so this isn't obvious in most measurements. I go up to 30kHz.

 

[Jimbob54]

There is no DSP in the QC35, the N.C. is analog in this one. There are quite a few N.C. headphones that do ADC on the analog in and then do the N.C. digitally and apply some tone control but the Bose is not one of them.

There is only N.C. which (below 2kHz) doubles as MFB making the response flatter, even with a seal loss.

Ah thanks . yes, the response with ANC on is very much flatter than with ANC off. Wireless ANC off is quite boomy

 

[solderdude]

The boomyness is the peak around 150Hz.

You can see the 'boomy' description in my tonal character plot below in that part of the frequency range.

 

[Jimbob54]

The boomyness is the peak around 150Hz.

You can see the 'boomy' description in my tonal character plot below in that part of the frequency range.

Makes sense based on what you've said. I've changed my eq to focus on that 150 peak and some other small areas of the green trace on amir's review charts (the passive wired) as, based on what you've said, wireless but ANC off should have similar FR to that.

I'd turn the anc on but I use them for walking and I'm heavy footed and the anc introduces some weird wobble effects that are offputting. I've tried some sonys and they struggled too with this. But the passive noise isolation is quite good.

 

[rrr]

Thanks for taking the time to type out the long replies, I appreciate it.

To add some oil to the fire, here is a quoted post (from another user) I found from one of my recent reddit topics about the QC 35 II's and why oratory didn't measure them:

The qc35(ii) have dynamic eq built in which raises the bass on lower volumes -> they have no consistent frequency response. this is why oratory didn’t measure them.

Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/oratory1990/comments/sab22a/_/htupar7
So how does Amir and ASR's graphs deal with that? Who is right in this case based on the reddit quote? (or is that guy on reddit somehow wrong?)

TIA

(edit: direct link not showing up, here it is again, remove the SPACE in reddit: https://www.red (SPACE) dit.com/r/oratory1990/comments/sab22a/for_the_4_options_for_the_bose_qc_35_iis_in/htupar7/?context=3

edit: another link from a user this time on here stating that the bose headphones in general the volume is tied to EQ, see post 15:

Bose QuietComfort 45 - Impending Release!

Hey everyone!~ So it seems like the cat is out of the bag, Bose is finally releasing a direct update/replacement to the legendary QuietComfort 35 II, whohooo! So far everything looks good, the basic design has been kept the same and we are getting a USB-C port at last!! Really excited for these...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[solderdude]

I did not notice this but also did not measure it at lower levels (nor did Amir) so when this feature is there it isn't seen on these plots.

It seems to be volume dependent (loudness contour) but is probably related to the volume control on the headphone or the app.
Most likely everyone that measured it will have had the volume control set to 'maximum'.

 

[rrr]

hey, i just noticed that I updated my post at the same time you posted your post, not sure if you were able to read the update at the end, it seems that this EQ + volume thing is common knowledge to some. if you already saw the update, ill just edit/delete this reply later so as to not clutter up the thread, thanks.

also, i usually listen to my bose qc 35ii headphones at 44% (according to soundsource (a popular PEQ app for mac), see attached) volume, not sure if that is typical, but at 100% volume (the way you stated how this is measured to get that graph) would definitely cause hearing damage. so im not sure if the review process needs tweaking or what, and not sure of the stated goals of the purposes of the reviews, but obviously 100% volume is not a real world case (for sane people at least).

 

[solderdude]

When you use it without the app, just like any other BT headphone, but control the volume using that of the player of the phone most likely there will be no volume dependent bass control.
I assume this feature can be switched off in the app.

 

[rrr]

An rtings update, here is the reply i got back:

Thanks for reaching out.
We tested these headphones wirelessly and used the high/max setting for ANC.
If this is something you're curious about in the future, you should be able to find this information in the 'test settings' section of our reviews!

 

[solderdude]

When testing one usually does not use phone apps. The volume control position dependent EQ is either there or in the headphone (using the volume buttons) or the volume buttons on the headphone operate the app via BT connection.
In any case... the loudness contour function is to correct for SPL differences. In that case the EQ/correction would still need to be the same.

 

[rrr]

Just to be clear, i meant app as in short for application, soundsource is an application for MacOS. and I dont know how this phone thing came up, I rarely listen to music on my phone, around 99% of the time I use my wireless headphones on my macbook pro.

 

[EasyGuy]

Thanks Amirm for the recommendation. I stayed away from Bose all my life because of its reputation and didn't even looked at this Bose headphones when I was shopping around. Glad I read your review and your recommendation, the ANC is awesome, I'm pretty sure the Sony is better with ANC, but I care about is comfort and sound quality and it sounds like the Bose got it.

 

[nathan]

Thanks Amir for the recommendation. I stayed away from Bose all my life because of its reputation and didn't even looked at this Bose headphones when I was shopping around. Glad I read your review and your recommendation, the ANC is awesome, I'm pretty sure the Sony is better with ANC, but I care about is comfort and sound quality and it sounds like the Bose got it.

Having tried both, I would say the Bose is slightly better at the ANC than Sony.

 

[EasyGuy]

Having tried both, I would say the Bose is slightly better at the ANC than Sony.

Thanks! your impression is different than a lot of the "review websites" out there. Good to know I have one of the best ANC too!

 

[nathan]

I think it boils down to the fact that ANC is different at different frequencies, so what works best on an airplane versus what works best when mowing the lawn versus what works best in a cafe is not necessarily the same headphones in each situation.