Sony WH-1000XM4 Review (noise cancelling headphone)

[LoyK]

If I owned this headphone for $300, I would want to use it at home wired all the time and not worry about charging it. Rechargeable batteries have X number of cycles. You don't want to use that up when you are using it at home. This is why I focused on creating a good EQ for them using wired connection.

Even wired they are not designed to be used without builtin amp/dsp which at least should try to correct L/R matching because of different earcups.
I can see your point here but I think for 90% of users at least this is not the prefered way of using them.
If you want to use them passive wired there a options which are cheaper and better so why would you buy them for this usecase in the first place? (You pay for wireless, ANC, microphones, amp, dac, etc. and then only use the drivers?)
I think that this passive EQ is a cool idea but I would focus the testing of such wireless headphones on their active/wireless performance. (I think that wireless is the future and I am happy when I don´t have to worry about that stupid cable.)

Battery life and degradation is not a problem for my XM2s after using them quite a bit - they still last several days.

 

[TSB]

If I owned this headphone for $300, I would want to use it at home wired all the time and not worry about charging it. Rechargeable batteries have X number of cycles. You don't want to use that up when you are using it at home. This is why I focused on creating a good EQ for them using wired connection.

With all due respect, that makes you sound a bit like my grandparents talking about the first walkman.

• These are designed for non-critical listening while working, traveling, and studying.
• If you don't use the battery you won't have ANC, defeating the point of buying them.
• This is not hifi critical listening gear, they are designed for the multitasking millenial. Their sound signature is designed to be non-fatiguing and pleasant at lower listening levels for very extended amounts of time. Think the length of a working day.
• Very often these headphones will be connected to phones, many of which don't have 3.5 mm jacks. Not everybody enjoys lugging around an external DAC to the office/library/airport.
• Yes, te batteries will wear out at some point. Just as they do in your phone. I don't have my phone on the charger whenever I'm home. It's a choice between convenience and longevity of the battery.

We all on audiosciencereview have a shared focus on one thing in audio, absolute "quality" of the reproduction. But not every product that makes different choices is a piece of crap.

 

[Piotr]

Absolutely @Timon VDB, couldn't agree more.

These are not meant to be connected via cable. It's the last resort thing you do when your battery is discharged. 90% of headphones at my work are the Sony WH1000-XM3 or 4 + few Bose. All people use them cordless and it's super convenient. No stupid cable, freedom, and enjoyment. They use it when they work, have meetings, commute, have a phone call. Their phone or notebook doesn't even contain a jack port.

These are not headphones for audiophile nirvana. For that, you want to have a decent amp, a good atmoshpere at home, a glass of wine, and what's the most important, comfortable, high-quality, open-back headphones.

Open-back, read carefully. What Armir never mentioned and few audiophiles care about is the health aspect of the headphones. Only open-back headphones don't make you deaf at 50. Keep your ears ventilated and healthy. Closed headphones are for short or commute sessions, never use them regularly, it's a stepping stone for deafness, especially if you like high decibels.

Always mind the health and comfort aspects and don't be tempted and mislead by cute graphs showing some not even audiable deviations.

 

[threni]

• If you don't use the battery you won't have ANC, defeating the point of buying them.

I don't agree. I'm perfectly happy with my Sony WH-CH700N headphones, which I bought to use via Bluetooth while I'm outside or in an office. ANC is terrible on these, especially outside, where it amplifies wind noises, and uses extra battery, so I have it turned off all the time (except on rare occasions such as when I'm in a plane). Obviously, if I needed ANC to improve the sound quality, or I needed to remove external sounds, I'd use it.

 

[threni]

Absolutely @Timon VDBOpen-back, read carefully. What Armir never mentioned and few audiophiles care about is the health aspect of the headphones. Only open-back headphones don't make you deaf at 50. Keep your ears ventilated and healthy. Closed headphones are for short or commute sessions, never use them regularly, it's a stepping stone for deafness, especially if you like high decibels.

I was going to ask whether you believe the negative health impact of closed headphones to be related to the fact that maybe people listen to them at a higher volume than for open headphones (although I cannot imagine why this would be the case; it seems more likely that you'd increase the volume on open-back ones so as to compete with external sources of sound), but the fact that put "especially if you like high decibels" makes it sound as if they do more damage at the same volume that open-back ones would do. Is there any truth to this? Surely a given volume does a certain amount of damage regardless of how much sound is leaking out into the room as you listen?

 

[TSB]

I don't agree. I'm perfectly happy with my Sony WH-CH700N headphones, which I bought to use via Bluetooth while I'm outside or in an office. ANC is terrible on these, especially outside, where it amplifies wind noises, and uses extra battery, so I have it turned off all the time (except on rare occasions such as when I'm in a plane). Obviously, if I needed ANC to improve the sound quality, or I needed to remove external sounds, I'd use it.

Yes, the CH700N has shit ANC, so if you buy the CH700N you're likely not going to use ANC. The WH-1000XM4 on the other hand, is the most expensive ANC model Sony offers. It doesn't amplify wind noise and I don't know anybody who ever uses it without ANC. Why would you get the most expensive ANC headphone if you don't need ANC?

 

[PeteL]

I use this mostly with cable, and I will not think 99% use it with cable: I have no data to think that way.

I like to use it with cable because I don't like to have a bluetooth receiver on my head. When the cable is connected, bluetooth is off and I feel on peace. I bought it because the ANC. So when I was in a flight, for example, I used the ANC and the cable. May be there is a lot of people who use it this way as well. Plus, it is a good use case as well when you want to save battery from both the headphone and the dap/phone.

Maybe I missed some of the point in this review, but is there an ADC for the wired input in this? I was under the impression that wired=fully passive but your point about anc on while wired suggest otherwise. If so do we know what is the conversion rate is on this? Or maybe you mean wired with a USB cable? sorry I don't know the features of this headphone, amir on the "focus on wired review" seams to treat as a fully analog unamped headphone, with no ANC, but the hybris use case you are mentioning is interesting, altough if we are talking analog wired, it would use the battery just the same, but usb in with anc and dsp is certainly a valid way to use this indeed.

 

[TSB]

Maybe I missed some of the point in this review, but is there an ADC for the wired input in this? I was under the impression that wired=fully passive but your point about anc on while wired suggest otherwise. If so do we know what is the conversion rate is on this? Or maybe you mean wired with a USB cable? sorry I don't know the features of this headphone, amir on the "focus on wired review" seams to treat as a fully analog unamped headphone, with no ANC, but the hybris use case you are mentioning is interesting, altough if we are talking analog wired, it would use the battery just the same, but usb in with anc and dsp is certainly a valid way to use this indeed.

With cable you can choose passive or active mode. Active mode has 3 settings: amplify surroundings, cancel noise, regular active.

 

[PeteL]

With cable you can choose passive or active mode. Active mode has 3 settings: amplify surroundings, cancel noise, regular active.

Thanks, do you know if conversion is Lossless? Do you know if it sounds better than trough Bluetooth? Is it possible to use it with a USB connection instead, and wondering, if this mode exist, the battery is bypassed from the power supply. That would be a nice touch, being able to prevent the life of the battery, and it can easily be done. I agree with some here that the fully passive is a last emergency scenario and few would use it that way given the performance.

 

[TSB]

Thanks, do you know if conversion is Lossless? Do you know if it sounds better than trough Bluetooth? Is it possible to use it with a USB connection instead, and wondering, if this mode exist, the battery is bypassed from the power supply. That would be a nice touch, being able to prevent the life of the battery, and it can easily be done. I agree with some here that the fully passive is a last emergency scenario and few would use it that way given the performance.

For the 1000XM3 and 1000XM2 which I own, they can only be used in passive mode when connected to USB power.

 

[Jimmy]

I agree that normally open backs are superior in terms of sound quality (at least in the openness/soundstage department), but in terms of auditive health I don't think there's a real difference, the most important factor is listening at safe sound levels.

Comfort is an important factor, and in that regard, normally ANC headphones use pleather/leather earpads, which tend to generate more heat, while velour/textile earpads are usually more comfortable but with more sound leakage, but I wouldn't correlate that with auditive health.

In fact many closed back headphones can be made more comfortable just by changing earpads to velour ones, but earpads have a large impact on sound, so they are part of a headphone's tuning, and if noise cancelling (active or passive) is important, then it's not a good idea because they will leak sound both from inside the earcups and from outside.

Absolutely @Timon VDB, couldn't agree more.

These are not meant to be connected via cable. It's the last resort thing you do when your battery is discharged. 90% of headphones at my work are the Sony WH1000-XM3 or 4 + few Bose. All people use them cordless and it's super convenient. No stupid cable, freedom, and enjoyment. They use it when they work, have meetings, commute, have a phone call. Their phone or notebook doesn't even contain a jack port.

These are not headphones for audiophile nirvana. For that, you want to have a decent amp, a good atmoshpere at home, a glass of wine, and what's the most important, comfortable, high-quality, open-back headphones.

Open-back, read carefully. What Armir never mentioned and few audiophiles care about is the health aspect of the headphones. Only open-back headphones don't make you deaf at 50. Keep your ears ventilated and healthy. Closed headphones are for short or commute sessions, never use them regularly, it's a stepping stone for deafness, especially if you like high decibels.

Always mind the health and comfort aspects and don't be tempted and mislead by cute graphs showing some not even audiable deviations.

 

[amirm]

No noise-cancelling headphones you buy work this way, including this one. Such misinformation is just based on 'lay intuition' and a lack of understanding of how ANC headphones actually work. As Oratory (an acoustic engineer) explains:

That is like someone asking how a mobile phone works and you answer by explaining how an analog wall phone works!

What you quoted from Oratory, creating an anti-phase (out of phase) signal is NOT at all the algorithm used in these advance ANC headphones. None work in analog domain to simply invert a phase of a signal and mix it. Indeed Oratory goes on to bullet list of reasons why such an idealistic, paper solution fails to produce state-of-the-art noise cancellation.

The solution used by Sony, Beats, Bose, etc. is all in digital domain using an adaptive filter. Here is the general block diagram:

A multi-tap adaptive FIR filter is used as the heart of the system. The filter starts with unity coefficients meaning it does nothing to the signal. The filter coefficients are filled in over time using that "prediction unit." A feedback signal, e(t), instructs the system as to how far off it is from filtering the input noise component, u(t). This is a non-trivial, computationally intensive problem to solve. Various schemes are used for arriving at an answer with the most common being Filtered LMS (FxLMS). LMS stands for least mean square and is a mathematical metric of error. So by minimizing that, it is assumed that the audible perception of noise is reduced proportionally (this is not perceptually accurate but is good enough here).

Now back to the argument, the filter is programmed in real-time for the noise source in question. For the duration of adaptation (which could be a few seconds), the noise needs to be what we call in signal process, "stationary" meaning its make up does not change. If it does, then all the previous training of the filter goes out the window and the system has to start over to characterize the new source.

A stationary noise is one that doesn't change over time. A computer fan noise is such a noise. As are other mechanical sources of noise (airplane for example). Any kind of cyclical noise is a friend of ANC and its adaptation since its spectrum remains the same.

What isn't stationary is impulsive noises like a shot-gun, or someone banging something. Since the initial strike is different than the spectrum after that, the adaptation by definition can't work on the initial impulsive sound. This is why as I was testing the Sony, as my wife worked in the kitchen, on every bang as she was handling the dishes and such, noise cancellation would go away completely and then gradually come back (the tail end of underdamped system is filterable).

Anyway, the math and science here is quite complicated and I don't know that I can simplify it any more than this. If you want to learn more, search for "adaptive digital filters" and or "LMS" and you should find more information.

BTW, this area is a patent minefield. Given how popular this technology is, every random patent troll will go after you on this. This is why you don't see any detailed write up from headphone companies how their systems work. You can tell some though from their marketing material. Here is Sony:

Dual microphone (sampling input noise and output error) is a give away as is digital processing in their VLSI.

Apple says a bit more about their Beats headphones but basically the same message:

You can clearly read the message of adaptation as opposed to simple analog phase inversion you talked about.

Note as headphone designers, you usually just buy the DSP and software to go with it that performs this functionality. It is only companies like Sony, Apple, etc. that are big enough and have their own lawyers and patents to defend their algorithm, that you will see proprietary implementations. So someone being in headphone business does not at all arm them with knowledge of how these systems work. To them, it is just a black box and hence the ancient/lay scheme Oratory explained.

 

[velasfloyd]

For the 1000XM3 and 1000XM2 which I own, they can only be used in passive mode when connected to USB power.

This is not true. At least with XM3 which I own.

you can simply plug any phone/dap/amp out to the 3.5 mm of the headphone. And it will play. This is passive and it sounds like a 5$ headphone.

It sounds so bad that is only recommendable when you get out of battery. Anyway, at least you can do it.

usb in is only for power. No audio.

Now, when the headphone is “on” you have 3 possible modes:

- anc on
- ambien sound on (let outside sound come in)
- anc and ambien sound off

this 3 modes works the same no matter if you are using bluetooth or the cable. And the sound is equally good

 

[martin900]

Feels like a headless Panther to me, I've heard the XM3's and always found them to be awful, the sound just was not right. No matter what DSP settings you'd use, the music wouldn't sound as it should.

 

[JohnBooty]

I don't think anyone buying these headphones intends to use them via cable. They are Bluetooth headphones and that's how 99% of people are using them. The convenience is tremendous and worth sacrificing a bit of quality (if it's only a bit). No DACs, no headamps, no cables, just Bluetooth, and freedom.

Therefore, having a review focusing on a cable connection is pointless. This is not all about. The cordless, dac-less, headamp-less setup is the future, and that's obvious. It's not on the same level yet but it will be; it's just a matter of time.

I would probably use them via cable 50% of the time, but more importantly...

Personally I wouldn't care about testing them cabled vs. wireless. That shouldn't make a difference in test results unless the BT implementation is broken in some way.

What I would care about is active vs. passive. I can't imagine using them in passive mode unless the battery was dead.

 

[amirm]

With all due respect, that makes you sound a bit like my grandparents talking about the first walkman.

??? I would keep such commentary out of your post. I have had NC headphone technology for 20+ years. If you think this is something new for your generation, you need to hit the history books.

These are designed for non-critical listening while working, traveling, and studying.

Who says? With equalization they produce excellent fidelity

If you don't use the battery you won't have ANC, defeating the point of buying them.

This is not hifi critical listening gear, they are designed for the multitasking millenial.

This is a $300 headphone. It comes with hardwired connection. It took extra circuitry (analog switch) to allow a pass-through mode like this when the unit is powered off. Sony would not do all this if they thought like you, that no one should use the wired connection.

Their sound signature is designed to be non-fatiguing and pleasant at lower listening levels for very extended amounts of time. Think the length of a working day. Very often these headphones will be connected to phones, many of which don't have 3.5 mm jacks. Not everybody enjoys lugging around an external DAC to the office/library/airport.

I explained to you that my usage case for wired access would be when I am at my desk. No one is talking about lugging around an external DAC. With wired connection you get the full fidelity and power of an external amp which far outperforms the amp internally.

Yes, te batteries will wear out at some point. Just as they do in your phone. I don't have my phone on the charger whenever I'm home. It's a choice between convenience and longevity of the battery.
We all on audiosciencereview have a shared focus on one thing in audio, absolute "quality" of the reproduction. But not every product that makes different choices is a piece of crap.

Piece of crap? What on earth you are talking about? I recommended the Sony with equalization in passive mode:

Overall, I am going to recommend the Sony WH-1000MX4 if you apply equalization.

It is anything but crap. At the risk of repeating myself, if I spent $300 on this headphone, I absolutely would use it in wired mode when at my desk with equalization. If you want to go and spend another few hundred dollars for another headphone, that would be your choice, not mine.

 

[mkawa]

i've been using it wireless via my mac with the oratory peq applied and it actually is quite pleasant! i wish multipoint weren't so buggy and i could get ldac via the mac, but baby steps in the software on the HP i guess.

also i have plenty of critical listening headphones, and the BT is freeing even in my apartment. the ANC once personalized is also quite nice. right now it's filtering construction noises from next door. at this lower price (350 was really steep), i am pretty happy with it.

one of the ways i looked at it was that the qudelix isn't exactly critical listening either, has the burn of trying to figure out where to put the cable and adds 110$ to the cost of a headphone and doesn't come with ANC, so even if i get a headphone worth maybe 140$, more after EQ, i'm pretty happy this time

i can also see using it wired with a tempotec at my simracing rig for gaming, but the only reason i would do that tbh is because the input lag is too high for gaming otherwise.

overall, it's an exceedingly _functional_ headphone that sounds good with EQ, and worth 300$ as a consumer electronics product. if you instead want an audiophile lower utility higher SQ headphone, get an HD6xx and ignore this review.

 

[outerspace]

I don't get one thing. Why Sony still making such bassy shit even after all Harman's researches? There is more or less consensus about optimal headphone's FR. AKG with K361 and K371 realize this. Sennheiser with HD560S too. What's wrong with Sony? With DSP they could have made any FR. Will they continue to make shit even in this price range?..

 

[PeteL]

That is like someone asking how a mobile phone works and you answer by explaining how an analog wall phone works!

What you quoted from Oratory, creating an anti-phase (out of phase) signal is NOT at all the algorithm used in these advance ANC headphones. None work in analog domain to simply invert a phase of a signal and mix it. Indeed Oratory goes on to bullet list of reasons why such an idealistic, paper solution fails to produce state-of-the-art noise cancellation.

The solution used by Sony, Beats, Bose, etc. is all in digital domain using an adaptive filter. Here is the general block diagram:

View attachment 109226

A multi-tap adaptive FIR filter is used as the heart of the system. The filter starts with unity coefficients meaning it does nothing to the signal. The filter coefficients are filled in over time using that "prediction unit." A feedback signal, e(t), instructs the system as to how far off it is from filtering the input noise component, u(t). This is a non-trivial, computationally intensive problem to solve. Various schemes are used for arriving at an answer with the most common being Filtered LMS (FxLMS). LMS stands for least mean square and is a mathematical metric of error. So by minimizing that, it is assumed that the audible perception of noise is reduced proportionally (this is not perceptually accurate but is good enough here).

Now back to the argument, the filter is programmed in real-time for the noise source in question. For the duration of adaptation (which could be a few seconds), the noise needs to be what we call in signal process, "stationary" meaning its make up does not change. If it does, then all the previous training of the filter goes out the window and the system has to start over to characterize the new source.

A stationary noise is one that doesn't change over time. A computer fan noise is such a noise. As are other mechanical sources of noise (airplane for example). Any kind of cyclical noise is a friend of ANC and its adaptation since its spectrum remains the same.

What isn't stationary is impulsive noises like a shot-gun, or someone banging something. Since the initial strike is different than the spectrum after that, the adaptation by definition can't work on the initial impulsive sound. This is why as I was testing the Sony, as my wife worked in the kitchen, on every bang as she was handling the dishes and such, noise cancellation would go away completely and then gradually come back (the tail end of underdamped system is filterable).

Anyway, the math and science here is quite complicated and I don't know that I can simplify it any more than this. If you want to learn more, search for "adaptive digital filters" and or "LMS" and you should find more information.

BTW, this area is a patent minefield. Given how popular this technology is, every random patent troll will go after you on this. This is why you don't see any detailed write up from headphone companies how their systems work. You can tell some though from their marketing material. Here is Sony:

View attachment 109229

Dual microphone (sampling input noise and output error) is a give away as is digital processing in their VLSI.

Apple says a bit more about their Beats headphones but basically the same message:

View attachment 109230

You can clearly read the message of adaptation as opposed to simple analog phase inversion you talked about.

Note as headphone designers, you usually just buy the DSP and software to go with it that performs this functionality. It is only companies like Sony, Apple, etc. that are big enough and have their own lawyers and patents to defend their algorithm, that you will see proprietary implementations. So someone being in headphone business does not at all arm them with knowledge of how these systems work. To them, it is just a black box and hence the ancient/lay scheme Oratory explained.

Adaptative filtering and phase inversion are not mutually exclusive concepts, neither the original poster nor oratory thread said anything about it being done in the analog domain, in fact he mention the "recorded" signal of the microphone. What you say is indeed correct, but basic phase inversion is still at the root of many if not most of the modern anc algorythms, combined with what you say. I agree about inability to work well with fast percussive sounds, but not the general idea that it don't work that way, the core basic Idea is still phase inversion.

 

[mkawa]

I don't get one thing. Why Sony still making such bassy shit even after all Harman's researches? There is more or less consensus about optimal headphone's FR. AKG with K361 and K371 realize this. Sennheiser with HD560S too. What's wrong with Sony? With DSP they could have made any FR. Will they continue to make shit even in this price range?..

people like the bassy bits of sony's headphones. they target a different preference curve based on their sales, not on harman's research.