Anonymous, 29 Oct 2018Compare to Bang & Olufsen Beoplay H9i please.
I need to choose between Sony, Bose, and B... moreBang & Olufsen is probably the best option.
More comfortable than the Bose, better built, equal ANC, and more features than the Bose as well.
Sony wins in ANC but in build and audio quality B&O is better.
How are the Sony headphone features gimmicks? They're more useful than not, and it's like you aren't that much of an audio enthusiast.
Duck of death, 01 Nov 2018Why is it that Sony spends more money on phone gadget blog spam bots than development of their... moreOne I donÂ’t own a Sony phone for many reasons and two IÂ’m not a bot.. not my fault your to lazy to research products.. before you complain or make a comment at least have some evidence to back it up.. other wise you are just a dead duck =)
Anonymous, 31 Oct 2018Hmm I would have a feeling the fax they use for ldac is decent as if you turn off ldac or swap... moreWhy is it that Sony spends more money on phone gadget blog spam bots than development of their phones?
Duck of death, 31 Oct 2018It would be nice if you could refer me to a source that sells a lot of genuine 24-bit/192kHz m... moreHmm I would have a feeling the fax they use for ldac is decent as if you turn off ldac or swap it to aac codec using an android phone or even aptx hd you can tell the different with the same music fill source. I would image itÂ’s up scaling also AK dac chips arenÂ’t very large and neither is ES chips
JohnsonJun, 31 Oct 2018You are right. It's really hard to find Hi-res music. I am really happy if I can find some 24b... moreI would agree Sony knows what it doing when it comes to sound quality.. I feel Bose is becoming a beats type headphone along with B&O all branding and make it looks better on the outside with a swappable battery... but when it comes sound quality and noise cancellation Sony still stands out as better.. itÂ’s a shame really but hopefully it will make other brands up there game..
Duck of death, 31 Oct 2018It would be nice if you could refer me to a source that sells a lot of genuine 24-bit/192kHz m... moreYou are right. It's really hard to find Hi-res music. I am really happy if I can find some 24bit/96kHz. 24bit/192kHz is rare. It's definitely overkill for 1000MX3 or QC35 II. 24bit/48kHz flac or ape vs mp3 or AAC already make a big difference.
I don't want to do AD here, you can try to search "HD Audio service" or "Hi-res audio download" on google to find some. From my experience, Sony Hi-res tag really matters.
JohnsonJun, 31 Oct 2018I tried blind test, in terms of aptx even aptx hd vs ldac, I really can hear the difference, l... moreIt would be nice if you could refer me to a source that sells a lot of genuine 24-bit/192kHz music. The places I buy my "hi-res" music rarely ever sell anything above 48kHz at 24-bit. Listening to 16-bit sound and comparing is an extremely flawed comparison as you're just comparing how the player is transcoding towards the different codecs.
One more conundrum I would argue is potentially making sound worse if you try playing 96kHz sound on a tiny headphone-integrated DAC is that it's very likely to create intermodulation as the analogue part simply can't process the sound coming in. I have a feeling this is the main reason most labels limits the hi-res music they sell to 44-48 kHz. Maybe this is why the reviewer above liked the sound better in the Bose even though it has worse tech specs?
Anonymous, 29 Oct 2018You tried Bang & Olufsen before?they are more of a fashion cum audiophile headphones that don't deliver for the price. They neither have the technology nor the acoustics to match the big brands. B&O are like harman kardon. Other audio brand with kind of similar name is much better. It's called B&W. They are much much better but at exorbitant prices.
Duck of death, 31 Oct 2018Okay, my best headphones are "only" a pair of planar-magnetic Audeze Sine. It could very well ... moreHmm I would say there defiantly is a difference though it may be small itÂ’s noticeable imo. Either way the Bose headset doesnÂ’t support apt x or even aptx HD , so itÂ’s only 16bit not 24 bit and itÂ’s supported codecs are AAC or SBC which are both 16 bit as such in terms of the Bose QC 2 vs sonyÂ’s 1000XM2 which uses ldac at 24/96hz
Great comparison, very helpful. One (minor) miss: the Bose do have NFC.
FullmetalJun, 31 Oct 2018I personally own a qc35 ii & while I agree it does sound very neutral & good, most rev... moreCheck your phone or player first, make sure it support AptX or LDAC if you want to use bluetooth.
Duck of death, 30 Oct 2018Claiming you easily can hear the difference between 24-bit/48kHz (AptX HD and most likely Sams... moreI tried blind test, in terms of aptx even aptx hd vs ldac, I really can hear the difference, ldac is much better. You can feel larger sound field and more sound detail. Aptx sounds more flat but much better than SBC and AAC. SBC and AAC just trick your ears and give the sound you want to hear. As I know QC35 don't have aptx and ldac. Not only the audio quality, but also there is about 200ms audio lag always there. It's bad for video.
I don't know why, theoretical, almost no difference between 24bit/48 vs 32bit/96 for human, I think maybe the aptx and ldac codec process the music differently within the phone.
I personally own a qc35 ii & while I agree it does sound very neutral & good, most reviewers put Sony 1000xm3 above it when it comes to sound quality.
I'm not satisfied with my anc anymore. I have to try Sony's to judge, but most reviewers prefer it
Duck of death, 30 Oct 2018Claiming you easily can hear the difference between 24-bit/48kHz (AptX HD and most likely Sams... moreI totally agree with you.
My point here is sony 1000xm3 have much better audio quality.
Anonymous, 31 Oct 2018I think your ears are burnt out , I can tell the difference between apt hd vs ldac. , also du... moreOkay, my best headphones are "only" a pair of planar-magnetic Audeze Sine. It could very well be that you can hear more detail with true audiophile equipment, but I can guarantee you that no current Bluetooth headphone has comparable accuracy so I'll call your bluff. ;)
And again, 24-bit music above 50kHz is almost impossible to feet your hands on.
Duck of death, 30 Oct 2018Claiming you easily can hear the difference between 24-bit/48kHz (AptX HD and most likely Sams... moreI think your ears are burnt out , I can tell the difference between apt hd vs ldac. , also due to the exnyos chips in Samsung phones in the uk you canÂ’t use apt or even aptx hd , so I compared to a V30 over wireless and imo there defo a quality difference , but saying that.
As you get older you hearing gets worse and depending if you have blasted your ears.. with music so to you it may not be beneficial to your lucky for me... hope it stays this way .. IÂ’m young and have decent hearing.. though I wish it was better... at higher frequencyÂ’s and worse at bass..
JohnsonJun, 30 Oct 2018If you are using 3.5mm plug or mp3 format, I think QC35 maybe sounds better according differen... moreClaiming you easily can hear the difference between 24-bit/48kHz (AptX HD and most likely Samsung HD) and 24-bit/96kHz (LDAC) is an incredibly bold statement! :) Most bats would be envious with your ears!
If I have to be honest, I wouldn't be able to do a blind test on 16-bit/44kHz and 24-bit/192kHz. I actually bought a few 24-bit albums this year for my FLAC collection just to see if the crazy price premium is worth it... The jury is still deliberating, but it doesn't look good for the expensivererer codec on my behalf! I might not have flawless hearing, but I did do a hearing test recently and my hearing line was surprisingly flat up to the higher frequencies, considering I've always tortured my eardrums with too loud music.
Just a side-note: Most 24-bit music you can buy is encoded between 44-48kHz. Making higher rate capabilities a bit redundant today.