| ▲ | jeffwask 2 days ago |
| This def needs to be celebrated and rewarded. I am more likely to purchase Bose now. |
|
| ▲ | bartread a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| Exactly this. "Bose blows" is a popular comment amongst the audiophile community but, to me, it seems like they don't blow at all[0]. In fact quite the opposite: this is a fantastic example for other companies to follow. Top marks, Bose! [0] What is actually true is that they are opinionated about sound reproduction in ways that a bunch of people don't agree with but which in the right context are often effective and enjoyable to listen to. |
| |
| ▲ | filoleg a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > "Bose blows" is a popular comment amongst the audiophile community but, to me, it seems like they don't blow at all[0] That comment is not wrong, you are imo just not making an important distinction that the criteria on which audiophiles judge Bose as “blowing” (which is almost purely the sound profile + a few other smaller things like physical comfort/connectivity/price/etc.) vs. what you judge it on (which is more in the long-term technical user/community product support, idk how to describe that area much better) are almost entirely disjoint. It is perfectly fine and valid for an audio product to “blow” from an opinionated audiophile perspective, while being exceptionally great from the long-term product/user/community product support perspective. I heavily agree with you btw, Bose should be heavily lauded for making a decision to open-up their speaker firmware after it reaches the official end of support deadline. The fact that this is an exceptional practice is imo, a little bit sad, because I believe that it should be way more common. | | |
| ▲ | PaulHoule a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Build quality of Bose products is good in my opinion. The headphones are alright but so are Sony, Plantronics and Apple. I love the sound of Airpods Pro in particular even if they don't want to stay in my ears [1] and the pairing experience even with the iPhone isn't what I expect of >$100 headphones in 2016. If you want really good stereo or 5.1 sound there is no substitute for big speakers that can move a lot of air. [1] maybe it is that gene polymorphism that makes my ears overflow with wax and has my doctor warning they will plug up one of these days | | |
| ▲ | filoleg a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Agreed on pretty much all points. There is no "ultimate audio equipment piece" that is just perfect in all aspects, and the choice criteria are spread across both user preferences and specific use-cases as well. I love the new airpods pro for my daily commute (subway, not a car; just clarifying before I get hammered down in replies for driving and using airpods at the same time), doubly so given their compactness+heavily improved ANC. For home, I love my open-back Beyerdynamic DT1990Pro pair, due to the audio profile + insanely good physical comfort when worn for prolonged periods of time. For gatherings with friends for when I need a somewhat-portable bluetooth speaker (that also happen to look good when sitting on a bookshelf outside of active use), I have a TE-OB4. If I had a larger living space, I would consider getting a pair of high-quality speakers again too. But there is not a single "this is it" piece of audio equipment that would just replace everything, so you gotta pick and choose your poison. | |
| ▲ | mike50 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Build quality is trash consumer with a hefty markup. The older CD player era equipment has the cheapest CD mechanisms I've ever seen for the era. The audio pathway is the same hybrids that everyone else uses. Bose is 100% mass marketing. I'm old enough to remember the endless ads in the back of magazines. | | |
| ▲ | com2kid a day ago | parent [-] | | Until the rest of the market caught up, Bose's noise cancelling algorithms were top notch. As soon as Apple entered the fray a bunch of money was thrown at the problem, the bar was raised, and now good quality noise cancelling is the norm. But for awhile Bose's headphones had the best noise cancelling out there. Their old ads were super irritating though, and many people (such as you and me!) are still irritated about them decades later. | | |
| ▲ | filoleg a day ago | parent [-] | | > Until the rest of the market caught up, Bose's noise cancelling algorithms were top notch. As soon as Apple entered the fray a bunch of money was thrown at the problem, the bar was raised, and now good quality noise cancelling is the norm. A minor nitpick: while Apple entering the ANC arena certainly set fire under the existing mainstream brands to improve their ANC headphones, imo Bose started facing serious competition on that front even before Apple moved in. I remember Sony releasing their MDR-1000X par being the first crack in the wall. I specifically remember this, because I picked up those headphones in favor of Bose options at the time. P.S. Yes, the naming scheme on Sony's side is atrocious, because MDR-1000X is the first gen of their very popular WH-1000XM line of ANC headphones that people treat as a flagship ANC headphone pair (with the most recent one being WH-1000XM6). | | |
| ▲ | com2kid a day ago | parent [-] | | I had forgotten about Sony. They were indeed going back and forth with Bose on who could make the highest quality ANC. I actually had a pair of Sennheiser noise cancelling headphones and they had a really good BT implementation, super low latency and the ANC was really good. Sadly they developed a persistent hiss in one earpiece. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | eikenberry a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Bose is fine for what it is, but it is overpriced for what it is. IMO the main point the audiophiles make is that you can get a superior product for the same cost. | |
| ▲ | tstrimple a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | If you haven't tried foam replacement tips, they make a world of difference for me. I couldn't use the airpods (non-pro) at all. I could barely use the silicon tipped pros. But when I put a foam tip on them it not only blocks out ambient sound better, they stay in place. Unfortunately the foam wears out rather quickly and I replace them around three times a year. | | |
| ▲ | PaulHoule 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | To be fair I'm pretty satisfied with the AirPod fit situation if I am sitting at my computer where the noise reduction is handy when the guy across the hall for me at the office is talking up a storm administering contracts and when my son is practicing guitar scales upstairs at home. They don't fall out often and when they do I'm not worried about losing them. Out in public is different. (1) It's a pet peeve of mine that people are wearing them and oblivious to warnings about environmental threats or sitting in a machine at the gym for 20 minutes doing nothing looking at their phone and hard to get in contact with. (2) I am doing a practice that increases sensory awareness when I "go out" and listening to music with noise canceling isn't compatible with that. | | |
| ▲ | tstrimple 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | I tend to use transparency mode when in public but still want to pay attention. Even with the foam tips, you can hear clearly then. |
| |
| ▲ | astrange a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sedna CrystalEarFit worked the best for me on older AirPods. Pure foam tips have a noticeably different sound profile. On the newest ones, the tips have a foam core inside them. |
|
| |
| ▲ | jacquesm a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The audiophile community usually are people with more money than ears, their opinion on the quality of particular brands is easy to discard, it is usually correlated more with expense than actual measured performance. | | |
| ▲ | timc3 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Except from what I remember Bose audio stuff is measurable bad by any standards (its been a while since I even took note). Their noise cancelling was good in the past though. My personal experience of Bose PA and HiFi equipment is that is belongs in the trash. |
| |
| ▲ | bayindirh a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Came here to say exactly this. I consider myself an audiophile (the sane kind) and, if I want “that sound” and have time, I use my HiFi, but if I want to enjoy music and just relax, I use my Bose headphones with whatever thing I have close. I like how they color sound, and how they use psychoacoustics to do what they do. Audiophiles using music to listen their systems are missing the point. | |
| ▲ | RajT88 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > The fact that this is an exceptional practice is imo, a little bit sad, because I believe that it should be way more common. If we gave tax breaks for open sourcing EOL products, we'd see a lot more of it. Code escrow companies might not like it, though. |
| |
| ▲ | cjk a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In a previous life, I was the platform architect for the Bluetooth headphones at Bowers & Wilkins. We, naturally, did tons of competitive analysis, and I tend to agree Bose blows sound quality-wise, but their active noise cancelling is hands-down the best in the biz, and they have the weight and comfort extremely dialed-in. Glad to see them setting a great example here instead of letting these speakers become expensive paperweights. | |
| ▲ | JodieBenitez a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > "Bose blows" is a popular comment amongst the audiophile community I have a 15 years old Bose system. Is it audio-transparent ? Absolutely not, its frequency response is well documented. But the sound is very pleasing, it's reliable and nearly invisble in my living room. I'm not an audiophile though, just a music lover. | | |
| ▲ | acomjean a day ago | parent [-] | | We have some really old Bose speakers my brothers and I bought 30+ years ago at my Moms place. Just listened to them over the recent holidays. Not ann audiofile but they sounded pretty good even now. |
| |
| ▲ | com2kid a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "Bose blows" is typically in regards to their price/performance, and especially with how they marketed themselves throughout the 90s and early 2000s. Bose used to advertise that they were the best sounding speaker out there, while also running advertisements that made claims which violated the laws of physics. For the same price as a Bose system you could get something much higher quality. Bose was selling at luxury prices w/o luxury quality. They got away with it because compared to the cheap garbage most people listened to, Bose's stuff was nicer. Their quality was mid to upper mid tier, and the build quality was generally good. But people got irritated by a decade ads saying a tiny speaker is more powerful than a proper speaker setup. Now days Bose makes good quality noise cancelling headphones (and I suspect they made more revenue selling NC headphones during the open office and then COVID era than they ever did selling speakers in the 90s!) and they brand car stereo systems. Their noise cancelling headphones are good, even if the ear pads wear our way too fast. Pretty much no one has a home hi-fi setup anymore, everyone just has a sound bar. I do have a hi-fi music setup, people are rather shocked when they come over that I even bothered. I got it for $2k on Craigslist years ago, the setup cost someone a small fortune when they were brand new. IMHO buying new hi-fi gear is pointless, Speakers made in 2005 sound just as good as speakers made in 2025, the laws of physics haven't changed any! | | |
| ▲ | timc3 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Speakers often use materials that degrade over time unfortunately. For example electronics in the crossover, foam, glue, and depending on the environment paper. |
| |
| ▲ | reactordev a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Seems to me like an executive saw klipsch failures and saw an opening to kill two birds with one stone. One, to show their support for audiophiles who supported them. Two, make superior products to klipsch that - ummm - actually state the real ranges of the speakers and use real copper windings instead of “painted” copper. | |
| ▲ | tclancy a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Alternatively: Bose now provides highs! No lows. | |
| ▲ | SoleilAbsolu a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Well, Bose has a long history of continually hyping whatever they're selling as the complete & utter pinnacle of sound reproduction technology, whether or not that's actually the case. Before the internet it was through their print media ads, starting with their Direct/Reflecting home speaker tech, continued through the 800 series PA speakers, Acoustic Wave tabletop radio, etc. Not to say there were not benefits, but that the choices they made -- single driver size, requiring certain room boundaries/geometry for optimal sound, need for active EQ/processing to get full-range response before the tech was really there to do so optimally -- did not always equal great trouble-free sound as advertised. That said their implementation of noise-cancelling headphones/earbuds was a legit game-changer. And good on them for open-sourcing these speakers! | |
| ▲ | juris a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | not an audiophile but is it possible to tease out those aspects of sound reproduction if the software is open source? | | |
| ▲ | bartread a day ago | parent [-] | | My comment about sound reproduction was more a point on Bose's longstanding philosophy in building speakers than in anything about this specific software but, to answer your question... quite possibly. Bose intentionally colour the sound and apply, at the very least, EQ and some sort of active processing to it to get what they believe is the best out of the speakers and enclosures they use. And I'm couching this all in very neutral terms, not because I have an axe to grind with them, but because I don't want to get into a flame war with the kind of audiophiles who hate Bose. FWIW the Bose products I've heard and used all sounded pretty good. At the end of the day they're designed for people to enjoy music within a particular target context, not necessarily to be the most accurate at reproducing the recording exactly. (I'll say this as well: reproducing the recording exactly isn't necessarily what you want to get something to sound good. A lot of albums from the loudness war era benefit significantly from rolling off some of the higher frequencies, where clipping occurs, for example. So I have one amplifier that includes - gasp, shock, horror - tone controls that I sometimes use and, on another system where the amp doesn't have tone controls, I've hooked up a [true] stereo graphic equalizer. You also have to take the listening environment into account and when you do that some element of processing the sound before it comes out of the speakers can also prove to be beneficial. Anyway, I shall now go and brace myself for some righteous abuse from the purists.) |
| |
| ▲ | spogbiper a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | i always heard "no high, no lows, must be bose" | |
| ▲ | sleepybrett a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The audiophile community is so far up it's own ass it doesn't see a distinction between bose and a piezoelectric buzzer. |
|
|
| ▲ | riedel a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Just to mention: Teufel has been even moving further with their fully open hardware design of MYND [0]. Hope others will follow. [0] https://teufel.de/mynd-107002004 |
| |
|
| ▲ | hamdingers a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Ironically this makes me want to buy this discontinued model, not anything currently supported by Bose. |
| |
| ▲ | inanutshellus a day ago | parent | next [-] | | A better way to say that is "This will boost the second-hand value of older Bose speakers". Budget-aware folks will buy these second-hand, neophiles will buy new, confident that long term solutions will exist even after "long term support" is over. Heck, even knowing there's a second-hand market makes me more likely to buy Bose new. | | |
| ▲ | castillar76 a day ago | parent [-] | | Many companies miss how important this is, too: they get caught up in "but if they buy it second-hand, they're not buying our new stuff!". When people buy the stuff second-hand, though, they become Bose fans — that means when the second-hand Bose stuff dies, they're more likely to replace it with new Bose stuff. That's particularly true with audio equipment, where people become attached not only to how something works but how it sounds. If they like Bose's rather particular audio signature, they'll keep buying more. Between that and the good-will they're getting from this move, this is making a ton of life-long Bose fans out of a lot of audio geeks. And if there's a community well-known for creating religions out of their hardware preferences... | | |
| ▲ | jerf a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Another thing companies miss is that the second-value is priced in to the price. If I know I can resell a thing for some value, that makes it more valuable than if I can't resell it all, and I can pay more for it. Contrary to what the companies think, they were in fact compensated for the after market value, and it's even better then they hoped, because that compensation occurred at time of first sale rather than some random time years later. The most amusing anti-example of this was the Switch generation: $60 for a cartridge, or $60 for a digital license. Guess which is actually more valuable? Guess which you were more likely to find discounted, even if only by a marginal amount, by some store desperate to move stock out of the way? By contrast, I'm not worried about the fact I can't resell my copy of Game X I got on Steam when I only paid $5 for it in the first place. | |
| ▲ | freedomben a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Indeed, and also people buying second-hand are pretty unlikely to buy brand new if they aren't able to find the second-hand item (or use it). It's similar to piracy in that respect, that some people who pirate might have actually bought it, but the majority likely would not have anyway so can't just say "1,000 people pirated our thing, therefore we lost 1,000 sales". The cynic in me thinks they know that and just use it as a convenient way to over-inflate the damage piracy is doing to them, but that's a separate topic | | |
| ▲ | InitialLastName a day ago | parent [-] | | On the other hand, lots of people buying audio gear new DO take the second-hand market into account, and will spend more on the initial purchase if they think the product will retain its value. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | jcmfernandes a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It makes me want to buy both! Old to tinker with, new to support the move. | |
| ▲ | platevoltage a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Bose products seem like they are most popular with older, non-technical people who see it as a luxury brand. This is the same reaction that I would have with this news because I like modifying hardware/firmware, but I was never in the market to buy Bose products in the first place. My parents on the other hand have at least 3 wave radios in the house. |
|
|
| ▲ | cipehr 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Agree. This is huge. Definitely makes me want to buy more Bose products for my house. |
| |
|
| ▲ | DiabloD3 a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Bose hardware quality is rather low and, and their sound quality is sub-par, while forcing you to pay the Bose brand tax, riding the corpse of Amar around for profit. I'd avoid, even if they happened to do this. |
| |
| ▲ | Teckla a day ago | parent | next [-] | | My experience is the opposite: Bose hardware and sound quality seems excellent to me. This may be subjective. Bose might sound good to some people's ears and less good to other people's ears. | | |
| ▲ | schrijver a day ago | parent | next [-] | | People keep bringing dead Bose bluetooth speakers to our repair café. These are a lot more expensive than the competitors. Bose has a reputation so people think they’ll last longer, but they don’t, they’ll fail just out of warranty just like cheaper brands. They also don’t sound meaningfully better. And they’re not at all engineered to be repaired. I’d avoid. I personally prefer corded headphones and mains powered speakers, but if I were to buy a small wireless speaker I would buy a cheaper brand and ideally second hand, because this category of devices are basically consumables. | |
| ▲ | kiney a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don't know about Bose.
But sound quality in general is absolutely objectively measurable. | | |
| ▲ | lelanthran a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > But sound quality in general is absolutely objectively measurable. Sound quality is not the same as music quality. To be more specific, Sound Reproduction Fidelity is not the same as Pleasant Music To be even more specific, Signal Reproduction is not the same as "Pleasant Sounds* The goal of music is not always high fidelity of reproduction; if it were, over-driven valve amps would never have been a thing. The only thing objective in this context is signal reproduction, which is not the highest concern for music production. | | |
| ▲ | Wowfunhappy a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > To be more specific, Sound Reproduction Fidelity is not the same as Pleasant Music If a speaker reproduces some music with 100% accuracy and the result is unpleasant, doesn’t that just mean the original music—as created by the artist—is unpleasant? Where possible, I’d prefer a speaker that respects the artist’s decisions instead of inserting itself into the creative process. | | |
| ▲ | sosborn a day ago | parent [-] | | Unless you are listening through the same studio monitors in the same room or headphones as the mixing engineer, it will never be the same. IMHO, people place too much importance on "accuracy". While accuracy might be objectively measured, it means nothing when it comes to individual taste. | | |
| ▲ | Yodel0914 a day ago | parent [-] | | There’s a whole field of research on this (look up Floyd Toole) - while any one individual can have skewed taste, on aggregate people prefer speakers that are as close to neutral as possible. |
|
| |
| ▲ | jrajav a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Signal reproduction matters quite a bit more for music production than it does for music listening and enjoyment. That's why producers and engineers look for 'monitors', rather than hi-fi speakers. Hi-fi speakers, tube amps, and other accessories generally "degrade" the sound with added harmonics and natural smile EQs. That's what makes them sound more pleasing. (I'm not disagreeing with you, just adding more color.) |
| |
| ▲ | pete5x5 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You can certainly measure it, but the catch is that there is not always a single "correct" value. So just because you can measure what the speakers are outputting and then adjust it, it doesn't mean there is one correct output value. A good example of this is a target curve, often used in room calibration. Dirac has a good explanation: https://www.dirac.com/resources/target-curve (highly recommend Dirac room correction, by the way) | | |
| ▲ | timc3 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah that was a very interesting thing to learn. When my room was being tuned (after being built to a specification for acoustics) the acoustician then actually tuned in several switchable curves because it was so flat in response he wanted to make it sound more natural to work in. |
| |
| ▲ | EvanAnderson a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There's arguably a subjective quality to sound enjoyment, though. The fidelity of reproduction can be measured, but I'd argue there's personal preference in the types of artifacts generated by inaccuracies in reproduction. | | |
| ▲ | bombcar a day ago | parent [-] | | There's really two camps - "I like what I hears" and "this is as close to in-studio monitors as you can get". There's an argument for both, but frankly, if studio monitor setups don't sound "as good" why bother? |
| |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | b00ty4breakfast a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | you can absolutely quantify certain metrics, and you can even generalize what "good" is by surveying listener preference but that isn't the same thing as any one individual's subjective preference. |
| |
| ▲ | JodieBenitez a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Bose in general (there are many models...) is not what I'd call high-fidelity. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy your music or your movies with it. Just don't buy this if you care about transparency, otherwise it's usually a pleasing hearing experience. Their PA line is IMO overpriced and sacrifices too much to the design and weight. | | |
| ▲ | BobaFloutist a day ago | parent [-] | | I've been playing with the idea for a bit, can you give me an order of magnitude for "entry-level HiFi"? Even if that's an oxymoron, how many zeroes does it take to get an experience that's noticeably superior to, say, default car speakers or built-in Smart TV speakers? | | |
| ▲ | JodieBenitez a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It's like buying a gun or a car, there are all kinds of offers and all kinds of prices. You should be able to find great offers with amp+speakers under 1k€, including VAT. Probably even less with 2.0 or 2.1 systems. | |
| ▲ | t-3 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It doesn't usually take much, because very few cars or TVs come with powered subwoofers or 6x9s or quality tweeters. Second hand amps, receivers, etc. are usually a good deal, entry-level speakers are pretty cheap new though. | |
| ▲ | ssl-3 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Better than smart TV speakers? That's a low bar. A $40 Bluetooth box from any big name brand is better than the speakers in a smart TV. |
|
| |
| ▲ | sleepybrett a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Similar experience, even after picking up the new airpod pro 3's (the hearing aid stuff i great for my ailing ears) I still prefer, when I'm sitting at my desk working while listening to music, the quietcomfort 2 earbuds. The noise cancellation is hands down better than apple's an it's a more comfortable fit. |
| |
| ▲ | 10729287 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Typical so called audiophile stance here. I have numerous headphones (including high ends ones) and always been happy with my Bose. Sound is great and gently enhanced for listening enjoyment, whatever snobs could say about it, and the hardware is really nice. My Bose SoundSport earbuds are the best fit I ever had in 30+ years of wearing earbuds and my QC35 never failed on me. That move from them adds to all the great things I can say about this brand. | |
| ▲ | cjk a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If you're talking about their headphones, I agree they _feel_ cheaply-made, but they are by no means low-quality. When you make headphones with premium materials, they get heavy, and that makes them uncomfortable/painful to wear. Speaking from prior experience. It's an incredibly delicate balancing act. Bose optimizes for comfort, which is important for e.g. long plane rides. | |
| ▲ | aethrum a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm an audiophile and very happy with one of their portable speakers. I wouldn't buy Bose monitors, though | |
| ▲ | senshan a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Please suggest better alternatives | | |
| ▲ | bee_rider a day ago | parent | next [-] | | If you were going to consider Bose, you should at least take a look at Sennheiser. They are similar in a “can’t really go too wrong” sense. Nice build quality, generally pretty flat and analytical usually. They are such a standard response that presumably a real audiophile will come along to point out that their favorite model is much better, than a particular well known Sennheiser model, but as far as one can say in brand terms they are solid. | | |
| ▲ | DiabloD3 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Sennheiser sold out to a Chinese factory, and recently even stopped producing their flagship stuff in-house. They're even shutting their "cheap" Irish factory down (where modern HD650s and HD660Ss were made). All the Chinese-made Sennheiser stuff has awful QA. | |
| ▲ | dundundundun a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I loathe analytical sound. It destroys all listening pleasure for me. Give me nice warm coloured midtones and I'm happy! |
| |
| ▲ | DiabloD3 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sure. What exactly are you looking for? Also, there are multiple forums and subreddits you can ask this question on. You will get more answers than you would from me and the rest of HN. | |
| ▲ | drnick1 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Beyerdynamic DT1990s run circles around consumer-grade stuff. | | |
| ▲ | DiabloD3 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Beyerdynamic announced earlier last year they're finally exiting pro and flagship tier stuff, and selling out to a Chinese equity firm. Their build quality is exceptional, and they're built like tanks. The only problem, imo, is the Beyer house sound is very shouty and fatiguing, especially with the "990" versions of the product line over the years. Disclaimer: I owned a Beyer DT880/600ohm (the neutral one of the 770/880/990 siblings), paired with an amp that could properly handle it. Its one of the few headphones I sold and did not retain in my collection, it deserved someone that could love it. The new Tesla-based drivers are better (such as that 1990), but still retain that Beyer sound. | | | |
| ▲ | astrange a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I can't stand Beyerdynamic audio and don't understand why anyone recommends it. It has an awful treble peak you can't stop noticing once you hear it, and you can't drive their headphones without an amp. I recommend HiFiMan Sundara/Ananda if they fit your head and there aren't any CPU fans in your room. | | |
| ▲ | DiabloD3 a day ago | parent [-] | | I don't. Hifiman QA is exceptionally bad, and they tend to not stand by their warranty, and their US repair facility is just some dude's house. The threads on /r/headphones over Hifiman shafting them are numerous. Disclaimer: I too had a Hifiman pair, they sounded great, but their physical design just didn't hold up to daily use, no matter how much I babied them. |
| |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
| |
| ▲ | makach a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Some of their high priced noise cancelling headphones have excellent quality. I purchased the QC-25 ages ago, and when it stopped working I reached out to support, this was beyond their 3y warranty, provided serial number and they sent me a new QC-35 no questions asked replacement unit. I am very happy with my QC-35 headphones. They are probably 5y+ now and they go with me everywhere. I think it is unfair to state their hw quality is low. It is much better than low. | | |
| ▲ | maximilianthe1 a day ago | parent [-] | | In current dynamic world product quality of a company 'today' vs '5y+ ago' may drastically change. Sadly, usually to the bad side | | |
| ▲ | stewarts a day ago | parent [-] | | Bose's QC/QC Ultra lines continue to receive praise for comfort, durability, sound quality, noise cancellation, etc. They make pretty great consumer quality headphones. Until quite recently, they were widely one of if not the most recommended wireless headphones. The new Sennheiser's that come with a USB-C dongle might have finally stepped past what Bose has been delivering, but at a higher price. | | |
| ▲ | bornfreddy a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I had the new QC Ultra and gave it away. The sound was mediocre at best and you can't turn NC off - a dealbreaker for me (no, passthru is not the same as off). Hope it helps someone make my mistake aa they are quite pricey. Now if I could change the firmware to turn NC off, that would be something entirely different... | | |
| ▲ | duskdozer 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | Is it auto-adjusted NC? I'm thinking of the Sony equivalents that reduce or increase the strength of the NC depending on the environment, but do not allow you to just choose the strength. |
| |
| ▲ | wincy a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | My wife normally isn’t one to splurge but after her Bose headphones died, we tried a couple other brands, returned them, and went with the QC-35 II despite them being more expensive. The “comfort” part is key, she’s on the spectrum and has a hard time with headphones irritating her, and these are hands down the most comfortable. We also like the Bose soundbar as it has a mode that makes dialogue more intelligible on our TV. | |
| ▲ | sleepybrett a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I love my QCII earbuds, comfort and noise cancellation blow the airpodpro3's out of the water. But sadly the new hearing aid features of the airpodpros are very handy to me, so I have both. I wear the QC2's when I'm at home alone, and the app3s when I'm out and about and expect to have to have some conversations. My ears aren't so bad yet that I need hearing aids, but they are bad enough that I'm forced to lean in more than I used to. Aging is the worst. |
|
|
|
|