AirPods Max vs Sony XM6 - Over-ear headphones shootout

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited May 28

Announced on May 15, Sony's WH-1000XM6 are premium over-ear headphones with ANC, which improves upon its predecessor. Here's how they compare to Apple's AirPods Max.

Two pairs of over-ear headphones on a table, one black with dark ear cushions, the other white with light ear cushions, against a blurred purple background.
AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Both sets of ANC headphones



The premium headphone market has a few companies at the top, and Sony is one of them. Its headphone heritage is extensive, with its XM4 offering good quality at a price $200 cheaper than the AirPods Max.

The Sony WH-1000XM5 were a revision that more directly competed with the AirPods Max, and was very well received in 2022. Now, Sony has continued the line with the WH-1000XM6, this time boasting highly improved active noise cancellation.

In a rematch three years in the making, here's how Sony's latest ANC headphones compare against Apple's long-standing AirPods Max.

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Specifications

Sirir>
SpecificationsAirPods MaxSony WH-1000XM6
Price$549
On sale at Amazon
$449.99
On sale at Amazon
Weight13.6 ounces8.96 ounces
FoldableNoYes
Drivers40mm30mm
Noise CancellationYesYes
Spatial AudioYesYes
Charging portUSB-CUSB-C
Battery Life20 hours ANC on30 hours ANC on
ControlsDigital Crown,
Button
Buttons
ColorsSilver,
Space Grey,
Sky Blue,
Pink,
Green
Black,
Platinum Silver,
Midnight Blue

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Design



Apple's design for the AirPods Max hasn't changed at all over the years, except for one connector. It's a stainless steel headband wrapped in rubber, with a canopy cushion at the top.

The aluminum earcups of the AirPods Max are matched by a mesh textile-covered foam for comfort. It's a thoroughly premium design, but one that can lie flat, if not fold.

The Sony XM6 follow the same sort of design philosophy as the previous generation, but this time, Sony has gone for a wider headband made with synthetic leather. The earpads are made from a stretchy material intended for all-day wear, with the earcups neatly swiveling into position.

Hands holding an open gray case containing folded over-ear headphones and a neatly coiled cable against a gray fabric background.
AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - The Sony XM6 headphones in their carrying case



You don't get the shiny exposed metal of the AirPods Max here, as Sony prefers a uniform appearance here. Aside from some highlights like the Sony logo, of course.

When it comes to weight, the XM6 are pretty similar to the last generation at 8.96 ounces. Once again, this is positively lightweight compared to the 13.6-ounce AirPods Max.

Sony does, however, allow the latest edition to fold up. This makes the XM6 much better from a portability and storage perspective, and a bit better for travel.

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Control



When it comes to physical controls, the two headphones go down slightly different routes. Sony opts for a large power button and a smaller NC/AMB button, while Apple relies on a Digital Crown and a noise control button for flexibility and minimalism.

Beyond these, the two headphones also rely on a bunch of other ways to manage your music and audio needs. There's also a lot of crossover here.

Sony has a dedicated app that can be used to fine-tune the earphones to your listening needs. Apple offers something similar within iOS itself for the AirPods Max, thanks to its deep integration.

Person holding a gray headphone cup focusing on power button and controls labeled NC/AMB.
AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Power and ANC button on the Sony XM6



Both are capable of playing and pausing music when put on or taken off. This is handy for preserving battery life or for halting playback temporarily.

One area where the AirPods Max lose out is gestures, as you can nod or shake your head with the XM6 to answer or decline calls, for example.

Both also have the ability to work with connected digital assistants like Siri and Google Assistant, which adds another layer of control.

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Audio Processing



Premium headphones require premium features, and both examples here offer just that.

AirPods Max is known for active noise cancellation, with Apple also including Transparency Mode using its array of microphones. There are nine in total, with eight used for ANC and two ANC mics used with the spare for voice pickup.

It also handles things like Personalized Spatial Audio with dynamic head tracking, and an adaptive EQ. All of this is driven by the H1 chip included in each earcup.

Two hands holding black over-ear headphones with soft, oval ear cushions against a gray textured background.
AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Earcups for AirPods Max that house the 40mm drivers



For the XM6, Sony includes an upgraded ANC system. The new HD Noise Cancelling Processor QN3 is said to be seven times faster than the previous generation, with it also adding more microphones for ANC, with a total of 12 in use.

The noise cancellation is also optimized in real-time, thanks to the Adaptive NC Optimizer.

An Auto Ambient Sound model is able to adapt to the user's surroundings, offering a balance of music and environmental sounds similar to Transparency Mode. However, Sony does allow you to adjust the settings within its Sound Connect app.

Pumping sound into the ears is Apple's custom 40mm dynamic drivers. Sony goes for a 30mm version, which it also says is optimally tuned for noise cancellation purposes.

Sony also created a carbon fiber composite material dome and its own voice coil structure for improved vocal reproduction.

For audio pickup, the XM6 uses a six-microphone array with an AI-based beamforming system. Sony says this helps improve voice isolation.

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Audio and ANC Quality



Despite the AirPods Max's unuqdated audio components, they still sound incredibly good. In our testing, the AirPods Max just edge out the still-excellent Sony XM6.

Specifically, the mids on AirPods Max are a bit more clear. This is more true on instrumental music where they also sound more true to life compared to synth-heavy modern tracks.

Additionally, AirPods Max still have an incredibly-large soundstage. The audio sounds like it is coming from all around versus sounding more constrained a bit on the XM6.

The soundstage is very important when it comes to other features too, like Spatial Audio with head tracking. The audio has more room and separation for a more convincing effect.

Sony does have the edge when it comes to customization though. While Apple prioritizes accuracy, Sony offers a companion app with a built-in equalizer.

A hand holding a smartphone displaying device sound settings, including noise canceling. Another hand points at white over-ear headphones placed on a gray surface.
AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - The Sony companion app for the XM6 headphones



Users are able to tune the headphones to their liking. That way you can amp up the bass or make it more level, depending on your preferences.

If you are particular in a certain sound profile, the Sonys may be better since you can dial them in. Apple doesn't allow for such granular customization.

For noise cancellation, AirPods Max continue to be best-in-class. We found the Bose QuietComfort were still superior overall, but between the Sony XM6 and AirPods Max, the latter were better.

Slightly more ambient noise came through in our simulated test in the studio, playing loud airplane-mimicking white noise through a series of surround speakers.

Again, both of these are very good and we're getting into the nitty gritty. We'd happily listen to either of these headphones for hours on end without any complaints on the audio or ANC quality.

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - Connectivity and Battery Life



Physical connectivity is handled by USB-C on both headphones, with Sony also adding a headphone jack.

On the wireless side, Apple uses Bluetooth 5.0 to connect to its hardware. Apple's use of iCloud and Apple ID makes it so the AirPods Max can switch easily between Apple devices.

A firmware update worked with iOS 18.4 enabled lossless audio and ultra-low-latency audio in the AirPods Max.

Sony includes multi-point connection, including support for two Bluetooth devices at the same time over Bluetooth 5.3. There's easy pairing available with Windows 11 and Windows 10 PCs, along with Fast Pair on Android devices.

It's also claimed that the XM6 are ready to work with LE Audio, allowing the headphones to enter a low-latency mode for gaming. Support for Auracast is also available for public broadcasts.

When it comes to battery life, the AirPods Max offer up to 20 hours of listening from a single charge with ANC and Spatial Audio enabled. Fast-charge is available, with 1.5 hours generated from five minutes of charging.

Sony claims it can last for up to 30 hours from a single charge with ANC on, but that stretches to 40 hours with ANC off.

AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - One upgrade, one in waiting



It's safe to say that the Sony WH-1000XM6 and the AirPods Max are great examples of premium audio, if you can afford them.

Sony's newest update to the line brings with it a folding design, beefier onboard processing, improved ANC, and the capability to fine-tune the settings. If you have a multi-ecosystem computing environment, they would fit in pretty well almost anywhere.

AirPods Max, meanwhile, is still arguably the best option if you're entrenched in the Apple ecosystem completely. The integration with Apple's operating system makes it a better choice in that situation.

Three pairs of over-ear headphones, black, white, and blue, hang on a minimalist metallic rack against a plain background.
AirPods Max vs Sony WH-1000XM6 - The XM6 color range



For previous generations, we would've pointed out how much cheaper the Sony headphones were compared to the AirPods Max. However, at $449 for the XM6 and with AirPods Max hitting $480 when discounted, the price is no longer an advantage Sony can lean on.

What is evident, though, is that Sony's willing to rethink its premium headphones at a much faster rate than Apple. In two years, it's updated quite a few bits of its headphones for the better.

Apple, meanwhile, has barely made any material changes to the AirPods Max since its launch in late 2020. The addition of USB-C instead of Lightning for charging is nice, but not entirely groundbreaking.

That said, with Apple's lossless and low-latency firmware update earlier in 2025, it shows there's still some room to grow for the AirPods Max, over four years after release.

Where to buy the Sony XM6 vs AirPods Max headphones



Sony's XM6 over-ear headphones retail for $449, with Amazon and B&H accepting orders for the 2025 release.

Apple's AirPods Max, meanwhile, are regularly on sale, with Amazon discounting the USB-C headphones to as low as $479.99 at press time (down from $549). You can check out our AirPods deals coverage and compare prices across popular resellers in our AirPods Price Guide.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 17
    xyzzy01xyzzy01 Posts: 154member
    "AirPods Max is known for active noise cancellation."
     That's stretching it a bit. The Airpods Max impressed because they were as good as the Sony WH-1000XM4 when they were launched. In 2022 Sony released the WH-1000XM5 (They really need simpler names), and the active noise cancelation there is better than the Airpods Max. If WH-1000XM6 is even better, that will just increase the distance to Apple in the rearview mirror for this specific area. 

    I've had both - I used Airpods Max until last year. There were so many issues (hangs, not found by phone/computer, getting in states where it reversed head detection etc), and I was waiting for a new version of the Airpods Max. When Apple didn't bother to update, I switched to the XM5 - and I've been happy so far. Just wish they'd support three Bluetooth units at the same time...
    edited May 16
    williamlondon
     0Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 17
    ramanpfafframanpfaff Posts: 173member
    I have the 4 version. Great headphones for flying with the nose cancellation. I've been buying older ones when the new ones come out, so got the 4 for just $180. Other than flying and vacuum cleaning I don't wear headphones. 
    williamlondonmike1
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 17
    jonrojonro Posts: 70member
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    Flufflesworthywilliamlondonxyzzy01Alex1Njeffharrismike1MplsPdecoderringronnnapoleon_phoneapart
     15Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 17
    nubusnubus Posts: 863member
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.
    The AI team covered the announcement. It isn't a review  and there is no rating of XM6. It is still a great service as Max is dated.
    What HiFI got a headset from Sony and to answer your question:
    Has Sony managed to give the headphones the sound quality a flagship pair demands?
    The answer is a resounding yes.
    https://www.whathifi.com/headphones/sony-wh-1000xm6
    williamlondonAlex1Nbyronlmacgui
     2Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 17
    dewmedewme Posts: 6,056member
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    I think it's absolutely correct to compare competing headphones based on objective physical and functional characteristics and features. Anything beyond that gets into areas where a great deal of subjectivity is involved. They could go one step further and look at objective things like frequency response curves or noise cancelation performance when subjected to the exact same audio waveforms. This may provide more data for potential buyer who have a reasonably good understanding of how their hearing responds to audio with certain frequency response curves.

    Nothing compares to putting the headphones on your head, adjusting them for a comfortable fit that you can tolerate for extended listening sessions, and listening to actual music that is at least characteristically similar to what you enjoy listening to. If you can repeat the same subjective evaluation for different sets of headphones you're considering, all the better. Every head is different, every ear is different, every person's hearing frequency response is different (and changes with age), and every person's brain and emotions reacts to sound in a unique way. 

    I'm not suggesting that headphone evaluator's listening experiences and reactions are invalid, but they are always subjective and in many cases are more discerning. The higher you go in the range of audiophile hierarchy the more the terminology spoken or written about becomes more like a foreign language to a lot of people who are in the market for a new set of headphones, like me. No matter what anyone says sounds better or worse is only their opinion, but the only opinion that matters is your own. If you have a history with a particular reviewer who has helped you based on his or her subjective opinion, that can be helpful as a filtering process. It's no guaranteed but it's not totally random either.

    Articles like this one do help you narrow down the list of candidate products based on objective visible, touchable, and measurable differences. No more and no less. It's a great step in the right direction. I'm not going to say that someone else's opinion of what sounds good or what sounds bad does not matter because it is a data point to consider.  I've bought $30 headphones that delivered a far more enjoyable listening experience than $300 headphones. This is why I'm wary of buying any product that has so many dependencies on my subjectivity without the option of trying it myself or having the ability to send it back if it doesn't meet my expectations. In a lot of ways the old brick & mortar experiences were actually much better than the YouTube, blog, online articles, or Amazon review based ones are. 
    Alex1Nmike1ronnmuthuk_vanalingamlibertyandfree
     2Likes 3Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 17
    Marvinmarvin Posts: 15,578moderator
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.
    There are some sound sites that do in-depth and consistent sound quality tests:

    https://www.soundguys.com/apple-airpods-max-review-44975/
    https://www.soundguys.com/sony-wh-1000xm6-review-137397/

    The XM6 like the XM5 has 30mm drivers, XM4 has 40mm and some reviews rank it higher for sound quality. Smaller drivers tend to produce weaker sound, especially weaker bass but some people prefer the sound clarity with weaker bass. Airpods Max has 40mm drivers like most premium over-ear headphones.

    https://versus.com/en/headphone?filter%5B%5D=driver_unit=30,90

    This is mentioned in this review:

    https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/sony-wh-1000xm6-review-hail-to-the-new-noise-canceling-king/

    "When Sony moved from the XM4 to the XM5, it went from using 40mm drivers to 30mm drivers, which changed the sound fairly dramatically, and not everyone liked the change. The XM4, which remains available, is a warmer headphone with bigger, more energetic bass, while the XM5 offers more detailed sound and tighter bass. 

    The XM6's sound is essentially an enhanced version of the XM5's, with even smoother, more detailed sound, better midrange clarity and slightly better bass performance. It's a richer-sounding headphone with a little more depth and extension to the sound. Well-balanced and fairly precise (various instruments feel like they're right where they're supposed to be in the soundstage), the XM6 has a bit more of a studio headphone vibe, more in line with Sony's top wired headphones, though Sony doesn't classify these as "analytical" headphones.

    Sony has touted how it had some exceptionally accomplished sound engineers in New York tune the headphones, and I spoke with one of them before the launch of the headphones. He said the stiffest competition for sound quality came from the AirPods Max, and I tend to agree with that, although I also think the Sonos Ace is quite competitive. However, I liked the midrange on the Sony slightly better, and the bass has a little more kick to it. With tracks that had very deep bass, the Sony resolved the lows with aplomb and sounded quite consistent."

    The main things reviewers said against the Airpods Max were weight and price but sound quality and noise-cancelling were rated as high as competing headphones and probably why they haven't brought out a 2nd model yet as there's little to improve in terms of sound quality.
    nubusxyzzy01ronnmuthuk_vanalingam
     0Likes 0Dislikes 4Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 17
    nubusnubus Posts: 863member
    Marvin said:

    The main things reviewers said against the Airpods Max were weight and price but sound quality and noise-cancelling were rated as high as competing headphones and probably why they haven't brought out a 2nd model yet as there's little to improve in terms of sound quality.
    The Max is the last to be on H1. It is stuck on Bluetooth 5.0 from 2016 with newer versions having reduced power consumption and higher effective bandwidth for better audio.
    Max is also too heavy something Apple should address. As for NC the XM6 is by reviewers seen as superior. And the case... Apple should have create a new case years ago. XM6 is reported to charge for 3 hours in 3 minutes while Max is capable of 1 hour in 5 minutes. There are plenty of reasons for doing a proper update.

    Preferably launch Max 2 with Bluetooth 6 and a better audio codec at the same time as iPhone 17 Pro.
    xyzzy01williamlondonashsaturdayronn
     3Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 17
    CheeseFreezecheesefreeze Posts: 1,420member
    So… what about, you know, the sound? 🤷‍♂️
    decoderringwilliamlondonronnmacgui
     3Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 17
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,496member
    dewme said:
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    I think it's absolutely correct to compare competing headphones based on objective physical and functional characteristics and features. Anything beyond that gets into areas where a great deal of subjectivity is involved. They could go one step further and look at objective things like frequency response curves or noise cancelation performance when subjected to the exact same audio waveforms. This may provide more data for potential buyer who have a reasonably good understanding of how their hearing responds to audio with certain frequency response curves.

    Nothing compares to putting the headphones on your head, adjusting them for a comfortable fit that you can tolerate for extended listening sessions, and listening to actual music that is at least characteristically similar to what you enjoy listening to. If you can repeat the same subjective evaluation for different sets of headphones you're considering, all the better. Every head is different, every ear is different, every person's hearing frequency response is different (and changes with age), and every person's brain and emotions reacts to sound in a unique way. 

    I'm not suggesting that headphone evaluator's listening experiences and reactions are invalid, but they are always subjective and in many cases are more discerning. The higher you go in the range of audiophile hierarchy the more the terminology spoken or written about becomes more like a foreign language to a lot of people who are in the market for a new set of headphones, like me. No matter what anyone says sounds better or worse is only their opinion, but the only opinion that matters is your own. If you have a history with a particular reviewer who has helped you based on his or her subjective opinion, that can be helpful as a filtering process. It's no guaranteed but it's not totally random either.

    Articles like this one do help you narrow down the list of candidate products based on objective visible, touchable, and measurable differences. No more and no less. It's a great step in the right direction. I'm not going to say that someone else's opinion of what sounds good or what sounds bad does not matter because it is a data point to consider.  I've bought $30 headphones that delivered a far more enjoyable listening experience than $300 headphones. This is why I'm wary of buying any product that has so many dependencies on my subjectivity without the option of trying it myself or having the ability to send it back if it doesn't meet my expectations. In a lot of ways the old brick & mortar experiences were actually much better than the YouTube, blog, online articles, or Amazon review based ones are. 

    Here's an interesting summary of some research done to try and understand listener preferences and thereby design headphones.



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 17
    dewmedewme Posts: 6,056member
    mike1 said:
    dewme said:
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    I think it's absolutely correct to compare competing headphones based on objective physical and functional characteristics and features. Anything beyond that gets into areas where a great deal of subjectivity is involved. They could go one step further and look at objective things like frequency response curves or noise cancelation performance when subjected to the exact same audio waveforms. This may provide more data for potential buyer who have a reasonably good understanding of how their hearing responds to audio with certain frequency response curves.

    Nothing compares to putting the headphones on your head, adjusting them for a comfortable fit that you can tolerate for extended listening sessions, and listening to actual music that is at least characteristically similar to what you enjoy listening to. If you can repeat the same subjective evaluation for different sets of headphones you're considering, all the better. Every head is different, every ear is different, every person's hearing frequency response is different (and changes with age), and every person's brain and emotions reacts to sound in a unique way. 

    I'm not suggesting that headphone evaluator's listening experiences and reactions are invalid, but they are always subjective and in many cases are more discerning. The higher you go in the range of audiophile hierarchy the more the terminology spoken or written about becomes more like a foreign language to a lot of people who are in the market for a new set of headphones, like me. No matter what anyone says sounds better or worse is only their opinion, but the only opinion that matters is your own. If you have a history with a particular reviewer who has helped you based on his or her subjective opinion, that can be helpful as a filtering process. It's no guaranteed but it's not totally random either.

    Articles like this one do help you narrow down the list of candidate products based on objective visible, touchable, and measurable differences. No more and no less. It's a great step in the right direction. I'm not going to say that someone else's opinion of what sounds good or what sounds bad does not matter because it is a data point to consider.  I've bought $30 headphones that delivered a far more enjoyable listening experience than $300 headphones. This is why I'm wary of buying any product that has so many dependencies on my subjectivity without the option of trying it myself or having the ability to send it back if it doesn't meet my expectations. In a lot of ways the old brick & mortar experiences were actually much better than the YouTube, blog, online articles, or Amazon review based ones are. 

    Here's an interesting summary of some research done to try and understand listener preferences and thereby design headphones.



    Thanks, that’s an interesting paper. I do understand the value of looking at the frequency response of headphones as an objective measurement. If you know that your personal experience closely matches the defacto standards then this information will be helpful for you to form candidates for consideration. 

    I follow “The Headphone Show” on YouTube and they get into great detail around these objective measurements, which is a reasonable weeding-out mechanism. If the frequency response curves alone were the final say in defining sound quality one would think that every headphone maker would simply design to precisely match the most preferred frequency response curve. But they don’t do that for some reason and the frequency response curves show it. The final decision still resides with the listener and their subjective perception, which includes more than simply the acoustics. 

    In any case, I’m not expecting AppleInsider to dig into the audio performance of headphones or speakers that you would find on a site devoted to audio. Of course they could reference multiple audio review sources and reiterate the consensus of a certain number of those sources. One key takeaway from the referenced paper was the lack of correlation between headphone prices and their frequency response measurements. 
    edited May 18
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 17
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,600member
    dewme said:
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    I think it's absolutely correct to compare competing headphones based on objective physical and functional characteristics and features. Anything beyond that gets into areas where a great deal of subjectivity is involved. 
    I agree there's value in comparing competing products' feature set. Such things like the XM6s now folding flat again and folding flat when around a user's neck are worth noting and considering.

    But calling a comparison a "shootout" really should include details about audio quality. Any overall conclusions can obviously be shaped by subjective interpretation of audio characteristics. But there are audio characteristics/details which can be observed and reported with a level of objectivity. Things like audio roll off at earlier then typical frequencies or overly bright, or grittiness of symbols instead of a sheen etc. Muddiness in the midrange. How important any anomalies are to any one user would be the subjective part. 
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 12 of 17
    ITGUYINSDitguyinsd Posts: 576member
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    Agreed.  It's a long, over-worded summary of a specs sheet.  The article is titled "shootout", not specs comparison, and since their primary purpose is to replay music, I also found it odd there was no mention or comparison of sound quality.  Equivalent of an article about 2 high end TV's without mentioning screen quality.
    macgui
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 17
    thedbathedba Posts: 845member
    I'd hardly call this a shootout. 
    AirPods max haven't changed since their introduction back in December 2020, other than a port change in September 2024.
    The Sonys OTOH have been constantly updated XM4 (2020), XM5 (2022) XM6 (2025) making them more technologically advanced. 
    If you're talking about volume sales, I don't have any stats, I would be willing to bet that the Sony line has outsold the Max by significant numbers. Of course most of it comes down to price and more frequent discounts. 

    That being said I still prefer the Max. I've been on my original pair since the end of 2021. 
    Although the AirPods line is heavier than the plastic Sony's, they are more comfortable to wear for my head.
    No pressure points on my hairless head and the tissue of the earcups does not overheat my ears when compared to the plastic ones of their competitors. 
    Transparency mode excellent on the AirPods and noise cancellation more than adequate. 

    If I were in the market fo a pair of headphones today, would I still consider Apple's offering? 
    Yes but not at the listed price. I'd be looking for a refurb. 
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 of 17
    mrooneymrooney Posts: 1member
    Why was Bose's offerings not included? I find Bose's much better than Sony's. 
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 15 of 17
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,496member
    dewme said:
    mike1 said:
    dewme said:
    jonro said:
    Why bother to review headphones without comparing the sound? Seriously, features comparisons mean little without discussing the sound quality, which is the core feature of headphones. It's like comparing cars without mentioning the engine or doing a test drive.

    I think it's absolutely correct to compare competing headphones based on objective physical and functional characteristics and features. Anything beyond that gets into areas where a great deal of subjectivity is involved. They could go one step further and look at objective things like frequency response curves or noise cancelation performance when subjected to the exact same audio waveforms. This may provide more data for potential buyer who have a reasonably good understanding of how their hearing responds to audio with certain frequency response curves.

    Nothing compares to putting the headphones on your head, adjusting them for a comfortable fit that you can tolerate for extended listening sessions, and listening to actual music that is at least characteristically similar to what you enjoy listening to. If you can repeat the same subjective evaluation for different sets of headphones you're considering, all the better. Every head is different, every ear is different, every person's hearing frequency response is different (and changes with age), and every person's brain and emotions reacts to sound in a unique way. 

    I'm not suggesting that headphone evaluator's listening experiences and reactions are invalid, but they are always subjective and in many cases are more discerning. The higher you go in the range of audiophile hierarchy the more the terminology spoken or written about becomes more like a foreign language to a lot of people who are in the market for a new set of headphones, like me. No matter what anyone says sounds better or worse is only their opinion, but the only opinion that matters is your own. If you have a history with a particular reviewer who has helped you based on his or her subjective opinion, that can be helpful as a filtering process. It's no guaranteed but it's not totally random either.

    Articles like this one do help you narrow down the list of candidate products based on objective visible, touchable, and measurable differences. No more and no less. It's a great step in the right direction. I'm not going to say that someone else's opinion of what sounds good or what sounds bad does not matter because it is a data point to consider.  I've bought $30 headphones that delivered a far more enjoyable listening experience than $300 headphones. This is why I'm wary of buying any product that has so many dependencies on my subjectivity without the option of trying it myself or having the ability to send it back if it doesn't meet my expectations. In a lot of ways the old brick & mortar experiences were actually much better than the YouTube, blog, online articles, or Amazon review based ones are. 

    Here's an interesting summary of some research done to try and understand listener preferences and thereby design headphones.



    Thanks, that’s an interesting paper. I do understand the value of looking at the frequency response of headphones as an objective measurement. If you know that your personal experience closely matches the defacto standards then this information will be helpful for you to form candidates for consideration. 

    I follow “The Headphone Show” on YouTube and they get into great detail around these objective measurements, which is a reasonable weeding-out mechanism. If the frequency response curves alone were the final say in defining sound quality one would think that every headphone maker would simply design to precisely match the most preferred frequency response curve. But they don’t do that for some reason and the frequency response curves show it. The final decision still resides with the listener and their subjective perception, which includes more than simply the acoustics. 

    In any case, I’m not expecting AppleInsider to dig into the audio performance of headphones or speakers that you would find on a site devoted to audio. Of course they could reference multiple audio review sources and reiterate the consensus of a certain number of those sources. One key takeaway from the referenced paper was the lack of correlation between headphone prices and their frequency response measurements. 

    Keep in mind that it is a target frequency response curve. Very hard to hit the target exactly. There are many design variables at play even if you wanted to hit it exactly. Over or in-ear design, size of the drivers, cost of materials etc. Assuming we're talking about legit audio companies that desire to make good sounding products, you can have every manufacturer trying to design for that target frequency response curve but the results are different because of the compromises/choices that needed to be made for that particular headphone. Every designer will make different choices resulting in different sounding headphones.
    edited May 22
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 16 of 17
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 1,496member
    thedba said:
    AirPods max haven't changed since their introduction back in December 2020, other than a port change in September 2024.
    The Sonys OTOH have been constantly updated XM4 (2020), XM5 (2022) XM6 (2025) making them more technologically advanced. 

    That being said I still prefer the Max. I've been on my original pair since the end of 2021. 
    Probably without realizing it, you've made an important point here: in the world of audio, technological "advancement" does not necessarily translate into significant audible improvements. Despite Sony "updating" their premium headphones and earbuds about every two years, you still prefer your 4.5 year old AirPods Max. I own the XM4 and the APM, and while I thought upgrading to the XM5, my audition of them confirmed what I read in a lot of reviews: no compelling audible advantage over the XM4, and I have a huge preference for the more streamlined look of the XM4 over the bulbous XM5. (If you think the XM5s sound much better than the 4s, I'm not going to tell you that they're wrong--you have to be a fool to try and tell someone what their ears are hearing.) Anyway... now the reviews on the XM6 seem pretty mixed as well for the same reason--yes, they're a very fine set of headphones but not compellingly better than the XM5. It's important to keep in mind that consumer tech companies need to keep selling us stuff, and there's no more powerful sales word in the English language than "new."

    What's my definition of compelling audible advancement? That's an easy one. AirPods Pro 2 vs AirPods Pro 1. I still have both and the difference in sound quality and ANC is night and day. 
    muthuk_vanalingam
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 17 of 17
    Own both Airpods Max and XM6.  For listening on iPhone Pro Max I prefer the Airpods Max.  I connected the XM6 to a Android device and LDAC codec was activated.  The XM6 then blew away iPhone and Airpods Max.    Why do I pay a premium price for iPhone Pro Max and am unable to enjoy maximum bluetooth performance on wireless headphones because Apple was  too cheap to include advanced codecs?

    williamlondon
     0Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.