As oxymoronic as it sounds, even cheap soundbars are expensive. Flagship soundbars? Oof, don't look at the price tag if you're already feeling a bit weepy, because you won't like it. "How many zeros? That has to be a typo, right?"

Nope. No typo. Unfortunately, dropping well over $1,500 for one of the best soundbars is... normal? How can this possibly be normal? Who has that kind of money? Not me, that's for sure, but I'm here to help you make well-informed purchasing decisions.

I recently reviewed the JBL Bar 1300X MK2 and the Samsung Q990H — both the American and Korean behemoths' current flagships. While the JBL option came out in late 2025, it's still the current flagship, hence my referring to it as 2026's flagship. Samsung's was released earlier in 2026.

These two soundbars represent the best of the best. While I'm sure you won't be disappointed by either, I know which one I would buy, and here's why. Let's get into it.

Bass battle

Both the JBL Bar 1300X MK2 and the Samsung Q990H have extremely powerful bass. Both models come with a standalone 300W subwoofer. In real terms, that means hella bass.

In the U.S. model, JBL's sub has a single 12-inch driver, whilst the E.U. and U.K. model equals Samsung's dual 8-inch driver setup. As I'm in the U.K., I tested the dual-driver version, and, unfortunately, I can't confidently say if there's a tangible difference between the models. I can, however, assure you with every fiber of my being that the U.K. sub is Epic. Yes, with a capital 'E'.

I watched "Top Gun: Maverick" with both soundbars. Of the JBL, I wrote in my review, "The first scene, with Maverick flying in hypersonic, rumbled through the subwoofer with immense energy and depth." Even so, "each [high-frequency] siren blare and alarm was clear over the pounding bass", which proves the subwoofer doesn't overpower the rest of the soundstage.

Similarly, Samsung's bass performance was excellent during "The Batman". In my review, I wrote, "I could feel the subwoofer through the chair", and "My colleagues told me they could feel the subwoofer rumbling from downstairs, so I’m sorry, but I was having too much fun to care."

Yep, that's all I really needed to write, isn't it? What else can you ask for from a flagship soundbar?

There's also a bass boost mode on the JBL and Samsung apps, and individual subwoofer volume adjustments, which I set to the max during my testing period. While I wouldn't recommend this if you've got sensitive downstairs neighbors, you can seriously push the subs to their peaks.

Dialogue duel

One of the most important features in a soundbar is its ability to produce clear, intelligible dialogue without losing bass, high-frequency in-scene (diegetic) sound effects, soundtrack, and 360° audio. It's not a tall order, is it?

Both the Samsung and JBL models have a dialogue enhancement in the app. I didn't find the need to use this on the Samsung, not even during radio-ed dialogue scenes. JBL's isn't explicitly called dialogue mode, but Movie mode brings dialogue to the center channel, and the soundbar has something called PureVoice 2.0. In real terms, this means it's better at isolating and pronouncing speech than soundbars without PureVoice 2.0.

I've seen some users online discredit the 1300X MK2's dialogue performance, but I completely disagree. I never struggled to hear dialogue; not during flying scenes in "Top Gun: Maverick", nor the action sequences in "No Time to Die". I heard every word.

The Samsung model is just as clear. In "Top Gun: Maverick"'s near-overwhelming dogfighting scenes, I "could hear every layer of in-scene plane sound effects, each rich guitar chord, and every syllable of dialogue."

I don't think there's a clear winner here. Perhaps I'd recommend the Samsung if you know you have dialogue processing issues personally — due to the explicit dialogue enhancement mode — but I never strained to understand actors in any movie on either soundbar.

Dolby Atmos dalliance

Dolby Atmos is another must-have feature when you're looking at premium, flagship soundbars. Of course, both the JBL and Samsung have DTS:X as well, but as I watched Dolby Atmos-enabled 4K UHD Blu-rays, I need to evaluate Dolby Atmos performance here. If you have DTS:X DVDs, just know both soundbars will play them to their full potential.

Even so, the JBL just took the win here. "Top Gun: Maverick" is the best movie to test Dolby Atmos (I'll fight you on this) thanks to the gorgeous flying scenes. When I watched this movie on the JBL, the planes "raced overhead as if I were truly outside."

On top of that, the OST was "bombastic without overpowering the screeching jet engine sounds, and the radio dialogue was surprisingly clear."

However, I still wanted a little more. Now that I've tested the $3,500 Yamaha True X Surround 90A — the best Dolby Atmos soundbar I've ever used, but way too expensive and with unimpressive dialogue performance — I'm a tough cookie.

Similarly, when I tested the Samsung, I wrote, "width is great, but the Q990H doesn’t sound quite as high as I’d like for $2k."

I could hear the planes around me, but the JBL did a better job of tricking me the planes were flying over me. "I wanted more from the surround speakers," I wrote of the Q990H. "Even on “Surround” mode, I wanted a stronger surround sound."

Although it's close, and although I still thoroughly enjoyed testing the Samsung Q990H, the JBL just cinched this victory.

Feature facedown

New for 2026, Samsung no longer restricts its awesome "SpaceFit Sound Pro" to compatible AI Samsung TVs. I tested the Q990H on both an LG and a TCL and I enabled SpaceFit Sound Pro in SmartThings.

JBL has a similar room configuration tool, but its name is a little less snazzy: audio calibration. Boo! Where's the whimsy? Where's the trademarkeable moniker?

I jest, I jest. As long as the feature works, I really don't care what it's called.

Both Samsung and JBL's room calibration features work perfectly. When I tested the Samsung, the sound before was good enough, but it was a little pinched in the center speaker and a touch diffused on the rear channels. After enabling SpaceFit Sound Pro, the soundbar readjusted itself so the dialogue was more expansive.

Similarly, JBL's audio calibration increased the height, width, and depth of sound, providing a more immersive experience.

If you have an oddly shaped living room or weirdly low ceilings, both these calibration tools will adjust audio output to optimize for your space. I wouldn't buy a premium soundbar without this feature.

Of course, both soundbars have more features than just automatic room calibration. Both have AirPlay, so you can play music from your phone to the devices, and both sound surprisingly great. Soundbars are notorious for making even the best songs sound mediocre, but that's not the case here. Bass is powerful and controlled through both 300W subwoofers, and the soundbars themselves do a fantastic job of separating vocals for maximum musicality.

There's a plethora of playback modes in both soundbars, namely dialogue enhancer and bass boost, which I discussed earlier.

However, there's one key place where the Samsung takes the lead: 4K pass-through at 120Hz. The JBL lags behind at just 60Hz (still — this was one of my major qualms with the original model).

If you're a 4K gamer, this will probably edge your hand towards the Samsung. Personally, though, I would never notice the 60Hz refresh rate, as I don't game. Just something to think about.

My choice

This decision is much trickier right now — both soundbars are massively discounted. The JBL Bar 1300X MK2 is $300 off, down from $1,700 to $1,400. Similarly, Samsung's Q990H is $1,500 down from $2,000. Yes, a huge $500 off.

Before the discount, it's a no-brainer: grab the cheaper JBL if you don't have a Samsung TV. You'd save $400 and get a more immersive experience while you're at it.

I would personally still buy the JBL instead. I'm a famous (or infamous, depending on how you view it) spendthrift. If something is $9 and something else is $8.99, I'm buying the $8.99 one. I get to keep my cent!

Both soundbars have room-filling bass. Samsung and JBL's 300W subwoofers are both forces to be reckoned with, and both the 11-channel soundbars provide unbeatable dialogue clarity. On top of that, both have wireless rears for true Dolby Atmos immersion.

For me, though, the JBL just ekes out the win thanks to the slightly better height and more palatable price tag.

Which one would you buy?

More from Tom's Guide

• iPod 25th Anniversary: 25 things you need to know about the product that changed Apple (and the world)
• Bluesound Pulse Flex review: Tried so hard and got so far, but it's not a slam-dunk (yet)
• 7 new movies and shows to stream this weekend on Netflix, Hulu and more (Oct. 23-25)

“What if this milk carton could play music?” is probably what the engineers over at Nothing asked themselves when they designed the CMF Speaker M. The M is Nothing’s budget sub-brand’s venture into the world of portable speakers, and for the most part, it’s a triumph. It’s beautifully (and whimsically) designed, comes with handy features like IP68 waterproofing, and delivers great sound (for the most part).

But few things in life are perfect, and the M isn’t one of them. It struggles with heavy tracks so I can’t, in good conscience, call it udderly delicious (see what I did there?). Battery life isn’t class-leading either, which makes the M’s price a hard pill to swallow.

To find out if this is the best Bluetooth speaker for you, read my full CMF Speaker M review.

CMF Speaker M review: Specs

CMF Speaker M review: What I like

• Whimsical, colorful design
• IP68 waterproof, NFC Fast Pair, and other features
• Great sound (for the most part)

There’s a lot to love about the CMF Speaker M. Its whimsical and colorful design is easily lovable, while its sound quality is great (for the most part). Throw in a user-friendly companion app and useful features, like IP68 waterproofing, and you’ve got yourself a winner.

Design

I’ve tested my fair share of Bluetooth speakers and I have to say, most of them look the same. Black rectangles or squares that don’t look appealing, per se, like the EarFun UBoom L ($79) and the Tribit XSound Go ($39). So when a funky-looking speaker lands on my desk, like the 8BitDo Retro Cube 2 ($49) or the Sodapop ($68), I’m over the moon.

The CMF Speaker M is one such gadget, and boy does it look good. Well, it looks like a milk carton, but it’s a good-looking milk carton. There’s a handle on top for easy transport, and a round volume dial that looks like a milk carton’s cap.

If you’re after a speaker that doesn’t just come in black or white, the M is for you. Alongside your run-of-the-mill colors, it comes in Turquoise or Orange, and having tested both, these look fantastic. The front panels can also be removed (by pushing the unlock button on the rear) if you want to mix and match colors.

Measuring 8.6 x 3.4 x 2.1 inches, the M is highly portable and doesn’t take up much space in your day bag. It weighs 1.3lbs so it’s heavier than the EarFun UBoom L (1.4lbs) and the Sodapop (10.6 ounces), but not too heavy that it weighs you down. If you want an ultra-portable speaker, you can’t go wrong with the JBL Go 5 ($54, 8.16 ounces), or the CMF Speaker S ($59), the M’s smaller sibling.

The M is a fairly stripped-back, minimalist speaker. There’s no flashy RGB lighting or loud branding. As CMF’s first portable speaker, it’s an aesthetic home run.

Features & connectivity

One of the CMF Speaker M’s biggest selling points is its rugged design. The speaker is IP68-rated, which is the highest possible rating a consumer-focused gadget can be assigned. That makes it waterproof and dustproof, so you can use it at the beach, in the shower, and even in a sandy desert. This is the same rating you’ll find on the JBL Go 5 and the pricier JBL Xtreme 5 ($399).

The M is well-connected, too. It utilizes Bluetooth 6.0 with support for AAC and SBC codecs, and there’s LC3 for Auracast multi-speaker pairing. There’s a Stereo Mode and a Party Mode. For Stereo Mode, you’ll need two Ms, which pair through the Nothing X app. Party Mode, on the other hand, enables you to connect two or more Auracast-enabled speakers by pressing their respective Auracast buttons. CMF sent me two review units and I found toggling both modes a breeze.

Alongside Google and Microsoft Fast Pair, one of the M’s edges is fitted with an NFC Fast Pair tag. This is a short-range wireless technology that lets electronic devices (so the speaker and your phone) share data when they are placed within a few centimeters of each other. I held my Google Pixel 10 Pro XL against it and within 10 seconds, I got a notification to pair my phone with the speaker.

I haven’t seen this feature on a speaker before, and I love that it simplifies (and speeds up) the pairing process. You can see how this works in the video above, where I tap a Samsung phone against the M's NFC tag.

Sound quality

For the most part, the CMF Speaker M sounds good, especially if you don’t listen much to heavy rock or metal. It’s got a slightly neutral tuning, and its 2.6-inch woofer and 0.6-inch tweeter deliver a 35W power/bass output. To test the speaker, I listened to my array of testing tracks on Qobuz, the best music streaming service for audiophiles.

Little Simz’s vocals in “Fear No Man” sounded deliciously detailed and textured, with her voice sitting front and center. The different percussion instruments, like the nine-piece bata drum ensemble, sounded bright but never overzealous or fatiguing. Her words didn’t bleed into one another either, making for an enjoyable listening experience.

“Two Suns in the Sunset” by Pink Floyd sounded beautiful, too. The soundstage felt wide and spacious as the saxophone and piano spread around. While the M doesn’t quite recreate the expansive depth of a larger speaker, like the JBL Xtreme 5, it keeps the track feeling engaging.

However, heavy tracks are a struggle. The guitar riffs, bass and percussion in “Unamerican” by Dead Sara blended into one another and fell flat. The low-end sounded suppressed, and Emily Armstrong’s vocals sounded shrill and tinny. Enabling the Ultra Bass EQ preset salvaged some of it, but even so, the track continued sounding like a muddy wall of sound.

For songs that aren’t very heavy and don’t feature rock ‘n’ roll elements, the M is a good shout and warrants a recommendation. But if you want a speaker that can handle anything you throw at it, the JBL Go 5 is the way to go.

Listen along to my review with the CMF Speaker M testing playlist:

App

The CMF Speaker M is accompanied by the Nothing X app which I’m a big fan of — I’ve previously sung its praises in my Nothing Headphone (1) Pro and Nothing Ear (3) reviews. The app sports a clean interface and is extremely intuitive to use.

It enables you to customize the M’s controls, toggle Stereo or Party Mode, choose an EQ preset, and most importantly, customize the equalizer to your liking (something missing from the 8BitDo Retro Cube 2). In a nutshell, the Nothing X app is great and doesn’t give you much to complain about.

CMF Speaker M review: What I don’t like

• Middling battery life
• A little expensive

As I mentioned earlier, the CMF Speaker M’s sound quality is great but it struggles with heavy tracks. Battery life isn’t the best either, and the speaker itself is expensive.

Battery life

The CMF Speaker M’s battery life is neither the best nor the worst. When playing at 50% volume with the Ultra Bass EQ preset enabled, the M is rated for 18 hours. Your mileage will naturally depend on volume, EQ and other playback settings. I left it running, playing at 60% volume, and the speaker promptly died after about 17 hours.

There are quite a few similarly priced or cheaper speakers that last longer than the M, like the Tribit XSound Go (24 hours), the Tribit StormBox Micro 3 ($64, 24 hours), the 8BitDo Retro Cube 2 (30 hours), and the Sodapop (30 hours). But there are also speakers that the M upstages, like the Marshall Willen II ($99, 17 hours), the EarFun UBoom L (16 hours), and the JBL Go 5 (10 hours).

Price

With middling battery life and lack of LDAC support, does the CMF Speaker M do enough to justify its price? It retails for $109 at Amazon U.S. / £99 at Nothing U.K., making it pricier than most of our favorite portable Bluetooth speakers — though a speaker like the Bose SoundLink Micro 2 ($129) does cost more. At $54, the JBL Go 5 comes in at half the M’s price and is, arguably, the compact speaker to get. If the M had been cheaper with a price tag of, say, $70, it would have made a more compelling case for itself.

CMF Speaker M compared

When it comes to visual aesthetics, there’s no other speaker like the CMF Speaker M. Most of its rivals, like the JBL Go 5 and the EarFun UBoom L, look like plain Janes (no offence to the Janes of the world). It also features NFC Fast Pair one-tap pairing which none of its competitors do, and just like the JBL Go 5, it’s IP68 dustproof and waterproof.

The M sounds better than a lot of its rivals, too, like the Tribit XSound Go, the Sodapop and the 8BitDo Retro Cube 2. But that doesn’t mean its sound quality is peerless — the JBL Go 5 upstages it there as the M struggles with heavy tracks. When it comes to battery life, the M is neither the best nor the worst, as it lasts longer than the JBL Go 5, the Marshall Willen II, and the EarFun UBoom L, but shorter than the likes of the 8BitDo Retro Cube 2.

At the end of the day, if you want full-bodied sound with plenty of low-end impact, I’d recommend the JBL Go 5 if you’re on a budget, or the Bose SoundLink Micro 2 if you can spare an extra $20. But if you’re after a speaker that looks much, much better than most others out there, the M is a no-brainer.

Who should buy the CMF Speaker M?

As with most Nothing products, if you care about owning a gadget that looks otherworldly, then the CMF Speaker M is for you. It’s stylish, sleek, colorful, and whimsical. It’s highly portable and IP68-rated, so if you enjoy taking a speaker to the beach, this is the one to get. As for sound quality, the M sounds great across most genres.

I say “most” because the speaker struggles with heavy rock and metal tracks, which is somewhat salvageable by customizing the EQ via the user-friendly companion app. And while battery life isn’t outright awful at 18 hours, the M’s competitors offer longer playtimes — especially at lower prices. If neither of those are dealbreakers for you, the M deserves a place on your coffee table or bookshelf.

Black Friday is still a month away, but the deals are seemingly already here. I know, I know, I was just as confused as you. I was researching a long-form comparison piece, and randomly discovered both JBL and Samsung's flagship 2026 soundbars are already discounted — and obviously I had to let you know about it.

The JBL Bar 1300XMK2 and the Samsung Q990H are two of my highest-rated soundbars of this year. I adore both of these soundbars — Dolby Atmos performance is truly immersive (but the JBL is better!), dialogue is always perfectly clear, and bass is powerful thanks to the 300W subwoofers.

Are they the best soundbars? 100%. But at $1,699 (JBL) and $1,997 (Samsung), they're not cheap. I find it tricky to recommend soundbars at this price because it's just not accessible for most of us. Even so, it's your lucky day! Right now, the JBL Bar 1300XMK2 is just $1,399 on Amazon, and the Samsung Q990H is just $1,497 also at Amazon. Score!

Both the JBL and Samsung models have 23 drivers and 300W subwoofers, and an 11.1.4 channel configuration. In real terms, this means there are 11 channels in the center soundbar, one subwoofer channel, and four rear speaker channels.

If you want genuine Dolby Atmos, you need at least a 3.1.2 channel — so you know 11.1.4 means business. With so many channels, the soundbars can project layers of sound in all directions, providing a genuinely immersive experience.

On top of that, the Samsung soundbar has 4K pass-through at 120Hz, which is great for gamers. While the JBL misses out on this, if you're not a gamer, it probably won't be a huge issue.

I would probably buy the JBL because it's a better-value product than the Samsung. You get better immersion for less money, but there's no dedicated dialogue mode. If you struggle to hear dialogue sometimes, you might need the Samsung's AI dialogue enhancer.

But both flagships discounted at the same time before Black Friday? It's almost too good to be true.

More from Tom's Guide

• Huge Android phone sale at Best Buy: save on Pixel, Galaxy Z Fold 8 and more
• 35 best Amazon deals worth shopping this weekend — my favorite fall finds starting at $17 from Apple, Skechers, Carhartt and more
• Black Friday is weeks away, but these 37 Amazon deals are worth shopping right now

The iPod is long gone now, but it was the product that turned around Apple's fortunes, got PC users to take the Apple brand seriously, established Apple as a player in mobile devices, and went on to revolutionize the music industry and lay the groundwork for the iPhone. And it did all of that in a tiny window of time, from its introduction in the fall of 2001 to the rapid rise of the iPhone beginning in 2007.

Here are 25 things you might not know about how the iPod came to be, and its legacy.

1. Steve Jobs thought he missed his moment

In the year before the iPod began development, Steve Jobs introduced a whole new concept in order to sell Macs: the "Digital Hub." The idea was that a proliferation of new gadgets — most notably digital cameras and digital video camcorders — worked best when connected to a computer, and that meant a Mac. This was the origin of the iMovie app, which exists to this day.

But despite Jobs's personal love of music, he never really noticed the rise of MP3s, Napster, and the new wave of MP3 players (like the Diamond Rio) that were hitting the scene. It was only in late 1999 that Jobs realized that he had been so focused on photos and video that he had missed the digital music revolution.

"I felt like a dope," Jobs told Fortune's Brent Schlender. "I thought we had missed it. We had to work hard to catch up." Apple quickly reached out to the developers of SoundJam, as well as another MP3 app called Audion, and made it clear that it was interested in bringing those developers to Cupertino to work on a crash project that became iTunes.

2. iTunes owes its life to an MP3 player, but not the iPod

Apple couldn't have made the iPod without iTunes, which performed most of the important tasks of organizing and syncing so that the tiny device didn't need as much brainpower or custom software. But iTunes wasn't built with the iPod in mind.

Instead, former Apple engineer Bill Kincaid started building SoundJam, the app that would one day become iTunes, in order to let Macs sync with the Diamond Rio, an early MP3 player that held roughly a dozen songs. To help with the user interface, Kincaid enlisted former Apple intern Jeff Robbin, and the pair went on to create the app that formed the basis of iTunes. Jobs bought SoundJam, moved Robbin and Kincaid into an office a short walk from his own, and began the process of building an MP3 player jukebox app with Jobs's sensibilities in mind.

3. It all started with a hard drive

In 2000, Jobs decided Apple needed to build its own MP3 player. Early the next year, a bunch of Apple executives (including Jobs, marketing director Phil Schiller, and hardware chief Jon Rubinstein) were in Japan for Macworld Tokyo. Rubinstein took the opportunity to make a tour of Apple's suppliers, and at the end of a meeting with Toshiba, execs brought out a new product that they admitted they hadn't found any use for.

It was an incredibly tiny 5GB 1.8-inch hard drive, much smaller than anything found in a laptop in those days. Rubinstein and operations exec Jeff Williams took one look at it and realized that it would be perfect for that MP3 player. Rubinstein called Jobs and said he needed a $10 million check to buy out every single drive Toshiba could make. Jobs was happy to oblige, and the trajectory of the iPod was sealed: it would be built around that little Toshiba drive.

4. Apple hired a contractor to run the iPod team

In 2001, Apple was a much smaller company than it is today, and it was intensely focused on turning around the Mac product line after years of stagnation before Jobs returned to Apple in early 1997. As a result, Rubinstein felt that he couldn't devote any of his senior people to the MP3 player project. Instead, he asked around Silicon Valley and ended up with a referral to a guy who had been trying to build portable devices (including MP3 players) at his own startup for a few years.

Rubinstein reached that guy, Tony Fadell, when Fadell was on a chairlift, skiing at Vail. Fadell was intrigued, as he had worked with numerous early Mac legends earlier in his career at General Magic. But Rubinstein refused to tell him any details about what Apple wanted him to build until he took the job. Fadell signed on for an eight-week contract, and only then was told that he was going to be spinning up a team to build an Apple MP3 player.

5. The iPod's product manager tried to leave

Eight weeks into the project, as the project was hurtling forward, Fadell expressed uncertainty about whether he wanted to keep working on the iPod or if he should go back to his startup. Rubinstein ended up demanding that he sign on as an employee right in front of the entire iPod team. Fadell agreed, but he also never forgave Rubinstein for putting him on the spot. The two executives would clash repeatedly over their tenures at Apple.

6. The iPod's killer feature also made it brutally incompatible

In 2001, most computers used USB 1.0 for peripherals. But transferring MP3s at USB 1.0 rates was excruciatingly slow. Apple estimated you'd need ten minutes to transfer one CD's worth of music via USB. But not so with the iPod, which was built around the newer, much faster FireWire standard that was common on digital camcorders during that era. Most new Macs were shipping with FireWire, as well as a handful of PCs.

FireWire could transfer an entire album in something like 30 seconds. It would have been excruciating to transfer 1,000 songs to the iPod at USB 1.0 speeds. The result was an incredibly fast syncing process with iTunes, and the optional ability to load your personal files on the iPod hard drive – but it meant that even if Apple built or licensed some Windows software to sync to the iPod, almost no PCs could connect to it.

A couple of years later, the much faster USB 2 standard arrived, freeing the iPod from FireWire at last.

7. The iPod ran on someone else's operating system

We're so used to Apple building and owning the whole widget, hardware and software. But Apple of 2001 was still trying to ship the first stable, usable version of Mac OS X while also keeping Mac OS 9 alive. It didn't have the time to build an entirely new operating system for the iPod, and certainly not if it was going to ship by the end of 2001.

So Apple relied on a small Silicon Valley company called PIXO, which had built a tiny embedded operating system atop a processor built by a company called PortalPlayer. PIXO and PortalPlayer were creating products designed for portable devices, including figuring out how to use a spinning hard drive in a music player without skipping or killing the battery. (They came up with a clever system of buffering audio, then spinning down the hard drive until it was needed to fill the buffer again).

The companies also had connections with other links in the digital music supply chain, introducing Apple to the Scottish company that would supply the digital-to-analog audio converter that fed the iPod's headphone jack.

8. The iPod was dumb, and iTunes was smart

With very little time to build an interface on top of the PIXO operating system, Apple made a fateful and smart decision: It offloaded as much of the work that went into building the iPod's music database and file organization as possible onto the connected Mac running iTunes. iTunes did all the heavy lifting and synced the results to the iPod, allowing the iPod software to remain relatively lightweight, and let Apple focus on building a pleasant interface on top of PIXO's software.

The one drawback to this approach is that it meant that only iTunes could sync with the iPod, which meant it couldn't work even with Windows PCs with FireWire ports. Eventually it added support for Windows, first via MusicMatch Jukebox and later iTunes itself.

9. Fadell used a good/better/best approach to impress Steve Jobs

When it came time to unveil potential designs to Jobs, Fadell took the advice of Rubinstein and revealed mock-ups one at a time, from worst to best. Fadell showed off a player with a slot, into which you could plug a spinning hard drive or a flash memory card. It ran on double-A batteries. Jobs thought it was too complicated.

Next was something more like the Diamond Rio, a compact flash-memory based device, but with dynamic memory. If its rechargeable battery ever got too low, the memory would be wiped and you'd need to re-load all your songs. Jobs thought that was no good.

Then Fadell assembled something very much like the iPod from an array of component parts already on the table, a bit like snapping together Lego. Jobs seemed intrigued by the result, at which point Fadell revealed something very much like the final iPod design, which had been hiding under a bowl on the table the entire time. Jobs was sold.

10. Apple's marketing guy came up with the scroll wheel

Jobs hated that the other MP3 players in the category were covered with buttons and hard to navigate. He felt that Apple needed to find a better way, especially if users were expected to load a thousand songs on the device.

The answer was counterintuitive and pretty brilliant — the iPod's interface was driven by a wheel that you spun around, with a button in the middle that you'd click to select an item. The wheel was encircled by four other buttons to take you up a level, forward or reverse, or pause/play. It made driving the iPod's hierarchical interface easy and fast, which is what Jobs insisted on.

What's funny about it is that the scroll wheel didn't come from Apple designer Jonathan Ive, or Fadell, or Rubinstein. It came from Apple marketing executive Phil Schiller, who had been inspired by a Bang & Olufsen land line he had at his house. Jobs loved it, and Fadell quickly agreed that the wheel could be part of his device.

11. To hide the iPod's design, Apple built a "Soviet rocket launcher"

Apple is famously secretive, and it didn't let even most employees working on the iPod actually see what it would look like. Instead, it created impossibly ugly plastic enclosures for its guts, which were mostly air inside. On the outside was a big wheel, a screen, and a bunch of buttons. Employees said it looked brutal and ridiculous, like a vintage Soviet rocket launcher.

12. The iPod is the reason Jony Ive loves the color white

The caricature of Jony Ive as a designer is that he was someone obsessed with minimalism, and usually appeared on Apple product videos inside an entirely white room. But in 2001, he was not that guy. Ive was the guy who had designed the original iMac, a very unusually shaped computer with translucent colored plastic. It was the opposite of minimal — it was meant to draw attention.

But for the iPod, he took a different approach. Ive believed that the personal nature of the iPod, that it was a small thing you carried in one hand and slipped in a pocket, required an entirely different approach to an iMac. He wanted it to be "restrained, pure, and quiet." And that's what led him to white.

But if it was going to be white, it was going to be really white. Jobs and Ive argued about exactly which shade, but once they settled, they also made sure that the headphones were entirely white — an Apple branding coup to this day.

13. The name is a reference to a classic movie

Nobody seems to remember the moment when "iPod" was picked as the product's name. The iPod's code name was P68, which is far from memorable. A group of execs and people in Apple's marketing department, as well as people from Apple's ad agency, kept meeting and throwing out ideas. Most of them were terrible.

One name thrown out by Apple creative director Vinnie Chieco was, he said later, inspired by the fact that it was the year 2001, and in "2001: A Space Odyssey," the astronaut Dave Bowman famously orders the mad computer HAL to "open the pod bay doors" and let him fly his space pod back in. Pod – that sounded futuristic.

Nobody really liked it. Schiller thought it sounded sinister, like the pod people from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." But Steve Jobs thought it might work... with Apple's telltale lower-case letter "i" (introduced with the iMac) stuck on the front of it.

In the run-up to the product launch, Jobs never seemed to truly embrace the name. But no other name came along that was better, so it stuck.

14. The manufacturer didn't even read the contract

In a show of hardball supply-chain negotiating tactics that would become an Apple hallmark over the next two decades, Apple's potential manufacturer for the iPod was given no time to consider or even read its contract with Apple. Apple's ruthless supply executive, Tony Blevins, went to Taiwanese manufacturer Inventec, put a contract down on the table, and told them to sign it or lose the business.

Blevins was probably a great poker player. Apple didn't have many alternatives to using Inventec. But rather than insisting on showing the deal to its lawyers, Inventec executives just signed the contract — and built the iPod.

15. The whole thing was done in less than a year

Today it seems that we hear about new Apple products a couple of years before they arrive, at the very least. But Apple of 2001 was a much smaller and more nimble company.

Still, the speed of the iPod's development is staggering when you think of it. In February, Rubinstein and Williams saw Toshiba's hard drive and got Jobs to write them a $10 million check. Apple announced the iPod eight months later, and shipped it nine months later.

16. Apple cleaned out Bay Area record stores to buy CDs

When it came time to introduce the iPod, Jobs was concerned that Apple would be accused of furthering Napster-style MP3 piracy. In those days, digital music wasn't for sale online; you had to buy CDs and "rip" them to your hard drive... or just use peer-to-peer file sharing to download them for free.

Apple planned on giving iPods to journalists who attended the event, but they realized that forcing journalists to find a FireWire-equipped Mac, install a prerelease version of iTunes that synced with the iPod, and convert their own music was asking a lot. So instead, every iPod came equipped with a selection of music.

The problem was that Apple didn't have the right to load that music on those iPods. It came across as reinforcing the idea of the iPod as a piracy device.

So instead, Apple dispatched its PR and marketing people to local record stores to buy multiple copies of every CD they were planning on pre-loading onto the iPod. The result: journalists didn't just receive a prerelease iPod when leaving the event, but a gift bag that also included a taped-together cube of CD jewel cases representing the albums that were preloaded on the iPod.

17. The product launch event was lightly attended due to 9/11

If you didn't live through it, you might not realize that the announcement and release of the iPod happened in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. And as a result, Apple's launch event on October 23 was lightly attended, with many international and even East Coast outlets declining to make anyone fly out to California. Apple managed to fill its Town Hall conference center with lots and lots of Bay Area journalists (Macworld magazine brought at least a half-dozen people, myself included) and a lot of Apple employees as well.

The 9/11 attacks also affected the product's launch in November, since it was meant to draw people to Apple's then-new retail stores — but in that era, people were reluctant to go to shopping malls or other high-profile public places.

18. The guy from Smash Mouth played a prominent role in the product video

As was usual for the period, Apple's introduction included a lengthy demo from Steve Jobs, as well as a few pre-produced product videos. One featured Jony Ive extolling the virtues of its design — and yes, the color white — at length. Another, though, was essentially a proto-reaction-video of several professional musicians being amazed by what the iPod represented.

If you know your 2000s music, you may not be surprised by the appearance of electronic artist Moby or pop singer Seal. You may be more surprised to see Steve Harwell, the late singer of the band Smash Mouth. But make no mistake: Harwell was a huge presence in Apple commercials during this period, including one introducing the concept of burning your own audio CDs.

19. 2001 social media hated the iPod

You may think the Internet has gotten worse in the last decade or two, but it was pretty bad even back in 2001. In the wake of the iPod announcement, a reader of the aggregation site Slashdot submitted a link to Macworld's coverage over the event with a summation of the product's features and prices.

Famously, Slashdot editor Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda offered a one-line critique of the product: "No wireless. Less space than a [Creative Labs] Nomad. Lame."

Sorry, Malda's going to have to live that one down forever.

20. It wasn't a hit… At first

Because the original iPod didn't work with Windows, it was a strictly Mac-only product. The second-generation model added limited Windows support (which Steve Jobs allowed only under protest!), but you still had to have a PC with FireWire, which was rare. Only with the third-generation model, which supported USB, did the iPod take off.

21. The iPod halo effect was real and huge for Apple

To put it bluntly, the iPod completely rehabbed Apple's brand image. A company that was viewed as having seen better days, who made a computer that was incompatible with PCs and used by 5% of the computer-using population, was just too weird and sad. But then the iPod happened, and PC users fell in love with it, and once you love an Apple product, you start to wonder whether those computers Apple makes might be worth looking into — and oh, what luck — Apple happens to have a retail store in my local shopping mall.

It was a huge swing in fortunes for Apple. Mac sales began to grow rapidly. And the entire thing laid the groundwork for the iPhone.

22. The iPod really only had five years as Apple’s golden child

It's stunning to think about it, but by the time the first USB iPod arrived, the iPhone was only four years away. The biggest hit iPod model, the iPod Nano, debuted two years before the iPhone was announced. If you lived through that era, it's hard to really conceive of how relatively quickly it came and went. But maybe it's better to burn out than to fade away?

To be clear, iPod sales peaked in 2008 with 55 million sold, but the iPhone would blow past that number with 72 million by 2011.

23. The iPhone music app was originally called iPod

How big was the iPod? When Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone, one of its three primary features was to be a great iPod. So much so that the music app on the iPhone was, for several years, called iPod. Branding!

24. The iPhone used the iPod connector until iPhone 5

Today's iPhones use USB connections, and for many years (from the iPhone 5 onward) they used the tiny Apple-designed Lightning port. But the first five iPhone models all shipped with Apple's iPod dock connector port on the bottom. It's just one of the many ways that the iPhone owes a lot of its legacy to its mobile-device predecessor.

25. My daughter might be the first "iPod Baby"

Apple handed out those cubes of CDs and demo iPods to the press after the iPod launch event on October 23, but the product didn't ship to the public until November 10. In those intervening two-plus weeks, members of the press were pretty much the only people outside of Apple to have access to the exciting new music player.

Something else happened during that brief window: My wife and I had our first child. (Yes, this means my daughter turns 25 this year, too.) And, yes, we built a playlist to play in the birth room, and brought the iPod along with a portable stereo with a cassette adapter that let us play the iPod out of some speakers into the room. I'm a little dubious if Apple would have let any of its employees out in public with an iPod before it was announced, which may mean that my daughter was the first baby to be born with an iPod in the delivery room. If someone else can beat that story, I don't want to hear about it.

Flagship soundbars are always exciting to test. Enjoying blockbuster movies with best-of-the-best sound is, most definitely, one of the biggest perks of my job. And that’s exactly how I felt testing the Samsung Q990H. This is a flagship soundbar in (almost) every way — bass, dialogue, width; it’s got it all.

Is that enough to make it one of the best soundbars? It depends on how much you’re happy to spend. $2,000 is a lot of money, especially when soundbars like the JBL Bar 1300X MK2 exist for $300 less. SmartThings integration is a huge plus, especially if you have a Samsung TV, but I can’t tell you if that’s worth $300 over the JBL.

I’ll go through everything in detail, from design to subwoofer quality to Dolby Atmos performance in this Samsung Q990H review.

Samsung Q990H review: Specs

Samsung Q990H review: What I like

There’s so much to like about the Samsung Q990H — it is Samsung’s 2026 flagship, after all.

Supremely clear dialogue

The SmartThings app has a number of dialogue-enhancing settings: “Active Voice Amplifier Pro”, “Voice enhancement”, and individual channel EQs. Even so, I found dialogue sounded more than good enough without any of these additional features.

I test all soundbars with “Top Gun: Maverick” on 4K UHD Blu-ray, alongside two other UHD Blu-rays, standard TV on streaming services, and music on Spotify and Qobuz.

Dialogue in “Top Gun: Maverick” was extremely clear without additional dialogue features needed. In the busy bar scene, I could hear lead actors speaking clearly over the hubbub of the bar. “Top Gun: Maverick” also features tons of radioed dialogue in flying action sequences. I didn’t miss a single word. The screeching jet engines and soundtrack (“Won’t Get Fooled Again”) melded together nicely underneath the fuzzy dialogue. I could hear every layer of in-scene plane sound effects, each rich guitar chord, and every syllable of dialogue.

In “Super Mario Galaxy Movie”, dialogue was equally as clear. Just to reiterate, this was with zero dialogue enhancement features enabled. I could feel the texture in Bowser Jr.’s gravelly-yet-high-pitched voice.

“The Batman” features moody, mumbled dialogue for the majority of the movie. However, I never struggled to hear anything — neither the processed radio dialogue nor Robert Pattinson’s atmospheric voiceovers. Even in action scenes, I could make out every word. For such a broody, mumbled movie, this performance was excellent.

Even basic streaming services sounded good. Obviously, a basic-level stream will never sound as good as a UHD Blu-ray. I have Now TV’s cheapest tier (HBO for all you across-the-ponders), which uses Stereo audio — not even 5.1.

I’m not going to pretend this would impress any home cinema enthusiasts, but it’s the streaming service’s fault, not the soundbars. The Q990H did the best with what it was given; every word was clear, and I never struggled to understand dialogue.

Powerful bass

As I’d hope from a $2,000, 300-watt subwoofer, bass is great, with no distortion. “The Batman” was a particular standout here. My colleagues told me they could feel the subwoofer rumbling from downstairs, so I’m sorry, but I was having too much fun to care.

The brooding, ominous soundtrack carried a decadent depth to the low-end, bringing body to low-action scenes. High-action scenes were equally as dramatic, especially the iconic car chase and the club scenes. I could feel the subwoofer through the chair. If you long for cinematic lows and clear dialogue, you won’t be disappointed.

Music performance is decent for a soundbar, too. I listened via AirPlay. Bass in Muse’s “Supermassive Black Hole” shook the floorboards without overpowering the falsetto vocals. Softer songs fared equally as well; “Kill Me” by Hayley Williams was delicate and controlled, and the texture in Williams’ voice came through.

Wireless subwoofer and rears

Unlike the Samsung QS750F ($899), the Q990H’s rears (and subwoofer) are truly wireless. Each rear speaker and the subwoofer require only a power cable. They sync up automatically as soon as they’re plugged in.

When I set up the Q990H, I only had to connect everything to power — the sub and rears did the hard work for me. I didn’t even have to set them up in Samsung’s SmartThings app, which I was initially expecting to do. This was one of the easiest soundbar setups I've had the pleasure of experiencing.

The rear speakers are excellent in some movies and middling in others: of all the content I watched, by far the best movie for surround was “The Batman”. The car chase scene was immensely immersive. The soundtrack, pouring rain, and screeching cars were controlled deftly, and the speakers separated high-frequency effects with skill.

Design, features, and SmartThings

Samsung soundbars really excel in terms of design. They all look more or less the same (except the Samsung Ultra Slim) — sleek, inconspicuous, and although quite plasticky, this doesn’t detract from the overall appearance.

Setup is also a breeze: I plugged all the elements in, hooked up the soundbar via HDMI, and I was listening in seconds. Samsung also provides a wall mount for the soundbar if that’s your thing. The rears don’t come with stands or mounts, but you can easily find third-party options online.

SmartThings is one of my favorite companion apps, and for good reason. It’s supremely easy to use, looks great, and is replete with genuinely beneficial features. No longer restricted to Samsung TVs, SpaceFit Sound Pro is Samsung’s proprietary room calibration feature. I was able to get this working with both an LG and a TCL TV. SpaceFit Sound Pro analyzes your room space to improve immersion. If you’ve got a bigger room, it will increase audio power to ensure you still get space-filling sound.

Without SpaceFit Sound Pro, “The Batman” still sounded immersive, particularly the rain sounds coming through the rear speakers. However, with SpaceFit Sound Pro enabled, the soundbar adjusted the center channel to make dialogue and OST clearer.

In SmartThings, you can also adjust individual channel volume, sub volume, and treble/bass volume. I adjusted the rears and side-firing channels to the maximum volume, but I didn’t notice a huge difference. More on that in the “What I didn’t like” section below, though.

Wireless listening

Now, this one comes with a caveat. You can use the Q990H wirelessly — if you have a compatible Samsung TV. As I test soundbars with LG and TCL TVs, I was unable to use this feature.

However, it’s still worth mentioning here. If you have a compatible Samsung TV (all Samsung TVs with Bluetooth or Wi-Fi), you’ll be able to use the soundbar without an HDMI cable.

Samsung Q990H review: What I don’t like

As much as I enjoyed listening to the Samsung Q990H, it missed out on a perfect 5-star rating for a reason.

Sound not immersive enough for $2,000

Even though I love the Q990H, it’s not perfect. Don’t get me wrong, it sounds fantastic, and I’m sure you won’t be disappointed… unless you’ve just dropped two grand.

At $2,000, there’s very little room for error. Nay, there’s zero room for error. You could spend just a little (!) more on the $2,500 KEF XIO or save money on the JBL Bar 1300X MK2 ($1,799). Honestly, I recommend the JBL Bar 1300X MK2 wholeheartedly. It’s by far the best bang-for-buck soundbar I’ve ever tested.

Anyway, back to the Samsung Q990H. You can adjust individual channel levels in SmartThings, but I didn’t notice this had a tangible difference. Width is great, but the Q990H doesn’t sound quite as high as I’d like for $2k.

As I discussed earlier, bass was a different story — I could feel every rumble of the jet engines in “Top Gun: Maverick” and the ominous soundtrack in “The Batman”. Music playback was also decent — soundbars are never excellent, though — but I wanted more from the surround speakers. Even on “Surround” mode, I wanted a stronger surround sound. The JBL Bar 1300X MK2 excels here.

Consequently, I’m reticent to recommend the Q990H widely unless you find it on sale.

How does the Samsung Q990H compare?

I would recommend the Samsung Q990H over some of the super high-end soundbars I’ve tested. Once you get to a certain price point, it might make a little more sense to invest in a buildable hi-fi setup (like floorstanders and loudspeakers).

For example, the $2,500 KEF XIO and $3,500 Yamaha True X Surround 90A both sound excellent. Don’t get me wrong, you won’t be disappointed by their sound. The Yamaha soundbar is one of the best Dolby Atmos products I’ve ever used. However, they’re both eye-wateringly expensive. $2,000 is the most I would ever recommend spending on a soundbar.

There’s another however here, though. $2,000 is still incredibly expensive for a soundbar. Even though the Q990H sounds fantastic, with expansive width and clear dialogue… $2k is $2k. When you can get more immersive performance from the JBL Bar 1300X MK2 and similar performance with the $999 Samsung QS90H or Sony Bravia Theater 7 ($1,099), I would recommend grabbing the Q990H on sale only.

Should you buy the Samsung Q990H?

It depends on your budget. Is $2,000 an easy amount for you to spend? Then you probably won’t be disappointed by the Samsung Q990H. Dialogue is honey-smooth and clear; bass is propulsive and energetic; Dolby Atmos is immersive and all-encompassing. The only thing missing is height, and that true cinematic experience.

If $2,000 is a lot for you (relatable), then I’d recommend checking out the JBL Bar 1300X MK2. This is by far the best bang-for-buck soundbar I’ve ever tested, with industry-leading audio power and immersion.

Of course, though, the Q990H is a fantastic soundbar in its own right, and well-deserving of the flagship name. It’s just really, really expensive.

I don’t know what I’d do without my Wi-Fi speakers. It’s such an underrated product category — one I can definitely see blowing up in the next few years. Zero wires, play music straight from your phone, and it’s hi-res? Yes, please.

So of course I leapt at the chance to test out the Bluesound Pulse Flex. I tested the 2025 model, which is an upgraded version of the 2018 original Pulse Flex 2i. Seven years later, we’ve got some new features: double the power (25W to 50W), a gorgeous new design, and more streaming integrations.

Is all this newfangled tech enough to make it one of the best speakers? Argh, it came so close to an instant recommendation. While the sound quality is almost perfect and the rounded oblong-style design would look at home in any well-designed space, BluOS issues and a well-priced JBL competitor make it a little hard to recommend. Find out the full story in this Bluesound Pulse Flex review.

Bluesound Pulse Flex review: Specs

Bluesound Pulse Flex review: What I like

As a home speaker, you’d hope the Bluesound Pulse Flex looks and sounds premium — and this is true in both cases.

Fantastic sound quality

As you might expect for $379, the Bluesound Pulse Flex sounds incredible. I listened to a variety of genres on Qobuz, our best music streaming service for audiophiles, but I’ll just discuss three standouts here.

“flight fm” by Joy Orbison is an energetic electronic track with a heavy bassline and bright synths at the top of the soundstage. Despite its compact size and 50W power, the Pulse Flex delivered the bass with gusto. The floorboards were literally shaking — I felt the vibrations through my desk chair. Even though the low-end took most of the power, the higher-frequency sounds weren’t softened. Each sibilant snare synth held its own, a bite of brightness over top of the propulsive bassline.

Rock and grunge fared well, too. “Violet” by Hole sounded remarkably expansive — Courtney Love’s vocals carried reverb well, isolated even over the guitar-heavy soundscape. Each textured growl of Love’s voice thrashed its way out of the speaker. When I closed my eyes, I could almost convince myself I was at a Hole gig in the ‘90s. The vocals didn’t overpower the instrumentation, though. Cymbals crashed, and the snare drums pounded through the tiny speaker. Speaking of closing your eyes and pretending — you could easily believe this speaker was triple, quadruple, quintuple its size. It’s seriously powerful.

Lastly, I went for a softer track. Hayley Williams’ vocals were the sure-fire standout in “Kill Me.” This track is built over acoustic bass guitars and a prominent snare rhythm. I noticed some struggling in the coda, as if the speaker couldn’t isolate the over-processed guitar sections and Williams’ distorted vocals, so it pushed both layers together. In the second verse, I couldn’t hear Williams’ low harmony as well as through the Denon Home 400, but that’s a much bigger speaker.

While I was a touch disappointed by this performance, for 99/100 songs, the Pulse Flex still does a fantastic job. Treble is bright without erring on the side of tinniness, just as bass is energetic yet controlled. There’s a lovely U-shaped sound curve built into the speaker.

Of course, some genres are handled better than others. If you tend to listen to rock, pop, electronic, hip-hop rather than acoustic singer-songwriter or classical, you’ll likely never even notice that a quiet harmony isn’t as audible as it should be.

Design

You’d never be able to guess the Bluesound Pulse Flex’s size from listening to it. At just 5 inches wide and 7 inches tall, it’s positively adorable, but it packs a major punch.

In terms of appearance, the Pulse Flex is relatively inconspicuous, ideal for nestling on mantlepieces or the corner of a coffee table. I put mine on my TV stand, and its sound filled the living room while taking up just a few inches of space.

Build quality is decent, too. The fabric mesh casing looks sleek, just like the Denon Home 200, and the shiny Bluesound logo is a surprisingly pleasant touch. Buttons on top of the speaker control volume, play/pause, and presets, which you have to configure in the BluOS app — which I’m not a massive fan of, but more on that later.

Bluesound Pulse Flex review: What I don’t like

Even though I love the sound quality, I’m not going to pretend the Bluesound Pulse Cinema is flawless.

Price

At $379 (Amazon U.S.) and £299 (Amazon U.K.), the Bluesound Pulse Flex is not a budget-friendly speaker. While this price is, unfortunately, par for the course in the Wi-Fi category, you can still get much better value for money with a traditional Bluetooth speaker. Of course, these products have different use-cases and mostly different audiences, but if you’re short on cash, I’d wholeheartedly recommend a Bluetooth speaker, like the JBL Flip 7, or bookshelf speakers instead.

Naturally, Bluetooth speakers aren’t capable of playing music at 24-bit 192kHz, but bookshelf speakers are. If you only want to listen at home, I’d recommend saving your money and grabbing something like the Edifier R1280T. These speakers sound much better than their $120 price tag might suggest — and while you need a wired connection for hi-res playback, this is fine if you’re listening in your living room.

There are some Wi-Fi speakers at a more appealing price point. While I’ve not fully tested it yet, I’m working on reviewing the new JBL Cove M1, $229, which sounds awesome for the price. I’d recommend this model for the budget-conscious. The closest competitor, Denon Home 200, is $399, which is even more outrageous than the Bluesound.

Needs some quality-of-life improvements

I’m still waiting for a Wi-Fi speaker that can do it all. The Bluesound Pulse Flex isn’t quite there yet. Most of its issues reside in the BluOS app, like the Denon Home system’s problems are all HEOS-shaped. Sound-quality-wise, the Pulse Flex is awesome.

But when 99.9% of using the speaker is done through BluOS, it’s impossible to overlook. It’s simply not user-friendly at all.

I could only add one music streaming service to the homepage, despite me using both Spotify and Qobuz. Spotify and Qobuz both popped up in the “music sources” tab, but I want both on the homepage, too!

Furthermore, while playing music through the BluOS app, you can’t control it through your phone. You have to go into the app and fiddle with settings like volume manually. This isn’t the case with my Denon Home speaker system — if I’m listening via Qobuz either on the Qobuz app or the BluOS app, the song doesn’t show up on my lock screen. I have to open the respective apps to play/pause, change the song, or adjust the volume.

This was also an issue when I listened to the radio from the BluOS app. I couldn’t control the volume — or even see what I was listening to — from my homescreen. On top of that, I added players to my “Favorites”, but this tab always failed to load.

However, when I listened via Spotify, I could control this from my home screen. I would just skip playing through the app and instead play directly from your streaming service’s app using AirPlay or Google Cast.

If this is a Spotify/Qobuz/TuneIn issue rather than a BluOS issue, then I’m not sure what Bluesound can do about this. However, it does detract from the overall user experience, so it’s still worth noting.

Bluesound Pulse Flex review: How does it compare?

The Bluesound Pulse Flex’s biggest competition here is the Denon Home 200 and the JBL Cove M1. I’ve unfortunately not tested the Home 200, but I have thoroughly tested both the Home 400 and Home 600. And, while I’ve not published my review of the JBL Cove M1 yet, I have listened to it.

Neither the Denon Home line nor the JBL Cove have a proprietary on-board smart assistant — Denon utilizes Siri (when used in tandem with a HomePod) and JBL offers Alexa+. Obviously, none of these brands can hold a candle to Sonos, which has its own on-board smart assistant “Hey Sonos”. Like the Denon and JBL offerings, the Bluesound offers only a third-party smart assistant — Alexa.

I, unfortunately, do not have a HomePod nor Alexa, so I was unable to test this feature. However, if you have Alexa, great!

Just like the Denon Home 200 and the JBL Cove M1 can work as rear speakers for the Denon Home 550 and the JBL Bar 300MK2/500MK2, respectively, the Pulse Flex can be used as rears for the Bluesound Pulse Cinema.

In terms of sound quality, the Bluesound Pulse Flex is closer to the Denon line than the JBL. Again, I’ve not tested the Denon Home 200, but I do use the Home 400 and 600 every day. The Bluesound and Denon are more your hi-res Wi-Fi speakers with more control and finesse across the frequency range. Even so, the JBL M1 doesn’t sound bad — quite the opposite. It’s just a little bassier. If that’s what you want, then I’d recommend saving $$$ for the JBL.

Should you buy the Bluesound Pulse Flex?

If, for whatever reason, you don’t want to buy the $229 JBL Cove M1, the Bluesound Pulse Flex is a decent step up. I’d definitely recommend it over the $399 Denon Home 200. However, because the JBL option is so much cheaper with relatively similar performance, I’m more inclined to recommend that one wholeheartedly for people on a budget.

And $379 doesn’t give you a lot of wiggle room for substandard quality-of-life functionality, hence the 3.5-star rating. I’m sick of brands releasing fantastic audio products with subpar apps, because it makes me feel like Satan himself — marking down frankly excellent speakers for some misfiring 1s and 0s.

However, if you love the premium appearance of the Bluesound Pulse Flex, I can see reasons for buying it. Most importantly, it sounds incredible. Bass is tight yet powerful, and while treble and vocals tend to take center stage, nothing else is pushed back because of it. On top of that, it’s supremely easy to set up.

SnoozeBand Original Sleep Headphones review: Review in brief

A few weeks back I visited a friend who shares a wall with a rambunctious neighbor. I was up half the night listening to drunken covers of Sweet Caroline. She slept through it all, thanks to her SnoozeBand Bluetooth Sleep Headband. I had to put it to the test. Does the SnoozeBand Original deserve a place among the best sleep headphones?

After testing it, the Snoozeband has become my secret weapon to falling asleep faster when I need to listen to something in order to nod off but don't want anything in my ear. Whether I'm staying at my friend's house with her karaoke-loving neighbors or I'm trying to sleep when travelling, the Snoozeband offers a comfortable cocoon to stream white noise and block out distractions.

The thin speakers, soft band and breathable design ensures the SnoozeBand is comfortable all night long. Yes, even for side sleepers. You might feel some light pressure on the ears but a quick readjustment should put a stop to it. I've tested a couple of Bluetooth sleep bands and the SnoozeBand has the thinnest speakers I've come across.

It's also super portable. You can tuck the band into your pocket while traveling, making plane journeys a touch nicer. But be aware, the mask delivers sound masking rather than total blocking. I found it covered most traffic but could only soften snoring.

As headphones, the audio's at its best when you're listening to simple white noise and ambient sounds. Things that don't require richness or clarity but provide enough masking to help you nod off, essentially. Stick on your favorite playlist and you'll notice distortion. And you might spot some sound leaking, which didn't happen with ambient fan noise — and which your partner might not appreciate.

The basic SnoozeBand starts at £39.99 in the UK, with some designs £44.99. In the US, all options are $49.99. So no reason not to splash out on Blush Pink. Standard delivery is free for all UK orders or $3.49 in the US. But it is free over $70, so keep that in mind if you're planning some holiday shopping. A 1-year warranty and 15-night trial is included.

Compared to the MUSICOZY, the SnoozeBand is a touch pricey. But the brand promises the thin speakers and high quality band are worth the difference. And the comfortable fit does justify the price, in my opinion. Although MUSICOZY is better for budget shoppers.

The SnoozeBand Original is a convenient and comfortable way to block out unwanted noise, whether that's loud neighbors or persistent traffic. It won't completely cover snoring but it will muffle it, particularly if you opt for low drone brown noise — and you'll find plenty of options in the SnoozeBand app, a free feature that provides you access to a vast sleep library.

SnoozeBand Original Sleep Headphones review: Features

The SnoozeBand Original consists of an elasticated headband fitted with two disk speakers and a central control panel. The stretch combined with the movable speakers means it should fit most heads, but some larger hat sizes might feel the squeeze. It's also relatively breathable, although on warm nights expect a sweaty forehead.

A control panel allows you to turn the SnoozeBand on and pair with your phone. You can also change track, adjust volume, answer calls and set a timer.

As well as a simple design, the SnoozeBand Original has simple functionality. It uses speakers to deliver consistent sound as you sleep, without putting anything in your ear. You can connect this to your chosen streaming service or meditation app. Or you can link up to SnoozeBand's app, which is preloaded with sleep-friendly sounds at sleep-friendly durations.

SnoozeBand also has an auto-off timer, to preserve the battery. But if you do want your sounds going all night (or journey, if you're wearing it while travelling), the estimated 10-hour battery life should have your back.

Beyond audio it's only other function is an ability to answer calls.

SnoozeBand Original Sleep Headphones review: Performance

I've been using the SnoozeBand for three weeks, assessing it in key areas of performance. Here's what I've learned.

Set up

The SnoozeBand Original uses Bluetooth 5.2 to connect to your smart device. It's simple enough but while my connection has never dropped, it sometimes takes a moment to connect.

You can connect to your chosen streaming service, a mediation app like Calm or Better Sleep, or SnoozeBand's app (more on that below.)

Then you just have to familiarize yourself with the buttons. Do that before you get in bed and turn off the lights, or expect some mistakes.

For my money, it's a little confusing that you change track by tapping and adjust volume by holding the button. I instinctively try it the other way. But that's a minor preference and probably based on my headphones. (JLAB Go Pods, FYI.)

Audio and sleep sounds

It's best to be upfront: sleep headbands are never going to deliver clear, crisp audio. Especially not for under $50. If you want high fidelity audio, I recommend the premium Soundcore A30 sleep ear buds instead.

But for a headband, it's not bad. The quality is at its best when you're listening to white noise or ambient sounds — nothing that puts too much pressure on the clarity. Spoken word is also decent, if perhaps a little blurred.

For your everyday listening, the SnoozeBand won't replace your go-to headphones. But they get the job done. I've just been to Iceland so celebrated with some Sigur Rós, which came through thin and sharp, rather than rich and layered. In my room, it was a disappointment. But during a jog or on a plane, I could overlook the audio flaws for the convenience and comfort of the SnoozeBand.

The app itself is easy to use (as well as optional.) Its packed sleep library includes masking sounds, binaural beats and meditations.

For me, however, the main benefit of the app is the timer function. While the mask itself allows you to set an auto-off for one or two hours, the app delivers shorter, more precise timings. That means I can enjoy just 30 minutes of ambient train noises, at which point I should be asleep without too much battery strain.

Battery

SnoozeBand promises a 10-hour battery life. Which, with the auto-off function, should ensure multiple nights of use.

Even better, if you don't want to stop the disco, a full battery should see you through the night (and then some.)

I've had the SnoozeBand on the desk next to me for over ten hours in one go and the battery was going strong. The SnoozeBand also charges quickly, going from dead to full in under two hours.

But for an even more powerful battery, check out the Silk Sound Sleep Mask, which can go for over 20 hours.

Pervious sleep headbands I've tested have had diminishing returns when it comes to battery life. But I've trawled the SnoozeBand reviews and seen little mention of it.

SnoozeBand Original Sleep Headphones review: Should you buy?

The SnoozeBand Original Bluetooth Sleep Headphones allow you to wind-down with your favorite white noise without hurting your ears or disturbing the person next to you.

Comfort is its greatest benefit. The material is soft and (relative to other sleep bands I've tested) breathable. The speakers are also impressively slim, minimizing pressure against the ear.

The audio quality is fine, although music comes out tinny. But simple sleep sounds are clear and guided mediations crisp enough. Add on the impressive battery life and you can comfortably listen to hours and hours and hours of waterfalls, trains, or something the (optional) SnoozeBand app calls "Quiet Cosmos."

There are some notable downsides, however. The band stretches but isn't adjustable, which makes it too tight for some heads. Plus, it's pricier than some alternatives. And while it masks most sounds, it won't entirely block snoring.

But if your white noise machine is bothering your partner, or your neighbors are butchering a Neil Diamond classic, the SnoozeBand is the comfortable solution.

SnoozeBand Original Sleep Headphones review: Alternatives

How do you pack ground-shaking bass, a wide soundstage, and 40 hours of battery life into a portable party speaker? Ask the Marshall Bromley 150. Marshall’s latest party speaker is a triumph, boasting incredible sound and a plethora of features. It’s IP55-rated, so it’s dust-resistant and waterproof, and its long battery life keeps the party going all day long.

With a range of wired and wireless connectivity options, the Bromley 150 is perfect for party hosts and musicians on the move as it doubles as an amp and karaoke machine. Drool-worthy looks, classy LED lighting, and tactile controls make the Bromley 150 one of the best Bluetooth speakers today. Though its app could have been better and LDAC support would have been appreciated, these minor issues are overshadowed by everything else on offer.

For the complete breakdown, read my full Marshall Bromley 150 review.

Marshall Bromley 150 review: Specs

Marshall Bromley 150 review: What I like

• Drool-worthy, amp-like design
• Powerful bass and detailed soundstage
• Chock-full of features, including 360° sound and 40-hour battery
• IP55 waterproof and dustproof

The Marshall Bromley 150 completes the brand’s party speaker lineup, and it gives you little to complain about. Classy looks, a range of useful features, and ground-shaking bass and refined sound quality make it a winner.

Design

There’s no denying that Marshall knows how to make a good-looking speaker, and the same is true for the Marshall Bromley 150. Just like its bigger siblings, the Bromley 450 ($799) and the Bromley 750 ($1,299), the Bromley 150 sports an amp-like design. It comes in black with brass accents, and it looks drool-worthy.

The well-defined front grille houses the integrated and customizable LED stage lights, and the branding on the front looks classy and premium. That extends to the tactile buttons and amp-like knobs, too, which are well-signposted and straightforward to understand. The dials and buttons let you adjust the bass, treble, and swap between sources. You don’t really need the companion app as you can control basically everything via the onboard controls themselves — which bodes well as it’s not very good, but more on that later.

As Marshall’s smallest party speaker, the Bromley 150 is cube-like, measuring 11.69 x 11.42 x 8.19 inches, so it can comfortably sit on your TV stand or even kitchen counter. It’s much smaller and more portable than the Sony ULT Tower 5 ($448), too, as it weighs just 13.9lbs. There’s an integrated and luxurious-feeling handle located on the Bromley 150’s top plate for easy transport — and I haven’t had any issues carrying it from A to B. Overall build quality is phenomenal, and the Bromley 150 doesn’t give you anything to complain about in the design department.

Features & connectivity

There’s no dearth of features on the Marshall Bromley 150. Let’s start with connectivity first. For wireless playback, you get Bluetooth 5.3 with support for AAC, SBC and LC3, as well as Auracast for multi-speaker pairing. Thanks to Auracast, you can daisy-chain an unlimited number of Bromleys together — now it’s a party!

Wired connectivity is in spades, too. There are USB-C and 3.5mm jacks for wired playback. The Bromley 150 doubles (or triples, even) as a karaoke machine and an amplifier as there are two XLR/6.35mm combo jacks for plugging in mics and instruments. There’s no RCA jack, though, for DJ controllers and turntables, like on the bigger Bromley 450 and Bromley 750, and the Sony ULT Tower 5 — but it’s a minor drawback in the grand scheme of things.

Features next. First, the Bromley 150 is IP55-rated, which makes it highly resistant to dust and water, so you can use it on your balcony even when it’s raining, for instance. Marshall’s party speaker is more durable than the Sony ULT Tower 5 which is only IPX4-rated, so it isn’t dustproof. You also get Marshall’s stunning True Stereophonic 360° sound, and its front and rear speakers create an immersive listening experience regardless of where you’re standing.

Sound quality

Though it’s small, it’s mighty. The Marshall Bromley 150 packs a 200W power output, driven by its 6.5-inch 40W woofer, dual 2-inch 6W full-range drivers, and a 7.5-inch passive radiator. It delivers ground-shaking bass, as you’d expect from a party speaker, and its expansive soundstage makes for an immersive listening experience. I tested the speaker by listening to my favorite tunes on Qobuz, the best music streaming service for audiophiles.

This is a party speaker, first and foremost, so the first song I listened to was “Von Dutch” by Charli xcx. The Bromley 150 packs a party-ready sound, and the song sounded bold with a lively presentation that captured the atmosphere of a packed club. I could feel the bass vibrating the floorboards under my feet, but it sounded tight and controlled throughout. Other aspects of the soundstage weren’t sacrificed either, as the high-frequency synths remained distinct.

Listening to “Unamerican” by Dead Sara through the Bromley 150 revealed a bold, energetic sound that suited the track’s raw alt-rock character. The overall soundstage felt lively and spacious, with the guitars, vocals and driving rhythm section occupying individual spaces. The guitar riffs were the real highlight as they came through with plenty of bite and grit. The Bromley 150 excelled at giving the power chords a convincing weight, and delivering punchy sound.

The Bromley 150 is suited to detailed listening, too, as I found when playing “Nova” by Four Tet. Individual clicks, taps and repeating patterns sounded well-defined, and the soundstage felt open enough to give each element room to breathe. The Bromley 150 allowed the finer details to emerge without losing sight of the overall hypnotic quality.

Overall, the Bromley 150 is an outstanding, powerful speaker that’s suited to virtually any genre. Whether you’re a low-end fan who wants to feel the bass in their soul, or someone who appreciates subtle details, the Bromley 150 is sure to impress.

Listen along to my review with the Marshall Bromley 150 testing playlist:

Battery life

One of the Marshall Bromley 150’s biggest selling points is its long battery life. Just like the Bromley 450 and the Bromley 750, the Bromley 150 has a 40-hour battery life. For a speaker its size, that’s phenomenal. Your mileage will naturally depend on playback settings, such as volume, Bluetooth codecs, LED lighting and bass/treble tuning, but having tested nearly every modern Marshall product, that 40-hour figure is quite reliable.

The Bromley 150 blows its competition out of the water when it comes to playback time. The Sony ULT Tower 5 is rated for 20 hours, while the JBL PartyBox 130 ($449) lasts just 15 hours. There’s also the JBL Xtreme 5 ($399) which is a little cheaper than the Bromley 150 and lasts only 28 hours.

Similar to the other Bromleys and the Sony ULT Tower 5, the Bromley 150’s battery pack is user-replaceable. You can also use the Bromley 150’s USB Out port to charge your phone, laptop and other devices.

Marshall Bromley 150 review: What I don’t like

• Underwhelming companion app
• No LDAC (even though other Marshall speakers have it)

There are a couple of things I wish the Marshall Bromley 150 had. LDAC support would have been a good addition, and I wish the companion app was more robust.

Underwhelming companion app

This is a complaint I’ve had with both the Marshall Bromley 450 and the Bromley 750, and turns out third time isn’t the charm, as the problem persists with the Bromley 150. The speaker is accompanied by the Marshall Bluetooth app which is quite underbaked and really basic.

The app itself looks good and functions well, with a stripped-back interface and no intrusive pop-ups — but it doesn’t allow you to change much about the Bromley 150. You can tune into an Auracast channel, customize the speaker’s ‘M’ button to toggle strobe lighting, and set a power-off timer. But that’s it, and it’s quite disappointing that there isn’t more functionality.

In comparison, the Sony Sound Connect app for the Sony ULT Tower 5 enables you to customize the speaker’s 10-band EQ, add live audio effects while playing music or singing through the mic, and more. Marshall can easily solve this issue by having the Bromleys use the Marshall app, which its Homeline speakers, like the Acton IV ($299), and soundbars, like the Heston 60 ($699), already do. Oh well.

No LDAC

While not a massive drawback or outright dealbreaker, the Marshall Bromley 150 doesn’t feature support for LDAC, as its codec support is limited to SBC and AAC. LDAC is a proprietary lossy Bluetooth audio codec that handles audio up to 32-bit / 96KHz. It essentially lets you stream hi-res audio over Bluetooth. The Sony ULT Tower 5 features LDAC, but none of the Bromleys do — though Marshall’s home speakers, the Acton IV and the Stanmore IV ($399) do.

Now, the reason why this isn’t a dealbreaker: the Bromley 150 is a party speaker that focuses more on powerful, bass-heavy sound rather than detailed listening. It’s worth considering the Sony ULT Tower 5 if you absolutely need LDAC, but there’s not much in it.

Marshall Bromley 150 compared

The Marshall Bromley 150’s closest competitor is the Sony ULT Tower 5, which is Sony’s smallest party speaker. At $448, it costs a little less than the Bromley 150, and features RCA input for turntables, LDAC support, and a better companion app. The reason to get the Bromley 150 over it? A smaller form factor, more tasteful LED lighting, and classier looks. In terms of sound quality, both speakers are fairly close, though the Tower 5 has a 300W power output as opposed to the Bromley 150’s 200W.

Then there’s the JBL PartyBox 130, which is also $50 cheaper than the Bromley 150. I’m not a massive fan of the PartyBox 130’s design, as the RGB lighting looks garish and loud. It’s also not as portable as the Bromley 150. But the Tower 5, the PartyBox 130 and even the JBL Xtreme 5 don’t last as long as the Bromley 150.

Personally, I’d get the Bromley 150 for the design alone. No other brand comes close to Marshall’s superior design philosophy. And it’s highly portable and easy to carry around — especially compared to the JBL and the Sony.

Who should buy the Marshall Bromley 150?

If you want a supremely good-looking speaker that’s easy to transport and doesn’t compromise on sound quality, the Marshall Bromley 150 is for you. It looks stunning, sporting Marshall’s usual good looks and reactive LED lighting. It’s highly portable thanks to a built-in handle, and it sounds bigger than it looks. Plenty of low-end impact and a spacious soundstage that makes for an immersive listening experience, it’s the quintessential party speaker.

The Bromley 150 is great for gigging musicians, too, given its dual XLR ports. IP55-rated, the speaker is highly waterproof and dustproof. Though the Sony ULT Tower 5 features a more refined companion app and LDAC support, the Bromley 150 excels where it matters most: it delivers room-shaking bass and looks oh-so-good doing it.

I’m an Apple fangirl, so when I say I enjoyed listening to something more than my AirPods? You know it’s real. That’s exactly how I feel about the Technics EAH-A100: they’re just so vibrant, fun, and energetic. I want to listen to them all the time.

If the U.S. name, Technics EAH-A1000, wasn’t enough — the U.K. name is as follows (big breath in): Panasonic Technics EAH-1000E. Why? Just why? At the end of the day, I guess it’s not that deep, but apologies when I just start referring to these cans as “the Technics”. My hand’s been forced.

So, are the Technics EAH-A1000 some of the best headphones? Yes. Well, semi-yes. If you can ignore middling ANC, then yes. If your neighbors love screaming or construction, then I’d err on the side of caution. To find out the full story, keep reading my Technics EAH-A1000 review.

Technics EAH-A1000 review: Specs

Technics EAH-A1000 review: What I like

There’s so much I like — nay, love — about the Technics EAH-A1000, so let’s get into it all now.

Sound quality

Right, so there’s no photographic or video proof of this (and I would rather be deleted from this planet than share it if there were), but the EAH-A1000 sound so good that I was dancing at my desk.

As always, I listened to a big ol’ bunch of music on Qobuz, our best music streaming service for audiophiles, but I’ll discuss three standouts to save your attention span.

“space cadet” by sim0ne is an energetic hard house track with a pummelling bassline, spiralling, almost clockwork-like keyboards flickering in the background, processed female vocals and euphoric ‘90s piano house sections. Not one layer of instrumentation was lost here: the propulsive rave drum machine clattered along the top, with the pulsing bass rounding out the track fearlessly. sim0ne’s vocals were pitch-perfect, isolated perfectly from the clockwork keyboards without stressing the treble.

Seriously, I have nothing bad to say about this sonic performance. This is better than the Sony WH-1000XM6, and I’ll go ten toes down on that. Better than the AirPods Max 2? The EAH-A1000 are softer than the AirPods Max 2 — there’s a certain warmth to the treble absent on the AirPods Max 2. I can’t say unequivocally which is superior, but the Technics are easier to listen to for longer periods.

Heavy genres also fare well thanks to the mixture of decadence and restraint in the low-end. “Be Quiet and Drive (Far Away)” by Deftones sounded gloriously expansive, with width in the sludgy bass and over-processed guitar sections I’ve not often heard before. The vocals were a touch more pushed back than on the AirPods Max 2, but the fuzzed guitars were much easier to listen to on the Technics. If you want a set of headphones you can wear for hours and hours without getting tired — both wear-wise and listening-wise — then the Technics will not let you down.

USB-C playback is also excellent. Technics provide a USB-C cable and a 3.5mm cable. Detail and bass are somehow both even more pronounced. In “Kill Me” by Hayley Williams, I could feel every guitar string vibrating in my jaw. Every layer of Williams’ emotive vocals was clear, textured, and faithful. The EAH-A1000 are tight in the high-end, exemplified by the gloriously controlled alto harmonies and tangible texture to Williams’ timbre.

Naturally, there’s also Dolby Atmos in the Technics app. I’d recommend this for movies, but for music, it was a little uncanny. While it didn’t warp the sound like the Cambridge Melomania A100 SE earbuds, I’m a bit of a music purist now — so I’m not a huge fan of my music moving location.

This is high praise, and I don’t say it lightly, but the Technics EAH-A1000 may just be one of the best-sounding headphones I’ve ever listened to. If I’m reaching for the Technics over my AirPods Max 2, you know it’s special. These sure are special.

Battery & call quality not forgotten about

Despite being more in-line with your lifestyle-slash-audiophile cans, the Technics EAH-A1000 still have decent quality-of-life features. The battery is a whopping 45 hours with ANC — and the battery doesn’t go down while you’re listening wired, of course. I listened for eight hours, one of which was wired playback, and the battery still says 100%. Iconic behaviour, honestly.

This is much, much better than any other premium cans: AirPods Max 2 has a measly 20 hours, Bose QC Ultra 2nd Gen 23 hours, Sony XM6 24 hours, and Bowers & Wilkins Px7 S3 30 hours. 45 hours beats these without even breaking a sweat.

On top of that, call quality is decent. My colleagues reported I was intelligible, but there was a touch of fuzziness to my voice over Google Meet. When I phoned my boyfriend, he reported I sounded good, and he couldn’t hear the fuzziness.

Extremely comfortable

I say this as someone with glasses, a weirdly small head, and mild sensory issues — the Technics EAH-A1000 are extremely comfortable. I was able to wear them for over three hours before needing to give my head a break.

At 10.8 ounces, the EAH-A1000 are three ounces lighter than the AirPods Max 2, the audio world’s maligned heavyweight champion. Even so, the Technics are still out-skinnied by the Bose QC Ultra 2nd Gen. To date, the Bose remain the best for long-haul flights or sensitive heads due to their lightweight feel (and best-in-class ANC).

Despite this, though, I have no reservations recommending the Technics as extremely comfortable headphones.

Price

Sure, $449 is objectively a lot of money. I’m not trying to dispel that. In an ideal world, there would be no headphones more expensive than my first car (£300). But premium headphones exist, and they bring a premium price tag to boot.

At $449, the EAH-A1000 are the same price as the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones 2nd Gen, $10 cheaper than the Sony WH-1000XM6, and $100 cheaper than the AirPods Max 2. There’s also the Bowers & Wilkins Px7 S3, $469, so you’re saving $20 on the Technics here — and both have equally meh ANC.

Technics EAH-A1000 review: What I don’t like

Despite having industry-leading sound quality and music-focused features, there’s a reason why the Technics EAH-A1000 missed out on the top score.

ANC could be better

At $450, there’s very little room for error… especially when said error is so egregious. Two of the best ANC headphones hover around the same price — the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones 2nd Gen at $449 and the Sony WH-1000XM6 at $459.

In 2026, powerful ANC is essential in any lifestyle earbuds or headphones. And, unfortunately, I wouldn’t describe the EAH-A1000’s ANC as “powerful”. It’s more like the final wheeze of a dying man.

When I was testing the headphones in the open-plan Tom’s Guide offices, I could hear myself typing and general chatter. At the pub (I was writing my novel, not just ignoring my friends, I promise), I could hear everything. I could hear the friends I *wasn’t* ignoring; the hordes of screeching students; worst of all, the pub’s playlist over my far superior music choices. Even at home, every car driving down my road infiltrated my lovely music bubble.

It really breaks my heart writing this, but I wouldn’t recommend the EAH-A1000 for anyone who needs strong ANC. Public transport warrior? Neighbours love vacuuming at 3 am? Need to lock in at your busy office? Get the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones 2nd Gen, Sony WH-1000XM6, or AirPods Max 2. I’m sorry, Technics, but the EAH-A1000’s ANC just isn’t good enough.

Technics EAH-A1000 compared

As mentioned thoroughly throughout this review, the EAH-A1000 have three big-name competitors: AirPods Max 2, Sony WH-1000XM6, and the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones 2nd Gen. Of the more hi-fi brands, you’re also looking at the Bowers & Wilkins Px7 S3 — or you could save $150 with the Cambridge Audio Melomania P100 SE.

ANC requirers would be better off with the Sony or Bose options — Apple evangelists with the AirPods. However, if you want the best music performance at this price point, I’d wholeheartedly recommend the Technics. Personally, I would go for the Technics over the Bowers & Wilkins due to the lower price. If you want cheaper cans, then the $399 bass-forward Nothing Headphone (1) Pro might be good for you.

Then we’ve got the flat-tuned $299 Melomania P100 SE: controversial opinion, but I’m not a huge fan of these cans. I’m not a huge fan of the overly flat tuning, so I would always choose the Technics instead.

Should you buy the Technics EAH-A1000?

If you take music quality seriously and aren’t too fussed about ANC, you should definitely buy the Technics EAH-A1000. I loved every second of testing these headphones. Bass is warm and enveloping, mids are faithful and articulate, and the treble is energetic without pinching.

Of course, the ANC leaves something to be desired, but you might be willing to sacrifice that for delectable sound. Only you can answer that question.

If anyone asks me for a recommendation of the best noise-canceling headphones, I’m more than likely going to recommend a set of cans from Sony. And while I am in love with the sound and features of the Sony WH-CH730N, the price tag in the U.S. makes it hard to recommend them to everyone.

But if you want headphones with great sound quality, effective ANC, a super comfy design and battery life that lasts for days, they’re well worth your consideration. So if you’re in the U.K., where the headphones are a lot cheaper, I don’t think you can go wrong.

To find out more, keep reading this full Sony WH-CH730N review.

Sony WH-CH730N review: Specs

Sony WH-CH730N review: What we like

• Great sound quality
• Impressive ANC
• Comfortable
• Exceptional battery life

I’ve got to say, there’s a lot that I like, and even love, about the Sony WH-CH730N headphones. I’ve found myself reaching for them more than my flagship Sony headphones.

Sound quality

While it may not be flagship quality, the sound of the WH-CH730N is still something to behold. I heard an impressive level of detail across all my favorite tracks.

I tested these headphones using Qobuz, our choice for one of the best music streaming services. I first listened to She Moves In Her Own Way by the Kooks. The song sounded bright, and none of the layers competed with each other — there was enough space for the guitars, drums and vocals to shine.

I also listened to Shout by Tears For Fears. This track has a bassy synth tone that carries on throughout the song, and it was always consistent without rumbling when the higher-frequency harmonies complemented it. Again, vocals were strong here even though they are very breathy.

To further test the bass, I listened to Supercut by Lorde. The bass in this song is so deep that it can often sound like it’s rattling, but with the Sonys the sound was clear, and I was still experiencing the sheer force of the beat.

One thing I noticed when testing the headphones is the volume. If you listen too loud, that’s a sure-fire way to make them tinny. I recommend listening at around 40-50% volume to get the best sound replication. I liked that I could make changes to the sound EQ in the Sound Connect app too if I needed to, but I decided to stick with the default EQ as this was perfect for me.

ANC

The Sony WH-CH730N ANC is very impressive. It completely blocked out the chatter around me in the office, made me feel like I was the only person sitting on the train, and allowed me to stay completely focused on my book at the coffee shop.

There are two mics in each earcup to help isolate ambient noise. You also have adaptive control with an ANC button on the earcup to allow ambient sound in if you need to. I found this particularly useful when travelling on public transport as I could listen out for travel announcements and block out the outside world whenever I needed to.

Comfort

The Sony WH-CH730N are just as comfortable as my WH-1000XM5 headphones. They only weigh 7.3 ounces, so they didn’t feel heavy on my head, and the padded headband ensured there wasn’t too much pressure. The headband is also adjustable, so you can create a looser fit if you need to. The foam ear pads are also very comfy.

Even when I was running, the headphones felt secure, which I love as there’s nothing worse than feeling like your headphones are slipping out of place.

Design and build

Despite being cheaper than Sony’s flagship cans, the WH-CH730N feel pretty sturdy. Everything from the button controls to the headband adjustment is easy to use and responsive — the controls on the headphones are very easy to get to grips with. I also enjoy the color options, my favorites being beige and pink, as I think they make the headphones seem more expensive than they are.

At a glance, they also look a lot like older versions of Sony’s flagship headphones, like the Sony WH-1000XM4s, which again reinforce the whole ‘premium looks; affordable price’ mindset.

The headphones are foldable, so I’ve found it easy to take them with me everywhere. Even though the headphones don’t come with a carry case, I can just throw them in my bag whenever I need to and not worry about them taking up too much space.

Impressive battery life

The battery life here is seriously impressive. I mean, a possible runtime of 75 hours? You have to be kidding me, right? That’s with ANC turned off, but with ANC turned on, you can still get up to 50 hours of battery life. After a week of listening whilst commuting and working out, I’ve found this to be about right.

As someone who is constantly forgetting to charge their audio gear, I tend to opt for a model that can hold its own in the battery department, so I won’t need to charge two or three times a week. It just adds an extra dose of convenience to my life.

Sony WH-CH730N review: What we don’t like

• Price in the U.S.

Like I said, using these headphones is a real treat, and there’s hardly anything wrong with them. It’s just that price tag in the U.S. — yikes.

Price (in the U.S.)

Let me start off by saying that if you’re in the U.K., you’re in for a real treat with these headphones. At just $99 on Amazon U.K., the Sony WH-CH730N are the definition of a pair of headphones that are worth every penny. But a trip across the pond tells a different story.

In the U.S., the Sony WH-CH730N will cost you $179 on Amazon. Given their relative affordability in other markets, this seems down to tariffs. But it makes these headphones hard to recommend. At this price, they’re not exactly budget anymore. The price difference is also confusing since the WH-CH530, which were released at the same time, cost $68 yet £48 in the U.K. — nowhere near as big a gap.

How do the Sony WH-CH730N compare?

The Sony WH-CH730N have impressed me, but they sit in a very populated field of budget (or mid-range if you're in the U.S.) headphones. The Soundcore Space One Pros are a better choice if you’re in the market for some seriously thumping bass. They cost $199 and have 40 hours of battery life with ANC turned on.

Another set of cans in the sub-$200 price range is the Nothing Headphones (a) for $199. These look a little funky but also have an IP52 durability rating so won’t get damaged by working out or getting caught in the rain. They could be the right choice if you want the longest battery life possible since they can offer a whopping 135 hours.

The previous version of these cans, the WH-CH720N, is cheaper than the new model, but I’d still recommend forking on the newer headphones, as there are huge improvements to battery, sound, and design.

It’s well worth noting that Sony’s flagship WH-1000XM5 can often be found on sale for as little as $179. Yep, that’s right, the same price as the new “budget” cans. So, I’d recommend waiting for a price drop and getting your hands on all of the latest features, including better ANC and premium sound quality.

Should you buy the Sony WH-CH730N?

Are the Sony WH-CH730N worth your money? In short, no. At least in the U.S.

But first, let’s go over what I like. The sound quality is some of the best out there in the price range — it makes the headphones feel a lot more premium. The ANC is also very effective and kept me in my own little bubble during a busy commute. They’re comfortable to wear all day long and for exercising if you need to, and the battery life is very impressive.

What lets them down is the price tag in the U.S. They’re not very competitive in the market since flagship models like the XM5 are in a similar price range when on sale. That said, if you’re in the U.K., I’m telling you to go and grab a pair of these headphones right now because there, they really are a budget wonder.

I've reviewed so many earbuds and headphones that I've lost count. Last time I checked, it was somewhere around fifty. That's 5-0. Yep, I've put so many earbuds in my earholes that it's a marvel I still wake up excited to test more.

But because I've reviewed so many, I know which are the best earbuds, and which aren't worth your time. And really? Most of the "best" earbuds are below $300. Some of them are well below $300.

I'll die on this hill: no one should be spending over $300 on Bluetooth earbuds. No, not even the Sony WF-1000XM6 ($330). No, not even the Bowers & Wilkins Pi8 ($499). No, not even the Noble Fokus Prestige Encore ($699). Hear me out.

Specs compared

Here are some of the most memorable earbuds I've reviewed, from cheapest to most expensive. Notice anything?

As you can see, the best-performing ANC earbuds are the AirPods Pro 3, Bose QC Ultra 2nd Gen, Samsung Galaxy Buds 4 Pro, and Sony XM6. While all other earbuds we've tested have at least acceptable ANC, no other brand really comes close to the big names. And Bose? The best. Dr. Bose literally invented ANC. (No, seriously. That's not an aphorism. Literally.)

I'm not going to walk you through the objective specs like IP ratings, Bluetooth codecs, and battery life. The numbers speak for themselves.

Let's chat about the most important spec: sound quality. Of course, sound quality is an inherently subjective criterion. What one person loves, another will think is mediocre, and vice versa.

I am extremely open-minded when I analyse sound quality. I accept that some people prefer bass — like the Soundcore Space 2 Pro — and some people prefer neutral tuning — like the Meze 99 Classics 2nd Gen. I don't mark down audio products for a bassy signature unless it negatively affects the overall listening experience, and vice versa. However, I do explicitly note where each product excels and falls behind, so you get a holistic view before buying.

But here's an opinion I have yet to be disproved: serious audiophiles will have multiple earbuds/headphones for different use cases. Out and about? Wireless earbuds or headphones. At-home listening? Wired headphones or wired earbuds.

Why I would never buy $300+ earbuds

So what about everyone else? I don't think you should spend over $300 on earbuds. I've used $4,000+ headphones, and I'm still happy with my 3-year-old, $250 AirPods. Every single day.

Super expensive Bluetooth earbuds just aren't worth it. Earbuds are tiny, ergo: loseable and less space for drivers.

I'm an audio reviewer, and I've been using my AirPods Pro 2 for over three years now. Am I going to upgrade? No. Heck, no! A) I'm poor, and B) I have headphones for deep listening sessions at home. My Bluetooth earbuds are for everything else. And honestly, my AirPods do everything I want and more.

Despite being four years old now, AirPods Pro 2 still sound creme de la creme. Bass is well-rounded and controlled; mids are melodic and vibrant; the treble is clear and bright without getting anywhere near tinny.

My love of the AirPods Pro 2 got me thinking. Are $500 earbuds much different?

Our Reviews Editor, Pete Wolinski, uses the $499 Bowers & Wilkins Pi8 as his daily drivers. When I asked him if the earbuds were worth it, he said, "I wouldn't buy these earbuds, in all honesty. I would buy Bowers headphones in a heartbeat though, as the build quality, comfort, and SQ all make it worthwhile. Especially the Px7 S3 on sale."

"The Pi8 have the reference tune, and it's classic Bowers: spacious, high fidelity, powerful but controlled bass." However, despite praising the sound quality, he said, "Judging, well, literally everywhere else, the Pi8 aren't worth it. ANC is passable but nowhere near what it could be for in-ear buds, and therefore nothing on the Apple/Sony buds."

But I'm not saying no one should spend more than $300 on certain audio products

As you'll see in the headline, I specifically wrote "Bluetooth earbuds". By all means, spend more than $300 on IEMs or headphones. Wireless earbuds, though? No! Save your money! Please!

Bluetooth headphones cost more than earbuds — it's an occupational hazard — so I'll forgive spending even $500 on wireless cans. It makes more sense to me as an audio reviewer. Headphones like the $549 AirPods Max 2, $459 Technics EAH-A1000, and the "entry-level" $479 Bowers & Wilkins PX7 S3 are worth it.

The same goes for IEMs like the Noble Audio Iris ($699) or budget-friendly Meze Alba ($169). If you go wired, you can get much better sound quality for much less money. Of course, you don't get digital features like ANC, EQ adjustment, or a mic (for the most part), but IEMs aren't intended for that kind of use.

You can also get wired headphones for much, much less than Bluetooth earbuds — with ten times the sound. I've tested most of FiiO's budget lineup: FiiO JT7 ($119), FiiO JT3 ($69), FiiO FT1 Pro ($219). All of these provide textured, tangible sound quality and are much cheaper than AirPods.

So if you want reference sound quality, I would just buy some wired headphones or IEMs. For everything else — ANC, call quality, convenience — you can honestly get top-of-the-range earbuds for well under $300. The Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 ($129), AirPods Pro 3 ($249), or Samsung Galaxy Buds 4 Pro ($249) will not disappoint.

More from Tom's Guide

• The Nothing Headphone (1) Pro prove the third time’s the charm as they’re the brand’s best headphones yet — but are they worth $399?
• I asked an audio engineer which earbuds he actually wears — and it’s not Apple, Bose or Sony
• Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review

If you’ve never listened to open-back headphones, boy am I jealous of you. The first time I put on a pair of open-backs, it was like I blinked and could suddenly see the entire color spectrum. A good pair of open-backs feels like music born anew.

The FiiO FT1 Pro are no different — if you’re listening to certain genres. As you might be able to tell from the 3.5-star rating, the FT1 Pro are great headphones, but they’re not as good at handling heavier genres without a secondary purchase. Indie, singer/songwriter, and pop all sounded clean, faithful, and immersive, with a nice warmth rounding out the bass. But trickier genres like grunge and DnB suffered from a touch of muddiness in the lower mids that I just can’t look past, especially considering the $219 price tag.

But don’t discount them — the FiiO FT1 Pro could still be for you if you’re a new audiophile who wants to dabble in the world of planar open-backs without spending your life savings. To find out if they’re some of the best headphones, keep reading this FiiO FT1 Pro review.

FiiO FT1 Pro review: Specs

FiiO FT1 Pro review: What I like

Considering the FiiO FT1 Pro are relatively well-priced open-back planar headphones, there’s a lot to like here.

Sound quality

As open-back planar headphones, the FT1 Pro have a certain expansiveness difficult to find on closed-backs. The midrange is decadently wide, almost capable of tricking your brain into thinking you’re listening to speakers rather than headphones, and the bass is controlled without overpowering the higher frequencies.

As always, I tested the FT1 Pro with Qobuz, our best music streaming service for audiophiles. “Kill Me” by Hayley Williams is an alternative rock track built over layers of acoustic guitars and vocals. In the second verse, Williams’ lower harmony almost vibrated through the drivers — just so deftly handled. I felt it in my bones rather than heard it.

The FT1 Pro didn’t just manage the vocals well, though. The processed guitar section towards the end was dynamic and vivacious, allowing for an encompassing, immersive listening experience.

Similarly, “Jump” by Madonna sounded incredibly wide, again almost capable of tricking me into thinking I was listening to speakers. In the verses, Madonna’s vocals embraced my ears, like she was singing directly to me. Drums and keyboards were layered with slick control, and the bass pulsed underneath energetically.

Without a DAC, the FT1 Pro will impress any budget audiophile who doesn’t listen to bassier genres. However, if you’re more of the grunge/heavy rock/basshead variety, you might need to invest in a DAC — more on that later.

Comfort

Thanks to the relatively light weight — for Hi-Fi headphones, after all — the FT1 Pro are comfortable even during long listening sessions. I wore the headphones for 5 hours, pretty much non-stop, and barely noticed them.

Although 13 ounces/374g is objectively heavy, the super-soft ear cups and padded headband mitigate the weight.

Price

At just $219 from Amazon U.S. and £179 from Amazon U.K., the FiiO FT1 Pro are some affordable audiophile headphones. They’re not the most affordable — that title goes to the FiiO JT7 or the FiiO JT3, which you should definitely check out — but you can easily drop $500 on Hi-Fi headphones like the Sennheiser HD660S, $679.

$219 is considerably cheaper than the spate of premium Bluetooth headphones available, though. Although open-backs and wireless cans are intended for different audiences and purposes, the sound quality on the FT1 Pro is undoubtedly better than the Bose QuietComfort 2nd Gen ($359). Of course, you’re trading off convenience here, but for headphone users who value sound quality over Bluetooth and ANC, you might want to consider some planar open-backs (and save some money while you’re at it).

For the best of all worlds, I’d recommend the 4.5-star-rated Meze Audio 105 AER, which rock immaculate sound quality and Art Deco aesthetics to boot.

FiiO FT1 Pro review: What we don’t like

While the FT1 Pro sound great in most genres, they’re not perfect, and they’re missing some quality-of-life features.

Need a DAC for top-notch sound

As much as the overall sound quality impressed me, it’s worth noting that you’ll want to spend extra on a DAC/amp to get the best out of these cans.

Initially, I thought most bass-heavy genres sounded lackluster. But, even though the FiiO FT1 Pro are advertised as “easy to drive” from a smartphone or laptop, I had to use an external DAC/amp for top-notch sound. Low impedance headphones can struggle to fully power their drivers accurately without a decent amount of power, resulting in sub-quality sound in areas of the response curve.

Connecting the headphones to my FiiO R2R K11 was no sweat off my brow and won’t be a problem for audiophiles, but it’s worth bearing in mind if you’re after your first set of detail headphones and don’t have a DAC already — especially if you like heavier genres.

The restrained bass in “flight fm” by Joy Orbison was unleashed when listening via the K11; the sub-bass rumbled with control and satisfying tension. This performs similarly to the Sennheiser HD550; a clean soundstage with well-placed instruments across the frequency range.

And while “Territorial Pissings” by Nirvana was a little repressed without the K11, with the DAC, the high-octane thrill of non-stop cymbals, ferociously scratchy guitars, Cobain’s screams, and prominent lower-mids were all isolated yet holistic.

Build quality

And then there’s the issue of build quality. At $219, there’s unfortunately not as much wiggle room as the designers up at FiiO HQ might like to believe. When you’re dropping two hundos, you’re well within your rights to expect decent materials — especially when the product literally has “Pro” in the name.

The ear cup feels quite plasticky, and the headband can twist if you’re not careful. I was pleased to see that the ear pads themselves are removable, though. This issue is also prevalent in the HIFIMAN Sundara ($179) — a “Frequently returned” item on Amazon.

There’s also no 3.5mm/1/4-inch to USB-C adapter, which is a huge shame considering the FT1 Pro are a new-for-2026 release. Surely a decent chunk of people listen via smartphone these days? Yes, even for at-home detail listening — TIDAL and Qobuz exist.

In the future, I’d like to see FiiO ship the FT1 Pro with a USB-C adaptor to account for every type of listener.

FiiO FT1 Pro review: How does it compare?

At this point, FiiO’s biggest competition is itself. Of course, there’s the aforementioned Sennheiser H550, but at the cheaper end of the spectrum, there’s also the FiiO JT7 ($119) and the FiiO JT3 ($69). You’ve also got the $179 HiFiMan Sundara and the $399 Meze Audio 105 AER — the latter of which I’d recommend if you really want to treat yourself without breaking the bank.

As much as I enjoyed testing the FT1 Pro, if you’re a totally new audiophile or someone looking for some home listening cans for as cheap as possible, I’d recommend looking at the JT3 and JT7 before dropping $219.

Both the JT3 and JT7 have a wide, faithful playback style. Similar to the FT1 Pro, the JT3 suffered from a little muddiness in heavier genres — but they’re only $69. That’s $140 cheaper than the FT1 Pro.

While the JT3 have a dynamic driver, the $120 JT7 also rock a planar magnetic driver. Naturally, the $219 FT1 Pro stretch up to 45kHz, while the JT7 tap out at 20kHz. I’d suggest sticking with the FT1 Pro. Typically, though, humans can only hear up to 20-22kHz — something worth thinking about.

Should you buy the FiiO FT1 Pro?

I can see two ideal consumers here: one, an audiophile looking to upgrade from their first cans, something like the closed-back $89 Sennheiser HD400S. And two, a brand-new audiophile looking for some first open-backs.

For the former, I’m not sure you’d be too impressed. I’d recommend investing a little more in the Sennheiser HD 599 ($239) or the Meze Audio 105 AER ($399). The forme have a flatter sound curve, while the latter are supremely warm.

If you’re part of the latter, then I’d recommend the FT1 Pro if you’re happy to spend $219. For those just starting out, perhaps check out the $69 JT3 or the $119 JT7. Don’t get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed testing the FT1 Pro, but you can get similar performance for much, much less.

At the end of the day, the FiiO FT1 Pro go where few open-back planar headphones have gone before: they’re fun, shine with pop music, and are completely unpretentious. You just might need a DAC if you love grunge or DnB (and who doesn’t?).

If you’ve ever put on a pair of high-end noise-canceling headphones and felt like the sound just wasn't blowing you away, you’re definitely not alone. I had that exact same reaction with my own pair.

Your hardware is likely fine, it’s just being held back. In most cases, a quick adjustment to your device settings, factory EQ, and background processing features is all it takes to unlock their full potential.

More from Tom's Guide

• My $300 noise-canceling headphones started making a strange pop on every step — the fix was surprisingly simple
• I just discovered these 5 hidden AirPods features — and they're game-changers
• Your earbuds are damaging your hearing — 3 warning signs you're ignoring

At this point, I’ve reviewed enough kids-specific headphones that a baseline of comfort and sound has been established. So I was intrigued when Belkin offered its new SoundForm ANC noise-cancelling headphones to test out.

At $40, these headphones look more premium than others in that range and promise features that more expensive kids' cans typically come with.

After a month of listening, the Belkin SoundForm ANC won’t dethrone iClever Q950 as my favorite kids' headphones, but at half the price, there’s some good here and one major flaw.

Read my full Belkin SoundForm review to find out why.

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: Specs

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: Price & availability

The Belkin SoundForm ANC cost $39 at Amazon, a good deal for over-ear headphones which usually cost at least $20 higher or more.

I want to note that there are other Belkin SoundForm headphones. If you don't save the link here, I highly recommend using "Belkin SoundForm kids headphones" in your search; it can get confusing otherwise.

Belkin’s offering competes with offerings like the iClever Auraa headphones ($39) and the Puro Sound Lab BT2200s ($99) or the extremely low-cost $20 JBL Junior 320s. The Puro Sound Lab options and iClever Q950 are the more premium options, but if you’re trying to save a buck, the Belkin SoundForm ANC serve as a nice middle ground.

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: Design

With muted colorways (blue, pink, black and white), the Belkin SoundForm ANC look more adult than most kid headphones, which tend to be more vibrant. The ANC headphones are an extension of Belkin’s SoundForm lineup of noise-cancelling headphones for both adults and kids.

They have a matte finish and seem to have a fairly durable build. I performed some drop tests and twisted the headphones around a few times. It never felt like I was about to break them, though a particularly destructive kid would probably figure it out.

These over-ear headphones have extendable earcups that can fold in. The fold is where you can feel the price a bit. It clicks and feels like a spot where the headphones could break.

In the box, the ANCs come with a cheap cloth bag, which I immediately lost, plus a USB-A to USB-C charging cable and a 3.5mm headphone cable.

Mostly comfortable

Unlike some of the other kid headphones I’ve tested, the Belkin SoundForm ANC feels like they are meant for kids ears and not my adult elf ones. I was able to comfortably wear the headphones for a bit, but eventually the cups felt like they were squishing my ears.

However, my son had no complaints and his ears appeared to fit comfortably with no squishing. Not that you’re buying these for yourself, but if you find yourself needing headphones and these are nearby, you’ll be okay for an hour or two.

The headphones have a cushion in the middle of the headband that I noticed while wearing them, a personal discomfort when it comes to over-ear headphones.

At 10.2 ounces (289 grams), these are the heaviest kid headphones I’ve tested, even more than the 9.9-ounce iClever Q950, which I dinged for its weight. As an adult, I didn’t notice, but it adds up for kids.

Connectivity

The Belkin SoundForm ANC features both wired and Bluetooth connectivity. I’m a fan of having 3.5mm wired connections when available.

I found the sound pretty clean whether I used the 3.5mm wire or Bluetooth connection. The wire is plasticky but I can’t tell how it will hold up over the long run. For now, it’s fine.

SoundForm ANC features Bluetooth version 5.4, not the most recent version but still compatible with most devices.

Interestingly, these headphones are built for sharing. If you have two SoundForm ANC headphones, there’s a separate headphone port to connect the headphones for shared audio. You can also share wirelessly using “RockStar Mode.” This works pretty well even if my son wasn’t interested in sharing.

I was able to cleanly connect to an iPad mini and my Galaxy S26 Ultra with no noticeable dips or drops. That’s all you need, especially if you’re on a road trip and using movies on the tablet to distract.

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: Sound quality

With the caveat that most kid headphones aren’t providing you with the same sound quality as the best over ear headphones like the Bowers & Wilkins Px7 S3 or the Sony WH-1000XM6, you’ll notice a huge difference.

I would describe the sound as bright with a bit of an echo, whereas a higher-end set might give you warmth and a more compact quality. The difference is as if you walked from a big empty room into a smaller, pillow-laden bedroom.

That said, the trebles and mids are understandable without losing depth. The bass vibrates the headphones, but it’s pretty shallow. Maybe don’t try to drop some U.K. house music on these.

Of course, unless your kid is already an audiophile, they’ll probably be fine with how these sound.

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: ANC

A lot of kid-friendly headphones feature active noise cancelling, and I’m not sure any of them have figured out how to properly utilize it.

ANC is meant to keep kids from turning up the volume too loud by blocking out some outside noises. With the SoundForm ANC, I found that the ANC seemed to muffle the actual audio. I’m not sure it really muted outside sounds. I share an office, and keyboard typing can get loud, but with ANC on or off, I didn’t notice a real difference.

Strangely, I thought the headphones sounded best when wired and just acting as a pass-through for the audio with the power off. There’s a muffled quality when the power is on, and it seems to be even more with ANC on.

I’m not entirely sure how ANC is on these Belkin ones, but this is a common problem I’ve found with many ANC headphones for kids. When I use ANC on adult headphones like the JBL Tour One M3, it just deadens outside noise; it doesn’t fundamentally alter what I’m hearing.

It’s not necessary to use ANC, but if you or your child is bothered by too much outside stimulation, this is a significant drawback to the SoundForm ANC.

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: What the kids are saying?

My son tried out the Belkin SoundForm ANC headphones over a couple of sessions with an iPad mini and while playing Pokémon on the Nintendo Switch 2.

He never mentioned anything about the sound, which usually means that it's fine.

However, he has a mop of hair and specifically mentioned that he thought the headband was uncomfortable especially after a longer go with the Switch 2. It wasn't enough to stop him from using them, but when kids call something out, it usually means it's a big flaw.

Belkin SoundForm ANC review: Verdict

The Belkin SoundForm ANC headphones aren’t the best I’ve tried, but they aren't terrible either.

The headband is noticeable, and ANC is a big drawback. However, if your child doesn't use ANC and isn't bothered by the headband, these aren't bad.

Audio quality won’t blow anyone away, but the ability to share and swap between Bluetooth or wired is great. Other kids' headphones don't really have that feature, so it makes the Belkins stand out.

At $40, you could take a flyer on these and your kids should be pretty happy.

I love running outdoors, but when you live in a busy city it comes with a few perils. That's where bone conduction headphones come into the picture. They leave your ears free so you can hear all of your surroundings, whether it's a speeding car or an unpredictable cyclist.

Shokz makes the best bone conduction headphones we've tested and right now Shokz is taking 5% off sitewide via coupon code "SHOKZPDTG5". The coupon is valid throughout the month of October. As a Shokz fan myself, I recommend the OpenRun Air 2 for $123 via the aforementioned coupon code. They're lightweight, provide a secure fit, and let you enjoy your workouts while staying aware of your surroundings. Below I've rounded up three of our favorite Shokz headphones.

Quick Links

• shop all Shokz headphones
• Shokz OpenRun Air 2: was $129 now $123 via "SHOKZPDTG5"
• Shokz OpenFit Air 2: was $129 now $123 via "SHOKZPDTG5"
• Shokz OpenRun Pro 2: was $179 now $170 via "SHOKZPDTG5"

Best Shokz Deals

Third time’s the charm! Nothing’s latest flagship headphones, the Headphone (1) Pro, massively improve on their predecessors in key areas. They sound more refined and full-bodied, thanks to their triple-driver setup. They look gorgeous, so they’re perfect for anyone who treats their gadgets as fashion accessories. Their app enables extensive EQ customization. Battery life is long, and Nothing’s knocked it out of the park with their design.

But few things in life are perfect and alas, the Headphone (1) Pro aren’t either. They come with an AirPods Max-esque hardshell case that’s bulky and looks silly. Some controls are hard to reach, too, and competitors from Bose and Sony offer better ANC.

To find out if these are the best over-ear headphones for you, read my full Nothing Headphone (1) Pro review.

Nothing Headphone (1) Pro review: Key specs

Nothing Headphone (1) Pro review: What I like

• Powerful bass and bright treble
• Striking, sci-fi design that’s supremely comfortable
• Highly adjustable EQ via user-friendly app
• Long battery life

If it’s a pair of excellent-sounding and long-lasting headphones you’re after, the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro should be your port of call. From their striking design to their user-friendly app, there’s a lot to love about Nothing’s flagship cans.

Sound quality

The most major improvement to the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro is the sound quality, and they now feature a triple-driver setup in each earcup for more bass, better treble, and refined mids. They’re certified Hi-Res Audio for wireless and wired listening, too, offering lossless playback at up to 24-bit/192KHz. I tested the headphones by listening to my favorite testing songs on Qobuz, the best music streaming service for audiophiles, with LDAC enabled on my Google Pixel 10 Pro XL.

I was impressed with the headphones’ wide soundstage when listening to ‘Knights of Cydonia’ by Muse. The galloping rhythms and layered guitars had plenty of separation, and the headphones’ expansive tuning meant that the music had room to breathe. In Lana Del Rey’s ‘In My Feelings,’ Lana’s vocals sat at the forefront, carrying the characteristic smoky and intimate quality without losing their delicate texture. The treble felt crisp and never became fatiguing either.

Listening to ‘Elephant’ by 070 Shake through the Headphone (1) Pro put the spotlight firmly on the low-end. The sub-bass had a satisfying sense of depth which gave the track a weighty foundation, while the bass sounded tight, controlled and very warm.

I would also like to give kudos to the Headphone (1) Pro’s spatial audio and head tracking feature here. With it toggled, the sound remains anchored in a fixed position, and turning your head slightly makes the presentation feel three-dimensional, adding a sense of space to tracks. It works extremely well.

Listen along to my review with the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro testing playlist:

Design & comfort

Keeping in line with the brand’s sci-fi design philosophy, the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro feature a transparent design that blends matte aluminum, machined titanium alloy arms, and even shatter-resistant glass earcup windows — and my goodness, do they look drool-worthy.

The Headphone (1) Pro weigh just 11.53 ounces, and they’re fitted with soft ear cushions that make you feel like your ears are resting on clouds, as well as a soft headband. The Headphone (1) Pro are some of the most comfy cans I’ve used, and even after wearing them for around six hours, I didn’t feel like ripping them off my head.

App

The Nothing Headphone (1) Pro utilize the Nothing X app, available on iOS and Android. The app allows for extensive equalizer customization. As the headphones have a triple-driver setup, the app lets you adjust the settings for each driver to get your desired sound. You can also tweak Gain and Frequency, and essentially boost whatever you want. Fancy a bump at exactly 9,864Hz? You can have it.

The app also unlocks features such as spatial audio with head tracking, Auracast for broadcasting audio to multiple headphones, and my favorite of all, Personal Sound Profile. This is essentially a hearing test that takes about three minutes and at the end of it, a personal EQ is created. It works extremely well, in my opinion, and Nothing’s done a great job of really personalizing the sound to your ears’ anatomy.

Battery life

With ANC off, the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro can last up to 68 hours, which drops to 30 hours when ANC is enabled. If you’re listening over LDAC, expect 53 hours with ANC off, or 28 hours with ANC on.

The Nothing Headphone (a) ($199) and the Nothing Headphone (1) ($299) offer longer battery lives, though, at 135 hours and 80 hours respectively — but the Headphone (1) Pro sound a whole lot better, so swings and roundabouts.

The Headphone (1) Pro trump their competition here, as the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen) ($359) last a measly 24 hours, while the pricier Sony WH-1000XM6 ($450) offer up to 40 hours. Though the Marshall Monitor III ($379) still take the crown for longest battery life in their price range — 100 hours — the Headphone (1) Pro are far from disappointing.

Nothing Headphone (1) Pro review: What I don’t like

• Bulky case just looks silly
• Competitors offer better ANC
• Controls a bit hard to reach

There isn’t a lot wrong with the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro. These cans excel in most areas, but I’m not entirely sold on the bulky AirPods Max-esque case that looks… really silly. Competitors also offer better ANC at the same price.

Bulky case

Looks like Nothing took a leaf out of Apple’s books when it was designing the Headphone (1) Pro’s case. Now, the OG AirPods Max’s ($549) unconventional “bra” case was controversial enough, but I’d argue that the Headphone (1) Pro’s case is worse. Unlike Apple’s soft leather case, the Headphone (1) Pro’s case that covers just the earcups is made of hardshell. It also features strap loops, and Nothing recommends adding a strap so that you can carry the headphones like… a crossbody bag.

I’m not sold on the Headphone (1) Pro’s case. It’s bulky and it looks ridiculous. The case, on its own, weighs 13.52 ounces, while the headphones weigh 11.53 ounces. Together, that’s 1.56 pounds! That’s a lot of added weight if you already have a full backpack. And no, you can’t stash the 3.5mm or USB-C cable in there. Bizarre design choice.

Hard-to-reach controls

The Nothing Headphone (1) Pro’s physical buttons are either hard to reach or accidentally clickable. Nothing features a Flat EQ toggle, located on the top inner edge of the left earcup. It’s quite difficult to reach when you’re wearing the headphones, so you need to remove them to swap to the Flat EQ, which is frustrating. The other controls, though well-placed and each sporting a unique shape, feel accidentally knockable. Even the softest touch increases or decreases the volume, for instance.

Mid ANC performance

Nothing says that the Headphone (1) Pro can block out up to 46dB of noise thanks to the silicone sound seal and 10 mics — but they can’t hold a candle to the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen), unfortunately.

ANC performance isn’t bad per se. Indoors, I couldn’t hear my colleagues and they had to wave to get my attention — but I was able to hear the loud clicking and clacking of my Epomaker Glyph mechanical keyboard. Outdoors, the headphones did well to block out idle chatter on the bus, but I could still hear loud honking. The Headphone (1) Pro’s ANC performance is on par with the Marshall Monitor III’s, but worse than the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen)’s and the AKG N9 Hybrid’s ($399).

Nothing Headphone (1) Pro compared

As I’ve mentioned throughout, the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro face fierce competition in their price range — from the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen), the Marshall Monitor III, the Sony WH-1000XM6, and the AKG N9 Hybrid. One of the most compelling reasons to get the Headphone (1) Pro over all of them is the sci-fi design which is unlike any other. Marshall’s got the rock and roll look which is also a class apart, and while I’m not a fan of Bose’s or Sony’s designs, they’ll be better if you don’t want to stand out.

ANC is one of the most important features in this price range, and the Headphone (1) Pro are outdone by the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen)’s and the AKG N9 Hybrid — though they provide better active and passive isolation than the Marshall Monitor III. And while the Headphone (1) Pro’s battery life is solid at 68 hours (and better than most of its competition), the Marshall Monitor III offer up to 100 hours if beefy battery is important to you.

When it comes to sound quality, the Headphone (1) Pro sound warmer and have a wider soundstage than the pricier Sony WH-1000XM6. Treble is also crisp and bright, and sounds more controlled than through the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen). Given all this, the Headphone (1) Pro have their pros and cons, and do a good job of justifying their price. I’d get them for their design alone.

Who should buy the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro?

If you’re design-conscious but also an audio enthusiast, and you’re looking for studio-grade tuning, the Nothing Headphone (1) Pro should be your port of call. They look beautiful with their sci-fi aesthetics, and they’re ridiculously comfortable, too. The warm and meaty sound is the real star here, and there’s LDAC support as well as Hi-Res Wireless streaming capabilities. With extensive EQ customization and great features, like spatial sound and IP52 waterproofing, the Headphone (1) are almost the complete package.

I say “almost” because if you want ANC that makes you feel lonely, you may want to consider the Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen) instead. Bose’s offering doesn’t come with a silly-looking bulky case either, if that’s a dealbreaker for you. For anyone who wants a competent pair of headphones that look good and sound even better, the Headphone (1) Pro are a no-brainer.

I’m a big fan of Sony headphones. Their tuning is hands down one of my favorites, but you are going to be paying a pretty penny for one of the flagship models. That’s where the Sony WH-CH530 come into play.

They bring premium tuning in a more affordable package, making it more accessible to music lovers who don’t have hundreds of dollars to drop on a new set of cans. The headphones are also lightweight with a comfy headband, and can deliver up to 55 hours of battery life.

Could these be some of the best cheap headphones to buy right now? Well, the on-ear design may be uncomfortable for some people, but they’re otherwise perfect budget cans. Keep reading this full Sony WH-CH530 review to find out more.

Sony WH-CH530 review: Specs

Sony WH-CH530 review: Price & availability

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones are a cheap option from the audio giant and cost $68 on Amazon U.S. and £49 on Amazon U.K. The headphones come in a variety of funky colors, including Pink, Coral, Mint, Cobalt, White and Black. They were released in September 2026 and came with the announcement of the WH-CH730N and the WH-1000XM4C (an updated version of the XM4), strengthening their entry-level lineup.

Sony has a whole host of affordable cans on their website, including the WH-CH520, which cost $59. These are the predecessors to the WH-CH530 and are a little cheaper but have a shorter battery life and don’t support the same audio codecs. There are also options from budget brands, such as the Anker Soundcore H30i for $39. They come with a very impressive 70-hour battery life, but they don’t sound as crisp as the WH-CH530.

But on-ear headphones aren’t for everyone, so if you need the comfort and better noise isolation of over-ears, the JLab JBuds Lux ANC could be for you. They cost $79 and have great sound — it’s all about the style you want.

Sony WH-CH530 review: Design

The Sony WH-CH530 are a sure-fire way to get a pop of color into your outfits, and they've certainly brightened up my day. I tested the cobalt color, and although I’m not one to usually reach for a splash of color — I much prefer color drenching with a black outfit — these are actually very pretty. That said, I felt like I was in 2014 trying to decide which color of the Beats Pill I should buy.

The headphones are made of 30% recycled plastic, which is commendable, but they feel a little on the flimsy side. They also don’t have a durability rating, so they’re not equipped to withstand any moisture or dust. This is normal for headphones, which are very difficult to waterproof. If you’re just using them on public transport, in the office or at home, it shouldn’t matter. But if you need a set of headphones for workouts or to survive light rain, check out the IP52-rated Nothing Headphones (a).

Comfort

I’m not the biggest fan of on-ear headphones, but even though I’m a hater, I initially found the WH-CH530 headphones surprisingly comfortable.

This was pretty short-lived, though, since the on-ear design caused pressure on my ears. This is likely going to be down to individual anatomy and preference — while testing these headphones on my commute, I noticed plenty of people wearing on-ear cans, so people must like them. They’re just not for me.

That said, the earcups are made from the same material as the premium models from Sony, so they were comfier than cheaper on-ear models like the Anker Soundcore H30i. Although the WH-CH530 headphones don’t have any ANC capabilities, the earcups did a good job of blocking out external noise, and I could hardly hear my colleagues trying to talk to me.

The headphones weigh 5.29 ounces and are very lightweight, and the padded headband is comfortable too. I didn’t feel like it was pushing down on my head at all.

Controls

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones use button controls, which were easy to use and responsive. There’s a power button and two buttons on either side for volume. The power button doubles as play/pause, and the volume buttons can be held down to skip songs.

Connectivity

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones use the latest Bluetooth 6.0, which offers more stability than previous versions and can support higher-efficiency codecs like LC3 and LE Audio (for better battery life). Bluetooth 6.0 also supports Auracast to stream sound from LE Audio devices. This is great to see in a pair of budget cans as it makes typically high-end features a lot more accessible.

Sony WH-CH530 review: Sound quality

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones sound brilliant. For $69, the sound quality is very impressive. It’s nothing like flagship models from Sony, but still in a league of its own in this price range.

I cycled through the EQ settings in the app and kept landing back on the standard EQ as my favorite, so I carried out all my testing on this setting. I also listened with DSEE enabled, which essentially rebuilds a compressed audio file to give you the best sound possible from basic SBC and AAC audio codecs, which usually have the lowest sound quality of all Bluetooth codecs. . The headphones are actually very well balanced, with a warm sound that replicates midrange frequencies very well.

Firstly, to test the bass performance, I listened to party 4 u by Charli XCX, which is a track with bassy synth and enhanced vocals. The modified vocals were crisp with no distortion, and the bass reproduction was very impressive, again, with no distortion. Even the deepest synth notes were well supported without overpowering the rest of the song.

Next, I listened to Sweet Disposition by Temper Trap. Mid-range separation was great — all of the instruments and vocals had room to breathe and were easy to tell apart. There was lots of detail in the treble, too. Sweet Disposition starts out with a riff and vocals that have a slight echo. This echo isn’t replicated very well on some headphones and earbuds, but it was prominent with the Sonys. Backing vocals were clear, and I could still hear the gentle shimmer of the cymbals in the background.

I really enjoy listening to music with these cans. I’d expect nothing less from Sony.

Sony WH-CH530 review: App

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones are compatible with the Sony Sound Connect app. Though it’s the audio companion app that causes the most division in our office, I personally like it. You can do a lot with the custom EQs, and seeing the information at a glance makes the experience very simple.

There’s space in the app for two of your own custom EQs. By using the 10-band EQ, I got a sound I was happy with across all genres. You can also enable DSEE in the app.

If protecting your hearing while enjoying your music is on your mind, then the Sound Connect app can help. You can choose from five maximum volume levels for the headphones. I opted to go with the quietest option since, as a concertgoer, I’ve become mindful of my hearing.

It’s worth noting that you don’t get as many controls in the app when using the WH-CH530 as you do with premium models. But, again, these are pretty basic headphones; you don’t need all the bells and whistles you get with the latest flagship model.

Sony WH-CH530 review: Call quality

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones have AI noise reduction for calls, which is always a feature I love to see in a cheaper pair of earbuds or headphones. Ultimately, the lower price can mean a lower-quality microphone, but AI noise reduction helps to focus in on your voice and filter out environmental sounds.

I called my mom, as I always do when testing out new audio gear, and asked her what she thought of the microphone performance. She said that she couldn’t hear the traffic around me and my voice was clear. This shows me the AI noise reduction works well.

Sony WH-CH530 review: Battery life

The Sony WH-CH530 headphones have up to 55 hours of battery life. This is very impressive to see in such cheap headphones. After using the headphones for 10 hours, the battery depleted by around 20%, which is what I would have expected.

Now, it’s worth discussing that Sony says the headphones have a maximum battery life of 55 hours with general usage. That’s calls, music, watching videos, and accounting for times when they may be idle. Sony lists an active use battery life of 35 hours, which is more realistic. So you can stretch it to 55 hours, but I would curb your expectations and expect a little less. Still, 35 hours is very impressive. Some flagship cans have a much lower battery life than this, with the Apple AirPods Max 2 managing a maximum of 20 hours.

If, like me, you often find yourself heading out the door with no charge in your headphones, fear not. The WH-CH530 are equipped with quick charging that can give you 1.5 hours of listening in just three minutes.

Sony WH-CH530 review: Verdict

The Sony WH-CH530 are the headphones to buy if you’re looking for an affordable option but don’t want to compromise on sound quality. The sound quality of these cans really is great and has many of the qualities I love from flagship Sony headphones, like the balanced, warm sound. They have a decently good battery life and are very lightweight.

Keep in mind that these are on-ear headphones, and however light they may be, they can still fatigue your ears. But that’s really the only bad thing I have to say about them, and mileage will vary.

I don’t feel like I’m missing out on flagship features when I listen to my music with these headphones, and I think they’re the perfect choice for affordability.

I'm just gonna come out and say it: there are way too many earbuds on the market. Heck, there's way too much of everything on the market. I type "earbuds" into Amazon and over 40,000 products come up! How are there so many people making so many earbuds? Most importantly, who's buying all these earbuds? Are there even enough ears on the planet to sustain this?

Okay, crash out over. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

No, but seriously. There's too much out there. Decision fatigue is real, and I've been using the same AirPods Pro 2 for three years now. What will I do when they break? Probably buy some refurbished AirPods Pro 2 off BackMarket. They might just be the best earbuds... until...

I got to talk with Mehul Kochar, Senior Director of Business Development for Knowles Specialty Audio, a brand known for making balanced armature drivers. In layman's terms: drivers that make music sound real nice. So, naturally, I had to ask him which earbuds he uses.

The answer made me feel oh-so vindicated — because he started talking about earbuds I gave 4.5 stars and haven't shut up about since. I told you!

It's the Status Audio Pro X, baby

Full disclosure: Knowles engineered the balanced armature driver in the Status Audio Pro X, so it makes sense from a business perspective that Kochar recommended the earbuds to me. Of course Kochar wants more people listening to the Pro X — Knowles has skin in the game.

I, however, have zero skin in the game. I review countless audio products: every week I've got some earbuds, headphones, a speaker, or a soundbar on the go. Review, rinse, repeat. Some earbuds are good, but not memorable. Some are memorable for all the wrong reasons. A very small minority are the perfect recipe: near-perfect and memorable.

So when I am still talking about a pair of earbuds eight months later? You know it was special.

And, boy, am I still talking about the Status Audio Pro X. Sometimes I feel like I'm screaming into the void. "Please!" I cry, tears streaming down my face. "Someone please hype these earbuds! I can't do it on my own anymore!"

So when Kochar mentioned the Status Audio Pro X were his current earbuds, I grinned so hard my cheeks hurt.

Why are these earbuds so great?

Easy answer: the sound. The Status Audio Pro X sound divine. At $300, they're expensive, so you'd hope they sound good, right? I mean, yes, but the Pro X are seriously gorgeous.

In my review of the Pro X, I wrote, "Vocals sounded particularly decadent; so affecting, complex, and emotive. There was no muffled bass, no tinniness, and fantastic instrument separation."

This rang true across all genres I tested them with. Even heavy metal, often belaboured by muddy lower mids, excelled. "‘Groping Dogs Gushing Blood’ was utterly monstrous — rolling guitars reminiscent of Queens of the Stone Age thrashed their way across the soundscape, bodacious percussion rounding out the female vocal."

Detail is one of the things I look out for when testing earbuds: can I hear the music, or can I feel the music? I want to feel it. I want the vocals to jump off the page, so to speak, and dance around in my head. I want to sense the vibrancy and the dynamism in my body.

Just like the AirPods Pro 3 and the Sony WF-XM6, Status focused on detail while engineering the Pro X. Instead of womping you with bass, à la Bose (which some people like, I may add), the Pro X are delicate, expansive, and detailed. You can hear every strata of your music. "You don’t miss anything with these earbuds," I wrote in my review. "Not a single cymbal, breath, or guitar string. Everything is laid out bare, exactly as it’s supposed to be."

Thanks to the unbeatable sound quality, I've not shut up about these earbuds since testing them.

You'd hope so, for $250

So I've got good news and bad news.

The good news is this: Status Audio reduced the MSRP from $300 to $250! Yay!

The bad news is this: the Status Audio Pro X are still $250. At $250, they're premium earbuds. These are not the everyman 'buds.

I discussed this thoroughly in my review, but I'll chat about it here, too: a small-name brand pricing its debut premium earbuds the same as the AirPods Pro 3? That's certainly a choice!

How can you entice people through the door when you're no cheaper than the most popular premium earbuds in the world... and no one knows who you are? It's tricky, because the Pro X sound that good. Yes, these are $250-sounding buds. But even so, as good as they sound, they're still relatively unknown.

Priced almost as steeply as the Sony WF-XM6 and the Bose QuietComfort Ultra 2nd Gen? It's harsh competition. I really wish the Pro X were $239 — $10 cheaper than the AirPods Pro 3 — to get them over the finish line. At $239, this'd be a no-brainer.

But what do you think? Would you take the risk and drop $250 on underdog earbuds? What would make you invest?

More from Tom's Guide

• Cambridge Audio L/R X review: Big on bass, big on features, big on price
• Apple and LG smart home products just leaked ahead of Apple October event — here's what the new images tell us
• I tested the Soundcore Space 2 Pro and it's a killer Bose alternative for $160 less — as long you ignore the AI features

Ahem, I have something I’d like to say. I’m actually over audio brands releasing earbuds with AI features. Bring back the good old days, when earbuds did nothing but play music block out annoying ambient sound. Those were the best of times, eh?

Well, Cambridge Audio is, consciously or unconsciously, bringing back that bygone era. And me? I’m all here for it. The new Melomania A100 SE are everything I want them to be: affordable, great-sounding, and straightforward. These are music-focused earbuds, and they’re not sorry about it. I can tell every bit of care has been put into how they sound — and it’s enough to make them some of the best earbuds of 2026.

So, are these entry-level hi-fi-tuned earbuds right for you? I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess “Yes”. I love these bad boys. But to find out, keep reading this Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE review.

Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE: Specs

Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE review: What I like

• Pretty, pretty price tag
• Warm, inviting sound quality across all genres I tested
• Just about the music, no AI features

The Melomania are super lovable for four main reasons: affordability, sound quality, battery life, and music-focused features.

Price

Look, the Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE are cheap. In 2026, $149 for earbuds with a hi-fi-adjacent sound profile, ANC, wear detection, and music-focused features is a great deal. You can buy the Melomania A100 SE for $149 at Cambridge Audio direct or £129 at Amazon U.K.

At this price point, the competition’s looking less like the Sony WF-100XM6 and more like the Apple AirPods 5 and the Bose QuietComfort Earbuds. Even so, the Melomania crowd is still a little different to the AirPods/Bose crowd — these are everyday earbuds for people who take sound a little more seriously.

Although the AirPods 5 were a major improvement on the AirPods 4, the Melomania A100 SE sound warmer and more well-rounded. Similarly, the Bose QuietComfort Earbuds go too far in the other direction — Bose’s bassy signature sound can be a bit too much for some audiophiles.

Sound quality

Overall, the Cambridge Melomania A100 SE sound excellent. Although a warmer earbud than traditional hi-fi IEMs — like the Sennheiser IE 200 — self-professed audiophiles will surely be pleased. Disappointed by Bowers & Wilkins’ Pi6’s shoddy connectivity and weird fit? Neither issues are present on the Melomania A100 SE.

Sub-bass is proficient, especially in sim0ne’s hard house track “Space Cadet”. The pulsing kick drum came through energetically here, leading the track with the energy of a ‘90s raver. Even so, sub-bass didn’t overpower the highest-frequency sounds — namely the shining synth stems layered over the verses and the skittering keyboards in the middle.

The A100 SE are surprisingly expansive, too. Muse’s “Soldier’s Poem” enveloped my ears with control, delicately layered above the acoustic bass and arpeggiated guitar sections. Undoubtedly, the vocals were the star of the show: each harmony was pronounced yet complementary, with zero muddling between tiers.

The biggest thing I look for in earbuds is dynamism and vibrancy — both of which are present here. Even a grunge, sludge-rock track, “Be Quiet and Drive (Far Away)” by Deftones, oozed attitude. With my custom U-curve EQ, the dramatic low-end and upper treble worked in tandem to breathe body and excitement into the song. There was no tininess in the crashing cymbals, and while some listeners might be looking for a touch more detail in the sludgey guitars, this would most likely impress most of you.

On the whole, the Melomania A100 SE are accurate, faithful earbuds. There’s no vacuum in the bass, and there’s clarity across the treble. While not tuned as neutrally as IEMs, the richer soundstage is more appealing to the masses, so I’d recommend them to all music lovers amongst you.

I’ll quickly discuss the built-in “Dolby Audio” feature. I wasn’t a huge fan of how this feature made my music sound. It stretched the bass and made some of the upper mids tinny. This is unfortunate, but I’d recommend this more for watching Netflix or the like on your phone rather than music. It’s worth noting that no audio brand has really got Spatial Audio like Apple — Dolby Atmos on the AirPods Pro 3 is truly excellent.

Android users will also benefit from LDAC and aptX Lossless Bluetooth support on compatible devices.

No AI features

I swear to you, I have never thrown my hands into the air with so much verve and gusto. When I downloaded the Cambridge Melomania app, I set it up with my buds… and held my breath. Reader — the relief I felt upon seeing zero AI “features”. Just music. No AI translation. No heart rate monitor. No AI note-taking. No AI call screening (although that does sound useful… hmm…). No AI chatbot built into the headphones (ahem, Soundcore Liberty 5 Pro). Nothing.

Just. Music.

If you’re the kind of person who is seriously fed up of getting “innovative” AI features no one asked for shoved down your throat, these are the earbuds for you. Sure, the app has “Dolby Audio” mode, which upmixes your music into an Atmos-adjacent sound profile, and “DynamEQ”, which automatically configures bass and treble at low volumes, but these are music-oriented features.

I personally didn’t like how Dolby Audio made my music sound — it dampened bass and made vocals a little echoey — but this is a music feature, not AI nonsense.

Lifestyle features: Battery life & call quality

Without looking, guess how long the Melomania A100 SE last (without ANC). If you said 39 hours, then well done! Give yourself a pat on the back.

Yes, 39 hours. This is such good battery life. Apple released the AirPods 5 with just 4-5 hours in the buds and 24 hours in the case — I listened to the Melomania A100 SE for 4 hours with ANC and the buds only went down to 70%.

Of course, the EarFun Air Pro 4+ go for 54 hours without ANC, so you might want them if you need unbeatable battery — but the Cambridges are better for serious music lovers.

Naturally, pretty much all decent earbuds have great call quality these days, and the Melomania A100 SE are no different. To test out the call quality, I phoned my boyfriend, who reported my voice was clear and audible, if a touch fuzzy in the sibilance. Even so, he said they were “comparable” to my AirPods Pro 2.

Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE review: What I don’t like

• ANC is quite mid
• The app is a little buggy

While not necessarily a con, I, the world’s representative for the small-eared, must announce the Melomania A100 SE are quite large. Even with the smallest tips, my ears ached after a couple of hours.

Besides that, there are a couple of things worth keeping in mind if you’re thinking of buying the Melomania A100 SE.

ANC is mid

If your upstairs neighbour loves drilling and your downstairs neighbour has a newborn baby, the Melomania A100 SE might not be for you. I tested the earbuds across multiple situations: in the Tom’s Guide office, at home, and while gallivanting around the city.

When testing in the office, I could still hear myself typing and my colleagues fussing with plastic bags.

Frustratingly, ANC also changes how music sounds. Only slightly, but it’s noticeable — much more than on the AirPods 5 or Bose QuietComfort. With ANC on max strength, bass is a little flatter and there’s a tightness in the treble. Again, this is incredibly slight, but I have the ears of a foxhound.

The app

Unfortunately, the Melomania app is a little buggy. Sure, the A100 SE only came out a week ago (at the time of writing), so this could be teething problems. Cambridge hi-fi gear like the Cambridge Audio L/R X use StreamMagic rather than Melomania. StreamMagic works a treat, so hopefully the Melomania issues are temporary.

The touch controls selection menu is buggy: you can’t actually customize the controls yet. Although the app brings up a customization menu, you can’t click on the settings, so you're essentially stuck with the default settings.

I’ve reached out to Cambridge’s representative, so hopefully this won’t be an issue for much longer.

Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE compared

As mentioned earlier, the $149/£129 price tag aligns the Melomania A100 SE more with the AirPods 5 than Sony’s XM6s. At this price point, you’ve also got the EarFun Air Pro 4+ ($99), Nothing Ear (3a) ($99), and Soundcore Liberty 5 Pro Max ($149).

I’d recommend spending $50 extra and grabbing the Melomanias over the EarFun or Nothing options as the former sound a touch warmer. While the bassier Soundcore Liberty 5 Pro Max sound equally as decadent, I’d recommend the Cambridges for hi-fi lovers due to the more basic UI. If you want earbuds developed under a mantra more like “How can we make these sound even better?” than “How can we put even more features in these earbuds?” then the Cambridges are for you.

However, if you want a big-name brand, you’re looking at either the AirPods 5 or the Bose QuietComfort Earbuds (2024). At $129-$149/$179 respectively, both Apple and Bose’s entry-level options would treat you nicely. For supreme ANC, look into the Bose, but for superior Apple ecosystem integration, I’d check out AirPods.

Of course, the Melomania A100 SE have multipoint — which worked seamlessly and without frustration for me — and a “Find My” feature, so Apple isn’t the be-all and end-all here.

Should you buy the Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE?

If you’re a serious music lover who wants earbuds reminiscent of a simpler time, then I wholeheartedly recommend the Cambridge Audio Melomania A100 SE. There’s no intrusive AI features like the Soundcore Liberty 5 Pro Max, they sound richer than AirPods 5, and they’re more detailed than the Bose QuietComfort (2024).

I can’t speak for everyone, obviously, but I’ve had it up to here with AI and health features in earbuds. I’m ready to strip everything out of all my audio gear — or switch to wired buds altogether. The A100 SE perfectly strike that balance of serious music earbuds with Bluetooth convenience, and I’m so here for it.

I think at this point you’d be forgiven for calling me a Beyerdynamic super-fan — and I don’t exactly try to hide it. From their headphones to open-earbuds, I can reach for a pair and rest assured that I’m getting detailed sound at an affordable price. The Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro headphones are no exception.

These headphones have a sleek and professional-looking design, and despite offering no ANC, there’s some passive noise cancellation thanks to the thick, padded ear cushions. The ear cups also swivel, and the headband is adjustable to get the best positioning possible. I could also hear amazing detail in more stripped-back tracks.

However, in heavily layered songs, the high end was lost a little for me, and as with all on-ear headphones, they can get uncomfortable after a while. If you would like to find out more, keep reading this full Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review.

Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review: Specs

Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review: Price & availability

The Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro headphones are available for $149 on the Beyerdynamic website, and £99 on Amazon in the U.K. Beyerdynamic doesn’t ship directly to the U.K., so you need to buy the headphones from a third-party retailer. These headphones are only available in black.

They’re a little bit cheaper than the Beyerdynamic DT 270 Pro headphones in the U.S., where they are priced at $159. I tested the DT 270 Pro at the beginning of the year and absolutely loved them for music practice in particular. I’d say the DT 270 Pro sound replication is superior, but I much prefer the passive noise isolation and the comfort of the DT 275 Pros.

This style of headphone is very basic, but if you want something better suited to studio monitoring and long listening sessions, then you can look at the Rode NTH-50 headphones. These are a little cheaper at $109/£99, but have textured and detailed sound reproduction, making them ideal for making music, not just listening to it.

Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review: Design

The Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro headphones have a closed-back, on-ear design, which isn’t typically my go-to. I tend to steer clear of on-ear headphones because they can be a little uncomfortable to wear, but more on that later.

While they don’t have any ANC capabilities, the closed-back design naturally isolates passive noise from my surroundings. I found this nice in a chatty environment like the office. I’ve also tested the Beyerdynamic DT 270 Pro, and they don’t block out as much sound.

The DT 275 Pros look very sleek and professional, so I feel comfortable wearing them in most environments. The cans come with a drawstring bag to protect them from dust when not in use.

Comfort

The headphones have swivel earcups, so I could position them where they were most comfortable, and I like the faux leather finish on the cups too. I found this more comfortable to wear for long periods than the plush earcup material of the DT 270 Pros, which became pretty warm after a few hours of wear. The headband of the DT 275 Pro headphones is padded and adjustable, so I was able to find the right fit.

Since these headphones have an on-ear design, they’re never going to be the most comfortable cans in the world. They exert a lot of pressure on your ears, so be prepared to slide one earcup off for a break now and again.

Connectivity

The Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro headphones are passive headphones, but very easy to drive from a phone, laptop or computer. They use a 3.5mm jack cable that can be attached to a 1/4" adaptor. The 3.5mm jack can be plugged into the left or right earcup and twists to lock into place, so I was never worried about accidentally tugging it free.

Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review: Sound quality

For testing, I listened to the headphones using the 3.5mm jack cable and Qobuz, which we think is the best music streaming service for audiophiles.

The sound profile of the Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro headphones is a little strange. At first, I noticed the driving bass, which I could feel pulsing against my ears — it’s very powerful. Unfortunately, that can mean frequencies toward the top end of the range, like cymbals and breathy vocal details, are drowned out or have to battle with the lower frequencies. But when the bass is stripped away for a vocal-heavy, acoustic track, the sound is detailed and refined.

A perfect example of that stripped-back track is Over Country by Lizzie McAlpine. Her breathy vocals are glassy, and the whole track is delicate and balanced. Since the bass is less prominent in the track, the DT 275 Pro let details shine through, and I could hear every movement over the frets along the neck of the guitar. The pared-back bass simply added more dimension rather than overrunning the track.

More bass-heavy tracks became too much for the DT 275 Pros. When listening to Safe and Sound from Capital Cities, the cymbals were completely lost, and other details started to disappear. The rest of the main instruments, like guitar and drums, sounded fine, as they have enough body to hold their own against the pulsing bass. Ultimately, for a bassy song like this, it’s no great loss, but it shows how the low end can quickly take over through these cans.

I finally listened to Witches by Alice Phoebe Lou, which is an upbeat, groovy track with delicate vocals. This is another track the headphones worked well with, as there wasn’t too much going on and I could hear a lot of dimension in the song. Instruments in the mid-range were clear throughout, and it wasn't too bassy.

But overall, the headphones sound good. The sound quality isn’t something to complain about in general, but the bass can be overwhelming depending on the genre.

These headphones perform best with speech. They’re designed to be used with a filming rig, so when testing the speech replication, I listened to a few audiobooks and watched some TV, and all of the speech was clear with perfect diction.

Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro review: Verdict

The Beyerdynamic DT 275 Pro headphones are another win for the audio brand. They put an impressive amount of music detail into a sleek and comfortable package. The adjustable headband and swivel earcups mean you can adjust the headphones to suit you. There’s also some passive noise cancellation, which isn’t typical in studio headphones, but the padding and closed-back style make it possible here.

While they’re mostly comfortable, the on-ear design won’t be for everyone as it puts a lot of pressure on the ears. And even though they replicate acoustic tracks well, they can struggle with heavily layered songs

Ultimately, these are a great choice for casual monitoring or video editing, but for more accuracy in music production, I would recommend the 270 version of these cans.

Back at High End 2026 in Vienna, deeply fragile after a preceding night of plentiful Austrian lager, I took a trip to Cambridge Audio’s stall — the folks there were rather keen to show me something. After being supplied with a bottle of water and kindly reassured that I would survive, I was ushered into a testing room, beckoned into a chair and asked for a song pick.

I was then treated to a demonstration of the L/R X, the latest, largest and most powerful member of Cambridge’s L/R compact speaker range. And heck: hungover as hell though I was, it was indeed a treat. And that’s saying something — at High End, I heard no shortage of incredible audio gear.

I’ve since spent a couple of months testing the L/R X at home, and I’ve gotta say, I’m actually a huge fan of them all round. Aside from their relatively steep price, I have no major complaints. So could these be some of the best speakers for you? Find out in my full Cambridge Audio L/R X review.

Cambridge Audio L/R X review: Key specs

Cambridge Audio L/R X review: What I like

• Powerful bass and hi-fi sound
• Striking neo-retro design
• Plentiful connectivity & features

Powerful hi-fi sound, a dashing neo-retro aesthetic and bags of connectivity options and customization features — there’s a lot to love about the L/R X.

Sound quality

The L/R X might look like they have a single tweeter and 5-inch woofer, but don’t be deceived: inside the cabinet, Cambridge has squeezed a second 5-inch downfiring woofer. Combined with two 6-inch passive radiators, the result is bags of low-end power.

Now, don’t get me wrong, a second woofer is no replacement for an actual sub. The L/R X response bottoms out at 35Hz, so on any songs straddling that boundary, subbiness tends to come in fits and starts.

Still, for a set of bookshelf speakers these things go impressively low, with ample power low down. The bottom woofer gives you the same sense of upwards swooping bass as a sub, demonstrated perfectly during the enormous wave of sub bass at the end of SOHN’s ‘Antigravity’ (which was truly window-shaking, especially in the bass boost EQ preset). It’s all deftly controlled, though, despite the power — each undulation of bass guitar in Odetta’s ‘Hit Or Miss’ was easy to trace, with no muddying or booming at all.

My only slight issue was a lack of attack in the lower mid-range, especially on busy tracks with heavy basslines. The dual distorted guitar riffs of Melvins’ ‘Honey Bucket’ felt a little smeared into one another, and I had the same problem on other sludgy songs like Metallica’s ‘Seek & Destroy’ and ‘Siva’ by The Smashing Pumpkins. However, this was mostly solved with a tweak to toe angle and some messing around with the software room acoustics settings found in the Cambridge app (more on this later).

Vocals sound absolutely fantastic, with Kelly Jones’ smoky voice carrying beautifully above the kick drums and guitars of Stereophonics’ ‘Just Looking’. And the higher end proved nice and crisp, with the ethereal vocals and delicate percussion of James K’s ‘Hypersoft Lovejinx Junkdream (Priori remix)’ sounding airy and spacious.

You’ll definitely want these speakers on stands. Obviously, speakers tend to sound better on them anyway, but that downfiring woofer will naturally shake anything underneath it to cause ugly rattles. Cambridge supplied me with a set of prototype stands, so although I can confirm they’re definitely in the works, you can’t buy any at the time of writing.

The stands I was sent were just basic flat-topped stands, atop which the L/R X’s weight keeps the speakers firmly planted — that means a basic set of third party flat-topped stands will do the trick.

Listen along to my testing playlist on Qobuz, in our opinion the best music streaming service for audiophiles.

Design

Just like their little siblings, the Cambridge L/R S and L/R M, the L/R X utilize a modern and clean design, with a dash of neo-retro from the tweeter housing. I think they look great, and I absolutely love the gentle mood lighting between the cabinet and metal riser. There are also the passive radiators on each side, which visibly vibrate when music is playing — so cool.

Of course, beauty is all in the eye of the beholder, so while I behold the L/R X well, my wife does not, disparaging them each time she enters the room. I guess you could call them divisive at worst, but honestly I think that’s unfair. In hindsight, I probably ought to have asked for a review unit in one of the many other colors Cambridge offers — the dark blue or green to match our lounge decor might’ve been a better shout. Alas.

If I were to rank them, then yeah, I prefer the timeless look of my Ruark Sabre-R, and also the more minimalist, monochromatic look of the Kanto TUK Grand Gen 2. But I much prefer the L/R X styling over the über-futuristic DALI Kupid.

Size-wise, oh they big. If your media unit is already full or you have shallow bookshelves, this could be an issue — the mid-sized L/R M or Ruark Sabre-R might be a better shout. That said, one of the L/R X’s crowning glories is the wireless hookup between speakers, which I’ll cover more later. In short, it gives you a lot of flexibility with placement and could remedy any worries about space.

Connectivity

These are some hooked-up speakers! And not just the normal stuff. Sure, there’s Bluetooth, Qobuz/Tidal/Spotify Connect etc etc. There’s a remote control, app hook-up, yada yada. Most importantly, though, each speaker is individually powered (so no amp or AVR required) and can connect wirelessly to the other with up to 24-bit/192KHz transfer, meaning there’s no need for a connecting cable. As I mentioned above, that gives you lots of flexibility with placement, providing you have each near a power outlet. It was lovely being able to move the L/R X around for the best sound without an annoying cable.

A swanky braided USB-C cable is included for wired pairing, though. The speakers will only pair over the same Wi-Fi network, with the main speaker connected to the StreamMagic app. If your Wi-Fi goes down, just hook up via wire and do things the old-fashioned way.

I/O-wise, you’ve got USB-A and USB-C input, phono AUX in, a phono stage for turntables, an Optical port, and an eARC HDMI slot for hooking up to your TV. There’s also a sub out port if you want even more subbiness. A decent array.

Features

These speakers are dripping with features, settings, tweaks, whatever you need. I’ve already touched on a few throughout this piece, and it all comes down to the extensive capabilities of the StreamMagic companion app. There’s a 10-band equalizer, which, while rather simplistic (I would’ve preferred a parametric EQ) is always handy nonetheless. Cambridge has tuned the L/R X for large rooms, but there’s a dedicated room acoustics panel to account for room length, speaker placement/wall gaps, and furnishings.

Initially I found the L/R X a little too bright and fatiguing, but simply tweaked the furnishings slider to compensate — a super quick fix that stopped me needing to mess around with EQ, placement or furniture. As I mentioned above, I had to play with toe angle and spacing anyway to clean up the mid-range, and used the room acoustics panel to make software refinements as I did.

There’s also a setting called DynamEQ, which boosts bass and treble at quieter volumes. That means you don’t have to sacrifice top and bottom end clarity if you can’t (or aren’t inclined to) blast it.

You can customize lighting, choose the primary speaker positioning, set standby times, and apply volume limiters. It’s an impressive roster of controls, and I’m not sure how I can go back to speakers without all this. It’s worth noting that I haven’t had a single issue with the StreamMagic app, either. It’s slick, polished, and has worked reliably throughout my entire time testing.

Cambridge Audio L/R X review: What I don't like

• Steep price versus rivals

This section’s gonna be pretty thin, as there’s only one thing I don’t like about the L/R, and that’s the price. In the world of high-end hi-fi, though, they aren’t beyond the pale.

Price

The Cambridge Audio L/R X cost $2,399 / £1,799 per pair direct from Cambridge Audio. Alternatively, you can buy them from Cambridge’s authorized retailers, which includes Sweetwater and Upscale Audio in the States; or Richer Sounds in Britain.

Obviously, these will be a considered purchase. $2,399 isn’t an impulse spend for most people. That said, hi-fi gear is simply expensive. And besides, the L/R X pack plenty of low-end power, which could save you buying a subwoofer.

As I'll cover below, though, you can pick up similarly powerful speakers for a lot less than this, like Klipsch's The Nines ($1,599 MSRP).

Cambridge Audio L/R X compared

As I touched on above, the L/R X are pricier than other large bookshelf speakers, but they offer a lot of power and tons of features. If you’re looking to save a little money you could check out the Kanto TUK Grand Gen 2 ($1,199 a pair), or the DALI Kupid ($600 a pair). Both are passive speaker sets so need amplifying. Although they pack plenty of power, bass lovers will probably want a sub.

The L/R X’s fiercest rivals are KEF's LS50 Wireless II and Klipsch’s active speakers, The Sevens and The Nines. The Sevens feature 6.5-inch woofers, while The Nines feature massive 8-inch woofers for excellent bass performance. Even at the $1,599 MSRP, The Nines have the L/R X beat on price, although you can find them for under a grand. The L/R X’s upper hand is their increased wireless connectivity and slicker app, making them a better blend of power and usability.

The KEF LS50 Wireless II are what the L/R X were built to compete with, though. The LS50 also offer wireless speaker connectivity, although data transfer between the two is capped at 24-bit/96KHz versus the L/R X's higher-res 24-bit/192KHz. The LS50 also cost $2,999, so $600 more. As I said, hi-fi simply costs a lot, and the L/R X are neither the best, nor the worst value proposition.

Who should buy the Cambridge Audio L/R X?

If you’re a serious hi-fi enthusiast who wants big sound, yes. That’s especially true if you’re somewhat space constrained or simply want to go without wires as much as possible. The L/R X offer tons of clarity and power, but give you the flexibility to put them wherever you need and tweak the sound easily to whatever room they’re in. They’re pricey, yes, but they’re aimed at people willing to spend for the right sound. And in my eyes, the completeness-of-package offered by the L/R X simply can’t be matched.

October Prime Day may be winding down tonight, but there’s still time to score a great deal. In fact, Bose is offering some pretty impressive discounts on a few of its best-selling headphones and speakers.

For instance, the original Bose Ultra Open Earbuds are on sale for just $199 (originally priced at $299). Looking for a new speaker? I recommend the Bose SoundLink Flex for just $99. When it comes to headphones, you can't go wrong with the Bose QuietComfort Headphones on sale for $169 — a whopping $190 off.

Prime Day ends tonight which means these rare Bose deals are likely to expire. We recommend shopping them ASAP. Keep scrolling to check out our favorite Bose audio deals this Prime Day.

Quick Links