Hey guys Marc here from Rtings.com and today
we are comparing the Sony WH-XB900N to the
WH-1000XM3.
The XB900N is the latest wireless noise cancelling
over-ear from Sony, with a similar design
to the WH-1000Xm3 but in a more affordable
format.
They have about the same list of features;
They are both wireless noise cancelling headphones
that deliver on bass, so which one should
you choose.
Also, the XB900N being cheaper do they provide
a better value or a you better of spending
a little more and going for the Xm3 instead.
Well in this review we will compare their
design, sound quality, isolation and leakage
as well as their active features and connectivity,
but as always let’s start with what’s
in the box.
As for what’s in the box starting with the
XB900N; You get a short USB-C charging cable
a 1/8TRS audio cable with no inline mic or
remote, the manuals, the pouch, then the Xb900N
headphones
As for the Xm3 you also get a short USB-C
charging cable, a 1/8 TRS cable with no inline
mic or remote, an airplane adapter, a sturdy
carrying case the manuals and the XM3 headphones.
Now let’s get the boxes out of the way and
compare their design.
For their build quality the WH-1000XM3 feel
more premium and durable overall when compared
to the XB900N.
The plastic used for the XB900N feels lower
end and the headband frame does not seem quite
as sturdy or as dense.
The ear cups also have big vents that do not
look as sleek as the small ports of the Xm3.
It makes the overall aesthetic of the headset
feel considerably cheaper, due two the two
tone glossy finish.
the also 900Ns do not come with a convenient
carrying case like the XM3 and instead come
with a pouch which is disappointing even if
they are a little cheaper.
This makes the 1000Xm3 feel a lot more reflective
of their price range overall and the polished,
elegant design has barely shown any wear and
tear since we got them, despite being one
of the more popular headsets in the office.
This easily makes them one of the better built
over headphones we’ve tested and better
choice when it comes to build quality.
For comfort it’s a bout a tie with a slight
edge to the XB900N thanks to the thicker pads.
As a result of the thicker padding the XB900N
also have slightly deeper cups that will not
touch the tip of your ears, which some may
have issues with when wearing the Xm3s.
They’re also a bit lighter which some may
prefer although the rest of the earcup design
is fairly similar.
On the other hand, the Xm3’s headband has
a slightly lower profile overall and the yokes
also feel a bit denser, but in terms of fit
it doesn’t change much, and
Both headphones should be comfortable enough
to keep wearing for hours of listening although
they may get a bit warm after a while.
Control scheme wise there is practically no
difference between the two models except that
you get a slightly bit more adjustment options
for the noise cancellation feature on the
XM3.
They both have a touch sensitive control scheme
on the right earcup.
Swiping up and down adjusts the volume and
left and right skips and rewind tracks.
A double tap on the surface, pauses and plays
your audio and the power button on both headsets
doubles as the pairing switch if you press
and hold.
You can also use the palm cover gesture on
the right earcup to quickly put the headphones
in talk through mode in case you need to pay
attention to what’s going on around you.
The biggest difference in control scheme between
the two headsets is that holding down the
NC/Ambient button enables the noise cancelling
optimizer on the XM3.
NC/Ambient button otherwise behaves the same
way as the custom button on the XB900N.
It can be mapped to cycle through noise cancelling
and ambient modes or to trigger Google assistant
and Alexa.
Unfortunately, we didn’t get a chance to
test the XB900N’s control scheme in the
cold like we did with the XM3.
So, we can’t yet confirm if the touch sensitive
surface of the 900N will have some of the
same issues.
Overall design-wise the XM3 have a better
build quality that feels a bit more durable
and higher end.
The XB900N maybe slightly more comfortable
for some but the difference won’t be that
noticeable.
Also the xm3 provide a bit adjustment options
for their anc feature but that’s about it
now let’s compare their sound quality, isolation
and leakage with sam.
The Sony XB900N and 1000XM3 are decent sounding
headphones, with a similar and bass-heavy
sound profile.
However, between the two, the XM3 is the more
accurate sounding one.
But before looking at their measurement results,
we’re going to play a recording we have
done with these two headphones, so you can
get an idea about how their sound compares
for yourself.
Just keep in mind that this is a relative
comparison, and not an absolute one.
So it is good for seeing which headphone has
more bass or treble for example, but you won’t
be able to judge their actual sound profile.
And if you get one of these headphones and
listen to the same track that we’ve used
here, you most likely won’t hear the same
thing.
Here we have the frequency response of the
XB900N on the left and the 1000XM3 on the
right.
As you can see both of these headphones have
an extended and heavy bass, but the XB900N
is slightly more bass-heavy than the XM3,
especially in the low-bass region.
This means they will produce a bit more thump
and rumble, so if you like a bass-heavy sound
you may prefer the XB900N, but we don’t
recommend that since the bass of the XM3 is
already overemphasized.
In the mid-range, the XB900N shows a wide
4dB dip which thins out vocals and lead instruments
and nudges them towards the back of the mix.
The XM3 performs noticeably better in this
range and has a virtually perfect response
so vocal and instruments will be reproduced
more accurately.
The treble performance of these two headphones
is quite similar, both have a dip around 5kHz
and are slightly overemphasized around 10kHz,
but the XM3 is slightly more accurate.
Overall the XM3 is the more accurate sounding
headphone here which will be mostly noticeable
on vocals and lead instrument.a Regardless,
since both of these headphones come with an
app that has an EQ, you should be able to
adjust their sound to some extent.
In terms of frequency response consistency,
the XB900 shows noticeable variations in bass
and treble delivery across multiple users
which means different people, depending on
the size and shape of their heads, may experience
a different sound using these headphones.
The XM3 however, seem to use their noise cancelling
system as a feedback mechanism to check for
their fit and seal, and because of that, their
bass delivery is very consistent across multiple
users and re-seats which is great.
Now for isolation and leakage, we have also
recorded a comparison, which we’re going
to play now.
First up, is isolation.
As you probably noticed from the recording,
the 1000XM3 is the clear winner hear.
The XB900N has a mediocre performance at best
and won’t be able to reduce the low rumbling
noise of a bus or an airplane effectively.
They perform well in the mid and treble ranges,
so they can block the chatter of an office
or the sound of an air conditioning system
to a good degree.
The XM3 however, has one of the best ANC systems
we have measured so far and outperforms the
XB900 by a big margin throughout the frequency
range.
Now let’s listen to the leakage recording.
In terms of leakage, the XM3 performs slightly
better than XB900.
Neither of these headphones leak in the bass
range, but leak noticeably in the mid and
treble ranges with the XB900 leaking a bit
more.
This results in a leakage that sounds mid-rangy
and not as bright as the leakage of open-back
headphones.
Also, since their leakage is not very loud
overall, you don’t need to worry about disturbing
the people around you unless you are blasting
your music or are in a very quiet environment
like a library.
Now let’s go back to Marc, for the active
features.
And now for their active features and connection
options.
For their wireless range the XB900N measured
better overall.
They reached up to 72 ft in our obstructed
test and 195ft in direct line of sight compared
to the XM3’s 53ft and 185ft respectively.
They should both have more than enough range
to use with fixed sources like a PC or Tv
and still walk around your house without too
many connection drops.
The Xb900N also did slightly better in terms
of latency with 208 ms compared to the XM3’224ms
with a regular sbc connection.
With aptx enabled the XB900N had about 164
ms of latency compared to the XM3 200ms.
They both won’t be ideal for watching a
lot of video content but 200 ms is about average
for most Bluetooth headsets so not everyone
will find this bothersome.
Also, some devices and proprietary software
compensate for latency although we do not
yet have a reliable test for that on our testbench.
You can learn more about our.
Latency test and judge your threshold for
latency by checking the sample videos on our
latency page.
For their battery life, here the WH-1000Xm3
did a lot better than the XB900N mostly thanks
to their shorter charge time.
The Xb900N have a longer battery life lasting
up to 38.3 hours in our battery drain test
compared to the Xm3’s 27 hours.
Unfortunately, they also took 5.9 hours for
a full charge which is considerably longer
than the XM3 2.2 hours despite also having
a USB C charging port.
This makes the 900n a lot less convenient
than the Xm3 when you need a quick charge
for the road or forgot to plug in your headset
overnight.
This maybe a deal breaker for some.
On the upside they can both be use passively
when the batteries and you have an auto off
timer for when you re not paired to anything
that you can adjust directly in the app.
On the upside app wise they are both quite
good although you do get slightly more options
with the Xm3 than with the XB900N.
The XB900N with the headphones connect app
gives you access to adaptive, ambient , and
sound position control, you also get access
to room effects, a 5 band EQ with presets
you can customize, an in-app player, sound
quality modes and the auto off timer settings.
This is about the same options that you get
for the xm3 but with a bit more control over
the noise cancellation feature.
You can calibrate the optimizer with the app,
you also get a lot more options and levels
you can set the noise cancellation to.
Overall, the Sony headphones app feels useful
with either headset and adds a lot of customization
options to make the headphones more versatile
to listening preferences and taste which is
nice.
For their connection options they are both
Bluetooth 4.2 headphones with NFC for easy
pairing with mobile devices.
They also both come with a 1/8TRS audio cable
that does not have an in-line remote or microphone
but provides audio passively even when the
batteries are dead.
They also both charge via a USB C port but
unfortunately do not have audio over usb like
some of the other headphones we’ve tested.
They also do not have full multipoint pairing
so you won’t be able to use them simultaneous
with two Bluetooth sources like the Bose QC35
II, unless you separate the audio and phone
channels.
So in the end which headset should you get?
Well for most saving up and getting the higher-end
Xm3 would be more advantageous and provide
a better value.
The XB900N are comfortable, decently well
built and fairly easy to use.
They also have an excellent wireless range,
a very long battery life and a bass-heavy
sound that some may like and that you can
always EQ if you want to with the app.
However, their noise cancelling is no where
near as good as that of the WH-1000XM3.
The XM3 also have a bit control options, a
shorter charge time which is convenient, and
much better, premium looking design that feels
more reflective of their price range than
the XB900N.
If you just like the look of the Sony design
and like a lot of bass then the XB900n could
be a good choice but for most the XM3 delivers
a superior performance for not that big a
difference in price, so get those instead
if you can.
And that’s pretty much it
Are you interested in getting the XB900N instead
of the Xm3 if so let us know why in the comments
we love to get feedback.
You can also check out all of the measurements
on our website.
If you like this video, subscribe to our channel,
or become an insider on the website for access
to our latest test results first.
Thank you for watching and see you next time.
