Technologies
Sony’s New WF-1000XM6 Earbuds Just Jumped to the Top of My Best Earbuds List
They aren’t cheap at $330, but Sony’s new flagship noise-canceling earbuds may very well be the best out there right now. Here’s why.
Pros
- Completely redesigned with upgraded components and slightly better fit than XM5
- Top-notch sound that’s accurate, well-balanced and natural
- Excellent noise-canceling and voice-calling performance with 8 microphones (4 in each bud)
- Decent battery life
Cons
- Pretty pricey
- Included eartips may not be a good match for all ears
- Android-only spatial audio features
When I first heard that Sony was coming out with new sixth-generation 1000X earbuds, I wasn’t quite sure what to expect. Companies like Bose and Apple have basically stuck with the same design — or a similar one anyway — for their flagship noise-canceling buds for the last few years. But Sony’s new WF-1000XM6 buds are completely overhauled inside and out and look nothing like the models that preceded them.
The end result is impressive: While expensive at $330, the WF-1000XM6 not only features great sound and excellent noise canceling, but their voice-calling performance is also top-notch. Are they the best noise-canceling earbuds out there right now? Aside from a caveat or two, I’d say so, though the AirPods Pro 3 remain a safer bet for Apple users from a fit and features standpoint (not to mention a lower price tag).
The WF-1000XM6’s design shift
Both the buds and their case are a little plain-looking. I’m OK with that, and from a practical standpoint, I liked that the case is flat on both its top and bottom, making it easy to place down on a flat surface, such as a wireless charging pad.
The XM5s have a partially glossy finish, but these have a full matte finish, which I prefer. That said, they don’t have anything to distinguish them as the XM4s did with their eye-catching copper ring that served as a microphone housing.
More intricately molded than your typical stemless buds, Sony says the new shape (11% slimmer overall than the XM5s and more aerodynamic to reduce wind noise) conforms better to the natural curves of your ears, and I agree with that. I also appreciated the little ridge along the top side of each bud that allows you to grip it better, so the bud is less likely to slip from your fingers when putting them in or taking them out.
The buds have touch controls that are nicely responsive and are equipped with ear-detection sensors that pause audio when you take a bud out of your ear and resume playback when you put it back in. They’re IPX4 splashproof and seem fine for gym use, though I probably wouldn’t recommend them for running because I wasn’t certain they’d stay in my ears with a lot of jostling.
Like a lot of high-end buds, they’re a little beefy and will stick out of your ears a bit. That didn’t really bother me. But once again, I can’t say I was thrilled with Sony’s included eartips, which are the same firm foam tips that were included with the XM5s. I was able to get a fairly secure fit with them, but I didn’t get a truly tight seal, according to the seal test in Sony’s SoundConnect app for iOS and Android. I didn’t find the tips super comfortable, either, so I went with a pair of large-size silicone tips from another set of buds I’d tested (I favor tips from Sennheiser and Bowers & Wilkins, which are wider and more rounded). With the tip change, sound quality and noise-canceling performance improved noticeably, which makes me wonder why Sony doesn’t include more tip options.
To be clear, many people should get a good fit from one of the included tips. But my ears fall into the 10% to 20% of ears that just aren’t a great match for Sony’s tips. And, as you may have read or heard me say too many times, it’s crucial to get a tight seal to get optimal sound quality and noise-canceling performance. That’s especially true of these buds because they deliver some real wow factor if you get a tight seal.
Upgraded components lead to better performance
Aside from the external makeover, the XM6s are upgraded on the inside with new drivers, a 3X more powerful QN3e chip with improved analog conversion technology, eight microphones — up from six — and an improved bone-conduction sensor that helps with voice-calling performance. The «HD Noise Canceling» QN3e processor is paired with Sony’s Integrated Processor V2, which now supports 32-bit processing compared with 24-bit processing. The same V2 chip is also found in Sony’s XM5 earbuds and its flagship WH-1000XM6 over-ear headphones.
Sony says the new XM6 buds feature 25% «further reduction in noise» than the XM5s, with gains made in the mid-to-high frequency range. I spent a lot of time comparing the XM6s to other leading premium noise-canceling earbuds, including Apple’s excellent AirPods Pro 3, the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Earbuds (2nd Gen) and Bowers and Wilkins’ Pi8. Both the AirPods Pro 3 and QuietComfort Ultra Earbuds have superb noise canceling. Sony says the XM6s have the best noise canceling for earbuds right now, based on international testing standards.
Alas, I don’t have access to expensive technical equipment to test noise-canceling performance, so I have to rely on a few less scientific tests, including comparing how well each set of buds muffles the noisy HVAC unit in my kitchen and wearing the buds in the noisy streets of New York and on the subway. In the HVAC test, they were all really close, though I thought the Sony had a very slight edge.
In the streets of New York, it’s really hard to sense that the noise canceling is any better than what you get with those competing models. All three are very close, and your experience could vary with the quality of the seal you get. It’s quite possible that these Sonys are able to muffle a wider range of frequencies with slightly more vigor, but they still can’t muffle higher frequencies as well as lower frequencies. That means you can still hear people’s voices and higher-pitched noises, albeit at significantly reduced volume levels.
I do think Sony has also made some improvements to its transparency mode. Apple’s is still the gold standard, but Sony’s now sounds quite natural at its highest setting. Previously, you had to play around with the level to find the most natural setting (the sound from the outside world was actually augmented at the highest setting).
Sony also now has an auto ambient mode that’s similar to Apple’s Adaptive Audio mode, which automatically adjusts the level of ambient sound filtered in, depending on the level of noise around you. Plus, you can toggle on a voice pass-through mode that filters in voices while suppressing ambient noise.
Superior sound
When it comes to sound, both the AirPods Pro 3 and Bose QC Ultras sound excellent, with the Ultras sounding smooth and clean across a variety of music genres. Some people complained that the AirPods Pro 3’s sound was a little too aggressive (not enough warmth) compared with the AirPods Pro 2’s, with more dynamic bass and treble and slightly recessed mids. I preferred the AirPods Pro 3’s sound — to my ears, it has a little more clarity and definition, and I was OK with the more energetic bass. But everybody has their own sound preferences, and you can experience some listening fatigue if you feel the treble has too much sizzle or the bass kicks too hard in the wrong way.
I think the XM6’s sound is better and more special than both the AirPods Pro 3’s and QC Ultra’s sound. Music sounds more accurate and natural with better bass extension, overall clarity and refinement, along with a wide soundstage where all the instruments seem well-placed. Additionally, I found the XM6s came across slightly more dynamic and bold-sounding than the Bowers & Wilkins Pi8 buds, which also feature accurate, natural sound for Bluetooth earbuds.
As I said, all the models mentioned here sound impressive, but the tonal quality varies a bit. While companies often talk about how their buds and headphones deliver audio the way artists intended you to hear it, some do it better than others and are able to live up to audiophile standards — or close to them anyway. Such is the case for the WF-1000X6 buds.
I tested them with an iPhone 16 Pro and a Google Pixel 9, listening to a variety of music genres on Spotify using the lossless audio setting. They handled everything with aplomb (virtually no distortion) and didn’t cause any listening fatigue. My connection was also rock solid with no Bluetooth hiccups. While I didn’t experience, any major connectivity issues with the XM5s, some people apparently did, and Sony says it equipped the XM6s with a new wireless antenna that’s 1.5x larger than XM5’s antenna to improve the wireless connection, particularly in crowded signal areas (there are certain intersections in new York City that have a lot of wireless interference and can cause Bluetooth hiccups).
Top-notch voice-calling performance
They’re also hard to beat for voice-calling performance, which I also grade an A. Callers said my voice sounded mostly natural and clear, and they didn’t really hear any background noise when I wasn’t speaking (and only a little when I did speak). If you want to hear a test, check out the one I did with fellow CNET editor Josh Goldman in my video review of the XM6 buds.
It’s worth noting that the buds have a side-tone feature, so you can hear your voice in the buds when you’re talking. And like previous 1000X models, these have Sony’s speak-to-chat feature, which lowers the volume of your audio and goes into ambient mode when you start to have a conversation with someone.
Also, Sony has redesigned the venting of the earbuds to increase airflow and reduce internal noises such as «footsteps and chewing sound.» I did notice some improvements there (yes, a lot of people don’t like having their ears feel occluded and hearing their footsteps).
As far as audio codecs go, the buds support AAC, SBC and LDAC as well as multipoint Bluetooth pairing, which allows pairing to two devices to the buds simultaneously. Sony says the buds are «ready for LE Audio,» which means that at some point they should support the LC3 audio codec and Auracast broadcast audio with a firmware update.
Sony has continued to streamline its SoundConnect app for iOS and Android, so it’s a little more user-friendly, though there are still a lot of settings to play around with, including scene-based listening settings and various equalizer settings.
Battery life is rated at up to 8 hours at moderate volume levels, with an extra two charges in the case. That’s a little better than what competing models offer and, again, the case supports wireless charging.
Sony WF-1000XM6 final thoughts
The XM6s are noticeably improved across the board from the XM5s, which I still like. And while these buds are certainly expensive, they’re pretty hard to beat from a performance standpoint across all the key areas, including sound quality, noise canceling and voice-calling, which is why I’ve awarded them an Editors’ Choice.
The one thing I can’t tell you is just how well they’ll fit your ears. While the AirPods Pro 3 don’t offer quite as good sound quality, they’re less expensive and are in some ways a safer pick for Apple users, as their lightweight stem design tends to fit a wide range of ears comfortably. They also have more features overall, including a Hearing Aid mode, Apple’s new Live Translation feature and personalized spatial audio (Sony’s spatial audio features are Android-only).
That said, if you’re able to get a good fit with a comfortable seal, the XM6s are truly impressive earbuds. They may just be the best out there at the moment.
Technologies
AI Slop Is Destroying the Internet. These Are the People Fighting to Save It
Technologies
The Sun’s Temper Tantrums: What You Should Know About Solar Storms
Solar storms are associated with the lovely aurora borealis, but they can have negative impacts, too.
Last month, Earth was treated to a massive aurora borealis that reached as far south as Texas. The event was attributed to a solar storm that lasted nearly a full day and will likely contend for the strongest of 2026. Such solar storms are usually fun for people on Earth, as we are protected from solar radiation by our planet’s atmosphere, so we can just enjoy the gorgeous greens and pretty purples in the night sky.
But solar storms are a lot more than just the aurora borealis we see, and sometimes they can cause real damage. There are several examples of this in recorded history, with the earliest being the Carrington Event, a solar storm that took place on Sept. 1, 1859. It remains the strongest solar storm ever recorded, where the world’s telegraph machines became overloaded with energy from it, causing them to shock their operators, send ghost messages and even catch on fire.
Things have changed a lot since the mid-1800s, and while today’s technology is a lot more resistant to solar radiation than it once was, a solar storm of that magnitude could still cause a lot of damage.
What is a solar storm?
A solar storm is a catchall term that describes any disturbance in the sun that involves the violent ejection of solar material into space. This can come in the form of coronal mass ejections, where clouds of plasma are ejected from the sun, or solar flares, which are concentrated bursts of electromagnetic radiation (aka light).
A sizable percentage of solar storms don’t hit Earth, and the sun is always belching material into space, so minor solar storms are quite common. The only ones humans tend to talk about are the bigger ones that do hit the Earth. When this happens, it causes geomagnetic storms, where solar material interacts with the Earth’s magnetic fields, and the excitations can cause issues in everything from the power grid to satellite functionality. It’s not unusual to hear «solar storm» and «geomagnetic storm» used interchangeably, since solar storms cause geomagnetic storms.
Solar storms ebb and flow on an 11-year cycle known as the solar cycle. NASA scientists announced that the sun was at the peak of its most recent 11-year cycle in 2024, and, as such, solar storms have been more frequent. The sun will metaphorically chill out over time, and fewer solar storms will happen until the cycle repeats.
This cycle has been stable for hundreds of millions of years and was first observed in the 18th century by astronomer Christian Horrebow.
How strong can a solar storm get?
The Carrington Event is a standout example of just how strong a solar storm can be, and such events are exceedingly rare. A rating system didn’t exist back then, but it would have certainly maxed out on every chart that science has today.
We currently gauge solar storm strength on four different scales.
The first rating that a solar storm gets is for the material belched out of the sun. Solar flares are graded using the Solar Flare Classification System, a logarithmic intensity scale that starts with B-class at the lowest end, and then increases to C, M and finally X-class at the strongest. According to NASA, the scale goes up indefinitely and tends to get finicky at higher levels. The strongest solar flare measured was in 2003, and it overloaded the sensors at X17 and was eventually estimated to be an X45-class flare.
CMEs don’t have a named measuring system, but are monitored by satellites and measured based on the impact they have on the Earth’s geomagnetic field.
Once the material hits Earth, NOAA uses three other scales to determine how strong the storm was and which systems it may impact. They include:
- Geomagnetic storm (G1-G5): This scale measures how much of an impact the solar material is having on Earth’s geomagnetic field. Stronger storms can impact the power grid, electronics and voltage systems.
- Solar radiation storm (S1-S5): This measures the amount of solar radiation present, with stronger storms increasing exposure to astronauts in space and to people in high-flying aircraft. It also describes the storm’s impact on satellite functionality and radio communications.
- Radio blackouts (R1-R5): Less commonly used but still very important. A higher R-rating means a greater impact on GPS satellites and high-frequency radios, with the worst case being communication and navigation blackouts.
Solar storms also cause auroras by exciting the molecules in Earth’s atmosphere, which then light up as they «calm down,» per NASA. The strength and reach of the aurora generally correlate with the strength of the storm. G1 storms rarely cause an aurora to reach further south than Canada, while a G5 storm may be visible as far south as Texas and Florida. The next time you see a forecast calling for a big aurora, you can assume a big solar storm is on the way.
How dangerous is a solar storm?
The overwhelming majority of solar storms are harmless. Science has protections against the effects of solar storms that it did not have back when telegraphs were catching on fire, and most solar storms are small and don’t pose any threat to people on the surface since the Earth’s magnetic field protects us from the worst of it.
That isn’t to say that they pose no threats. Humans may be exposed to ionizing radiation (the bad kind of radiation) if flying at high altitudes, which includes astronauts in space. NOAA says that this can happen with an S2 or higher storm, although location is really important here. Flights that go over the polar caps during solar storms are far more susceptible than your standard trip from Chicago to Houston, and airliners have a whole host of rules to monitor space weather, reroute flights and monitor long-term radiation exposure for flight crews to minimize potential cancer risks.
Larger solar storms can knock quite a few systems out of whack. NASA says that powerful storms can impact satellites, cause radio blackouts, shut down communications, disrupt GPS and cause damaging power fluctuations in the power grid. That means everything from high-frequency radio to cellphone reception could be affected, depending on the severity.
A good example of this is the Halloween solar storms of 2003. A series of powerful solar flares hit Earth on Oct. 28-31, causing a solar storm so massive that loads of things went wrong. Most notably, airplane pilots had to change course and lower their altitudes due to the radiation wreaking havoc on their instruments, and roughly half of the world’s satellites were entirely lost for a few days.
A paper titled Flying Through Uncertainty was published about the Halloween storms and the troubles they caused. Researchers note that 59% of all satellites orbiting Earth at the time suffered some sort of malfunction, like random thrusters going offline and some shutting down entirely. Over half of the Earth’s satellites were lost for days, requiring around-the-clock work from NASA and other space agencies to get everything back online and located.
Earth hasn’t experienced a solar storm on the level of the Carrington Event since it occurred in 1859, so the maximum damage it could cause in modern times is unknown. The European Space Agency has run simulations, and spoiler alert, the results weren’t promising. A solar storm of that caliber has a high chance of causing damage to almost every satellite in orbit, which would cause a lot of problems here on Earth as well. There were also significant risks of electrical blackouts and damage. It would make one heck of an aurora, but you might have to wait to post it on social media until things came back online.
Do we have anything to worry about?
We’ve mentioned two massive solar storms with the Halloween storms and the Carrington Event. Such large storms tend to occur very infrequently. In fact, those two storms took place nearly 150 years apart. Those aren’t the strongest storms yet, though. The very worst that Earth has ever seen were what are known as Miyake events.
Miyake events are times throughout history when massive solar storms were thought to have occurred. These are measured by massive spikes in carbon-14 that were preserved in tree rings. Miyake events are few and far between, but science believes at least 15 such events have occurred over the past 15,000 years. That includes one in 12350 BCE, which may have been twice as large as any other known Miyake event.
They currently hold the title of the largest solar storms that we know of, and are thought to be caused by superflares and extreme solar events. If one of these happened today, especially one as large as the one in 12350 BCE, it would likely cause widespread, catastrophic damage and potentially threaten human life.
Those only appear to happen about once every several hundred to a couple thousand years, so it’s exceedingly unlikely that one is coming anytime soon. But solar storms on the level of the Halloween storms and the Carrington Event have happened in modern history, and humans have managed to survive them, so for the time being, there isn’t too much to worry about.
Technologies
TMR vs. Hall Effect Controllers: Battle of the Magnetic Sensing Tech
The magic of magnets tucked into your joysticks can put an end to drift. But which technology is superior?
Competitive gamers look for every advantage they can get, and that drive has spawned some of the zaniest gaming peripherals under the sun. There are plenty of hardware components that actually offer meaningful edges when implemented properly. Hall effect and TMR (tunnel magnetoresistance or tunneling magnetoresistance) sensors are two such technologies. Hall effect sensors have found their way into a wide variety of devices, including keyboards and gaming controllers, including some of our favorites like the GameSir Super Nova.
More recently, TMR sensors have started to appear in these devices as well. Is it a better technology for gaming? With multiple options vying for your lunch money, it’s worth understanding the differences to decide which is more worthy of living inside your next game controller or keyboard.
How Hall effect joysticks work
We’ve previously broken down the difference between Hall effect tech and traditional potentiometers in controller joysticks, but here’s a quick rundown on how Hall effect sensors work. A Hall effect joystick moves a magnet over a sensor circuit, and the magnetic field affects the circuit’s voltage. The sensor in the circuit measures these voltage shifts and maps them to controller inputs. Element14 has a lovely visual explanation of this effect here.
The advantage this tech has over potentiometer-based joysticks used in controllers for decades is that the magnet and sensor don’t need to make physical contact. There’s no rubbing action to slowly wear away and degrade the sensor. So, in theory, Hall effect joysticks should remain accurate for the long haul.
How TMR joysticks work
While TMR works differently, it’s a similar concept to Hall effect devices. When you move a TMR joystick, it moves a magnet in the vicinity of the sensor. So far, it’s the same, right? Except with TMR, this shifting magnetic field changes the resistance in the sensor instead of the voltage.
There’s a useful demonstration of a sensor in action here. Just like Hall effect joysticks, TMR joysticks don’t rely on physical contact to register inputs and therefore won’t suffer the wear and drift that affects potentiometer-based joysticks.
Which is better, Hall effect or TMR?
There’s no hard and fast answer to which technology is better. After all, the actual implementation of the technology and the hardware it’s built into can be just as important, if not more so. Both technologies can provide accurate sensing, and neither requires physical contact with the sensing chip, so both can be used for precise controls that won’t encounter stick drift. That said, there are some potential advantages to TMR.
According to Coto Technology, who, in fairness, make TMR sensors, they can be more sensitive, allowing for either greater precision or the use of smaller magnets. Since the Hall effect is subtler, it relies on amplification and ultimately requires extra power. While power requirements vary from sensor to sensor, GameSir claims its TMR joysticks use about one-tenth the power of mainstream Hall effect joysticks. Cherry is another brand highlighting the lower power consumption of TMR sensors, albeit in the brand’s keyboard switches.
The greater precision is an opportunity for TMR joysticks to come out ahead, but that will depend more on the controller itself than the technology. Strange response curves, a big dead zone (which shouldn’t be needed), or low polling rates could prevent a perfectly good TMR sensor from beating a comparable Hall effect sensor in a better optimized controller.
The power savings will likely be the advantage most of us really feel. While it won’t matter for wired controllers, power savings can go a long way for wireless ones. Take the Razer Wolverine V3 Pro, for instance, a Hall effect controller offering 20 hours of battery life from a 4.5-watt-hour battery with support for a 1,000Hz polling rate on a wireless connection. Razer also offers the Wolverine V3 Pro 8K PC, a near-identical controller with the same battery offering TMR sensors. They claim the TMR version can go for 36 hours on a charge, though that’s presumably before cranking it up to an 8,000Hz polling rate — something Razer possibly left off the Hall effect model because of power usage.
The disadvantage of the TMR sensor would be its cost, but it appears that it’s negligible when factored into the entire price of a controller. Both versions of the aforementioned Razer controller are $199. Both 8BitDo and GameSir have managed to stick them into reasonably priced controllers like the 8BitDo Ultimate 2, GameSir G7 Pro and GameSir Cyclone 2.
So which wins?
It seems TMR joysticks have all the advantages of Hall effect joysticks and then some, bringing better power efficiency that can help in wireless applications. The one big downside might be price, but from what we’ve seen right now, that doesn’t seem to be much of an issue. You can even find both technologies in controllers that cost less than some potentiometer models, like the Xbox Elite Series 2 controller.
Caveats to consider
For all the hype, neither Hall effect nor TMR joysticks are perfect. One of their key selling points is that they won’t experience stick drift, but there are still elements of the joystick that can wear down. The ring around the joystick can lose its smoothness. The stick material can wear down (ever tried to use a controller with the rubber worn off its joystick? It’s not pleasant). The linkages that hold the joystick upright and the springs that keep it stiff can loosen, degrade and fill with dust. All of these can impact the continued use of the joystick, even if the Hall effect or TMR sensor itself is in perfect operating order.
So you might not get stick drift from a bad sensor, but you could get stick drift from a stick that simply doesn’t return to its original resting position. That’s when having a controller that’s serviceable or has swappable parts, like the PDP Victrix Pro BFG, could matter just as much as having one with Hall effect or TMR joysticks.
-
Technologies3 года agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies3 года agoBest Handheld Game Console in 2023
-
Technologies3 года agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies4 года agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies5 лет agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies5 лет agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies4 года agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies4 года agoiPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow



