Sennheiser’s Noise-Canceling Headphones Are a Beautiful Blend of Old and New

Sennheiser is one of my favorite audio companies. Its Momentum TW are amoung the best-sounding true wireless earbuds we’ve ever tested. Its 13-speaker beast of a soundbar, the Ambeo Soundbar, sounds simply incredible. And its previous noise-canceling headphones, the Momentum Wireless 2 (also called the HD1 Wireless), were simple-yet-fantastic. Obviously, there’s a catch with all of these products and that’s price. Sennheiser makes high-end audio products and they are accordingly expensive.

That’s a trend that holds true with its latest noise-canceling headphones, the Momentum Wireless 3. Of course, $400 isn’t unheard of when it comes to noise-canceling headphones; Bose and Bowers & Wilkins both released noise-canceling headphones in 2019 that cost $400, while Master & Dynamic’s own MW65 cost $500. The thing with Sennheiser’s new noise-canceling headphones is that they carry the company’s premium sound quality, but maybe more importantly, they don’t look like any other noise-canceling headphones on the market. It also should be noted that they’re decidedly better than Momentum Wireless 2 in almost every way.

The Good: Sennheiser’s second-generation noise-canceling headphones, the Momentum Wireless 2, were decidedly simple. They didn’t have any advanced features and won’t let you adjust the noise-canceling at all (it was always on, whether you liked it or not) – and the new Momentum Wireless 3 are definitely not that. They have optical sensors to automatically play and pause music when you place and remove the headphones on your head. There’s now a companion app that lets you adjust EQ and levels of noise-cancellation, as well as select a virtual assistant. There’s a transparency mode. They charge via USB-C (thank goodness). And then even have a Tile integration to help you find the headphones should you misplace them.

But that doesn’t mean Sennheiser has completely abandoned old-school touches that are still terrific for their simplicity. The headphones still have physical buttons to adjust volume, answer calls and adjust the noise-cancellation. As somebody who dislikes the ambiguity and lack of feedback that comes part and parcel with the swipe gestures you find on the Sony WH-1000M3 or Bose’s Headphones 700, I really appreciate this restraint. And yet the Momentum Wireless 3 still have the new features that I like too, like how they start playing every time I put them on, pause when I take them off and shut off completely when I fold them up. It’s equal parts intuitive and pleasant.

If you’ve ever used Sennheiser’s previous noise-canceling headphones, maybe the biggest upgrade with the new models is comfort. Sennheiser decked the Momentum Wireless 3 with huge, plush leather earcups. Not only does the extra padding make the earbuds a heck of a lot more comfortable – I had no issues wearing them for long stretches during work – but its density also lends itself to passive noise isolating; not as much outside noise gets in, thus these headphones sound better. But as a downside, this extra padding really makes these headphones look big on your head.

As far as sound quality, you can expect the Momentum Wireless 3 to sound as good if not better than most other new noise-canceling headphones. The sound is warm and accurate, but you’re also not getting that incredible soundstage that Bowers & Wilkins headphones are known for. You might like that. You might not. The noise-canceling abilities of these headphones is also pretty top-tier as well, and you can adjust the power of the noise-cancellation within the companion app (there are three different settings).

Who It’s For: Anybody who retro-industrial design of the Momentum Wireless 3 and wants some really great noise-canceling headphones. Of course, as they’re a little bit more expensive, you should be cool with dropping $400 on headphones, too.

Watch Out For: Aside from being on the expensive side, there are just a few things that could affect your purchasing decision. First, there’s no dedicated power button which is a bit strange. If you want to turn the headphones off, you have to fold them up. It’s also not super intuitive to adjust the levels of noise cancellation; you have to switch between the three settings within the app, but there’s no way of immediately adjusting on the actual headphones. Lastly, the claimed 16-hour battery life is on the low end compared to other wireless noise-canceling headphones.

Alternatives: Every audio company these days seems to be throwing its hat in the ring in regards to noise-canceling headphones. That said, these are premium noise-canceling headphones whose main competition is between three other companies: Sony, Bose and Bowers & Wilkins. Sony’s WH-1000XM3 are probably the best all-around choice if you want the best-sounding headphones with the most modern features. Bose’s new Headphones 700 ($400) remain the pick of the bunch for phone calls and overall noise-canceling abilities; while the QuietComfort 35 IIs remain a great and slightly cheaper alternative. And Bowers & Wilkins’s newest headphones, the PX7 ($400), are another premium option.

Verdict: There’s really not too much negative to say about the Sennheiser’s new-and-improved noise-canceling headphones. The Momentum Wireless 3 sound, look and feel great. What these headphones do best, however, is they blend all the new-age features that people want (and weren’t available on Sennheiser’s previous headphones) with the old things that people will want (like buttons!). If you like the industrial design and you’re comfortable forking over $400 on headphones, these headphones are fantastic.

What Others Are Saying:

• “Noise cancellation is really good. It outperforms the Master & Dynamic MW65 when it comes to filtering out midrange and treble frequencies. However, the low-end attenuation isn’t great compared to top competitors like Sony, Bose, and AKG. If you spend a lot of time on rickety trains, you’ll likely prefer the performance of the previously mentioned brands. If you go with Sony or AKG, you’ll save a significant amount of cash, too.” — Lily Katz, Sound Guys

• “The Sennheiser Momentum Wireless 3 are a great and much-needed update to Sennheiser’s high-end wireless headphones. I really like their retro-inspired design, and they’re comfortable to wear. It’s also nice to see Sennheiser experiment with some newer features, even if it doesn’t stick the landing on all of them. Tile support is a nice addition, for example, but I would have really liked to have seen a traditional on / off button in addition to being able to turn them off by collapsing them. If you’ve been holding off on buying the current Sennheiser Momentums because of their slightly dated specs, then the new headphones are a great update.” — Jon Porter, The Verge

• “The weird thing to me, still, is that it took me a few days to love the new Momentum Wireless. If you’re upgrading from the old generation, there’s a little bit of a learning curve, as the new Sennheiser’s are smarter. You will immediately love the sound quality, though. If you’re looking for serious noise-canceling headphones, the new Momentums might impress you less than the latest Sony or Bose headphones. If you’re on a bit of a budget, you can save $100 or so by getting the Jabra Elite 85h, which offer a lot of the same features as the new Sennheisers. But if you just want the best all-around wireless headphones, look no further than the Momentum Wireless. They’re simply majestic.” — Adam Clark Estes, Gizmodo

Key Specs

Drivers: N/A
Connectivity: Bluetooth 5.0
Charging Port:: USB-C
Battery Life: 16 hours
Key features: Sennheiser Smart Control app, Transparency mode, Tile integration

Sennheiser provided this product for review.

Read More Gear Patrol Reviews

Hot takes and in-depth reviews on noteworthy, relevant and interesting products. Read the Story

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

Is This the Perfect Entry-Level Smartwatch?

Last fall, Fitbit released the Fitbit Versa – and I loved it. It was a simple-to-use smartwatch that was slim and bespoke, relatively affordable, an excellent fitness tracker and it had a battery life that lasted nearly a week. It was a great entry-level smartwatch for basically anybody, but especially casual smartwatch wearers, and it worked equally well with both iPhone and Android.

The next generation of that smartwatch, the Versa 2, doesn’t mess too much with last year’s success. It has the same relative look and feel of the original Versa, but Fitbit updated in nearly every way. It has an even simpler design, a better processor, a new OLED display (a welcome improvement over the Versa’s LCD display), and improved sleep tracking. The most “touted” new feature is the addition of Alexa integration, so you can tell the smartwatch to do things like set alarms and control your other compatible smart home devices. Lastly is price: the Versa 2 comes exactly the same as last year’s Versa.

|

The Good: The Versa 2 is a better entry-level smartwatch than last year’s Versa, which is something you’d both expect and welcome. The two most important upgrades are that the Versa two now has an always-on display (if you select it) and superior sleep tracking feature, called Sleep Score, which gives you a nice little rating out of 100 – the higher the number, the better your sleep. If you’re fine wearing a smartwatch to bed and you want to track your sleep, the Versa 2 is exactly what you want.

As was true with the Versa, a huge selling point of the Versa 2 is its battery life. If you elect to not have an always-on display (it’s off by default) the Versa 2 can last around five days on a single charge; if you have the always-on display, it lasts around three days. Either way, this battery life which is huge, especially when you consider an Apple Watch lasts roughly 18 hours and is not designed to wear while you’re sleeping.

There are two other big reasons to buy a Versa 2. First, it’s solid and intuitive fitness-tracking abilities. It has an always-on heart-rate monitor and can accurately track things like steps and calories. It also, like the Apple Watch, has automatic workout detection, so if you forget to start a walk, run, bike ride or pool workout, the smartwatch won’t skip a beat. And secondly, the Versa 2 is very slim and lightweight, and it’s one of the most comfortable smartwatches that I’ve ever worn.

Who It’s For: The Versa 2 is an entry-level smartwatch designed for anybody who wants a good fitness tracker with some smartwatch-y features (like see call and text notifications, and control music). If you’re somebody who wants to keep track of your sleeping, the Versa 2 is particularly good. It works equally well for iPhone and Android users.

Watch Out For: The new Alexa integration might come as a welcome addition for some, but it really shouldn’t be the main reason to buy this smartwatch. The fact is that most people don’t really need (or want) to talk to Alexa when they’re outside the house. Also, talking to Alexa on the Versa 2 isn’t like talking to Siri on the Apple Watch. For instance, you can’t tell Alexa to send text messages, open certain apps or even play/pause music; all it can do is answer specific queries (“Alexa, what’s the weather?”), set timers and alarms, and control some of your connected smart home gadgets. The other thing is that there’s no speaker, so you won’t be able to hear Alexa and all its answers will just appear on the screen – it’s far from a seamless experience.

As was true with the Versa, the Versa 2 lacks a dedicated GPS, meaning if you want reliable workout data you’ll have to have your smartphone nearby. This is a big bummer for runners. There’s also no LTE model available for the Versa 2.

There’s a new Spotify app that’s available on the Versa 2, which isn’t available on the Versa, but it’s not super helpful. Like with the Apple Watch, the Spotify app on the Versa 2 doesn’t let you download anything (playlists, albums, songs, podcasts) for offline listening. If you’re a Spotify Premium subscriber, only a select few Garmin and Samsung smartwatches do this.

Also, the Versa 2 still comes with a proprietary charger. The annoying thing is that it looks and feels just like the proprietary charger that came with the original Versa, which I didn’t like to begin with, but it’s actually not the same and won’t work with previous Versa smartwatches. I still have and use my Versa, and mixed up the chargers on several occasions, which was obviously frustrating.

Alternatives: Fitbit has a right to feel frustrated after the latest Apple hardware announcements. That’s because, in addition to announcing new high-end Apple Watches, Apple also dramatically reduced the price of its two-year-old smartwatch – you can now buy an Apple Watch Series 3 for $200, which is the exact price of the Fitbit Versa 2. Basically, if you have an iPhone and you want an entry-level smartwatch that works well with it, the Series 3 is probably a better bet.

Verdict: The Versa 2 is a better version of last year’s Versa, which was the best entry-level smartwatch for most people, Android or iPhone owner, who just wanted an easy-to-use smartwatch to track fitness. A year later, the Versa 2’s main problem is that there’s more competition, especially within its $200 price range. The Versa 2’s best qualities are its 5-day battery life, its great fitness and sleep tracking, and it’s super-slim design. If you those things are important to you, then the Versa 2 remains one of the best – if not the best – entry-level smartwatches you can buy. However, the reality is that the Versa 2 will feel more like a glorified fitness tracker than an actual smartwatch, especially if you have an iPhone or Samsung smartphone.

What Others Are Saying:

• “If you’re not wedded to Fitbit’s platform, the Versa 2 is a harder sell when you compare it with other $200 smartwatches, such as the Samsung Galaxy Watch Active and the Apple Watch Series 3, which both have GPS, onboard music storage and contactless payments. One feature that could set the Versa 2 apart is Fitbit’s new subscription service, but it will take a lot to convince me to spend $80 more per year. Still, the Versa 2 is a very good fitness-focused smartwatch that offers plenty of insights into your overall health, subscription or not.” — Mike Prospero, Tom’s Guide

• “Overall, the Versa 2’s fitness tracking features are the best and most comprehensive you’ll find on any smartwatch, even though it doesn’t have a dedicated GPS radio and relies on your phone for GPS tracking.” — Dan Seifert, The Verge

• “If not for its connectivity problems, the Versa 2 would be an excellent smartwatch. It offers accurate, comprehensive fitness features and a nice design for a reasonable price. It’s also one of the longest-lasting smartwatches around, while the Alexa integration makes it more useful than its predecessor. I just wish Fitbit would get its Bluetooth act together already, and give me a better OS.” — Cherlynn Low, Engadget

Key Specs

Display: 300 x 300 pixel touchscreen AMOLED
Water resistance: swimproof; up to 50 meters
Sensors: 3-axis accelerometer, optical heart rate monitor, altimeter, ambient light sensor, vibration motor, NFC
Battery life: 5 days; ~3 days with always-on display

|

Fitbit provided this product for review.

Read More Gear Patrol Reviews

Hot takes and in-depth reviews on noteworthy, relevant and interesting products. Read the Story

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

The North Face Claims Its New Outerwear Is Revolutionary, but Does It Work?

A version of this article originally appeared in Gear Patrol Magazine with the headline “The Review: The North Face FutureLight.” Subscribe today

In 2017, after summiting 14,000 feet to the peak of Colorado’s Mt. Sneffels, Andres Marin turned to Scott Mellin, holding a sweat-soaked layer he’d just peeled off his back, and asked something to the effect of, “Wouldn’t it be great if we didn’t have to do this all the time?”

Any mountaineer, rock climber, backcountry snowboarder, resort skier, hiker, runner or bike commuter can describe the unpleasant clamminess that percolates inside a waterproof shell under hard exertion. But Marin, a professional climber for The North Face, and Mellin, the company’s Global General Manager of Mountain Sports, were in a position to do something about it.

Less than two years later, The North Face is releasing its first collection featuring FutureLight, a new and potentially revolutionary waterproof fabric technology that the company has been teasing for the better part of 2019.

The dream of FutureLight is simple, which is not to say easy: waterproof technical apparel that’s so breathable the wearer remains dry inside and out, even during serious effort. Every outdoor brand from Patagonia to Arc’teryx has been trying to solve this riddle for years; the breathable-waterproof conundrum has remained the Gordian Knot of the outdoors industry.

To make a fabric that lets sweat escape while still keeping rain or snow out, materials companies have long relied on substances like polyurethane and polytetrafluoroethylene, or PTFE. Gore-Tex, for example, makes its Pro membrane from a sheet of PTFE stretched to just .01 millimeters thick, with roughly nine billion pores per square inch. That’s small enough to prevent a water droplet from sieving through but plentiful enough to let body vapor out — up to a point.

FutureLight features a polyurethane manufactured through nanospinning, a process already used in technology and medical fields. The polymer starts as a liquid solution that gets drawn through over 200,000 nanosized nozzles to create indescribably thin threads that are then layered into a mesh-like pattern of crisscrossed fibers and intervening gaps.

Roughly 4,300 feet later I reached Ski Hayden Peak’s 13,316-foot summit, damp but not drenched, and very comfortable.

The North Face claims an ability to “tune” the membrane to create more or fewer of these gaps, increasing or decreasing a fabric’s breathability. This allows the company to craft FutureLight-equipped garments for wildly different activities, from urban running to off-piste skiing. I got a chance to test the stuff last winter, in Aspen, on peaks not far from where Marin and Mellin had their epiphany.

I’m attuned enough to know I run hot, so I typically start a climb wearing little more than a long-sleeved base layer, even when temperatures are in the teens: I’d rather start chilly than strip layers mid-ascent as I begin to sweat. But, for the sake of testing the new fabric, I donned both a base layer and a light fleece under The North Face’s A-Cad Jacket and bib, two products admittedly designed more for downhill than uphill use.

Previous experience insisted I was overdressed, but roughly 4,300 feet later I reached Ski Hayden Peak’s 13,316-foot summit, damp but not drenched, and very comfortable. I didn’t have to start the climb cold, and I also didn’t have to futz with layers in the summit wind. All I had to do was zip up my armpit vents.

FutureLight recently debuted in jackets and pants designed for skiing, snowboarding, alpine climbing and other cold-weather, high-elevation activities; next spring it will weave its way into new windbreakers, rain jackets and footwear. Recently, I stumbled into the perfect urban test for the forthcoming Arque Active Trail FutureLight Pullover rain jacket: a New York City downpour on the way home from work.

Aboveground, rain fell in sheets while below, the subway became a sauna. Wearing a rain jacket on a steamy subway car usually means a sweat-soaked shirt, but when I arrived home after the half-mile walk from the station, the only dry bit of fabric on my body was my shirt.

After more than half a year of sporting FutureLight for climbing, skiing and trekking around town, the largest dilemma I can identify is the need to rethink my layering entirely. Because the A-Cad jacket is so breathable, I have to wear more than usual to stay warm inside of it. Other early testers have suggested these new materials are more wind-permeable, which makes sense, though I didn’t experience that myself.

Some also point out that, despite TNF’s marketing push, nanospun membranes are not new. The technology was introduced most notably in Polartec’s Power Shield Pro and NeoShell fabrics, which debuted in 2009 and 2010, respectively, though with far less fanfare. The North Face concedes the membrane construction is similar to past products but notes points of differentiation in the process — notably, the brand developed its own machines to produce the material in a factory that makes electronic insulating elements outside of Seoul, South Korea.

But the unquestionable difference will be scale: the sheer variety of products that will come equipped with FutureLight from a brand of The North Face’s stature (the company’s annual revenue tops $2 billion) immediately raises the material’s profile — and application — across the board. By the end of 2020, every waterproof garment the brand produces will feature the stuff. That means, whether consumers are buying products for FutureLight or just the TNF logo, that FutureLight is destined to find its way onto city streets and backcountry trails across the globe. Not bad for a product born out of a sweaty conversation between two friends on top of a mountain.

Review: The Weirdest Headphones You’ll Ever Own

You’ve never worn headphones like these before. That’s because the Human Headphones are “the world’s first true wireless over-ear headphones,” or at least that’s how the company behind them, Human Inc, is advertising them. You can think of them over-ear headphones, just without the headphone, or something similar to AirPods, but instead of being in-ear headphones, they clip on and fit over your ears. Aside from the obvious visual differences, these Human Headphones are a bit more versatile than almost every other pair of headphones. They work with Google Translate and help the wearer translate up to 11 different languages. And when you magnetically clip the two earcups together, you can transform them into a portable Bluetooth speaker. Pretty neat.

The Good: The two things that really stand out with the Human Headphones are 1) the audio quality and 2) the fresh design of the product. They sound better than pretty much any pair of true wireless earbuds – the sound is fuller, more immersive and with considerably punchier bass. Then again, this improvement is sound quality should probably be expected; over-ear headphones naturally have better passive noise-isolation, so there’s less ambient interference, and because there are two speaker drivers in each earbud, the Human Headphones are going to sound way more dynamic.

The design of the Human Humans impresses straight out of the box. From the smooth and ear-shaped design, to the way the two ear cups magnetically snap together, to the innovative way they actually hold onto your ears without ever hurting or being uncomfortable, the Human Headphones are just a delight – to hold, to look at and to wear. Clearing a ton of time was spent making sure these things were designed as immaculately as possible and it shows.

The design of the app is also pristine. I’ve tested a lot of headphones, many of which come with companion apps that, well, you want to get out of them almost immediately after opening. That’s not the case with the Human app. It’s wonderfully sharp and clean, with instructive how-to videos and other helpful insights to help you get the most out of the headphones. They also share similar swipe gestures as many popular over-ear headphones; you can adjust the volumes, switch tracks and go into an ambient sound mode, just by touching the earpads.

The translate feature works pretty well from what I can tell. To access it, you need to open the Human app, select the quick translate feature and it can help you say any simple sentence or question in up to 11 languages, or interpret something in another language back to English. Having only a very basic understanding of Spanish, I had it the Human app translate some very basic sentences from English to Spanish, and vice versa, and it did a pretty quick-and-OK job.

Who It’s For: It’s tough to say who the Human Headphones are exactly for. Technically, they’d be a good option or anybody that’s willing to try a completely new type of headphones and won’t mind getting some strange stares and answering questions like “What are those?” On that note, these should be used wireless headphones first and foremost; the speaker and translate modes feel like nice add-ons that you will probably rarely use.

Watch Out For: It’s not necessarily fair, but the fact that the Human Headphones are so different than everything else out there, whoever is wearing them is going to elicit some stares. When wearing as over-ear headphones there’s some pretty significant audio bleed-through; if you’re listening to music or anything at any volume over 50-percent, there’s a pretty good chance that the people around you will be able to hear exactly what you’re listening to. The app can be glitchy at times; on several occasions, I was forced to restart the app because it wouldn’t allow me to switch back to headphone mode after using the headphones as a Bluetooth speaker. Speaker of using it as Bluetooth speaker, it’s not very good and sounds marginally better than your smartphone’s speaker on full blast.

Alternatives: Since the Human Headphones are a completely new kind of audio product, there really isn’t anything to compare them against. Of course, if you’re just looking for wireless headphones, there are seemingly infinite alternatives in the over-ear and in-ear variety.

Verdict: The worst thing I can say about the Human headphones is that they look strange, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. A few years ago when AirPods were just coming out, people thought they looked strange, too, and now they’re everywhere. The bottom line is that the Human Headphones better most every true wireless earbuds on the market, and they fit pretty great (for most people), too. If you can get around the fact that these headphones look a little bit different, then you might be able to justify the $259 price tag that they are going for.

What Others Are Saying:

• “If you’ve been wanting to try a new headphone and hate the thought of going back to the same brands, you definitely should give these headphones a try. I’m not sure if the $399 cost is justified since I personally look for noise-canceling and comfort when it comes to investment in headphones. However, I can see the perks of having a device that is so easily controlled with the tip of your finger.” — Roy Kim, Medium

• “Human Headphones are as crazy as they are cool. If you prefer the quality of over-the-ear headphones, these might be worth checking out.” — Michael Strange, The Gadgeteer

Key Specs

Type: 3 in 1 true wireless design
Frequency Range: 20 Hz to 20 kHz
Bluetooth: 4.2
Battery life: Up to 9 hours

Human Inc provided this product for review.

Read More Gear Patrol Reviews

Hot takes and in-depth reviews on noteworthy, relevant and interesting products. Read the Story

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

Sonos Move Review: The Perfect Do-It-All Home Speaker

The Sonos Move ($399) represents a bunch of “firsts” for Sonos. It’s the company’s first Bluetooth speaker, its first portable speaker and, thus, its first speaker to have a built-in battery (which Sonos had to build from scratch). Unlike all other Sonos speakers before it, the Move is designed to be listened to in, around and outside the home. And if you’re wondering, yes, the Move is weatherproof and drop-resistant, making it Sonos’s first truly rugged speaker, too.

Of course, the Move is still a Sonos speaker and it’s designed to work as such. It can connect to your home’s Wi-Fi network and, via the Sonos app, be grouped with other Sonos speakers in a multi-room system. It’s also a smart speaker, just like the Sonos One, so you can speak to Amazon’s Alexa or Google Assistant and request a song, adjust the volume or ask about the weather.

There are a couple of big questions surrounding the Move. In terms of sound quality, how does it compare to other Sonos speakers? And how should the Move be used? Is it more of a traditional Sonos speaker that, instead of being tethered to the wall, can be carried from room to room? Or is it more a portable Bluetooth speaker, designed to be listened to outside?

The biggest question, at least for me, has to do with the “Sonos experience.” The audio company is so beloved because its speakers sound great and work with almost every music streaming service, but, most importantly, they’re easy enough for anybody to use. So the fact that the Move can be constantly be moved around, switched between Wi-Fi and Bluetooth modes – does that negatively impact that Sonos experience?

The Good: The Sonos Move has that “Sonos sound” – it sounds warm, lively and punchy, both inside and outside, just as you’d expect from a Sonos speaker. Sonos specially designed it with a downward-firing tweeter and forward-firing woofer, and the result is that the Move has more of a 360-dree sound than any other speaker. (Fun fact: even though the Play:1 and Sonos One speakers have a dotted grill the wraps sound most of the speaker, both are still forward-firing and not omnidirectional speakers.) In terms of sound quality and power, the Sonos Move sounds more closely to the Sonos One ($199) rather than the larger and more expensive Play:5 ($499); but it’s definitely in-between the two.

The other neat thing about the Move is that Sonos rejiggered TruePlay technology so that it works with the Move. TruePlay is the in-app feature that helps tune each Sonos speaker so that it sounds best for the room it’s in; it’s a typically a one-time process that requires you to wave your smartphone around while the speaker makes some strange noises. Sonos knew this would be a pain in the ass with the Move, to have listeners set up TruePlay every time they moved the speaker, so they developed Automatic TruePlay.

Instead of going through the app and waving your phone around (typical TruePlay behavior), the Move uses its built-in microphones and automatically tunes itself ever time you move it. It’s convenient and you can hear the difference. For example, when you move the Move from an open space to a closed-in space, like a media cabinet, you can hear the speaker lower its bass and crank up its mids and treble. All this happens in the space of a few seconds and, again, it requires nothing out of the listener (the microphones have to be on, though). Pretty cool.

When it’s not on its charging dock, or charging via USB-C, the Move has a ten-hour battery life – which is decent. That said, it has a pretty neat trick to save battery life. Anytime the speaker is not powered and it’s not playing music, meaning it could be in either Wi-Fi or Bluetooth modes, the Move will automatically turn off after a few minutes. According to Sonos, the Move can stay in this “Suspend mode” for up to five days before needing a visit back to the charger.

The biggest thing, at least for me, is that the Move doesn’t really complicate or change the Sonos experience. Because it’s the first Sonos speaker that has automatic TruePlay, it arguably makes the Move even easier to set up than other speakers. If there’s one caveat to this “Sonos experience,” it’s that the Move will automatically connect back to your home’s Wi-Fi when switching back from Bluetooth mode, but it won’t regroup with your other Sonos speakers. Basically, you’ll have to visit the Sonos app if you want to regroup your speakers after using the Move as a Bluetooth speaker. Not the end of the world, but something to watch out for.

Who It’s For: The Sonos Move won’t be for everybody. In fact, it’s a speaker with a hint of irony about it. Sonos designed it so that it could work for anybody in any situation – whether that’s indoors or outdoors, in your home or far from it – but it’s actually a speaker that’s optimal for a select few people. It’d be a great addition to somebody’s household who just wants a great-sounding speaker in every room of their house, but only wants to buy one speaker. If the person has a Sonos system and has an outdoor space (backyard or patio) that’s covered by Wi-Fi, then the Move would be a great way to extend your home’s sound outdoors. Finally, if the person is just a die-hard Sonos enthusiast, they really can’t go wrong with the Move.

Watch Out For: The Sonos Move loses many of its best features when being used as a Bluetooth speaker. It can’t function as a smart speaker, so you can’t access Alexa or Google Assistant. Its automatic TruePlay doesn’t work, so it won’t sound as good as it possibly could. It’s can’t operate as a stereo pair with another Sonos Move (both speakers have to be connected to Wi-Fi for stereo pairing).

It’s also the first Sonos speaker that you’ll have to worry about replacing its battery (because it’s the only one to have a battery). Sonos claims that its battery should last roughly three years or 900 charges, but this will be an extra cost down the road; Sonos will sell the replaceable batteries, but they have yet to announce pricing. It’s worth noting that even if the Move’s battery does die, as long as it’s connected to power it will still function as a typical Sonos speaker.

At $399, the Sonos Move definitely feels expensive for what it is. It’s also not a small speaker and even though Sonos claims that it’s a great portable Bluetooth speaker (which I feel it definitely is), I have a hard time picturing many people lugging this 6-pound speaker to the beach.

Alternatives: As far as getting an entry-level Sonos speaker, you could buy two One ($199/ea) or two One SL ($179/ea) speakers, each of which has almost the same audio quality as the Move. If you don’t care about the versatility of the Move, just the audio quality, the Play:5 is a little bit more expensive and definitely is the superior-sounding speaker.

If you’re not committed to the Sonos ecosystem, there are plenty of alternatives. For instance, the UE Blast ($100) and UE Megablast ($170+), both of which are smart Wi-Fi speakers that work with Alexa and they are two of the best portable Bluetooth speakers, too.

It’s worth point out that Bose, arguably Sonos’s biggest speaker rival, recently released the Bose Portable Home Speaker ($349), which is a very similar speaker to the Sonos Move. The Bose Portable Home Speaker works with both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, is compatible with Alexa and Google Assistant, and can be grouped with Bose’s other multi-room speaker.

Verdict: The Sonos Move is a completely different kind of Sonos speaker, yet it still manages to feel…like a Sonos speaker. It sounds great, truly, and in some respects, it’s actually easier to set up and get playing than any other new Sonos speaker. That said, it feels a little expensive for what it is and unless you’re really going to take advantage of its versatility – take it from room to room, take it outdoors, and use it as true Bluetooth speaker – Sonos makes several other more affordable speakers that you’ll probably enjoy just as much.

What Others Are Saying:

• “For a lot of serious Sonos fans, the Move will be a no-brainer. Folks have been wondering for years when Sonos will make the jump to Bluetooth and make its famously exceptional multi-room wireless speaker systems more versatile. A lot of those people have invested hundreds if not thousands of dollars into their Sonos systems, and the idea of adding one more—one that has Bluetooth, that can go anywhere—is exciting. The Move sounds like a Sonos speaker. It works with all the other Sonos speakers. Sure, a Sonos diehard will love this thing. The average consumer just looking for a portable speaker, however, might not be so enthusiastic.” — Adam Clark Estes, Gizmodo

• “The Move also cannot connect to multiple phones or devices at a time either, so you only get to have one DJ at your party. Oh, and though Sonos is known for its ability to group multiple speakers into ad-hoc zones, this isn’t possible on Bluetooth. And that’s despite many competing speakers, like that Megaboom we keep mentioning, having the ability to daisy-chain together. For now, it’s clear that Sonos still sees Bluetooth as an add-on, not a core focus. Sonos could add more Bluetooth features in the future via app updates (something it does frequently), but the company’s heart still lies with Wi-Fi..” — Jeffrey Van Camp, Wired

• “The biggest question that most people seem to have about the Move is about whether it’s worth the nearly $400 price tag. Frankly, it’s a tough price to swallow for what largely amounts to a $200 Sonos One with a battery bolted to the bottom of it. It’s also a lot more money than the typical Bluetooth speaker costs. But the Move also does things that no other Sonos speaker nor any other Bluetooth speaker can do, and it does it all without compromising on sound quality, volume, or features.” — Chris Welch, The Verge

Key Specs

Drivers: One downward-firing tweeter, one mid-woofer; two Class-D digital amplifiers
Connectivity: Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, AirPlay 2
Battery: up to 10 hours
Water Resistance: IP56 rating
Weight: 6.6 pounds

Sonos provided this product for review.

Read More Gear Patrol Reviews

Hot takes and in-depth reviews on noteworthy, relevant and interesting products. Read the Story

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

Review: The Series 5 Is the Best Smartwatch Apple Has Ever Made

The Apple Watch has been the best smartwatch for anybody with an iPhone for years, but it feels like the fifth-generation model, the Apple Watch Series 5 ($399+), has the most to live up to. That’s because its predecessor, the Series 4, set the bar so darn high. It was the first Apple Watch to look different, with a larger edge-to-edge display and a thinner, lighter body; plus Apple gave it a bunch of innovative features (like fall detection and an electrical heart sensor) and basically upgraded it in every way.

Now that the Series 5 is here, you’ll notice that it looks strikingly similar to the Series 4. It’s the same size and thinness; it has the same rotating crown dial with a little red circle; and it has many of the same sensors and health tracking features. But the differences are there. The Series 5 is the first Apple Watch to have an always-on display. It’s the first Apple Watch to have a built-in compass. And it’s the first Apple Watch to come in four different finishes, including aluminum, stainless steel, ceramic and all-new titanium.

The Apple Watch Series 5 is available in GPS-only and cellular models, and starts at $399.

|

The photographed Apple Watch Series 5 has the all-new titanium case. It’s a 44mm model and goes for $849.

The Good: The always-on Retina display is the standout feature of the Series 5. Even for people who have worn an Apple Watch for years, like myself, it’s going to feel like a big deal because it actually changes the way you interact with the Apple Watch. With the always-on display, there’s no need to rotate your wrist to see check the time or see that your workout is still tracking – it’s just there. It also will probably prevent many social faux pas that were caused by previous Apple Watch models; seeing other person check the time or look at their watch can be distracting, after all.

It’s true that the always-on Retina display is always-on, but it’s not always bright. The watch face still lights up when you raise your wrist, just like it did with the Series 4, but it then transitions to an idle dark mode when you lower your wrist back down; what’s happening is that the display’s refresh rate gets lowered to one screen refresh per second (or 1Hz), which allows the Series 5 to use very little battery life and give the appearance of always being on. This allows the Series 5 to get the same full-day battery life as its predecessor. Apple updated all its old Apple Watch faces so they work with the Series 5’s always-on display – pretty cool – plus they added quite a few new ones, too.

The Series 5 is the first Apple Watch to have a built-in compass. There’s a dedicated compass app on the Series 4, but other Apple Watch apps, like Apple Maps, take advantage of it.

As mentioned before, Apple is offering the Series 5 in more options than ever. The aluminum version of the Series 5 is the most affordable and is the only one that can be purchased without cellular. The stainless steel version is heavier and more durable, so it feels more premium, but it starts at $699. The brand-new titanium version is significantly lighter than the stainless steel version, and it’s also more scratch-resistant, corrosion-resistant and hypoallergenic. And then there’s the ceramic version, which a high-end material that’s usually reserved for luxury watches. If you purchase any Series 5 through Apple Watch Studio (meaning online), you can pair it with almost any watch band you want (there are some restrictions).

The Series 5 is the first Apple Watch to have a built-in compass. There’s a dedicated compass app that you can access, which I rarely used, but the real benefit of the compass is how it works with other Apple Watch apps, such as Apple Maps. For example, when you’re using Apple Maps you can now see which direction just by looking at your Series 5. You’ll see the “field-of-view cone” rotate with direction you’re looking, which makes Apple Maps on the Series 5 feel way trustworthy. (Previously, you’d have to take out your iPhone to get the same sense of direction.) For those who are easily disoriented when navigating from A to B, like me, or have difficulty grasping your bearings when getting off the subway – like me – this new Apple Watch feature will save you a headache and a five-minute walk in the wrong direction.

The best part of the Series 5, and maybe you’ll roll your eyes, is that it feels like an Apple Watch – familiar – and it has all the best features of the Series 4. You can still pair it with your AirPods and listen to music sans iPhone. It still has the heart rate sensors and built-in ECG. It still has fall detection and Emergency SOS. It still has a GPS and it can track your runs. It’s waterproof enough so you can wear it swimming. It still tracks your steps and other metrics so you can complete your activity rings. And, of course, it works super well with iMessage.

The last thing to note is that all Series 5 models have 32GB of internal memory, which is actually twice as much as the 16GB on the Series 4. This might not be a huge deal for people who don’t plan on downloading music or a bunch of extra apps on the Series 5, but if you do, or if your current Apple Watch is already nearing its max storage, it might make sense to upgrade to the Series 5.

Who It’s For: Any iPhone owner who wants Apple’s best-ever smartwatch. Or if they desperately want an Apple Watch with an always-on display. Or if they want one of the Series 5’s higher-end finishes (and they’re willing to pay for it). The last big reason to get the Series 5 is if they’re going to take advantage of the Series 5’s built-in compass.

Watch Out For: No matter which Apple Watch Series 5 you buy, aside from the obvious difference between cellular and GPS-only models, they’re all going to have the same functionality. That means that the $1,300 ceramic model and the $399 aluminum model are built with the same internals and will keep track of the same metrics. There’s little downside to getting the cheaper models, other than how their aluminum finish looks and feels. (Although the stainless steel and titanium models are slightly more durable.)

One thing that I’ve been hoping for awhile is that the Apple Watch will start playing better with Spotify. Yes, there’s a Spotify app for the Apple Watch. And yes, if you have an LTE model you can stream music, but I wish the Spotify app would allow you to download albums and playlists for offline listening, similar to what several Garmin and Samsung smartwatches can do. As with previous Apple Watch models, the Series 5 is really only designed to download and store playlists from Apple Music.

Alternatives: The Apple Watch Series 4 is the most obvious alternative, but Apple did something a little bit sneaky this year – they stopped selling it. You can still purchase the Series 4 for third-party sellers like Amazon or Best Buy, for a slightly discounted rate. The Series 4 looks and feels (especially the aluminum models) very similar to the Series 5, and it’s a great option for Apple Watch wearers who don’t need always-on display.

If you don’t want to pay that much for a Series 5 (or Series 4), Apple is still selling the Series 3 but it lowered the starting price to just $199 – it’s undoubtedly the best entry-level smartwatch for people with an iPhone. The trade-offs are pretty clear, however, as the Series 3 doesn’t have the large nice display, the slim design or the many fancy sensors that enable a lot of the Apple Watch’s newer features. The Series 3 does have a built-in GPS and it’ll still accurately track your runs.

Verdict: The Apple Watch Series 5 is undoubtedly the best smartwatch that Apple has ever made, and it comes with the feature – an always-on display – that most people having been asking for. That said, with a few spec bumps and a few new capabilities, the Series 5 is admittedly an iterative upgrade over last year’s Series 4. If you’re not swayed by the premium materials, like the new titanium case, it really comes down to Series 5’s always-on display and how much you want it.

Key Specs

Case sizes: 40mm or 44mm
Case options: Aluminum, stainless steel, titanium and ceramic
Display: Always-On Retina display
Processor: 64-bit dual-core S5 processor
Storage: 32GB
Sensors: electrical and optical heart rate sensors, gyroscope, accelerometer, compass
Water resistance: 50 meters
Connectivity: Bluetooth 5.0

|

Apple provided this product for review.

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

iPhone 11 Review: The Affordable iPhone Is a Little Too Good

Watch Out For: There’s no getting around the fact that the iPhone 11 is basically the same phone as the iPhone XR, but with new rear and front camera systems, the A13 Bionic chip and some bumped up specs. The two iPhones have the same curves, dimensions, display and notch – it’s all very familiar. That’s good if you like the iPhone XR, but less good if you’re trying to justify the decision to upgrade from one to the other.

Alternatives: Let’s start with the assumption that you’re dead-set on an iPhone: If you’re willing to pay a little more, the iPhone 11 Pros have a better camera system, nicer display and few other upgraded features. They also are available in smaller or larger sizes. Last year’s iPhone XR is still a great phone and Apple lowered the starting price to $599 (previously $749). A little surprisingly, Apple isn’t selling new iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max, but it is selling the two-year-old iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus, starting at $499 and $549 respectively.

The above two photos are shot using the iPhone’s 1) wide and 2)ultra-wide lenses.

If you’re not dead-set on an iPhone, the scope of alternatives is too wide to consider fully here, but definitely includes Samsung’s latest offerings in the form of the S10 and the Note10, as well as Google’s Pixel 4, which is due to be announced in October, so it’s wise to sit tight for now.

Verdict: The iPhone 11 is the new iPhone that most people should buy. It has so many of the same features as the significantly more expensive iPhone 11 Pros, that it doesn’t feel like “the cheap iPhone.” Its dual-camera system with an ultra-wide lens and the ability to shoot 4K video at 60fps, also means that the iPhone 11 feels like a big upgrade over the older iPhone XR and iPhone 8. It doesn’t hurt that it’s also the most affordable new iPhone to be released in years.

(Need extra incentive? If you purchase an iPhone, iPad, Mac or Apple TV – new or older models – you’ll get a free one-year subscription to Apple’s new streaming service, Apple TV+, when it launches on November 1.)

Key Specs

Display: Liquid Retina HD
Processor: A13 Bionic
Rear Camera System: Dual 12-megapixal cameras; ultra wide (ƒ/2.4 aperture) and wide (ƒ/1.8)
Front Camera System:: 12-megapixal TrueDepth camera (ƒ/2.2)
Water-resistance: IP68 rating
Materials: Glass and aluminum design
Key features: Night Mode, 4K video at 60fps recording, slow motion selfies
Colors: Purple, yellow, green, black, white, (Product) red

Apple provided this product for review.

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

The JBL Link Is an Imperfect Peek Into the Future of Soundbars

It isn’t enough for a soundbar just to be a soundbar anymore, at least that’s what seems to be the trend in the entry-level soundbar market. Two such examples are the new Roku Smart Soundbar ($180) and the Anker Nebula Soundbar ($230); both have built-in smart operating systems, Roku OS in the Roku soundbar and Fire TV in the Anker soundbar, so they can each turn an older “dumb” TV into a smart TV that can access popular apps like Netflix and Hulu. It’s essentially like having a streaming stick fused into a soundbar. Two birds, one stone.

Another such example of this new breed of soundbars is the JBL Link Bar ($400). It’s a 100-watt soundbar with an Android TV operating system built into it, but the Link Bar further separates itself by having Google Assistant baked right into it as well. This makes the Link Bar a 3-in-1 device – a soundbar, an Android TV streamer and a smart speaker – and thus totally unique. The question is: how do all these three features work together and does it actually make the experience easier or better?

The Good: As a soundbar, the JBL Link Bar can work in two different situations. First, if you have a dumb TV, you hook it up the soundbar – via optical or HDMI ARC – and turn it into a smart TV that runs Android TV. Second, the Link Bar can be hooked it up to any smart TV and turn it into an Android TV. If you already have Chromecast TV, some capabilities of the Link Bar will be redundant, but because there are mics built into the soundbar itself, you will get some unique capabilities like using voice commands to change between apps, HMDI inputs or even turn the TV on or off without having to touch a remote.

There are some definite advantages to adding Android TV, whether you had a smart or dumb TV. It enables the soundbar to be used as a central hub for controlling your smart home devices with Google Assistant, and it also adds built-in Chromecast, so you can easily stream music to it whenever you want and use it as a stand alone speaker. If you’re an Apple Music subscriber or you use iTunes (both of which aren’t supported by Chromecast), the Link Bar also has built-in Bluetooth so anybody can stream music to it.

The Link Bar acts sort of like an AV receiver, as it has three HDMI passthrough inputs so you can connect a number of different devices; I was able to connect my cable box, Xbox One and Apple TV straight to the soundbar and use “Hey Google” commands to switch between inputs.

Who It’s For: Two different kinds of households. First, the JBL Link Bar would make a great soundbar for a household that doesn’t have smart devices or isn’t committed to a smart ecosystem, and wants to upgrade their older non-smart TV to a smart one. Second, it’s a solid soundbar for families who are well-versed using “Hey Google” commands and just want their TV to sound better; they shouldn’t want a soundbar that can be upgraded into a big home theater system.

Watch Out For: The biggest issue with the Link Bar is actually with one of its defining features – it doesn’t actually work as a great Google Home smart speaker. The “Hey Google” commands are noticeably delayed and can be a bit finicky when trying to control your TV (turning the volume up and down worked fine, but switching between HDMI inputs was very much hit or miss). If you have any other Google Home speaker nearby, which I did (a Google Home speaker and a Lenovo Smart Clock), the microphones on those devices will pick up “Hey Google” before the Link Bar and thus hamper your commands.

On the sound quality side, it’s a very good entry-level soundbar, but it’s no high-end home theater soundbar – it doesn’t support Dolby Atmos or DTS:X surround sound technologies. It also isn’t very upgradable. You can add the JBL SW10 wireless subwoofer for an extra $300, but there’s no opportunity to add surrounds or rear-channel speakers. If you already have an AV receiver, the Link Bar won’t work with it.

Unlike the Sonos Beam, which can sync the TV’s audio with the rest of the Sonos speakers in your house, the JBL Link Bar doesn’t support multi-room audio. This means that if you have any kind of Google Home, you won’t be able to group it with the Link Bar, whether if you’re watching TV or just trying to play music though the house in a Chromecast group – the Link Bar doesn’t play well with others. It doesn’t support AirPlay 2, either.

Alternatives: There are a few different routes you could go, but you should know that none of them live up to the promise of the JBL Link Bar. For example, the aforementioned Roku Smart Soundbar ($180) and the Anker Nebula Soundbar ($230) both are cheaper options that have a built-in operating systems, capable of turning an older TV into a smart one; but their sound quality is supposedly inferior and they can’t work as a smart speaker on their own. The Sonos Beam, on the other-hand, is the same exact price as the JBL Link Bar and is much much better at multi-room audio; it also works as a smart speaker with either Alexa or Google Assistant. The big tradeoff is it lacks a TV operating system.

Verdict: The JBL Link Bar nails the sound and Android TV parts, but leaves a bit to be desired when it comes to actually being a smart speaker that can fully control your TV. If it got little more responsive, this thing would be a hit. Right now, it still will be a good soundbar that a lot of people will like, but it’s not quite the futuristic soundbar we were hoping for. Still, we’re getting close and, in that way, the Link Bar is exciting.

What Others Are Saying:

• “Judged on sound quality alone I would choose the Link bar over the Sonos Beam. But the Link Bar is all about smarts, and that’s what ultimately lets the product down. Maybe it’s worth waiting six months to see if some of the lag and nonresponsiveness can be smoothed out. Until then, more polished products like the Beam and the Polk Command Bar are better buys right now.” – Ty Pendlebury, CNET

• “As a soundbar, this product is good if a bit overpriced. As a Google Assistant speaker, I’d definitely look elsewhere. As an Android TV, it’s a solid option with no major flaws. Combining all of those together, I’d say the JBL Link Bar is a good choice at $399 if you want to cover all of these needs with one device. Until the Google Assistant portion is fixed, however, you might be better off getting an Nvidia Shield, a Google Home Mini, and a cheaper 2.1 soundbar for the time being. If future updates fix that problem, I could see the Link Bar being a great buy.” – Ben Schoon, 9to5 Google

Key Specs

Drivers: 0.8-inch tweeter (2x), racetrack drivers (4x)
Smart OS: Android TV (with Google Assistant built-in)
Streaming: Wi-Fi, Chromecast, Bluetooth
Ports: 3 HDMI inputs, 1 HDMI Arc output

Surfline Has Given Every Surfer a Reason to Wear an Apple Watch

There is something inherently captivating about seeing photos and video footage of yourself surfing. No matter how old we get, all surfers want to bank away those fleeting moments when everything aligned to tap back into them again and again. After all, surfing is about continually finding that feeling — of speed, of freedom, of adrenaline and total presence.

But not everyone has a friend who is willing to sit on the beach and shoot photos or video. Nor does it make sense for everyday, non-professional surfers to hire someone to do so. Thankfully, Surfline — which got its start as a number you could call for surf reports — has created a way for Premium members to access its vast network of hundreds of surf cameras to score video footage of every wave they catch.

Part fitness tool, part video footage compiler, Surfline Sessions is an extension of the Surfline Premium membership app. It pairs with an Apple Watch Series 2 or newer to track a surfer in front of one of Surfline’s wave cameras, logs footage of each wave and trims them down by the time the surfer is out of the water. It also tracks fitness data like calories burned, number of waves caught, feet traveled on each wave, top speed and more.

The biggest beneficiaries? Everyday surfers. “Pros see themselves on video all the time, so their marginal benefit is modest,” notes Surfline President Ross Garret. “But when you’re average or beginning, it’s massive. Preserving little bits of that experience — in whatever form — is magical, and to do so effortlessly is going to be a huge benefit to surfers everywhere.”

The Good: Up to this point, the only way to watch your sessions via Surfline’s cameras was through the Cam Rewind feature. But as Surfline Executive Vice President Dave Gilovich concedes: “It’s not the easiest product to use. Really tough to find your rides, kind of a pain to edit them into clips once you do, no way to easily share them with friends and you have to figure out where to store them. Surfline Sessions solves those problems.”

Surfline Sessions is certainly an upgrade on that experience. Combined with the fitness tracking data it provides, it’s a fairly handy tool for the modern surfer who wants more out of their sessions.

Who It’s For: Those who surf regularly at breaks that have Surfline cameras pointed at them. While Surfline currently has over 500 cameras worldwide, if you favor spots without them, you won’t have much use for this app. You also need an Apple Watch and a Premium Surfline subscription ($95/year). If you can check off those three boxes, you should definitely give Sessions a try; it’s free for Premium subscribers, after all.

Watch Out For: Make sure that whatever camera you are surfing in front of is working before you start your session. If a camera is down your footage most likely won’t be logged. I found this out first-hand after my first go, not checking the camera ahead of time only to finish my session and come away empty-handed.

Note that certain surf cameras work better than others for Sessions. Those that are more zoomed out will obviously not be as good as those based closer to the break.

Also, while wearing the streamlined Apple Watch while surfing is anything but clunky, you’ll want to upgrade the band to feel confident it’ll stay on through the gnarliest wipeout. I used Urban Armor Gear’s Active Watch Strap ($60).

Alternatives: One of the most common ways to get footage of yourself surfing is with a GoPro ($300). But that has obvious limitations in that it’s POV footage and the surfer has to do all the filming, which is not the easiest task while surfing. The SoloShot3 is probably the most direct alternative. It comes in a package with a camera, tripod and GPS tracker to essentially do the same thing as Sessions but with your own equipment — though it’ll cost you at least $599.

Review: The first time I used the Sessions app I learned the hard way that you should confirm the camera you’re surfing in front of is actually working. I had a really fun session at 90th Street in Rockaway Beach, New York, and was pretty excited about seeing the footage. Upon syncing my session with my phone, I found there was no video footage of any waves. Pulling up the camera I saw that it was in fact down, meaning my session was not recorded.

While I have largely given up caring about “getting shots” of myself surfing, the prospect of technology magically capturing good ones is still enticing. So I was definitely bummed out after that mishap. The morning of the next session I embarked on in Long Beach, I made sure that the Pacific Boulevard camera I’d be surfing in front of was in fact working properly.

This session was a pleasant summer surprise after a mostly flat season (typical on the East Coast). I got in the water, open the app, tapped “start session” and went wave hunting. After getting out of the water and “ending” my session on the Watch, I was happy to find my clips were already synced into the app on my phone. I dug through them and relived the glory on the LIRR train into NYC.

The footage is downloadable and shareable via plenty of platforms, and while you can zoom in, it’s not quite the high-quality video you would get from a filmer set up on the beach. That said, it was pretty satisfying seeing the waves played back and recalling each one with a smile. I also find the number of waves I caught, the top speed on each of those waves and the distance traveled on them to be really interesting data. Sure, there are product out there doing that already, but they don’t pair that ability with video footage of each of wave.

Verdict: If you’re already a Surfline Premium member, have a local break that has a Surfline camera and own an Apple Watch, it’s sort of a no brainer. But for literally anyone who wants to track their sessions and log video footage for posterity, this is by far the easiest way to do so.

What Others Are Saying:

• “Surfers aren’t hurting for ways to shoot videos of themselves. Thanks to waterproof GoPros and other action cameras there’s been an explosion of footage from the waves. But getting a wide shot that you can easily share with friends without mounting equipment on a surfboard is a nice feature. Plus, you no longer have to convince your non-surfing friends that they should shoot videos of you from the beach instead of relaxing.”” — Roberto Baldwin, Engadget

Surfline provided a Premium membership, an Apple Watch and an Urban Armor Gear strap for this review.

Read More Gear Patrol Reviews

Hot takes and in-depth reviews on noteworthy, relevant and interesting products. Read the Story

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.

Review: These Wireless Earbuds Are AirPod Alternatives for Audiophiles

Klipsch is best known for its incredible line of Heritage loudspeakers and high-end home theater systems; the American audio company holds a special place in the hearts of many hi-fi enthusiasts. More recently, the company has dipped its expertise into more mass-market products, like portable Bluetooth speakers, headphones and earbuds. Enter the Klipsch T5 True Wireless ($199), the company’s first true wireless earbuds and a bonafide AirPod competitor. If you’re wondering: yes, they wanted the charging case to look like a Zippo.

|

The Good: First, the sound quality. Klipsch has been able to transition from the world of high-end (and high-priced) loudspeakers to accessible earbuds with relative ease. The T5 True Wireless really excel in the high and midrange frequencies – they’re clear and while – while the bass still hits you as most other true wireless earbuds. The sound quality on par with the likes of Sennheiser Momentum TW, Master & Dynamic MW07 or the most-recent Sony WF-1000X, but at just $199, the Klipsch T5 True Wireless are significantly cheaper.

Second, the design of the charging case and the fit of the earbuds is each unique. The charging case is meant to look and, to some extent, feel like a Zippo, and it pulls this off pretty well. The one caveat is it’s considerably heavier than a Zippo, but this extra weight makes the charging case feel premium in the hand. In terms of the actual earbuds, Klipsch has sort of trademarked the oval shape earbud design – the tips of the T5 True Wireless are flattener than those on most other earbuds; the idea being that they’ll fit deeper and more securely in your ear.

Who It’s For: The T5 True Wireless are for most people that want true wireless earbuds, just so long as they don’t work out in them. They’re a little more expensive than Apple AirPods or the Jabra Elite 65t, but they also sound noticeably better. If you like great sound quality and/or the Klipsch brand, these are pretty great true wireless earbuds to buy.

Watch Out For: The “deeper” fit of the earbuds won’t be for everybody and the elongated body of each earbud causes them to stick further out when in your ears. Even though they’re water-resistant, these aren’t sport-focused earbuds and I probably wouldn’t exercise with them. The on-button controls work well – except when controlling the volume. The Klipsch Connect app, which will allow you to tweak the EQ settings of the T5 True Wireless, isn’t available at launch (though it’s expected this fall). Lastly, the Zippo design of the case might not be your cup of tea.

Alternatives: In terms of audio quality, two direct alternatives of the T5 True Wireless are the Sennheiser Momentum TW ($299) and the Master & Dynamic MW07 ($299). Both are excellent headphones but they’re also significantly more expensive. If you want noise-canceling as well as excellent sound quality, the Sony WF-1000X are also are an outstanding option.

Verdict: There’s really little to complain about with the Klipsch T5 True Wireless. If you can get over the arguably tacky design of the charging case, and you know that the earbuds fit well in your ears (the fit is unique compared to most other true wireless earbuds), these are one of the best sounding true wireless earbuds that we’ve tested. The fact that they’re $100 less expensive than most other “audiophile-grade” wireless earbuds, makes them even more attractive.

What Others Are Saying:

• “Ultimately, this is a very good first stab at true wireless for Klipsch. These headphones are a little expensive at $200 and not everybody is going to love the fit, but they’re certainly worth checking out if you’re considering a set a premium set of true wireless headphones.” — David Carnoy, CNET

• “The Klipsch T5 True Wireless feature the signature Klipsch sound, which is warm, detailed, and never harsh. That’s not to say the Klipsch are neutral, though – they’re simply closer to neutral than the Sennheiser Momentum when it comes to bass. Mids are where the Klipsch shine, allowing vocals to really shine as acoustic music, which favors mids, are lush and detailed. The detail extends to the highs as well, allowing the headphones to sing in the higher registers without ever being harsh. .” — Lewis Leong, TechRadar

• “Klipsch has one key advantage over the competition: price. Most “flagship” true wireless earbuds cost around $300, except for Sony’s stellar WF-1000XM3 ($230). You might get better sound from the Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless or the Master & Dynamic MW07, but you’ll have to pay $100 more for them. I also still like Jabra’s Elite 65t as a solid all-around option, especially for $170. Audio quality is slightly better on the Klipsch, but Jabra has a better overall experience — including comfort and controls. However, if you don’t mind spending a few extra dollars, you’ll be much happier with the WF-1000XM3.” — Billy Steele, Engadget

Key Specs

Driver: 5.0 mm dynamic moving coil micro speaker
Frequency Response: 10Hz – 19kHz
Water-resistant: IPX4
Connectivity: Bluetooth 5.0
Battery: 8 hours per earbud; up to 24 additional hours with the charging case

|

Klipsch provided this product for review.

Read More Gear Patrol Reviews

Hot takes and in-depth reviews on noteworthy, relevant and interesting products. Read the Story

Note: Purchasing products through our links may earn us a portion of the sale, which supports our editorial team’s mission. Learn more here.