PCMag editors select and review products independently. If you buy through affiliate links, we may earn commissions, which help support our testing.

Creative Aurvana X-Fi Noise-Canceling Headphones

 & Tim Gideon Contributing Editor, Audio

Our team tests, rates, and reviews more than 1,500 products each year to help you make better buying decisions and get more from technology.

Our Expert
LOOK INSIDE PC LABS HOW WE TEST
65 EXPERTS
43 YEARS
41,500+ REVIEWS
 - Headphones
4.5 Outstanding

The Bottom Line

These chunky headphones from Creative could be a bit more comfy, but they eliminate as much noise as the Quiet Comfort 2, sound much better, can operate passively, and can play more loudly.

Pros & Cons

    • Pleasant audio performance—much better than Bose's Quiet Comforts.
    • Excellent noise cancellation.
    • Well-defined bass.
    • More powerful output than the Quiet Comfort 2's.
    • iPhone-compatible extension cable.
    • Cable fits awkwardly into headphones.
    • The X-Fi 3D special effect isn't great.
    • Set is less comfy than Bose's Quiet Comfort 2.

Creative Aurvana X-Fi Noise-Canceling Headphones Specs

Active Noise Cancellation: Active
Impedance: 450 ohms
Type: Circumaural (over-ear)

I approached the Creative Aurvana X-Fi set of noise-canceling headphones as a skeptic. First off, it costs as much as the noise-canceling industry standard, the Bose Quiet Comfort 2—a whopping $300. Then, the price seems to be driven by the inclusion of two technologies I could do without: Creative's X-Fi Crystalizer and its X-Fi CMSS-3D sound enhancer. I wasn't counting on the Aurvana X-Fi headphones to eliminate as much ambient noise as the Quiet Comfort 2, but they sure did. To top it off, the Aurvanas are much better-sounding and more powerful than the QC2s. Without a doubt, the Sennheiser PXC 450 NoiseGards eliminate the most noise of any pair I've tried, including these, but they cost a mind-blowing $450. Given that the QC2 and the Aurvana X-Fi sets perform equally well on the noise-cancellation level, the question of which is better comes down to which sounds better, and the Aurvana headphones, our new Editors' Choice, slam-dunk the Bose Quiet Comfort 2s in terms of audio performance.

Creative's X-Fi headphones are bigger than the Quiet Comfort 2s and slightly less comfy, but all the padding is in the right places, and wearing them is effortless. The earcups and headband are black, with silver plastic earpieces. The left earpiece holds two AAA batteries (the Quiet Comfort 2s use only one), and all the controls are on the right earpiece. These include volume (a dial on the rim of the earpiece), power (which activates all the effects, including noise cancellation), noise cancellation, X-Fi Crystalizer, and X-Fi CMSS-3D. The headphones come in a Bose-esque black case, which also contains an iPhone-compatible 5-foot extension cable, a detachable 3-foot audio cable (which can be a bit of a pain to attach to the right earpiece), and double-prong and quarter-inch jack adapters.

Now, before any Bose fanboys out there blow a gasket, let's address how the Quiet Comfort 2 and the Aurvana X-Fi fared head-to-head. I tried both pairs in the PC Mag Labs server room, which has some ridiculously loud fans. In this room, both sets significantly reduced the noise level. But on tests for noise reduction, without audio coming through the cans, each produced very different results.

To my ears, the Creative pair definitely eliminated fewer very high frequencies, resulting in a slight high-frequency hiss. The Quiet Comforts, however, cut out less of the overall frequencies across the board. Compared with them, the Aurvanas sounded quieter, despite the remaining hiss. Both, however, are excellent noise-canceling headphones. When it came to blocking out ambient noise, the result was basically a draw.

I have an issue with Creative's X-Fi Crystalizer technology. Supposedly, it analyzes your lossy files, such as MP3s, and does its darnedest to recreate any missing information, resulting in a crisper, fuller sound. I repeat: supposedly. You might be wondering (as I did), what if you play a lossless file through these phones? Will the Crystalizer realize there's nothing to replace and leave it alone? To find out, I played some lossless Bob Dylan tracks with the Crystalizer off, and then with it turned on. To my surprise, the Crystalizer boosted the lossless files' sound the same way it did for lossy, low-bit-rate files. In other words, I'm officially saying I don't believe that this technology does anything special. It's just an EQ algorithm that gets applied to everything, boosting lows and highs to give things a fuller, crisper sound.

What's wrong with that? Absolutely nothing. Let me be clear, these headphones sound much better with the Crystalizer on. Think of the Crystalizer technology as producing more of a bass/treble boost—similar to the "rock" settings on several EQ presets. I may not believe Creative's claims regarding the Crystalizer, but I certainly think the final results sound good—much better than the output of the Bose headphones. With the Crystalizer off but with the power on, the Aurvanas yield audio performance very similar to the Bose model. With the Crystalizer on, however, the Aurvanas serve up a much deeper and clearer audio experience. Additionally, while the Aurvanas offer a fairly muffled sound in passive mode, the Bose model doesn't even have a passive mode, so there's no contest here, either.

On top of that, the Aurvanas are much more powerful than the QC2s, which simply don't get very loud. Not that you need to be blowing your ears out, but the extra battery and on-set volume switch make a big difference in terms of output—especially in noisy environments. On tracks with deep bass from groups like The Knife and Radiohead, the Aurvanas excelled. Sure, this isn't necessarily an accurate bass (nothing with a heavy bottom end is, really), but it's certainly fun to listen to, and on songs where the bass is less pronounced, such as acoustic ballads from Smog, the extra-low end wasn't an issue.

As for the X-Fi CMSS-3D effect, I have three words: Leave it off. No stereo headset can produce real "surround" effects; hence, the algorithms applied to music and movies to accomplish this magical feat make vocals sound weird and midrange frequencies muddy. The X-Fi CMSS-3D is no exception.

Honestly, I've never been a huge fan of the Bose sound: The company is rooted much more in innovation than in excellent audio performance. Nor is Creative a name that pops into my mind when I think of excellent audio performance. Still, these new Aurvana headphones are fun to listen to, and they're much more dynamic than the QC2s.

Both the Quiet Comfort 2 and the Aurvana X-Fi headphones cost $300. Both cut out noise effectively, despite the fact that they eliminate slightly different frequency ranges. The Aurvanas sound a whole lot better than the QC 2s, however, and therefore merit our Editors' Choice. I suggest, however, that you view the X-Fi Crystalizer as an EQ boost button, and that you leave the X-Fi CMSS-3D in the Off position. Finally, if you happen to have $450 to spend, the over-priced Sennheiser PXC-450 NoiseGards are the best-sounding, most effective noise-canceling headphones on the market (though too expensive merit an Editors' Choice). For $150 less, Creative has given Bose reason to worry.

Creative offers a one-year limited hardware warranty with a 90-day service warranty. For support, visit: creative.com/support

More headphone reviews:

Final Thoughts

 - Headphones

Creative Aurvana X-Fi Noise-Canceling Headphones

4.5 Outstanding

These chunky headphones from Creative could be a bit more comfy, but they eliminate as much noise as the Quiet Comfort 2, sound much better, can operate passively, and can play more loudly.

About Our Expert

Tim Gideon

Tim Gideon

Contributing Editor, Audio

My Experience

I've been a contributing editor for PCMag since 2011. Before that, I was PCMag's lead audio analyst from 2006 to 2011. Even though I'm a freelancer now, PCMag has been my home for well over a decade, and audio gear reviews are still my primary focus. Prior to my career in reviewing tech, I worked as an audio engineer—my love of recording audio eventually led me to writing about audio gear.

My Areas of Expertise

  • Headphones and earphones
  • Wireless and computer speakers
  • USB mics
  • Bluetooth headsets

The Technology I Use

Probably because of their prevalence in the recording studios I worked in a long time ago, I am most comfortable on Macs—I'm writing this on the 2019 iMac I use for testing. I also have a MacBook Pro that gets plenty of similar use.

My workspace has a mini recording studio setup, and the the gear I work with there is a mix of items I've used forever (Paradigm Mini Monitors and a McIntosh stereo receiver) and newer gear I use for recording and review testing (such as the Universal Audio Apollo x16).

I'm obsessed with modern boutique analog synths—some of my favorites instruments in this realm are the Landscape Audio Stereo Field and HC-TT,  the Soma Enner, the Koma Field Kit, and the Lorre Mill Keyed Mosstone.

From my studio days, I'm comfortable using Pro Tools, and in recent years have branched out to other realms of creative software, like Adobe Premiere and After Effects.

I stream music, but I also still buy albums, digitally or on vinyl, and encourage anyone who wants fair compensation for musicians and engineers to do the same.

I also play lots of Wordle.

Read full bio