Logitech G935 7.1 wireless gaming headset reviewed

Even as recently as a few years ago, the gaming headset market was still figuring out what people wanted in a headset. These days, though, the feature set is pretty well solidified, which can make it hard for each headset to stand out. The differences often come in the particular company’s build quality or look of the hardware, the software they provide, and of course the basic sound quality the headset can muster. Logitech’s G935 7.1 wireless Lightsync gaming headset is, in many ways, exactly what you’d expect from Logitech. It offers a clean look clad in lots of plastic, plenty of customization through Logitech’s G HUB software, and a lot of ways to use the gear.

If you’ve worn Logitech’s previous high-end gaming headset, the G933, you have a fairly good idea of what you’re getting into here. At a glance, the two headsets look all but identical. That’s okay, because there are a ton of great features that make the G935 worth a look on its own at the $179 price Logitech is asking.

Build, Style & Fit

Like the G933, the G935 is a mostly plastic affair; the only visible metal is the flexible stuff in the headband. The styling is a little different, but I literally had to compare the two side by side to notice.

Left: Logitech G933; Right: Logitech G935.

But that’s okay, because they look fine. The G935’s aesthetics are about what I’d expect in a gaming headset, if a bit subdued. The RGB LED lighting is basically identical to the G933, as is the shape of the boom mic.

Even the design inside the ear cups is the same. Inside the left earcup is a nice storage spot for the USB dongle, while the right earcup houses a rechargeable, replaceable Lithium-Ion battery.

The left ear also houses all the inputs and buttons. There are jacks for a 3.5mm audio cable (included), a micro USB cable for charging, four buttons, a power switch, and a volume knob. Three of the four buttons are programmable, while one is a dedicated mute button. That last one seems a little superfluous given that the mic features the “lift to mute” functionality that I’ve come to expect from powered headsets. Why build it in twice?

Instead of the sport mesh that we’ve seen on lots of previous Logitech headset earcups, the G935 has a faux leatherette type of material. The earcup material is replaceable, though the set doesn’t come with any extra cups. The headband cushion is made from the same material.

I found that wearing the G935 for extended periods is mostly very comfortable. Even as I’m writing this, they’re sitting on my head pouring Metallica into my ears, and they have been for hours. But they’re not my favorite, even among Logitech headsets. Logitech’s G533 and G Pro headsets both have more even head pressure and stand up better to head movement. The G935 will handle regular gaming movement just fine without budging, but if you do the old wet-dog headshake, the G935 starts moving sooner than the G533. The head pressure thing is going to be very subjective. If you have a slightly smaller head, the 533 might end up feeling loose.

 

Features, sound, and conclusion

One of the most important features in a high-end headset, for me at least, is that 3.5mm analog jack. While there are doubtlessly many gamers out there who play exclusively on PC, personally I switch between PC and console on a daily basis. For me, leaving this feature off a headset at this price point is inexcusable, but it happens enough that Logitech’s inclusion here is still laudable.

The biggest upgrade from the G933 though, is the switch from 40mm to 50mm drivers in each ear. Aside from obviously being 20% bigger, Logitech says it has redesigned the entire casing around the driver and claims the new driver cuts down on low-frequency distortion. We’ll get into how it sounds down below, though.

Another big feature for the G935 is the addition of DTS Headphone:X 2.0. The first revision of Headphone:X made surround sound possible with two-driver headphones, but the 2.0 version allows game creators to put sounds anywhere, not just where surround sound speakers would generally be placed.

The advertised battery life is eight hours with the RGB LED lighting on and 12 hours with it off. This matches up well with my experience with the headphones. I went through about two full charges while testing these for gaming with the lighting on, and 16 hours total is about right.

How it sounds

When we’re looking at a gaming headset rather than a pair of headphones, there are two distinct sound profiles (gaming and music) to consider, and two modes (wired and wireless).

On the gaming front, the DTS Headphone:X 2.0 really does make a difference. I played about eight hours of EA’s Anthem demo and a few hours of my one true gaming love, Doom. Because Anthem was an all-new experience, it’s a little harder to gauge the difference that the G935 made. In Doom, though, I was impressed with how well the surround sound works. I noticed noises I hadn’t heard before, and it was helping me catch enemies at my back before they got me. The audio feels clean and clear, and the ability to adjust EQ through the G HUB software means that just about anyone should be able to find a sound profile that works for them.

Talking over Discord using the wireless connection, I was pleased with how clear my chat partners’ speech came through, and they were especially impressed with how I sounded.

And that’s because the results were a little less impressive when I plugged the headset in. In addition to my time gaming on PC, I spent a good chunk of time playing Sea of Thieves on Xbox One X, in multiplayer the whole time and with the headset plugged into the controller.

Game audio was acceptable. Here, the headphones simply act as 2.0 stereo cans, and they do a fine job of that. Where they fell short was in delivering my voice to my players. I have a couple friends I regularly play this game with. Normally when I play with them, I use Logitech’s G Pro headset—a personal favorite because of its light feel, solid mic, and the excellent nylon-wrapped 3.5mm audio cable it comes with. The G935 has a shorter, rubberized cable that’s acceptable but has all the problems that come with rubberized cables. It catches on things like zippers and has some (though not much) shape memory. It’s not the worst, but I’m a little disappointed that the nylon cable didn’t make the jump.

But back to the sound: My shipmates noticed right away that I was on a different headset than usual. “You sound weird, did you change headsets?” they asked. To troubleshoot a little bit, I switched to Logitech’s also-new G432 and then to the G Pro. Both of those received high marks from my crew, but switching back to the G935 got the same lackluster result as before. I spent my time in Anthem with one of the same players. Thus, we had the same set of ears, using the same headphones, listening to me on three different headsets across two different gaming devices and networks, and the G935’s Xbox performance stood out in a negative way. Given that the other two headsets sounded fine on the Xbox One X, it doesn’t seem like Xbox Live is the problem. The same headset sounded better on the PC than on the Xbox, so it’s not the headset mic itself. It seems like something about plugging in with the wired connection with this headset was the cause of the drop in audio quality. This is total conjecture, but my guess is that something bandwidth-related is getting in the way to make the audio quality drop.

Logitech G935 microphone

As a set of music headphones, the G935 performs pretty well for a gaming headset, but personally, I still prefer my ATH-M50x headphones. It’s worth keeping in mind, though, that they go for just $25 less and don’t feature wireless technology, a microphone, a battery, LED lighting, or 7.1 surround sound. I’ll admit some personal bias toward dedicated music headphones there. My M50x headphones get louder and sound clearer than the G935. By comparison, the G935 feels like offers less instrument separation, and in the default configuration it leans heavier on bass. Metallica’s “Of Wolf and Man” didn’t have the punch I expect from the drums, for example. Miles Davis’ “Blue in Green” felt subdued.

I still found the sound acceptable, though, and I don’t think the differences will stand out unless you’re the kind of person who owns music headphones and has strong opinions about them.

In conclusion

The only big knocks I can offer against the G935 is the head pressure and console/wired sound quality. In every other department, it’s a rockstar. It offers solid battery life and checks all those must-have boxes for a pricey gaming headset: 3.5mm connectivity (even if it’s subpar), lift-to-mute mic, surround sound, and EQ functionality. DTS Headphone:X 2.0 feels like a substantial upgrade over Headphone:X, too.

If your primary gaming platform is a console or mobile phone, the G935 might not be the best option, but if you plug into your PC to get your game on, the G935 earns every cent of the $179 price tag.

Comments closed
    • Blytz
    • 6 months ago

    Just to confuse the issue, Logitech Malaysia are marketing this is the G933S

    • Blytz
    • 7 months ago

    So would you consider them much of an upgrade over the 933’s given the cost associated with investing in both ?

    • mikewinddale
    • 7 months ago

    What protocol does it use for wireless connectivity? Proprietary USB adapter? Bluetooth? I don’t understand why neither the manufacturer’s specifications nor the review specify the connection protocol.

    • DoomGuy64
    • 7 months ago

    Gasp, wireless? 7.1? But then how will I use my pricy DAC that does nothing to improve gaming audio, and power the speakers with a placebo AMP that is powerful enough to drive unpowered desktop monitors? No wait, merely having the DAC sitting where I can see my money being wasted on wood knobs improves audio quality. Because that’s how placebo works.

    *disclaimer* Not saying this headset is good, just that expensive DACs are overrated and don’t offer any real purpose for gaming, while most gaming headsets already include their own integrated dac and amp, making such products even further niche, but yet people still recommend DACs for gaming, when there literally is no point outside of audiophile use.

      • Ifalna
      • 7 months ago

      Esp when you consider that most games audio is rather heavily compressed using lossy compression algorithms. 😀

        • DoomGuy64
        • 7 months ago

        Yes, the vast majority of games use compressed audio, and are poorly mastered with little to no HTRF support by default. I totally understand the argument that 7.1 to 2.0 is not the “proper” way to play games, but if the game doesn’t support headphones or hrtf, 7.1 to 2.0 is better than stereo. The current state of PC gaming audio is absolutely terrible, especially without some sort of workaround for bad games, and it is the audiophiles who have ruined HRTF support, because they view playback hardware more important than the software/source material, and that makes no sense in games. Gaming audio is dependent on real time algorithms, while music is professionally mastered and relies solely on hardware to play back. You can have both, but only if everyone is willing to agree on it, and stop ignoring the HRTF aspect.

          • Thresher
          • 6 months ago

          Not sure why you are getting downvoted (or my response too). You are not wrong.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 6 months ago

            It’s the wood knob audiophiles. They don’t believe in HRTF, and think DACs magically make games sound better. They are the reason why PC gaming audio is garbage, and nobody calls out microsoft for breaking drivers every time they update windows 10. DACs don’t have drivers to break, so they don’t care when microsoft ruins drivers or don’t have good APIs for game audio, let alone enforces good use of what they do have.

          • Laykun
          • 6 months ago

          I actually have no idea what you’re trying to say, there’s a lot of assumptions here maybe?

            • DoomGuy64
            • 6 months ago

            It’s been going on since Vista. If you don’t see what’s going on, then you’re simply not a person who has ever cared about gaming audio.

            Here’s some workaround hacks you can look at, specifically for xaudio.
            [url<]https://github.com/kosumosu/x3daudio1_7_hrtf[/url<] [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJPpqssMPl0[/url<] Xaudio is crap, and developers don't care to properly implement what does work, making hacks like this necessary to enjoy games with 3d sound. You can have a $500 DAC and $1000 headphones, and it won't sound more 3d than a cheap set that has installed these patches, but the audiophiles like to pretend that their $$$ placebo does something that it doesn't do.

            • Laykun
            • 6 months ago

            1) I don’t see how you’re linking audiophiles to a lack of 3D audio.
            2) DACs and other audio hardware have nothing to do with 3D game audio, I have no idea why you even mention DACs and AMPs, as again, there is no link. FYI for more sensitive headphones more expensive DACs do make a difference, even with something as basic as the sound floor as unfortunately the better the headphones the more obvious these problems become and better equipment is required (ignorance is bliss I guess). If audiophiles want audiophile gear then let them have it? How does this affect you in any way?
            3) I do actually care about game audio, and I was the proponent of getting an HRTF integrated into our last title (developer here).
            4) Gaming audio is better now for developers than it was back in the pre-vista days with EAX and other garbage H/W accelerated standards. There’s now a plethora of choice in 3D gaming audio technologies to choose from since everything is now run on the CPU. If you have a problem with 3D gaming audio then take it up with game developers and not audiophiles (again I don’t see the link between audiophiles and bad game positional audio)?. Generally the decision comes down to “Will this feature net us sales that would offset its cost and make profit?”, generally the answer is no so most devs don’t bother.

            As someone who loves audio, has quite a bit of highend gear, I love HRTFs as I think they’re perfect for games, I think you have false association of audiophiles and some form of audio purist, which seems like a strawman to me. Even if such a demograph existed it would be so tiny to the gaming audio scene that it wouldn’t even be considered when deciding what positional audio tech to go for. Generally it’s gamers with “gamer headsets” that are considered these days when designing game audio as that’s the largest audience.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 6 months ago

            1. Read the forums, this is my own conclusion from watching audio posts, especially on this site.
            2. Correct, they do not. I am mentioning it because PC audiophiles PRETEND there is some merit to gaming with a DAC, when there is none. The DACs are solely capable of playback, and are only useful for playing back audio that is pre-mastered at a high quality level. Game audio is not high quality enough to merit the use of expensive DACs and headphones. How does it affect me? How about the total destruction of HRTF, and nobody caring about good HRTF, because DACs are what they care about? What the market wants, the market gets.
            3. Good for you, but obviously you haven’t been paying attention to how badly HRTF is being implemented everywhere else.
            4. There is no “plethora” of choice. There is xaudio, nobody is implementing it right, and nobody is “taking it up with game developers” en masse, because DACs are more important. “generally the answer is no so most devs don’t bother” Exactly. This is the freaking problem, and you can’t say xaudio is that great when devs don’t want to bother. Back in the day, devs used HRTF in every game, so that clearly shows the older APIs were superior to use and implement.

            “it would be so tiny to the gaming audio scene” No. It’s clearly the majority, especially on this website, including yourself.
            “gamers with “gamer headsets” Which still require HRTF that isn’t implemented, so those headsets use virtual 7.1 to compensate, and every time Microsoft updates Windows 10 they break everyone’s drivers. It’s a total disaster, and if you really cared about HRTF, you’d be promoting it over DACs that are useless for games. Even the most low end and onboard hardware today are overpowered in comparison to the source material. It’s time to stop obsessing over DACs, and start supporting HRTF.

            • Laykun
            • 6 months ago

            I think you’re suffering for tunnel vision and exposure to echo chambers. Audiophiles have no influence on the game industry. The mastering in games has no direct correlation to DAC quality, just like how using $1000 doesn’t automatically make no sense with 64kb MP3s. You’re taking an abstract version of “quality” and using it as a blanket term to cover everything. What you’re seeing is developers making the tradeoff of “good enough” because they think the majority of people won’t notice the difference, that’s the ignorance I had to fight against in my office.

            There is a plethora of choice. Check any game audio middleware, WWise for example has multiple choices for HRTF implementation, what you’re saying is just plain false, again, probably tunnel vision.

            I do not see how people on this site are relevant when making a blanket statement about the state of audio in gaming. Audiophiles are, by nature, a minority group simply out of virtue of it being financially unattainable for the majority of gamers. You’re just positing a false association with no real proof, it feels a bit conspiracy theory-ish if I’m being honest.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 6 months ago

            WWise is an out of date kludge that doesn’t work correctly in 4DOF games. I like to play Depth on PC, which uses WWise, and it is absolutely broken when objects move above or below the player. You can tell direction, but height doesn’t work at all. This also could be due to how the unreal engine implements xaudio, which according to xaudio hrtf is non-standard, and wouldn’t be a problem if an alternative api that bypasses xaudio was used.

            I’ve also tried Last Tide, from the same developers, who claim to be using more updated HRTF, but that game is unplayable with broken shark AI that swims through walls and infinitely spawns, which ruins the purpose of a battle royale game. As far as the HRTF goes, I don’t notice the height bug, but I don’t notice the HRTF either, as the 3d is not pronounced enough to stand out.

            Neither of these problems would exist if the developer had used OpenAL/steam audio, or done some work fixing the source in the existing engine, which seems to be a copy-paste implementation of the existing Unreal version. Good enough doesn’t mean it works in a useful manner, it just means the audio is tolerable and has some bare bones HRTF functionality.

            • Laykun
            • 6 months ago

            Depth doesn’t use an HRTF, that’s why you’re experiencing the height “bug”, where as Last Tide does use an HRTF. WWise gives the developer a choice over what HRTF they want to use as their output. All of these are controllable by the sound engineers doing mixing etc. WWise in both these cases though is far superior to the stock standard Unreal sound implementation. OpenAL / Steam audio is too low level to be useful for developing games like Depth or Last Tide as they’re ONLY an audio subsystem, where as software packages like WWise come with a whole studio of tools for sound engineers to use to mix and master the audio.

            Check out the WWise integrations page and you’ll see Steam Audio is a valid output from WWise [url<]https://www.audiokinetic.com/products/wwise-spatial-audio/[/url<] , so I don't see how just going for Steam Audio is a better option than going for WWise with it's pre-built and industry understood toolset and outputting to steam audio. No one in their right mind would use OpenAL, it's last release was 10 years ago.

            • DoomGuy64
            • 6 months ago

            The OpenAL thing is incorrect, it is still being updated under OpenAL Soft, which is a software implementation. It also works under linux, so cross platform support is better than xaudio. The few games that have used OpenAL Soft sound massively better than any other game on the market, and there is no licensing fees afaik. Amnesia and it’s dark atmosphere, for example, are greatly improved by using it.

            Also, if Steam Audio is a valid output for WWise, why not use it as an output? Especially if Depth doesn’t use HRTF with xaudio output.

            • Rectal Prolapse
            • 5 months ago

            Huh – a quick google of “openal soft hrtf” comes up with this:

            [url<]https://github.com/kcat/openal-soft/blob/master/docs/hrtf.txt[/url<] How do we know which games use HRTF?

    • reckless76
    • 7 months ago

    I realize that gaming hardware simply have to have LEDs all over the place… But I’m having a hard time understanding this one. You obviously can’t see the lighting while you’re wearing the headphones, but you probably can see the glare of it in your monitor. So, really, who asked for this?

      • K-L-Waster
      • 7 months ago

      I’m going to guess competitive gamers.

    • yokem55
    • 7 months ago

    How many drivers are actually in each ear? In other words, are these real 7.1 head phones, or are they emulating it in software?

      • Thresher
      • 7 months ago

      There are 2 drivers, one for each ear. There are a few multidriver gaming headsets, but they’re usually in the $200 range.

      They use signal processing to give the impression of discrete drivers, but it’s usually at best a good approximation.

      Interestingly, many games use binaural sound to do the same with just a simple headset or headphones and they can sound pretty amazing without all the elaborate processing.

        • JustAnEngineer
        • 7 months ago

        You have two ears. “7.1” headphones are still just a gimmick. It’s ludicrous to set your game to process positional audio to 8 output channels, then have a processor in the headphones reverse that processing and re-encode to 2 channels. Games should support positional audio with stereo output more accurately than what you’re going to get after re-processing an output designed for a different speaker arrangement.

          • Jason181
          • 7 months ago

          Thus the inquiry about whether there were more than two drivers, because actual 7.1 in headphones works. The rear speakers are physically behind your ears, and thus you hear rear channels using your built in signal processor (brain).

            • Froz
            • 7 months ago

            But it also works very well with regular headphones, or it least it used to. I don’t play FPS games nowadays, but in Quake you had a great advantage playing with (regular) headphones instead of speakers, as you could hear enemy position very well.

    • Thresher
    • 7 months ago

    So. Damn. Ugly.

    I am sure they sound fine. Logitech has been making decent sounding cans for a long time. Unfortunately, all of their highend stuff looks like the sort of thing a controller uses on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier to avoid being deafened. Now they come with disco lights.

    It’s not just Logitech, they all do it to some degree, some worse than others. I have many sets of high end headphones. None of them are as bulky as this, including my Sony top of the line noise cancelling headphones, which packs nearly the same set of features, including positional audio.

    Is it a style thing? Are gamer headphones supposed to look huge, bulky, and heavy? If so, it’s a terrible design choice. The first company that figures out how to make these much more compact with the same feature set is going to make a mint.

      • Ifalna
      • 7 months ago

      Well, over-ear cans are always bulky.

      I would never want to wear on-ears or in-ears for long sessions. My DT-880 are so comfortable, I often forget they are there.

    • shaq_mobile
    • 7 months ago

    Thanks for the review! Gaming headsets and wireless tech are two things I avoid when I can. It’s good to see that both are improving.

    Still, seems like a good USB mic and dedicated headphones are hard to beat, but I can see the advantage if you have multiple platforms that you switch between.

    I still use a $20 dollar USB mic I bought at Fred Meyer 12 years ago and Sennheiser 650s or 14 year old 580s. The ATH M50s are pretty great for the price. Massdrop 6xx are good when you can find them. Audio equipment is worth spending the extra money on and finding dedicated equipment. Good gear lasts forever.

      • Thresher
      • 7 months ago

      You give up positional audio going to that set up, but there are external processors and amps you can buy that will give you the same effects and they aren’t that expensive.

        • shaq_mobile
        • 7 months ago

        I guess that makes sense. The few games I play where it makes a difference it does seem to be handy. I guess I’m just used to playing with 5.1 most of the time and my headphones are reserved for morning or late night gaming, which usually excludes rage inducing games, which are games that positional audio usually helps. I dunno though, I never had a problem with regular headphones in counterstrike. Hmmm

      • JustAnEngineer
      • 7 months ago

      Check out the [url=https://antlionaudio.com/<]ModMic[/url<] as an addition to your quality stereo headphones.

        • shaq_mobile
        • 7 months ago

        Hey that looks neat. I’ve seen a few of those now. When my reliable usb mic dies I’m gonna check those out. Normal USB microphones cost an arm and a leg since all this streaming rage started.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This