Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: Pleasant sound.
A CASE (pouch).
Good build quality.
Good looking.
Cons: Cable tangles.
The "case" is a pouch.
Not vibrant enough for some?
Too affordable?
BQEYZ BQ3 ($68.99): They won’t leave you feeling blue.


There has been some good hype surrounding the BQ3. I call this iteration the fourth wave of Chi-Fi. The first was exploring the market viability for inexpensive IEM’s. The second was the production of second-gen IEM’s, which followed the first (markedly better in sound and quality). The third was the push by many Chinese audio companies into the mid-fi market and will good success. This, the fourth marks a filling in of the lower end of mid-fi (upper end of low-fi). Regardless, Chinese audio companies have grown profoundly in the last 4-5 years, gaining upon their experiences in build and sound. Some have fallen because of false-tactics (18 drivers per side!!! And of course, 6 of them actually work). But some have grown and matured quite well. I will also openly admit that I have never heard any BQ models, this is the first.

Moving a bit upscale, the BQ3 is the new “flagship” model from BQ, and as such it had better perform. If the build and color alone are any indication, the process is working. A note here as well. There has been a bit of smoke surrounding what exactly Chi-Fi consists of, and how some look at it. I would openly state it does not matter. Period. After all isn’t our hobby about hearing and finding something we like? Whether that be our $2400 CTM’s or sub$100 Chi-Fi. If we like it, then who cares what others think, and that is our version of this hobby. Listen to what you want, enjoy what you want. The heck with other opinions.

Thanks for Elle and BQEYZ for providing the BQ3 review sample. An open honest evaluation is what we agreed upon. It is also an understanding that the review sample is mine to keep but may be asked for at any time deemed worthy by either party.


Gear used/compared:

All prices in USD, unless noted otherwise

TinAudio T3 ($69)
Simgot MT3 ($59)
CCA C16 ($99)

XDuoo X10t ii/iFi Pro iDSD
Shanling M5s
MacBook Pro/Burson Fun

Songs used:

Too bloody many to list all, but you want songs, so there you go:

Coldplay-All I Can think About Is You
Coldplay-A Message
Coldplay-White Shadows
Dona Onete-Sonos de Adolescente
Los Lonely Boys- Heaven (en Espanol)
twenty one pilots-Trees
twenty one pilots-Car Radio
twenty one pilots-Heathens
Damian Marley-Everybody Wants To Be Somebody
Damian Marley-So A Child May Follow
Damian Marley-The Struggle Discontinues
Ziggy Marley-Lighthouse
Ziggy Marely-See Dem Fake Leaders
Mark Knopfler-Laughs And Jokes And Drinks And Smokes
Santana w/ Mana- Corazon Espinado
The new twenty one pilots album, Trench
Tedeschi Trucks Band…anything
Mark Knopfler-Down The Road Wherever

Specs/etc galore:

Color:With Mic Blue

Great sound meets ergonomic design
BQEYZBQ3 Series in-ear headphones deliver stunning audio clarity and Two Driver In-Ear Headphones combines its unrivaled design standards , for a perfect fit and a tight acoustic seal.

10 drivers earphone :
Three balanced armatures and two separate dynamic drivers create a spacious and transparent feeling of having nothing between you and music. The armatures are uniquely inset with durable silicone covers for lasting performance, while two outer layers of PET greatly increase bass and midrange response time.

10 drivers:BQEYZBQ3, 3 Balanced armature&2 Dynamic per side Simple,total10 drivers earphone: Dual Balanced Armature provide high-intensity resolution, rich sense of quality and full of vocals to give you pure listening experience; Independent research and development dynamic driver to strengthen bass texture to show you a shocking bass

High-definition sound
A bespoke dynamic driver provides high-definition sound, full-range audio clarity and rich bass that is
powerful yet controlled, resulting in natural, open and detailed acoustics.

Perfected Ergonomics
The aluminum alloy earpieces are ergonomically designed with oblique angles that match your ear canals so you can enjoy your music in total comfort. different sets of ear tips ensure you get a proper seal in your ear for the full range of sound.

Storage pouch
To keep C5 Series 2 safe, we've included a stylish storage pouch that fits perfectly into your pocket or bag when you're not using your headphones.

Key features
Weight: 25±5g
Cable Length: 1.2m
Plug Type: 3.5mm
Pin Type: 0.78mm
Frequency: 7-40KHz
Impedance: 22Ω
Sensitivity: 95dB

In da box:

IEM (blue)
3 sets of silicon tips (s/m/l)
Instruction manual
4-wire cable, w/ mic
A CASE!!!! Err, rather a cloth bag. But it’s still something!


What of this flagship?...

Listening the The Ending from Tedeschi Trucks, you get Susan’s rough sensuous voice, and one can do nothing but sit back and marvel. She is a musical spectacle. One that should be experienced in small venues everywhere. A phenomenal concert to be had. Find their group, listen and enjoy. But here you get the intimacy matching that small venue, without the extraneous noise. It is you with Susan singing in your ears. And it is grand.

The BQ3 imbues a solid bass line (with some bleed into the mids) but untamed. There is an overpowering to it, that needs to be controlled better. It is good mind you, but a bit too much. I do like it, though. The two dynamic drivers give that sense of bass and help to reach fairly deep. There is a small bit of rumble, but not like the Atlas (not much can…). Still good mind you. But, getting back to Susan’s vocals, they are sublime. Her deeper voice gives a good sense of the lower mid frequencies. Sensuous and beautiful, there is a good note of which to judge. But first, more on the critter itself…


Coming in a small box reminiscent of KZ, the wasted space is limited. Excess material multiplied by hundreds of thousands of units mounts up. Here the small sized-nature is appreciated. Sliding the cover off you are met with a hard foam insert up top with the IEM (mine are blue!), with the three sets of tips (one mounted) below inline. The lower “half” holds the cable in a rectangular tube sleeve as well as the cloth “case.” Nothing fancy, nothing missed, nothing unappreciated.

With an oblong shape, but a teardrop “fender” cutout, the IEM itself sits nicely in-ear, and is decent enough looking. Nothing spectacular, but nothing in wretched excess either. With a long nozzle one might think fit would suffer. It doesn’t. It is not one of those large diameter nozzles but is just right. The plastic housing over the 2-pin cable fits snug and tight. There is even a label on both the housing and cable, so simply match L-L and R-R. A long-shrink-wrapped plastic works as memory wire, but with too much bend for my tastes. This is another of the wrap around glasses style. This does not make for easy ingress/egress…

Tightly wound machine-processed cables are efficient, tight and do not create any sound. A bit thin for my tastes though, it simply works. With a clear plastic cinch, and a splitter housing labeled with the BQEYZ letters, the weight hangs nicely. Not often is it said, but proper weighting from where the cable hangs down (directly at the ear, and from the spittle) can be a huge benefit for comfort. The BQ3 does not disappoint. Weighted just about perfectly, this is made for hours of wearing without strain. The cable is a bit thin above the splitter to me, though. A right angle (slightly more than…) jack rounds out the unit, replete with SOFT Velcro wrap. Often the tie strap is made of Velcro and catches on darn near everything. Here it is soft and does not catch on nary a thing.

A pleasant package and one in which I have no qualms.



Listening to Mark Knopfler’s Just A Boy Away From Home, you can clearly hear the Liverpool theme of “You’ll Never Walk Alone” during the song. I’m not sure if that is on purpose, or happenstance, but it is clear as day. Fitting as Liverpool played in the Champions League final against that dreadful Sp*rs team…Go Pool. And the BQ3 represents the sound faithfully. Cymbal clashes are held in place. Vocals are fairly clear and concise. Detail is what you would expect from something in this price range, but ahead of some at this price. The level of clarity would punch slightly above for it is good. I’m always loath to do that, for the critter in Q should be judged on its own merits, not against something above. Compare in the same class? Good. Compare as “world beater” or punches way above its weight?” Bad.

Moving on to the bouncy Good On You Son, you get the quick punch of synthesizer disco-like. With a quick decay of bass, it does not hinder the following note. With a bit of push up top as well, there is nary a bit of sibilance (another aspect of the 2-4 gen Chi-Fi), and those treble notes do not tangle either. Epitomized by the cymbal and high note of synth, you get a decent amount of layering without too much suffer. A good wide sound stage adds to the overall package, while being average of depth and height; as does a decent instrumentation. I throw all together here, for they intermix well with purpose, and mostly without fuss. Hardly any commotion between the tonalities mentioned, they all mix as a happy family.


If I had to pick, it would be the clarity and instrumentation. It falls a bit behind others, but due to the sound characteristic(s) I do not mind too much. Running the warm Burson Fun on the V6 single Vivid aid in that warmth of sound. I do not miss that precise nature, such as one would find on an IEM, which is almost antiseptic of sound. Analytical, too much can ruin a good package. That does not happen here.



BQEYZ BQ3 ($69) v TinAudio T3 ($69):

As I have previously stated, the T3 is what the T2 Pro should have been. And the T2 Pro is what the T2 should have been. Of the three, I like the T3 the best. It has the most rounded sound of the three. The T2 was clear and concise but left any semblance of a bass sound at the station. The T2 Pro helped alleviate this somewhat, but not completely and in my mind at the expense of that clarity. The T3 melds the best, with a solid bass (not as much quantity as the BQ3 or C16), that gives a hint of rumble. And that is running through the Burson Fun with the warmer V6 Vivid OpAmp. So, it is still a little light.

But there is good sound and good clarity again. Mids sound a bit held back. I hate to use the word veiled, because that would inadequately describe the signature. Held back is a good analogy. For the price it presents good value and would be a competent alternative to the BQ3. Just do not expect the level of bass presence that the BQ3 has.

BQEYZ BQ3 ($69) v Simgot MT3 ($59):

The Simgot has the bass quantity and presence, but not the quality. Sounding like an hourglass shape, the mids seem squeezed and pushed forward compared to the BQ3. Treble is good, but without the quality one would hope for at this price. A decent offering overshadowed by the BQ3 and the others here.


BQEYZ BQ3 ($69) v CCA C16 ($99):

The first and biggest difference between the two is the open sound presented by the CCA. With a push of the higher note, the CCA could not be considered warm when compared to the BQ3. It could very well be slightly warm (that would be a push…), but the mids dominate the sound on the C16. With good bass to back up that mid push (vocals are quite up front), I would say that the sub bass on the C16 is better, but the presentation of the BQ3 is quite equal to the task and adds to that warmth of sound nicely, while going deeper.

Mind you, those with better ears might actually call the BQ3’s bass muddy, but I cannot discern that. They might also state that the C16 is overly bright, with slight sibilance of sound. They would not be wrong, but I do not find the C16 to be harsh. Only much different than the BQ3. There does seem to be a squeezing of the mids on the C16, something I have noticed on other Chi-Fi IEM’s of late. Think of squeezing a balloon from each end. The middle has nowhere to go, but forward. This would be a 3D representation of the C16. Not bad mind you, but different. Good clarity does come with that push, and it is not unpleasant to these middle-aged ears.


The BQ3 came to me by surprise, and it is much appreciated. For the price, it is a very good value, with decent enough sound to keep you interested. It can compete with the others here of its own accord. As such, it has nothing to be ashamed of, nor hide. It does not have the best treble quality. Mids tend to dominate (but are “covered” a bit), and thus vocals can be a bit forward. Bass is a strong point, but not overpowering.

Taken as a whole, the package is a decent offering, and one which I was glad to try; for it does seem to have a somewhat cult-like following. And after listening, I can see why.

A huge thank you to Elle and BQEYZ for the opportunity to try their wares. It is always nice to try something of which I have read about (and good words they are), but better to hear and discern what has been read and verify. Finishing this with twenty one pilots Cancer seems fitting, as the bass provides that rumble, which seemed to hide on some songs. Almost as if to say, “I’m here, I’m glad you were able to listen to me!”



Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: Best in class for Electronic Dance Music
Cons: Other genres, not so much
“After putting the BQ3 away for a solid week, then bringing it back-out, I had an epiphany. “

The Epiphany

“In literary terms, an epiphany is that moment in the story where a character achieves realization, awareness, or a feeling of knowledge.”

Let’s stop trying to make the BQEYZ BQ3 something it’s not. Let’s simply take it out of the box, add the included cable and add the IEMs to a phone or IPod. No fancy cable or expensive DAP. In reality, this is how the product was intended to be used.

bqeyz 000000.png

I’ve always thought that manufacturers were focusing on phone use with the $100 and under section of our industry. It’s kind of like looking for quality at a basic level. It’s the joy in finding just how things could be in the most rudimentary of forms; but not just a simple and dumbed-down way of looking at the BQ3. It’s getting the IEM in it’s home environment, putting on some EDM and forgetting about everything. At times reviewers can get too deep, look too hard and expect that everyone wants what they want. Most of the time that’s missing the mark.

Got it? $70 bucks and a phone.

My Gosh? I was somehow amiss here. To take $70 or less, buy this IEM then plug it into a phone, finally put on some TRANCE MP3s and all is well. Everything is perfect with the BQ3 alive at home roaming it’s native environment. Huh? I don’t know what to tell you? At times less can be better? At times the most simple path is the best. Sometimes the shortest direct route is the fastest and smartest.

So here we are. We found our place in the world, not only is the universe in balance but things are as they are supposed to be. What we have is a big broad soundstage with the bass not really excessive or too much with this style of music. Amazingly the whole signature becomes interlocked with nothing out of place. Treble seems right, even the midrange is just where it’s meant to be? So with my history and understanding of Electronic Dance Music IEMs.......I would choose the BQ3 in a shop. In fact I don’t think you can beat this style of quality in our price bracket for this intended use?

My review: 10 out of 10. Stop reading............though if you want an “audiophile review” with basic silly “audiophile-ism” simply keep reading.

Race cars and kitchen appliances are tools, they only perform one specific task but do it well. I’m sure the BQ3 was tuned specifically for Electronic Music. In this regard it’s a grand tool. There are more well rounded IEM performers out there, but with EDM, the BQ3 stands alone in it’s price.


BQEYZ BQ3 is funny Kids! Some folks like big... some folks like small. Some like hot.........some like cold, and some don’t even know what the heck they want. So from an IEM review standpoint, reviewers simply go by an idea in relation to known concepts. But.....then.........what happens when something new comes along and challenges the norm? And just as cool as wearing a Batman shirt for your high school graduation photographs......the BQEYZ BQ3 has arrived. If your new to BQEYZ as a company.....that’s “OK”......I was too.

bqeyz 67890.JPG

Things are different today in the IEM world with many products having to jump up to get noticed. The market is truly flooded and as consumers we have about 1.5 million IEM choices to chose from. OK.......well the number may be somewhat smaller......but it’s close. You can’t help but notice the BQEYZ BQ3. It’s design and looks ARE quite different, not to mention it’s sound and sound quality value.

I received a message out of the blue from BQEYZ’s Elle Zhou asking if I would like to review the BQ3 IEM. I have no affiliation with BQEYZ other than they sent me a free pair of IEMs. I’ll do my best to make this review as straightforward and realistic as possible.

BQEYZ BQ3 Review July 16th 2019

Was that an earthquake? No that’s just the BQ3?

The BQEYZ BQ3 is a bass-centric IEM. If your one of those pansy treble-heads or baby-like mid-heads, this IEM will be holding too much machismo in the bass department for you............move along!

I normally don’t listen to $70’s not that I’m a snob, in reality I have a number of $200 and $400 IEMs I truly love unconditionally and wouldn’t want to live life without. But anymore.......... with what’s out there........ it seems I just don’t reach for sub-$100 IEMs unless I’m doing something dangerous like putting out a house-fire or catching a bank-robber. Ok well, I made the house-fire and bank-robber stuff up. But you get the picture. Most of us have nice gear we leave at home and have mid-fi stuff for the gym or out in the rain. People go and search for utility IEMs and look to find Bluetooth IEMs for out and about. But what if we find a well built $70 pair of fun-sounding and great looking IEMs? Should they be known about? Should we value them? Yes! We should! they are!

Let’s get a firm grip on reality here! This is Head-Fi; we are not the norm. Average consumers look at $70 as the top apex in the IEM spending curve. For most of the world these BQEYZ BQ3 IEMs will be in the top audiophile league of dollars spent. For most they will not be their beaters or utility IEMs but a big, big purchase in sound. I’m fully aware of these concepts and will structure my review accordingly. Also as your reading keep in mind, the BQ3 is an trick pony. Lol

Construction, build quality and design:

I chose this subject first as it’s by far the easiest to write about.

I’m not well versed on the 2019 $70 Chi-Fi builds, but have owned numerous IEMs in the last 10 years. Firstly opening the box and taking out the IEMs is an amazing experience. The pictures are not able to convey what the BQ3 IEM is like in hand. Constructed as a two piece 100% aluminum CNC’s very different from anything you have seen; coming off much like a CNC high-tolerance aircraft part. Just the fact that the two shells fit together with no overhang or error is something to behold, and surreal for the $70 bracket! Even the insertion point for the two pin-cable connection makes you wonder why everything is not made this way. I’m assuming this aluminum build is to reduce resonance from our 2 per side 10mm coaxial dynamic drivers?


Impedance: 22Ω


Frequency range: 7-40kHz

Driver unit:3BA+2DD In Ear Earphone

Weight:About 25g±5g

Cable Type: 0.78mm Pin

As shown in the diagram the BQ3 reflects a 5 way hybrid design. The IEM contains three balanced armatures and two 10mm dynamic drivers per side. Also it’s nice to know this is currently the BQEYZ flagship IEM, and it truly feels like it in hand.

Before arrival (because of the photographs) I was seriously concerned about fit. We all know one of the most important aspects to success is fit, as if there is no fit, the party is over. How many IEMs has anyone ever seen with this wild shape? Though upon insertion all my worries were put to rest. Strangely the BQ3 ends up comfortable and easy to wear. As far as fit 10/10. Sound isolation 4/10.

This comfort comes about from nozzle angle in relation to the driver housing. The IEM comes with S/M/L tips. I was able to get close to perfect fitment with the L; but found better imaging and sound quality with my “go-to” Sony clear silicone tips. The nozzle is of medium length and offers a slightly wider than normal circumference tipped out with a quality chrome inset screen, looking almost like a circular dish with holes drilled in it.

bq eyz 22.jpg

As seen in the photographs; topping off the build is a striking CNC beveled edge which became polished and shining bright!

bqeyz 66.jpg

In balancing where to place the quality it seems most of the effort was put into the IEM itself. The included BQEYZ $9.99 cable is just “OK” with the IEMs gaining sound quality with other two pin cables. It’s not that the cable is bad in anyway, it’s just that the IEM itself has the ability to grow it’s signature quality and scales up fast with better equipment and cables. At first the cable quality was confusing to me, but then I contemplated the arraignment. They put 99.9 percent of their build-effort into the IEM itself. The included cable IS adequate and does a sufficient job for what it is. But for enthusiastic owners; they can join an aftermarket cable and reap the rewards. I spent an afternoon trying different cables and seemed to notice an improvement with aftermarket cables here. Remember just the simple fact that the BQ3 easily shows cable quality is actually an endearing concept. I would much rather have a dynamite IEM with the freedom to change cables, than a 50% quality IEM joined with a good cable..........but that’s just me?

It’s the BQ3’s up-scale prowess which separates the IEM from the norm, taking it way way out of it’s price point in the end. If a person gels with the overall BQ3 sound, it’s nothing short of astonishing how fast the IEM will show you the quality of your very best upstream equipment.

My first eye opening experience occurred putting this $70 IEM in back of a $2000 desktop setup running 4.4mm balanced.........just because I was curious where this IEM could go.

When ordering you have a choice of blue or black and a choice of a mic/volume control cable or a straight cable. Take note BQEYZ also offers a nicer aftermarket cable which some order at time of purchase.

The Box Contains:

2 BQEYZ BQ3 Hybrid IEMs

S/M/L Tips

Cloth Carry Pouch

1 Cable (terminated with 3.5mm single ended L plug)

1 Small IEM Safety and Recommendation Manual

bqeyz 4.jpg

bqeyz 7.jpg

bqeyz 2.jpg

bqeyz 1.jpg

The Sound:
It’s safe to say if your reading this you know and love bass. Not only is the BQ3 bass heavy but the L shape response delineates all you would want in a heavy bass response. It’s that the bass has a profound texture and separation from the rest of the response. And while the BQ3 responds well to EQ; trying to EQ the bass to “normal” would go against any reason to get the IEM in the first place. This response is special being a very different sound than just simply adding EQ bass to an IEM in your collection.

Big Sound:
The biggest overall sound of any value priced IEM I’ve ever heard. Big,big....big.

Besides EDM a second value would come by using the BQ3 for movie watching with a phone. Though keep in mind there will be better choices out there for dialogue. Though it’s cool how well the BQ3 does movie sound effects.

To fault the BQ3 against the better price no object IEM offerings out’s most likely in resolution, and the fact more expensive IEMs will do more music genres well. They maybe could have tweaked the treble a bump to increase the feeling of both soundstage and detail, but that’s not what this IEM is about. It’s laid-back with a rolled-off treble and recessed midrange. Much of my favorite IEM purchases also have this I’m right at home. While doing an amazing job straight out of a phone, improvement comes using a DAP or desktop system. Get the BQ3 a good source and some major juice and listen as it wakes. Still to be down to earth, folks are always hoping to find an IEM giant killer. Most want a $900 flagship for $70. Truth to be told there is no such thing. There is more likely $600 IEMs for $200. You can guess, there is going to be a better chance of finding a $290 IEM for $70. Somehow this is just how audio purchases work? So while there IS an amazing quality here and the sound is worth every penny of $70, more expensive flagships are going to provide phase accuracy and a less disjointed response with other non-EDM genres. In case your wondering, more expensive IEMs will include a more fleshed out midrange and more “air” in the treble response. Still listening to electronic music has it’s advantage making the BQ3 80%-90% close to perfect. Why?

You already know...........Bass.
DD Bass.......$2000 Bass!

Not one but two 10mm DD drivers per side, and you can tell. Even with all the technical advancements in IEM technology balanced armature bass IS different. Where BAs have a quick decay and attack.......they fail with the deep dynamics DD units perform with ease. There is also an issue with reverbs and “ambiance” which never gets provided well in BA response; no matter what the IEM cost is.

While just about adequate, it’s not a strongpoint here. Strangely too, trying to EQ the bass back does nothing more than to reveal how pedestrian the mids truly are. Most of my favorite gear is mid-recessed so I’m right at home. But don’t pull back the bass frequency cover as there is not much underneath! Lol

Articulated and natural, yet not hot or bright. I can’t help but think this IEM walks that fine line between just enough but not harsh in any way shape or form. EQ works as a tuning-knob to get a little more lively essence when needed! The legend this IEM is has been built off a specific laid-back treble personality. And while the bass seems to be our focus, it’s the treble personality which also seals the deal.

I can’t help but view the BQ3 as something innovated beyond the normal. It’s not a safe creation..........only appealing to a select group of EDM listeners. With that said, it’s not boring but wild and different. BQEYZ makes other IEM models with a more reserved response, but went out on a limb with this a place few ever go.

We could easily have been gifted a murky and crowded personality........but it’s really not here, even though your guessing this is one slow and dark's not. Two bass drivers add authority and 3 other BAs add to the resolution at hand.

The 3D highly refined bass response does not totally bleed over into our whole signature like you would think.

In My Everyday Use:
I have trouble finding any IEM in my collection better built. So for me the BQ3 was made to travel. The lower frequency response is a match made in heaven to block outside noise. Nothing can break this IEM short of a truck running over it, and the cable is replaceable. Keep in mind the polarity is reversed, meaning you will want to flip your aftermarket cables.

If your into EDM and want the most for $70, these are recommended; but have to like bass!

bqeyz 99.jpg

bqeyz 5678.jpg

These are not boring IEMs. They exude a personality which separates them from not only the pack, but anything your ever heard. They do have a close sound character to my qdc Anole V3 IEM, though the DD bass is even a smidge more. Here we have a very new and different design which goes to change our perspective of what’s possible in the entry level market.


October 2020:
Well interesting enough I have found the BQ3 to now scale up with better firmware and the Sony Walkman 1A. There is a new DMP-Z1 emulator aftermarket firmware which brings up the detail and soundstage of the Sony 1A. Joining the BQ3 ends as a very rewarding experience now!
Last edited:
"I would much rather have a dynamite IEM with the freedom to change cables, than a 50% quality IEM joined with a good cable."

Agreed. BQEYZ puts their focus on delivering best-in-class sound at very competitive pricing.

"They do have a close sound character to my qdc Anole V3 IEM....."

Quite a compliment for the BQ3. I read your "QDC Anole v3" review and it was a bit of deja' vu for me.
You'll probably like BQEYZ sublime KC2 and even their K2 since it has slightly more low-end oomph.

Johnny Mac

New Head-Fier
Pros: Great Build quality, Full bodied low end, non-fatiguing highs, comes with a storage pouch
Cons: Midrange needs enhancement, ovoid shape not the best for long listening use
Some things just take you by the name, either effectively or ineffectively depends on the individual’s personality towards a particular name. I was lucky enough to grow when the digital age started developing and advancing at a frantic pace. I can clearly remember the 1st time I was asked by Yahoo Mail to create an email username and password and one of the numerous things that popped on my mind was using QWERTY, it’s easy to spot on a keyboard and I thought, yeah, that could work. Until I found out most of my peers used the same password as well. It then made the QWERTY tagline in my mind of being associated with average, ordinary and common. Imagine what I was thinking when I heard about BQEYZ as a company name for an audio brand, no need to guess, you’d know by now what I was thinking.

BQEYZ, as of the moment has no official website but instead uses AliExpress for their official store which also supports all the other BQEYZ products such their other IEM offerings, the K1, KB1, K2 and KC2. What we have now to realview is their current flagship, the BQ3, along with BQEYZ C2 8-core(4-core single crystal copper and 4-core silver plated copper) upgrade cable which BQEYZ both sent as a sample unit in exchange for an honest review, no monetary factors were involved in the agreement. Priced at $68.99 for the BQEYZ BQ3 and the BQEYZ C3 upgrade cable for $35 can be checked and grabbed off their official BQEYZ AliExpress store front and BQEYZ Amazon store front.

The BQEYZ BQ3 is a hybrid type IEM featuring dual dynamic drivers and 3 balanced armatures per side. It is spec’d out with a 7-40 kHz Frequency Response, 22 Ohm Impedance and a 95dB Sensitivity. An option for either black or blue faceplate designs are offered by BQEYZ for the BQ3 and we have the black one for realview. The BQ3 stays departs BQEYZ’s known product naming scheme of using the “K” character which was according to BQEYZ, was their old factory’s 1st name. Does this mean that the BQ3 is the start of a new line of BQEYZ products coming off a newer factory production line? If that’s the case, it better deliver the goods or else it might hinder BQEYZ’s plant for a 3rd production factory.

Packaging and Build Quality



The BQ3 comes in a black sleeved box with just the BQ3 IEM snapshot on the front and minor product description details. Removing the sleeve showcases the BQ3 in a black foam cutout with 2 pairs of translucent gray eartips (S and L, with M being pre-installed on the BQ3), a small box with the BQEYZ brand is placed just below the foam cutout which contains the dark gray velvet storage pouch and the stock cable inside. It’s nice to find a storage pouch being included by BQEYZ since the BQ3 is for now, their flagship offering.

The BQ3’s housing makes use of an all-aluminum alloy build with an overall ovoid shape. The faceplate where the color option sets in can either be black or blue which both features metallic silver chamfered edges and the inscription “Hybrid technology”. The underside of the IEM housing features 3 vents with both placed flatly and is sized a tad wider than the single vent placed on the base of the BQ3’s nozzle. The BQ3’s nozzle is a separate piece and I’d guess it is some kind of hard plastic although it terminates to a metallic silver showerhead type cap. As with all metal build IEMs, the BQ3 is prone to scratches and feels cold to the ears when used on a fully air-conditioned room. It doesn’t feel totally uncomfortable for my ears although I can’t use it for more than 3 hours as the upper portion of the BQ3 tends to touch my ears way too much causing eventual discomfort (that’s at 3 hours usage).

The BQ3’s stock cable is a 4-core copper wire with black shielding and either comes with mic controls (1 button control for play/pause and answer/drop functions) or not. There is sufficient strain relief on both the gold-plated right angle 3.5mm jack and the black metal Y-split with the BQEYZ brand printed on it.

The BQ3 also utilizes removable cables with a recessed .78mm 2pin female connection on the IEM and a gold-plated .78mm 2pin male connector housed in black hard plastic with L-R markings and a clear plastic memory guide for over ear use.

C3 upgrade cable
BQEYZ decided to include one of their upgrade cables for the BQ3 and I was already expecting it to be packaged in either a small plastic or cardboard box so I was surprised when it came with a matte silver zip case which is lined with black velvet on the inside, it immediately became my go to storage case for the BQ3 since not only does it have enough space to store the upgrade cable and the BQ3 but also because it has quite a sturdiness to it which doesn’t easily compress when stored in a very tight bag.


The BQEYZ C3 upgrade cable is made of 8-core (4-core single crystal copper and 4-core silver plated copper) utilizing the usual round braid and is finished/sheathed with silver as well as copper making it an easy eye-candy. There is sufficient tension on the braid making it easy enough for storage and stiff enough to resist tangles. The gold-plated 3.5mm straight plug housing, y-split and chin slider are all made of aluminum as well with a matte silver finish, only the 3.5mm housing has ample strain relief though. The 2pin .78mm female housing uses clear plastic which has a memory wire guide as well for over ear use. Only a slight hint of microphonic noise was present when using the C3 upgrade cable, not enough to be annoying or disrupt your listening session.

The BQ3 comes off as a overall balanced sounding set of IEMs with a touch of emphasis on both the low-end and the treble yet not enough to say it’s boosted on the said frequencies. I decided to use the stock M ear tips along with the Sony CAS-1 off my MSI GF62-8RE laptop and the Sony A46HN music player outputting various FLAC files which would be mentioned along in the realview. The BQ3 also underwent the recommended “100 hour burn-in” period for those that advocate it.

Lady Gaga came in strutting for the low end performance test of the BQ3, singing her Starstruck track in 24/44 FLAC. Sub-bass hits has great depth to them which creates a rather powerful atmosphere. The occasional bass drops are full-bodied and resonates in a subtly lingering passion which doesn’t struggle when tracks get bass heavy, speedy bass came to play. The BQ3 handles the low end well and doesn’t disregard the fact that it needs a nice foundation towards the succeeding frequencies.

The BQ3’s midrange is where all the improvements should be made for their next iteration. I called on Lea Salonga to serenade me with her I Can’t Make You Love Me in 16/44 FLAC. The BQ3 renders the midrange in a smooth and soft manner. The lower midrange delivery is clear enough but comes short of providing a fuller sounding experience creating a somewhat lackluster lower midrange performance. The midrange rendition also follows suit, acceptable but far from engaging. The upper midrange is where it starts to grasp that it lacks on the prior frequencies by adding a much needed clarity and attack on the notes which although non-fatiguing, is already too late to save the midrange.

Tackling the highs of the BQ3 was a relief from the rather mediocre midrange performance it gave out. Lady Gaga’s The Fame in 24/44 FLAC gave out stellar clarity and definition of the treble hits, enough to put a smirk on a treblehead’s face. There is a noticeable emphasis on this frequency which I personally prefer, it gives instrumental hits a quick and clean snap. The BQ3 also reports to the higher frequencies without any sibilance and disorienting sudden peaks.

Soundstage and Imaging
The BQEYZ BQ3 is comparable to the collection of friends you’d probably have upon reaching an older age, small but intimate. It renders the instrumental presence to emanate a narrow sounding soundstage with the imaging somewhat on point, not with great accuracy though. There is also mediocre layering observed but is equalized with great left to right and right to left panning.

C3 Upgrade Cable
While the BQ3’s stock cables worked great, it’s always a welcome option to have an upgrade cable within one’s reach and I personally am a believer that cables do create and offer sonic changes and sometimes improvements, at a tiny fraction of the IEMs overall tonality that is. What the C3 offers for the BQ3 is an overall tighter presentation for the low frequency, with the bass drops benefiting the most, would have loved it if the C3 improved the BQ3’s midrange though.

The BQEYZ BQ3 makes me think that the BQEYZ brand name was indeed what I initially believed it to be, odd but unique and so far not underperforming. The BQ naming scheme could be meaning Best Quality which although doesn’t exactly fit BQ3, it also doesn’t stray way too far from it. The BQ3 glides across the various sound frequencies, leaving nothing exceptional and nothing unsatisfying along the way. The low-end performance is rendered with sufficient thump and power and the high frequency devoid of sharp peaky highs with just a tinge of kick. The midrange would certainly love some more care and revision which gives BQEYZ both a challenge and opportunity to outdo themselves with the BQ4 (Just guessing). And if you have some spare funds, the C3 upgrade cable while lacking the much needed midrange bump the BQ3 needs, does indeed worked better for both aesthetic function and portability for the BQ3.
  • Like
Reactions: Light - Man


500+ Head-Fier
Pros: Warm, fatigue-free tuning
Well-built aluminium housing
2-pin detachable cables
Price-to-performance ratio
Fast becoming a trusted brand in the audio enthusiast community
Cons: Not for trebleheads
BQ3 TripInTrance.jpg

Newcomer BQEYZ seems to be running on all cylinders at the moment. Thus far, all of their initial offerings (six different models) have been received well.






and this BQ3.


Of the four models I own I can tell you that I have difficulty picking a personal favorite. That said, the BQ3 is quite unlike the other three BQEYZ that I own.

Before I get into the meat of the review I'd like to send my sincere thanks to Elle Zhou at BQEYZ for sending me the BQ3 for feedback purposes.

Full disclosure:
I've no affiliation with BQEYZ and I receive no remuneration for any links I may include but the review sample is mine to keep.

Free stuff?


Honest review?


About me:
I tend to prefer a relatively neutral sound signature with a slight emphasis in both bass and lower treble, which is basically a mild "U" shaped sound signature where midrange frequencies are left intact and unaffected. I find that an absolute neutral sound signature usually lacks enough energy for the genres I enjoy most, which are Classic Trance and Progressive (early Tiesto, Markus Schulz, Otello, DT8 Project), Chill Out, Breakbeat (Hybrid & Burufunk Remixes) and 80's & 90's (New Order, Secession, The Cure, Siouxie & The Banshees, Depeche Mode). Sure I listen to Verve Remixed, Sade, Bach, Ella Fitzgerald and everything in between, but as of late the bulk of my listening pleasure is focused on the aforementioned genres.

About IEMs:
Take note when you read IEM reviews that when the reviewer gives his/her opinion regarding the sound that there are many factors that shape the final sound an IEM delivers to one's ear.

Those factors include:
1 - Shape & size of reviewer's ear canals. (shallow/deep, wide/narrow)
2 - Shape & size of eartips (round/cone, single, double or triple flange)
3 - Materials of eartips (silicone/foam)
4 - Shape of IEM (and/or angle of nozzle) can cause fitment issues for some.
5 - Source (quality of DAC in smartphone, laptop, digital audio player)
6 - Source (power rating) is it amplified/unamplified.
7 - The IEM itself (driver flex/trapping air in canal causing muffled sound.
8 - The Reviewers ability to hear all frequency ranges (age plays a factor).

Most consumers are unaware of how much weight each of these factors hold in rendering a final verdict. This is why there is such a wide variance in not only ratings, but the description of an IEMs sound. An unaware consumer purchases a perfectly fine IEM but has difficulty keeping the IEM in the ear or he/she does not satisfactorily seal the ear canal with the included silicone eartips (this is a common occurrence) and the consumer summarily dismisses the IEM as sub par. Another consumer purchases the same IEM but experiences a perfect fit and seal and has nothing but praise for the same IEM. Sealing the ear canals AND HAVING THE EARTIP FIRMLY AFFIXED to the IEM nozzle is the only proper way to use in-ear monitors. I can think of no audio equipment that is subjected to such praise or ridicule as the in-ear monitor. As if that's not enough, there is no "one-size-fits-all" when it comes to IEM eartips.

Materials (silicone/foam) have different dampening effects on final sound.
Shape of the eartips (olive-shaped, cone-shaped or other-shaped) can have different dampening effects on final sound based on how much space is between the IEM nozzle and your eardrum and how well the eartip has sealed the ear canal.
The aperture of the eartip's opening (wide-bore/narrow-bore) will have dampening effects on the final sound.

The easiest way for you to experience the different effects I am discussing is to take your current on-ear headphones or over-ear headphones, pick a song full of energy, put the earphones on and let them sit naturally over or on your ears. Listen to the music for two minutes. After two minutes, using your hands, slightly press the headphones closer to your eardrums. Notice the change in the sound. Is there more/less bass? Is there more/less treble? Did the vocals slightly slip forward/back?

Consider that on-ear and over-ear headphones have a driver that sits approximately 1 1/2 inches to 2 inches from your eardrums and by pressing the headphones 1/4" closer to your eardrums the sound changed. Now consider that an IEM driver sits anywhere from 3/4" to 1/4" from your eardrums and the slightest changes (angle, depth, shape, material) can have up to three times more of an effect due to the proximity of the IEM to the eardrum.

For this reason, I think it is wise to invest a nominal dollar amount on different eartips to find an eartip that works well for your particular ear's anatomy. This way you experience everything the earphone tuner intended for you to experience. Some IEM manufacturers supply multiple sizes (S/M/L) and/or materials (silicone/foam) of eartips to increase the odds that the consumer achieves a satisfactory seal, but even this is not foolproof. If this information holds any interest for you, there are a plethora of aftermarket eartip brands to look into, such as "JVC Spiral Dots", "Spinfits", "Comply Foam Eartips" or "Znari Foam Eartips", "Creative Aurvana" and others. If you really want to fine tune things, then you might find yourself doing what I do, which is scouring Amazon for inexpensive earphones that appear to have silicone eartips that have a shape that typically work well with my ear's anatomy.

My Ears:
You should also know a little bit about my ears since yours may differ. Below I have included two images. One image of an ear canal of typical length and the other image showing a more shallow ear canal. My ear canals resemble the more shallow of the two.

Keep this in mind when reading this review. I have no scientific evidence to back this up but I'd bet that ear canal length can play a part when it comes to resonance hotspots.



*** 7/3/19 edit ***

My initial review was written on April 30, 2019. After giving the BQ3 an additional 60 days of testing and playtime I think it is fair for me to edit this review. The need to edit/update my feedback is mostly due to better eartip selection. I believe you'll agree with my decision to edit/update this review as you read on.

If you've read the "About My Ears" section of this review then you'll be familiar with the uniqueness of my shallow ear canals. I usually prefer to use my soft/pliable wide-bore silicone eartips for my IEMs because they diffuse the bass and seal things off exceptionally well. Isolation when using said eartips (with almost every IEM) is almost akin to using custom or semi-custom IEMs.

Here's the thing. Using said eartips tends to bring the lower frequencies to the forefront on "V", "W" or "L" shaped sound signatures. My initial review characterizes the BQ3 as somewhere between a warm/darkish "V" sound signature and an "L" shaped sound signature (all frequencies balanced but an elevated bass response).

While using one particular eartip the BQ3 presentation opened up and became much more engaging. The sub-bass and mid-bass presentations were cleaned up considerably without loosing their authoritative kick and rumble. The cleaner bass in turn released the midrange and allowed the treble to breathe a bit more. Because there is less sub-bass in my ear canal the BQ3's overall presentation offered up more "air" and arguably more soundstage width.

So, what brought forth the change?

Oddly enough, it's the combination of my shallow ear canals and KZ's Star-tipped silicone eartips.


The combination of my shallow ear canals and said KZ eartips.


The tiny angled notches at the crest of the eartip are very close to my eardrum. The sound pouring out of the nozzle hits my eardrum and then hits the tiny angled notches.The end result is that the midrange and treble regions become more diffuse. Soundstage improves. Clarity improves. Separation improves. Imaging improves. In general, things sound less jumbled because treble and midrange move slightly forward.

My initial verdict was to give the BQ3 four out of five stars. After pairing the BQ3 with a better set of eartips (for my ears) four and a half stars would be my fair assessment of the BQ3. It's huge fun to listen to progressive house and breakbeat on the BQ3.

It's still a warm and smooth IEM just not as dark as I intimated in the review below. With this new information it looks like I'll have to revisit the problematic tracks listed in the review below and see how well the BQ3 smooths over the midrange peaks in said tracks.


p.s. - be aware that most people experience elevated bass when using KZ's Star-tipped silicone eartips. I do not. I experience wider soundstage and more air.

*** end 60-day edit ***


I'll start off by telling you up front that the BQ3 is quite unlike its BQEYZ siblings that I own (K2, KC2 & KB100). The machined aluminum earpieces have an understated elegance about them but it's the BQ3's sound signature that sets it apart from its siblings. Let's get through the unboxing before we delve into sound signature.

As usual, BQEYZ packaging is basic. No eventful unboxing experience or angelic choruses here but the BQ3 box is a little nicer than the K2, KC2 or KB100 box. I usually store my in-ears in zippered clamshell cases so as long as the contents of the box are safe during shipping I dont place much weight on packaging.

The medium-bore eartips that BQEYZ included do seal well for me but be aware that a good seal is only part of the equation. I usually employ wide-bore eartips from my growing eartip collection so the earphone's presentation can breathe as much as possible. I have shallow ear canals so Tennmak whirlwinds work well for me. However, several years ago I purchased a package of 20 sets of a generic wide-bore brand (photo). Ordering said eartips when they were available turned out to be one of the best decisions I'd made considering how many earphones I've placed them on because they're very difficult to find now. These particular eartips are quite pliable but despite their wide-bore design the BQ3 still gave a relatively thick presentation, to my ears. BQEYZ's stock medium-bore eartips increased the BQ3's mid-bass, for my ears.

2-pin Cable:
The detachable cable that BQEYZ shipped with the BQ3 is a decent cable that is supple enough to avoid kinking and it is terminated with a well-designed 90° angle on the 3.5mm jack. In addition the cable is equipped with a sturdy aluminum strain relief at the "Y" and preformed earhooks with plastic housings for the .78mm 2-pin connectors. I've said this before but I'd like to see BQEYZ adopt or design rectangular aluminum housings for their 2-pin connectors. Plastic seems a bit low-rent for BQEYZ's well-designed earphones.

Driver Housings:

My BQ3's housings are finished in the same beautiful electrical blue that my KB100's are finished in. The machined aluminum earpieces are elegantly chamferred with aluminum trim on the faceplates. It fits well with the shape of my ears.


The BQ3 has gotten a lot of positive feedback from several well-respected members of Head-Fi's Chi-Fi community. It is a 2DD (dynamic driver) + 3BA (balanced armature) configuration that, in typical BQEYZ fashion, is tuned for comfort. If there was one word to describe the BQ3 that word would be "smooth".

In my opinion the BQ3 is an IEM for those who eschew earphones that deliver an analytical and/or "in your face" sound signature. In many ways the BQ3 is the polar opposite to BQEYZ's own KB100.

Errrr....., that came out wrong. I'll be more specific.

To my ears, the BQ3 keeps things comfortable by keeping everything at an arms length as opposed to being upfront and personal. Soundstage width is average and the BQ3 has average soundstage depth (as usual with all of BQEYZ initial offerings) but instruments and vocals have a more rounded or softened presentation on the BQ3 (as opposed to an etched presentation). To be more specific, if you are familiar with the difference between a silicone eartip presentation and a foam eartip presentation, the BQ3 sounds as if the presentation is delivered via foam eartips. Foam eartips are highly recommended when using balanced armature IEMs because they tend to soften the balanced armature's analytical nature, particularly in the upper midrange and treble regions. If you've been paying attention thus far you should be asking yourself "if foam eartips smooth an in-ears presentation then what happens when foam eartips further smooth an already smooth presentation?"

Although the BQ3 is a 2+3 hybrid it doesn't sound like the typical hybrid. To my ears, you'd never guess that this is a hybrid in-ear because the balanced armatures are tuned with a very smooth delivery (atypical of a BA driver's more etched characteristics). In fact, it's so smooth that i'd go so far as to say that the BQ3 will have better synergy with a bright-leaning audio source. I don't recommend using these with a DAP that has a velvet-like presentation (Fiio X5iii, etc.) because, to my ears, pairing a warm-leaning DAP and the warm-leaning BQ3, and perhaps foam eartips, will offer a presentation that is beyond smooth and perhaps a bit dark. Most, if not all, of BQEYZ initial offerings have rolled off the upper-treble to keep things from getting dicey up top. The BQ3 is no exception so when introducing more smoothness and more warmth you'll likely find that a bright-leaning audio source will offer better synergy with the BQ3's smooth sound signature.

I use the BQ3 when I want to listen to some albums in my collection that have a tendency to push the envelope in the upper midrange and lower-treble. Rather than starting the breakdown with the treble let's start with the midrange.


When discussing "pushing the envelope" in the midrange the two albums that immediately come to mind are Bruce Springsteen's "Born In The U.S.A" and Pat Benatar's "Crimes Of Passion". To my ears, both albums were recorded with most of the focus on the upper half of the frequency range. The BQ3 makes listening to these recordings a bit more inviting because it smooths things so I can get lost in the music and even crank the volume a bit.

I usually listen to music at very modest volume levels but sometimes I do like to get my groove on. One of my favorite Springsteen songs is "Bobby Jean" but with most earphones I just can't increase volume due to the recording's peaky nature. It's the same with Pat Benatar's "You Better Run". Employing the smooth BQ3 the problem is solved and I can crank the music up until I am thoroughly satisfied. No strident behavior interrupts my enjoying either of these albums.

Another case in point is the very last song that Johnny Cash recorded before he passed. Cash (the "man in black") did a cover of Nine Inch Nails 1995 Grammy Award nominated single "Hurt". Trent Reznor, the original writer of the song, said that when he first heard Johnny Cash sing "Hurt" it actually made him cry. Cash's version really is an epic recording because Cash put his own stamp on such a somber song.

The recording itself will exemplify why I choose to listen to recordings like this on the BQ3. If I listen to the track with the KB100, KC2, ZS6, BA10 or any other remotely analytical in-ear monitor I have a difficult time enjoying the latter half of the song. It starts off clean and clear but distortion is introduced as the song progresses. As the track's energy picks up so does the distortion. It sounds as though there is one microphone recording this session but the microphone just wasn't up to snuff.

Cash unearthed.jpg

This BQ3 presentation is admirable but it's one of the few IEMs that I choose when I want to listen to "peaky" recordings because the BQ3 tends to smooth the presentation a bit more than any of my other IEMs.


The BQ3 has a decidedly thick mid-bass response so kick and impacted at the forefrunt. As I mentioned in the KB100 review, to my ears, "too much mid-bass tends to reduce clarity in IEMs"; "air" between instruments just vanishes because elevated mid-bass or mid-bass that bleeds into upper frequencies fills the ear canal and then lingers a little too long. The BQ3's mid-bass is elevated and, truth be told, I am not particularly fond of elevated mid-bass.

For bass impact I sampled the same tracks I used for the KB100:
Julie Thompson's "What Will I Do" paying particular attention to the 44 second mark and then listening for the BQ3's extension and delivery during the drawdown at the 4:40 mark. The BQ3 hit those low notes hard and the impact at the drawdown was solid. The BQ3 did well here.

My soft wide-bore silicone eartips seal exceptionally well. For me the end result is that I find bass impact on the BQ3 to be quite thick. You'll find that you can adjust bass impact and/or thickness by tip rolling; if anything you'd likely work toward reducing mid-bass presence by stepping down a size in eartips (Lrg to Med or Med to Sm)". Different eartips gave me different feedback but in general the word that defines the BQ3's bass is "thick". Bass is not as quick as BQEYZ own KB100because the BQ3's bass is tuned to punch and linger a bit.

With Basement Jaxx "Stay Close" I focused on the 54 second mark and 1:04 mark and once again the impact was solid and deep on both counts. Again, the BQ3 did well here.

The BQ3 bass is tuned for solid impact; it is a more thick presentation than the KB100 or the K2 (which has slightly more bass than the KC2). The BQ3 does have more impact than the K2 but the K2's bass doesn't disturb the midrange as much.

Bottom line on bass: It digs deep and hits hard (with a proper seal) so you may find the BQ3 to be satisfactory if you're a "basshead". Again, I'd use wide-bore eartips and maybe even step down a size from your usual eartip size but be aware that this may effect isolation.


Typical of the tuning on all of BQEYZ initial six offerings the upper-treble is rolled off to avoid discomfort/pierce. The lower treble is present but it is a "soft" presentation that is in keeping with the BQ3's overall presentation.

The triangles that start at the 22 second mark of Toni Braxton's "He Wasn't Man Enough" are smoothed over and as a result the shimmer/sparkle that should be there is absent in the BQ3 presentation. The presentation is good but I do miss the shimmer offered by a few of my favorite in-ears.

Another example would be found with P.O.D.'s "Thinking About Forever". There is a waterfall-like shimmer in the first five seconds of the track, the 25 second mark and then throughout the track. There is also a brief high pitch note at the 2:42 mark. On the ZS6 those notes give the track an almost ethereal effect. On the BQ3 the waterfall-like shimmer is smoothed over although there is some presence. Putting the BQ3 through these tests it appears that the BQ3 is all about "safe" and fatigue-free tuning.

The lack of shimmer and sparkle trends to give the BQ3 a less "airy" presentation but the imaging is decent. The elevated mid-bass and rolled off upper-treble contribute to the BQ3's smooth presentation but they also contribute to separation being somewhat average. To my ears, the mid-bass pilfers some of the clarity and air. Nothing detrimental, just noticeable when comparing the BQ3 with its smooth but vivid siblings.

Soundstage :

With most of BQEYZ's initial offerings soundstage width is decent and soundstage depth is good but average. I'd like to see BQEYZ improve soundstage depth to improve imaging, separation and that sense of "air" that take an in-ear from being a very good IEM to being an exceptional IEM. The BQ3 is a very good IEM with a thick and comfortable delivery. More "air" would have made these exceptional. That said, with the right eartips the BQ3 is eerily reminiscentof a comfortable over-the-ear headphone.

To summarize, the BQ3 soundstage has average width (edge of the ears or just slightly past the earlobes) with average depth, decent imaging, somewhat average separation (mostly effected by the mid-bass) and layering that is limited only by soundstage depth.

I've been listening to my ZS6 for more than a year now and lately my preference leans more toward its more etched and vivid delivery but in the real world I can't use my ZS6 outdoors without putting my long term hearing at risk. The BQ3 with its "thick and comfortable delivery", on the other hand, won't put my long term hearing at risk so they will be very useful outdoors.

For the past nine months I've been using my ZSR for on-the-go entertainment but last week instead of grabbing my ZSR I grabbed the BQ3 for outdoor use. On tracks that were mastered with a bass-heavy footprint the mid-bass was a bit much but the BQ3 performed very well indeed on everything else.

I'll have to take both IEMs (ZSR & BQ3) with me next time and report back on which in-ear I prefer for outdoor use. The BQ3's aluminum housing is vastly superior to the ZSR's plastic housing but stay tuned for those results.

TripInTrance BQ3.jpg

In the end, the BQ3's fit, isolation and sound signature were almost ideal for
on-the-go IEMs and I do recommend them if you're looking for a great set of IEMs for commuting (isolation for me was great). If your commute includes trains, planes or buses be sure to invest in a variety of eartips in order to find a set that will give you a complete seal.

If you enjoy a warm-leaning and smooth presentation then you'll likely enjoy the BQ3 but I'd recommend swapping out the medium-bore eartips for wide-bore eartips and also pairing the BQ3 with a bright-leaning source. Take that recommendation with a grain of salt; I'm very particular about mid-bass. I enjoy mid-bass punch but I usually prefer a 50:50 (sub-:mid-) distribution in bass or at the very least a touch less mid-bass punch and a bit more sub-bass rumble. Your preferences may be very different from my own.

I seem to be in the minority on the BQ3's overall presentation. I do like them but I enjoy a more vivid and etched presentation. That said, the BQ3 is growing on me.

In closing, I did deduct one star for the elevated mid-bass but that's my only complaint. The BQ3 is a very good in-ear, just not my preferred sound signature.

Abbey Rd.jpg

Hope this was helpful.



Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: Great imaging, fast transient response, tigh bass, good clarity, great construction, good value
Cons: thin sub bass, timbre lack richness, upper treble emphasis


SOUND: 8/10
DESIGN: 8.5/10
VALUE: 8.5/10

Even if the brand name look like a bad letters choice your stock with for an unlucky SCRABBLE game, you will be happy being stock with BQEYZ earphones in your ears.

This company caming out of no where in China really got (half-underground) respect from budget audiophile around here, but is less known than KZ, Tinaudio, TRN or some other banned chi-fi brands. In fact, they have been around as OEM company since lot of time in audio world, but well, we just don’t know them and one day a dude from this place decide to create an earphones company and name it with the must unique letters composition he can find (no in fact, while he was searching for company name for hours looking at blank screen, he fall asleep on its keyboard and voilà! ) and create BQEYZ audio company with one idea in mind : multi drivers iem without bad transient response or harsh peaks, something that stand appart from the chi-fi crownd!


Then the BQEYZ KB1 Dual dynamic drivers plus one balanced armature appear, then the KB100 2DD+1BA appear, then the KB2 2DD+2BA appear, and then the BQEYZ BQ3 Dual dynamic drivers plus 3 balanced armature appear.

This multi drivers BQ3 isn’t a copy cat of any other earphones and this BQEYZ audio company deserve to be know better.

This type of construction, tuning and overall quality is just too good to be hide in the shadow, and being able to achieve this balanced musicality for 55$ make the BQ3 a real dangerous competitors for the sub-100$ earphones.

Let me try to show you why in this review.


1. Product Name: In-ear Headphone

2. Type: In-ear

3. Impedance: 22Ω

4. Headphone sensitivity:95db

5. Frequency range: 7-40kHz

6. Interface: 3.5mm

7. Cable Length: 1.2m±5cm

8. Color:black / blue

9.Whether with Mic:with mic or no mic, you can choose

10.Driver unit:3BA+2DD In Ear Earphone

11. Weight:About 25g±5g

12.Pin Type:0.78mm


P1011002.JPG P1011003.JPG

UNBOXING is minimalist, but we get a pouch as bonus gift. I wish there where more eartips included tough.

P1011211.JPG P1011212.JPG P1011210.JPG P1011209.JPG

CONSTRUCTION is excellent and refreshingly unique. Its half metal half hard plastic and the beautifully polished metal have nice sharp curve to it that give a fashionable yet elegant look. 2Pin connector are hide in the shell wich will benifit for durability and the connection is tigh, not slidy as some other 2pin connectors. All in all, construction look sturdy and make me confident about durability potential.


Cable is basic but of nice quality, similar to the TRN cable, its a twisted 4 cores copper OFC, it have a metal L jack wich is nice too. Earhook is pre-curved but not too loose as memory earhook can be.

P1011207.JPG P1011208.JPG

DESIGN is quite nice too, but some may find the housing nozzle either too long or too large, yep, we have a big nozzle here wich guarantee secure fit but can be uncomfortable for ears with small hole. I find the BQ3 comfortable with the right tips, using large one instead of medium because with medium it was itching my ears and tend to strangely pop up as we have to push nozzle deep so the housing weight do not make the BQ3 be pull out of ears. Anyway, BQ3 are quite smale for number of drivers it have and most people will find them comfortable enough.



Overall sound impression is rather impressive, but more I listen to the BQ3, more there a little something about timbre that do not feel enough rich to my ears, i mean here that they aren’t perfect that’s all.
At first, it was the opposite. I really find the tuning mature and balanced, not overly bassy at all, it have punchy mid bass and rather liquid mids with upper treble sharpness that show micro details effortlessly.

The BQ3 have very fast transient response and attack, its an agile and detailed earphones, timbre is more liquid than textured, as well, the upper treble emphasis, without sound harsh, can sometime make percussion feel to foward and a little metallic due to extra brilliance. This is quite a balanced and energic sound we get in they end, wich is sure not typical for chi-fi iem.

SOUNDSIGNATURE is slightly U shape leaning towards neutral, only colouration here is mid bass and upper treble, mids without being recessed feel intimate and centered

SOUDSTAGE is average in wideness wich do not help for precise layering when lot of isntrument play at same time, still it have good deep to it, but its more hearable with less crownded music. Its not a very airy or around your head presentation tough.

LOWER BASS is thick, tigh and fast. Sub is well rounded but not particularly weighty. Timbre is smooth and have so so transparence, rumble is minimal and can mix a little with mid bass. Extension is average with little roll off that stole some body.

MID BASS have enough punch and fast pace but timbre is liquid wich give soft texture and do not help definition. This isn’t very authoritative mid bass, so i do not suggest these for rock or acoustic drum, it will do well with electronic, rap or pop where kick do not need as much texture as with acoustic music.

MIDS are clear and liquid, they have a smooth approach without upper mids emphasis, wich make them sibiliance free but lacking in grip and texture. Vocal feel enough fowards and barely not recessed, but instrument separation is just average so more there instrument, more the vocal became compressed and lack air. Female vocal sound transparent and appealing while male vocal lack a little lower mids and body.

TREBLE is delicate and articulate with extra emphasis in lower and upper region around 12-16khz. Strangely, this give more brilliance than decay and sparkle. Upper region is where micro details pop up effortlessly, giving ultra clear and brilliant percussion that can sound too metallic sometime. This region is the sharper aspect of BQ3, and without beging overlly trebly, can perhaps be problematic for treble sensitive people. There a lack of mid treble that is surely responsible for thin timbre and lack of air.

AMPING is suggested because of low 95db sensitivity, when properly drivin everything open up, especially soundstage, bass and mids.

EARTIPS really inflict on sound rendering because of long nozzle, so i did not use stock one and choose longer silicone eartips wich help with bass control and soundstage.


SUB : 7.5/10

MIDS BASS : 8.5/10

MIDS : 8/10

TREBLE : 8/10

TIMBRE : 7.5/10

ATTACK : 8.5/10

IMAGING : 9/10



VS CCA C10 (25-40$) :

SOUNDSTAGE of C10 is more around your head and feel wider, taller and deeper than the more intimate BQ3.

BASS is more emphased, have more sub rumble and slam while BQ3 have tigher, drier bass.

MIDS of C10 are brighter and more fowards, they have richer timbre but the upper mids can sometime be sibilant, BQ3 have transparent and very clear mids, but they sound intimate and slightly thin and congested.

TREBLE exstention is sharper with BQ3, having more upper highs emphasis, they have more brilliance and details than C10 but instrument separation is less good. C10 feel more natural and musical due to richer lower and mid treble.

CONSTRUCTION of both earphones is excellent, but the half metal construction of BQ3 give a more high end look. Both are comfortable, but I prefer the C10 because of less long nozzle that we don’t need to insert as deep as the BQ3.

VS KZ ZS10 (35-55$) :

SOUNDSTAGE of ZS10 is a little wider but is less deep and airy than BQ3.

BASS is thicker and have more sub presence, but its slower and less controled and more boomy than more agile and tigh sounding BQ3.

MIDS are brighter, thicker and while they have richer timbre than BQ3 they sound strangely more artificial and congested. Its like if vocal are too opaque and lack separation compared to BQ3 crisper presentation that are better separated and more transparent.

TREBLE is more grainy with ZS10, but can dig more details in 6-10khz range, still highs have less sparkle and decay. BQ3 have organic but inconsistant treble, with a mid drop that give place for air but stole some details too.

CONSTRUCTION of ZS10 is a cheap bothersome mess, very uncomfortable for the ears as well as for they eyes because they are horrifious looking. They are so immense its litteraly a bad joke. The BQ3 do not feel like a joke and have serious top quality construction that hit above its price range.



SOUNDSTAGE of KOEL is airier and about same wide of BQ3, but less holographic, deep and tall.

BASS of BQ3 is more extended, have more weight and resolution and better attack than drier and thinner sounding Koel.

MIDS of BQ3 have more body but are less texutured and presence than more mid centric Koel, wich have wider vocal presentation as well as brighter more detailed mid range.

TREBLE of Koel is brighter but less extended than BQ3, but it feel more balanced and linear, and while BQ3 have more brilliance in upper range, Koel have more sparkle in mid treble. Anyway, layering of BQ3 is from another league and level of microdetails is better too.

CONSTRUCTION of Koel look fragile and kinda ugly, while the BQ3 look sturdy and beautifull. Koel is less comfortable and can have problem to fit properly due to strange housing shape.



BQEYZ BQ3 is a very capable and agile earphones that offer a smooth, liquid yet detailed sound experience. Here, instead of upper mids bump that can make vocal too bright, we have softened upper mids that permit sibilance free enjoyment. The fast transient response help to give an organic musicality that do as good with electronic than pop and jazz, making BQ3 a great all arounder due to its permissive soundsignature that do not tend to make bad recording sound too grainy or harsh.

The construction being irreprochable as well make this budget earphones a great contender in sub-100$ over crownded chi-fi market and to me it stand appart due to its unique soundsignature.

If you’re looking for an energic, slightly warm earphones offering great resolution without agressivness in mids but extra details in upper range, I really think BQEYZ BQ3 can be the iem you search.

No doubt BQEYZ company deserve more praise by budget audiophile.


  • P1011006.JPG
    3.2 MB · Views: 0
  • P1011008.JPG
    3.3 MB · Views: 0
  • P1011206.JPG
    1.5 MB · Views: 0


New Head-Fier
Pros: fun tuning, deep bass, beautiful details and impressive three-dimensionality
Cons: Bass slips into the midrange, at high volume the midrange loses presence
There he is - the supposed showcase IEM of BQEYZ.
2 dynamic drivers cooperate with 3 balanced armature drivers. So here we are in a league with the KZ ZS10 in terms of the number of drivers, if you stick with hybrids. But in this review the BQ3 will rather compete with the HILL AUDIO S8, which I have to beat at the moment.
Both are extraordinary in-ears in the price range (50 €), but also fundamentally different.

BQEYZ are only a few examples when it comes to workmanship, texture and design. Also the BQ3 is no exception but joins the fantastic series (KB1, K2, KC2) seamlessly.
All of them are very comfortable to wear, even if not everyone will confirm this due to their size and have very good cables on board.

The fact that the BQEYZ packaging didn't hold any great surprises should be known by now, but there is already a small one. You get a cloth bag for storage, next to the cable and the silicone attachments.

Wearing comfort and isolation are also in the upper range.

First of all, I haven't had a bass that plays so low for a long time. Even at 10 Hz you can still guess it. Generally the bass is fantastic. Here we are again with the bass virtuoso REVONEXT QT2 and little wishes remain open. However, the bass can also slip into the midrange. Nevertheless it is hardly beatable by its impact and I hear some bass lines and details from the music, which I didn't know before, but rather thought to be the same bass tone. With nieces!

The mids only got one BA of the 5 drivers. This is really noticeable. If you turn up the full power, the bass and the treble will also turn up, so that the mids don't follow anymore. They become more opaque and the voices, especially in men, seem distant. If you remain at a moderate volume, however, you won't feel it. They are very dynamic and spray with energy in contrast to the KC2. Of course, the quite pronounced V signature is also noticeable here, but in a hearing-friendly volume we have a very good transparency, naturalness and resolution.

What I haven't heard in the price range before is the stage in width and depth. I even feel a bit overwhelmed at times, because the positioning works quite well, even if not outstandingly, but there is simply an unusual amount going on in the music and it can also seem restless. For orchestral music etc. this is of course something very special, with rock music I like it a bit more intimate.
Here, of course, the high notes also contribute a great deal to it. They are bright and have a lot to offer at the top. The brilliance cannot be denied and they have a great presence and attention to detail. But you shouldn't be afraid of highs either, because it can become a bit penetrating here and there and in rare cases the sibilants are taken along. But that's where the song has to go for. Otherwise they can be heard very well in the long run. Jazz is also very recommendable with the BQ3.

Despite the number of drivers we get the strongest V signature in the BGEYZ series. It's a lot of fun, because the bass is more than just a brute, it's also very textured, even if it slips into the midrange and the treble rarely tends to be a strain. But a little bit too opaque, especially when it gets louder. At normal volume we have a clear, warm and well balanced sound, with great resolution. The more you turn it up, the more the signature comes to bear. To minimize this you need a stronger DAC than most mobile phones offer.

Since I prefer the more pronounced and detailed midrange of the HILL AUDIO S8 and the bass, as well as the treble, are a bit too much in the foreground for me, the BQ3 can't get over it, but they are quite at eye level. This is where two worlds meet, which is why personal taste is so important. The BQ3 has an impressive stage and three-dimensionality. In addition a pumping bass and radiant highs that inspire.


More reviews:


Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: Great build quaility, good cable, very pleasant signature with good clarity and lots of detail.
Cons: no lip on nozzles, kit is less than expected for flagship

I purchased the BQEYZ BQ3 at a small discount in exchange for doing a review of it. My thoughts are purely my own and I have no financial interest in either the vendor or the manufacturer.

Unboxing / Packaging:

The BQ3 ships in a black slipcover style box with the front emblazoned with the logo, model name, the driver configuration, and picture of the earpieces. The reverse has the pertinent data. Inside the cover, a small manual covers the tray containing the earbuds and tips. SML tips are provided with the medium installed on the earpieces and the small and large resting in the foam tray. The tray takes up 2/3 of the box with the lower 1/3 having a small open-ended box with the cable, and carry bag inside. in the upper half and a small box holding the accessories below. The earpieces themselves are well protected from three sides as the foam is the full depth of the box. If there is a complaint, it is that for a flagship the kit is a bit sparse. It would be nice to see some foams, additional tip types, and a true soft case instead of the carry bag provided.

bq3-bf.JPG bq3-br.JPG bq3-contents1.JPG


Build quality is very good as has been the case with all the BQEYZ products I have tried to date. The shape of the earpieces is very similar to the k2 and kc2 but with a different design to the faceplate. The Faceplates are rounded rectangles with a dish at the bottom that nicely fits the curvature of my ear. The exterior of the shell is an almost electric blue with a silver band around the outer edge. The 2 pin connector is mounted centrally at the top of the faceplate with a 45º angle to the front. L and R are clearly marked on the outside of the Connector. The inside of the shell is flat black with a pair of vents behind the nozzle which is located at the leading edge of the earpiece. Nozzles have a very slight forward rake, are fairly shallow and lack a lip to hold tips in place. I didn't find any proclivity for tips to come off but I suppose if changed excessively or stretched this might become an issue.

bq3-ears.JPG bq3-ears3.JPG


The BQ3 is listed as a 3 driver with 2 dynamic drivers and 3 balanced armature drivers per shell. The pictures tell a slightly different story, a single housing with dual diaphragms is used for the dynamics, a dual package BA and a single BA make up the physical units inside the casing. This helps explain how a 5 driver in-ear can be made in the same size case as previous models with a single dynamic driver. The impedance is listed as 22Ω with a sensitivity of 95dB. I do find this iem benefits from a high powered source or an external amp. It will run directly from a cell phone but some details don't come through as cleanly as they do with a bit of additional power.

BQEYZ3 Break out.jpg


The cable supplied is the standard 3.5mm to .78mm bi-pin connector style supplied with all the BQEYZ products thus far. Starting from the jack, it is a 90º design with a black metal housing and a chrome ring to match the earpieces. Strain relief is excellent as the cable exits the jack. the cable is a 4 wire braid up to the splitter (matching matte black metal) and twisted pair above the splitter to the connectors. a chin slider is provided as well. At the upper end of the cable, pre-formed earhooks lead to the .78mm bi-pin connectors. L/R are clearly marked on the connectors. If I had one complaint about the cable, the pre-formed earhooks are overdone and want to wrap around the earpieces when not in use and make it a bit more effort when putting them on than usually is necessary. A few seconds with a heatgun or hair dryer will allow you to reshape the earhooks to your liking. (Just make sure to remove the earpieces first). Otherwise, it is an excellent cable.

IMG_0283.JPG bq3-splitter.JPG bq3-jack.JPG


All sound notes were taken with the supplied large tips. One of the things I noticed immediately about the BQ3 is that getting the best sound out of it is not nearly as volume dependent as some models and for those who like to listen at low volume levels, the BQ3 is a good option as it does not lose detail as volume drops as some others tend to.


The BQ3 has good sub-bass rumble with roll-off beginning to be evident below mid 40Hz range. Mid-bass is slightly forward but overall well controlled with good texture and fairly good attack and decay. Because of this, I didn't hear much congestion in the lower range on tracks like "Blues hand me down" that can get muddy quickly if not well controlled. The BQ3 definitely has a bass emphasis, but unlike many big-V signatures, it does not bleed into the mids profusely, nor does it get murky or one dimensional in the lower registers.


The BQ3 exhibits mildly recessed lower mids that build back up and plateau with the lower treble. There is some mid-bass bleed that provides a bit of warmth and fullness to the lower mids and gives male vocals a laid-back feel. As you move through the mids, the begin to move forward with the upper mids nearly at the same level as mid-bass. This gives female vocals a nice push forward without getting harsh.


The lower treble continues the climb of the mids and helps with moving the vocals forward and giving them a bit of extra clarity and detail. True treble drops back to avoid harshness with a bit of a bump at 6kHz and 12kHz to add some sparkle and air back in without sibilance or stridency. The good news is the BQ3 is bright and detailed without being harsh or aggressive like other similar offerings in the class.

Soundstage / Imaging:

Soundstage is well shaped with good dimensionality and some sense of height. I did find the BQ3 to be somewhat deceptive as stage is very much a function of source material and the BQ3 can seem rather intimate at times. Layering is very good as is instrument separation which makes it easy to close one's eyes and picture the orchestra seated on the stage. Imaging is also fairly good with movements on the stage being easily evident. I am not a gamer so can't speak to imaging for gaming use. I did not find any congestion unless it was recorded into the source material.


TRN v80

To me the TRN v80 is very good right up to the lower treble where it falls apart. The v80 has a grainy aggressive treble that ruins an otherwise good signature. The BQ3 shares a similar V shape and low end with the v80. Both have similar punch and bass depth, but control is a bit better on the BQ3. The Treble on the two is similar in that both are forward and fairly bright but again control is better on the BQ3 and the grain is much less evident than on the v80. I think treble extension may be slightly better on the v80 but not by enough to make the BQ3 to feel closed or lacking.

Revonext QT3

Here again, both share a similar low end, but the QT3 has an overly aggressive treble where the BQ3 is much less so. To me, the QT3 is only usable for short periods due to fatigue while the BQ3 is an all-day option with its much more polite nature.

TFZ Series 2

Again another V signature at roughly the same price point but this time a bit more different. The TFZ is plastic and nowhere near the build quality of the BQ3, cable is a tossup here. Signature wise, both are a V but the mids on the Series 2 are further recessed and considerably thinner than the BQ3 and the treble is more aggressive with a tendency to get a bit harsh on the Series 2 by comparison.


Thoughts / Conclusion:

Its not everyday you can buy a five driver per side flagship for less than $50. It is an even rarer day when that 5 driver per side sub-$50 flagship is very competently tuned and extremely well built. To say that BQEYZ came out swinging is an absolute understatement. I have five different models from BQEYZ now and all of them are best in class or very nearly so which is amazing considering the fact that 6 months ago they were not on the market. The BQ3 is the best Chi-fi hybrid I have tried to date for less than $200 and competes very favorably against a number of models costing well more than it does. If you like a V signature with plenty of detail, good control, and enough air to feel open without any tendency toward harshness, you should have already bought the BQ3 by now. If you are not a big fan of a V signature, you should still give the BQ3 an audition. It manages to pull enough detail (even in the mids) to make you forget its a V and it is just plain a fun listen.


  • bq3-nozzle.JPG
    1.1 MB · Views: 0
I understand that, but I try to be as realistic as possible about where they fit in the grand scheme of things. Compared to Something Like the Campfire Solaris or Empire Legend X, I think the score is about right. I recently reviewed the Hifiman He6se and it didnt break a 9 so you can imagine what it will take to get a 10 on my scale. 5.9 is almost a full point above average (5) which for a sub-$100 headphone is really pretty amazing when you think about it in that regard.
I guess you're aiming at the audiophile then and not the casual consumer looking for a decently priced decent sounding earphone, as someone in the budget market wouldn't know that the comparisons are with sets at £1000+. Cheers for getting back to me
Not sure if its the fiio m6 and new tips (perhaps burn in) but i'm hearing the bq3 in a new light. It's went from v shaped to a more linear, slightly balanced sound. Very open and smooth. I find with a wider tip treble becomes more prominent, so the smaller slightly below medium silicon i'm now using really works well with it. I must admit, the fiio m6 is perhaps the best sounding dap/dac i have for balancing out bass or treble heavy iems