Tinhifi C3
- Added by suicideup
- Create date
Introduction
TinHiFi has released two new IEMS C2 and C3, opening the C series. According to the website, they are dedicated for the cold winter of 2022-23, with the intention of making it warm. Following the descending order of my trio of reviews (T4, C3 and C2), it is now the turn of the C3. These are IEMS with a 10mm dynamic driver with a PU + LCP composite diaphragm, an ultra-powerful N52 magnet, all inside a semi-custom, 3D printed capsule that adopts a carbon fibre pattern on its outer face. To top it all off, a 4-strand 270C silver-plated 270C cable with 2Pin 0.78mm interface has been added. The C3s have been tuned in accordance with Target Harman. They weigh only 4.39g per capsule and have an impedance of 32Ω. Let's see what these new IEMS, priced at $49, have to offer.
Specifications
Packaging
The size of TinHiFi's packaging is becoming a classic of minimalism. It is a small white square box, 101x101x33mm. There is only the brand logo, in blue, in the top left corner and the letters C3 as if scratched, in grey ink, in the centre. The back is not much more explicit: the logo, where it was made, 3 QR codes and a barcode, along with several other logos of the certifications it meets. Inside there are several cards, while the C3s are inside a light grey foam mould. Underneath is a little white cardboard box with the rest of the accessories, all protected by separate clear plastic pouches. In a summary:
The quality of the cable makes it unnecessary to buy a replacement. Although it would have been nice if there had been a choice of cable with a balanced plug. There is no cloth bag or storage case, something I find clearly negative.
Construction and Design
The C3 have been 3D printed in a polished and smooth resin. Their semi-custom shape is very precise and adapts very well to my morphology. The outer face uses a checkered pattern of carbon fibre. In the centre is the logo of the brand, with silver edges. The outer shape is that of a triangle with very soft rounded edges. It has a medium thickness. On the hypothetical edge of the smaller cathetus there is a hole, while the 2Pin 0.78mm gold-plated connectors are integrated into the hypotenuse. On the inner side, on the edge, there is a smooth protrusion for anchoring in the ear. But there are also other rounded contours on this side, which fit my ears very well. There are two large letters L and R in gold ink. For once, these letters are clearly distinguishable. The mouthpieces are integrated into the body itself and are slightly projected. Their length is 4.2mm. They have two diameters, the smaller, inner diameter is 5.6mm and the upper edge is 6mm. They are protected by a dense metal grid.
The cable consists of 4 strands of clear PVC braided strands and 270C wires, silver plated, with 2Pin 0.78mm interface. The connector is 3.5mm SE gold plated. Its sleeve is a spiral fluted metal cylinder in a pinkish champagne colour. The divider is the same, but smaller. The pin is a metal disc with two through holes on its edge. The brand logo is printed on each side, in white ink. Its functioning is optimal. The cable, on its arrival at the 2Pin 0.78mm gold-plated connectors, has transparent over-ear guides. These are integrated into two metal cylinders, which have the same colour as the other parts of the cable. There is an inscribed groove near the cable and, as a base for the 2Pin, there is a translucent red or transparent plastic disc to indicate the channel. Additionally, there are letters R and L printed in white ink on each connector. Finally, the cable can be tucked away thanks to a light grey Velcro strap with the logo and brand name printed in white.
I think the capsule has been very well designed and studied to offer a very high level of comfort. It is light, only 4.39 grams. The cable is also excellent for the price, very manageable and with a low memory effect. The metal parts have a design and colour that I would call attractive. The silver plating is very eye-catching and denotes quality. The only downside is that there is no balanced option, because that would be a definite plus, even as a separately purchased cable.
Adjustment and Ergonomics
Thanks to the 3D printing, the smooth, polished resin used and, above all, the great capsule design, the C3s are very comfortable. They integrate excellently in my ears and don't move at all. There is not a hint of rotation, the degree of fixation and adjustment is outstanding. The insertion ranges from shallow to medium, it can't be any greater because of the perfect coupling with the pinna. I have had no problems finding the best insertion with my foam-filled tips. Isolation is high, thanks to the superior fit. The weight of each capsule, 4.39 grams, still accentuates the comfort of the set. The over-ear cable does not get in the way. All in all, the C3s are top of the line and a great choice for outdoor use, for everyday use, even for sports.
Sound
Profile
According to the brand itself, the C3s are based on the Harman target. Compared to the T2 DLC 2022, C2 and T4 Plus, it is clear that TinHiFi is squeezing a tuning with slight tweaks in the treble and bass. The C3s have the highest sub-bass boost of the four models. While the mid-highs are slightly earlier and subtly higher in excitation. There is little variation in the treble, maintaining a parallelism with the T4 Plus. The tendency towards the sub-bass turns its profile towards a U, but in no case is it an unbalanced profile, as the difference between the maximum and minimum of the FR does not exceed 10dB.
Bass
Again, this is a frequency response that can be slightly misleading. From the graph, I would have thought the C3s would have a predominance of upper bass. Of course, they're not exactly light, but I wouldn't put them at the bass-head level either. And I think that, in part, this is due to the emphasis of the sub-bass area, while the mid-bass has a downward, albeit present, tendency. On the other hand, it's nothing abnormal, not even new, but it's right. The sonority and timbre of the lower frequencies in pure tones is realistic and natural, offering a vibration that is consistent and without artifice, as befits a good dynamic driver. There is a good level of presence in the LFOs, combining a good level of physicality and sensory capability, without the sum being too much. The surface is slightly soft, resulting in a light but perceptible texture, without being too descriptive. The hit is relatively deep, subtly coloured, but quite acceptable. I would have preferred it to be more sensory and rougher, but for the price level it is quite pleasant. The speed of execution, the recovery and the sustain are remarkable for its range, something that puts the tuning in this range in a positive light. It performs well in complicated passages, being able to reproduce complex bass lines, although possessing a slight tendency to simplify these situations. It does not flood, nor does it overwhelm. The result is realistic and pleasant, without losing its composure, even showing a good performance in this kind of situations with powerful bass, with several lines, saturated and unfiltered. I have certainly put the C3s to the test in this type of complicated reproduction and the result has been quite remarkable. It manages to layer well, the bass lines are clearly discernible, with no muddiness, blending, merging or over-simplification, which gives a lesser sense of fidelity. Best of all, it even manages to respect the midrange very cleanly, in this kind of borderline situation.
Mids
I finished the description of the previous range by commenting on the good behaviour between bass and midrange. And it is true that this situation is superior when female voices are involved. The respect for this aspect is very good and its representation is always well assured. Its emphasis is not primordial, but its prominence is at the level of the sub-bass, being a coexistence that can reach the limit, but without being critical. It is clear that technically better IEMS will be able to resolve these passages with better grace, but within this range, I feel that realism is not lost, nor is the performance relativised. The point of sibilance may depend on the source connected. It is not a completely smooth performance in this respect, as the C3 demonstrates a relative flare at its initial point, but there is certainly a control phase that paralyses any uncomfortable situations. The result is a graceful whistle, which never comes across as piercing or excited.
In comparison, the male voices are slightly behind their male counterparts, yielding a bit of prominence to them. I've found that I've tried to compensate for this difference by playing with volume on tracks with male soloists, and I've found that the C3 has a good degree of richness in performance and a good physical balance. But a little more body and strength would have been great. The result is an ensemble that acquits itself very well in its first half, though better in its second, enjoying remarkable realism, adequate timbre and natural, attractive recreation, but lacking a greater emphasis to generate a fuller, more balanced sound. But, hey, this is an economical model that acquits itself with a good degree of detail, separation and descriptive ability, despite the classic midrange dip in this U-profile. The result is a very coherent, smoothly pleasing sound that coordinates male and female voices and instruments in good consonance, separation, descriptive power and a quite natural sonority that combines sparkle with control. And all this without feeling any compression or compactness in the sound. Again I repeat that the overall result is quite good and I only regret a closer presence, especially in the first half of the range, which would have made for a fuller and more remarkable sound. However, the final mix is clear, clean, with a notable dose of transparency and separation, in which the details or nuances are shown better than expected, achieving a very musical recreation, attractive and enjoyable for hours.
Treble
The mid-range is also the grace of the treble. And it is this aspect that TinHiFi continues to focus on, repeating the pattern in up to 4 models, with only subtle differences. In this case, except for a more enhanced presence in the second half of the mids, the treble is very similar to the T4 Plus. But here, the emphasised tuning in the sub-bass benefits the final set. And, in this case, I consider the overall musical fit of the C3s to be more positive than that of its bigger sibling.
Again, the treble starts with a good initial representation, but restrained and controlled by that little roll-off, which is giving TinHiFi such good results. The consequence is that the initial sparkle, contained in projection, feels relaxed as well as stretched, the result of this relatively balanced rise and fall. The good relationship between power and persistence remains, enriching the sound, providing a brightness that enjoys good projection and presence, not that I can say it is soft, but remarkable. In no case is the sound vigorous or overtly bright, but the presence is adequate, subtly vivid, relatively crisp and with a more than decent extension for the price range. Thus, the upper range performance is more than satisfactory, in keeping with the rest of the range, enjoyable, both individually and overall, as well as valuable to the overall sound of the C3s.
Soundstage, Separation
It is one of those times when the U-tuning manages to represent the scene in this way. There is a closer presence at the edges of the image, generating a concave scene, eminently frontal, of notable laterality and very good stereographic representation. The details are splashy, but respectful of the general timbre of each instrument and voices, without them predominating over the fundamentals. The mix is in tune, achieving a remarkable blend of naturalness, warmth and neutrality. The sound offers remarkable dynamics and feels separate, remarkably so for its price range. There is no congestion, a good level of transparency, cleanliness and clarity, but none of these are overly predominant. In fact, I don't really miss anything, technically speaking, and the overall package is very much in keeping with its value, if not better.
The sound is not analytical, but neither does it fall short in the execution of detail or nuance. It doesn't reach a micro level, but it achieves a range that doesn't lack more insightful expressiveness. In this way, the macro and midrange detail, the separation and the cleanness of the sound, manages to amplify the perception of the tiniest nuances above its price. Very good.
Comparisons
QKZ x HBB Khan
The QKZ Khan's are $10 cheaper, have a 3D printed capsule, slightly more compromised ergonomics than the excellent C3's and eloquent tuning. Without a doubt, my advice would be to invest that $10 in the C3. It is clear that they don't have a box, but the cable, after all, a fundamental part of the set, is far superior.
It is clear that I have not been able to fit the sound of the Khan and I prefer the more traditional Harman curve of the C3. But they also do it better in many ways. Balance, midrange, treble, clarity and technical aspects are superior in the C3s. The sound is different in the Khan's and perhaps that may be their advantage. But when it comes to music enjoyment, the C3s are much more all-rounders than the QKZs.
On a quick change, with the QKZs in my ears, I miss the fuller sound of the C3s, as well as their balance, greater coherence and presence in the midrange. I also miss their technical level, detail, greater separation and presence in the upper treble. I should clarify that the QKZs require more power to sound at the same volume. The only quarrel the QKZs might present is in the low end. They have more texture, but at the cost of a more unreal LFO sonority. In complex situations, the C3 is more resolute, recreating a more complex low end, with better resolution and better resolved than the QKZ, which in difficult passages, can be more overwhelming and tends to simplify both the bass lines and compact the layers.
In my opinion, the mid-range of the QKZ is more unbalanced. I think that the remoteness of the first half creates a sense of hollowness that gives an incomplete feeling of the music in this range. Even though there is also a distance in the first half of the C3 midrange, it is not comparable and the result is much more harmonious and realistic than in the QKZ. The midrange is fuller, more detailed, transparent and cleaner in the C3s.
Over time, the QKZs' treble has opened up and the sound no longer seems as shaded as it did in the beginning. Now, it feels that higher punch in the mid-treble. But I still prefer the studied coherence of the C3s. To describe the result I again appeal to realism and naturalness, that's enough.
The scene was simply adequate for the QKZs, in the C3s it is more remarkable, more air, more separation, better detail, better dynamics, better positioning, more transparency, they manage to widen the scene and present it in a concave and wider way.
Conclusion
I think I'm repeating myself, but I think TinHiFi is still going round in circles about the right tuning. Maybe I am as redundant as the brand, but the result is not to be criticised. On the contrary. On their own, the C3s seem to me to be a remarkable product, which I recommend if you are looking for a Harman target.
The capsules are very comfortable and the cable is remarkable for the price. The sound is good across the whole range. It has an emphasized sub-bass, it is capable and very solvent in the lower range. The second half of the midrange is very pleasant, closer, clear, crisp and transparent, achieving very attractive female voices. The relative distance of the first half of the midrange leaves me wanting more, due to its good work and performance, which could have been taken advantage of by bringing it closer and adding more body to this part. The treble repeats the successful formula of TinHiFi's latest top models, even adapting it more appropriately. Without presenting an analytical sound, the C3s enjoy a very good level of detail, resolution, definition and dynamics. Without being excellent, there is little or nothing more I can ask for at this price. So I can say that this is a very high grade.
Sources Used During the Analysis
Ratings
Purchase Link
You can read the full review in Spanish here
TinHiFi has released two new IEMS C2 and C3, opening the C series. According to the website, they are dedicated for the cold winter of 2022-23, with the intention of making it warm. Following the descending order of my trio of reviews (T4, C3 and C2), it is now the turn of the C3. These are IEMS with a 10mm dynamic driver with a PU + LCP composite diaphragm, an ultra-powerful N52 magnet, all inside a semi-custom, 3D printed capsule that adopts a carbon fibre pattern on its outer face. To top it all off, a 4-strand 270C silver-plated 270C cable with 2Pin 0.78mm interface has been added. The C3s have been tuned in accordance with Target Harman. They weigh only 4.39g per capsule and have an impedance of 32Ω. Let's see what these new IEMS, priced at $49, have to offer.
Specifications
- Driver type: 10 mm PU+LCP composite diaphragm
- Frequency Response: 10Hz-20000Hz
- Sensitivity: 106±3dB@1kHz 0.179V
- Impedance: 32Ω
- Jack Connector: 3.5mm SE
- Capsule Connection Type: 2Pin 0.78mm gold plated.
- 1.25m 4-strand 270C silver-plated transparent PVC braided cable.
- Maximum power: 5mW.
- Weight per capsule: 4.39gr.
Packaging
The size of TinHiFi's packaging is becoming a classic of minimalism. It is a small white square box, 101x101x33mm. There is only the brand logo, in blue, in the top left corner and the letters C3 as if scratched, in grey ink, in the centre. The back is not much more explicit: the logo, where it was made, 3 QR codes and a barcode, along with several other logos of the certifications it meets. Inside there are several cards, while the C3s are inside a light grey foam mould. Underneath is a little white cardboard box with the rest of the accessories, all protected by separate clear plastic pouches. In a summary:
- The two C3 capsules.
- One cable.
- Three pairs of black silicone tips, narrow core, sizes SxMxL.
- Three pairs of black silicone tips, medium core, sizes SxMxL.
- One warranty card.
- One certificate of authenticity.
The quality of the cable makes it unnecessary to buy a replacement. Although it would have been nice if there had been a choice of cable with a balanced plug. There is no cloth bag or storage case, something I find clearly negative.
Construction and Design
The C3 have been 3D printed in a polished and smooth resin. Their semi-custom shape is very precise and adapts very well to my morphology. The outer face uses a checkered pattern of carbon fibre. In the centre is the logo of the brand, with silver edges. The outer shape is that of a triangle with very soft rounded edges. It has a medium thickness. On the hypothetical edge of the smaller cathetus there is a hole, while the 2Pin 0.78mm gold-plated connectors are integrated into the hypotenuse. On the inner side, on the edge, there is a smooth protrusion for anchoring in the ear. But there are also other rounded contours on this side, which fit my ears very well. There are two large letters L and R in gold ink. For once, these letters are clearly distinguishable. The mouthpieces are integrated into the body itself and are slightly projected. Their length is 4.2mm. They have two diameters, the smaller, inner diameter is 5.6mm and the upper edge is 6mm. They are protected by a dense metal grid.
The cable consists of 4 strands of clear PVC braided strands and 270C wires, silver plated, with 2Pin 0.78mm interface. The connector is 3.5mm SE gold plated. Its sleeve is a spiral fluted metal cylinder in a pinkish champagne colour. The divider is the same, but smaller. The pin is a metal disc with two through holes on its edge. The brand logo is printed on each side, in white ink. Its functioning is optimal. The cable, on its arrival at the 2Pin 0.78mm gold-plated connectors, has transparent over-ear guides. These are integrated into two metal cylinders, which have the same colour as the other parts of the cable. There is an inscribed groove near the cable and, as a base for the 2Pin, there is a translucent red or transparent plastic disc to indicate the channel. Additionally, there are letters R and L printed in white ink on each connector. Finally, the cable can be tucked away thanks to a light grey Velcro strap with the logo and brand name printed in white.
I think the capsule has been very well designed and studied to offer a very high level of comfort. It is light, only 4.39 grams. The cable is also excellent for the price, very manageable and with a low memory effect. The metal parts have a design and colour that I would call attractive. The silver plating is very eye-catching and denotes quality. The only downside is that there is no balanced option, because that would be a definite plus, even as a separately purchased cable.
Adjustment and Ergonomics
Thanks to the 3D printing, the smooth, polished resin used and, above all, the great capsule design, the C3s are very comfortable. They integrate excellently in my ears and don't move at all. There is not a hint of rotation, the degree of fixation and adjustment is outstanding. The insertion ranges from shallow to medium, it can't be any greater because of the perfect coupling with the pinna. I have had no problems finding the best insertion with my foam-filled tips. Isolation is high, thanks to the superior fit. The weight of each capsule, 4.39 grams, still accentuates the comfort of the set. The over-ear cable does not get in the way. All in all, the C3s are top of the line and a great choice for outdoor use, for everyday use, even for sports.
Sound
Profile
According to the brand itself, the C3s are based on the Harman target. Compared to the T2 DLC 2022, C2 and T4 Plus, it is clear that TinHiFi is squeezing a tuning with slight tweaks in the treble and bass. The C3s have the highest sub-bass boost of the four models. While the mid-highs are slightly earlier and subtly higher in excitation. There is little variation in the treble, maintaining a parallelism with the T4 Plus. The tendency towards the sub-bass turns its profile towards a U, but in no case is it an unbalanced profile, as the difference between the maximum and minimum of the FR does not exceed 10dB.
Bass
Again, this is a frequency response that can be slightly misleading. From the graph, I would have thought the C3s would have a predominance of upper bass. Of course, they're not exactly light, but I wouldn't put them at the bass-head level either. And I think that, in part, this is due to the emphasis of the sub-bass area, while the mid-bass has a downward, albeit present, tendency. On the other hand, it's nothing abnormal, not even new, but it's right. The sonority and timbre of the lower frequencies in pure tones is realistic and natural, offering a vibration that is consistent and without artifice, as befits a good dynamic driver. There is a good level of presence in the LFOs, combining a good level of physicality and sensory capability, without the sum being too much. The surface is slightly soft, resulting in a light but perceptible texture, without being too descriptive. The hit is relatively deep, subtly coloured, but quite acceptable. I would have preferred it to be more sensory and rougher, but for the price level it is quite pleasant. The speed of execution, the recovery and the sustain are remarkable for its range, something that puts the tuning in this range in a positive light. It performs well in complicated passages, being able to reproduce complex bass lines, although possessing a slight tendency to simplify these situations. It does not flood, nor does it overwhelm. The result is realistic and pleasant, without losing its composure, even showing a good performance in this kind of situations with powerful bass, with several lines, saturated and unfiltered. I have certainly put the C3s to the test in this type of complicated reproduction and the result has been quite remarkable. It manages to layer well, the bass lines are clearly discernible, with no muddiness, blending, merging or over-simplification, which gives a lesser sense of fidelity. Best of all, it even manages to respect the midrange very cleanly, in this kind of borderline situation.
Mids
I finished the description of the previous range by commenting on the good behaviour between bass and midrange. And it is true that this situation is superior when female voices are involved. The respect for this aspect is very good and its representation is always well assured. Its emphasis is not primordial, but its prominence is at the level of the sub-bass, being a coexistence that can reach the limit, but without being critical. It is clear that technically better IEMS will be able to resolve these passages with better grace, but within this range, I feel that realism is not lost, nor is the performance relativised. The point of sibilance may depend on the source connected. It is not a completely smooth performance in this respect, as the C3 demonstrates a relative flare at its initial point, but there is certainly a control phase that paralyses any uncomfortable situations. The result is a graceful whistle, which never comes across as piercing or excited.
In comparison, the male voices are slightly behind their male counterparts, yielding a bit of prominence to them. I've found that I've tried to compensate for this difference by playing with volume on tracks with male soloists, and I've found that the C3 has a good degree of richness in performance and a good physical balance. But a little more body and strength would have been great. The result is an ensemble that acquits itself very well in its first half, though better in its second, enjoying remarkable realism, adequate timbre and natural, attractive recreation, but lacking a greater emphasis to generate a fuller, more balanced sound. But, hey, this is an economical model that acquits itself with a good degree of detail, separation and descriptive ability, despite the classic midrange dip in this U-profile. The result is a very coherent, smoothly pleasing sound that coordinates male and female voices and instruments in good consonance, separation, descriptive power and a quite natural sonority that combines sparkle with control. And all this without feeling any compression or compactness in the sound. Again I repeat that the overall result is quite good and I only regret a closer presence, especially in the first half of the range, which would have made for a fuller and more remarkable sound. However, the final mix is clear, clean, with a notable dose of transparency and separation, in which the details or nuances are shown better than expected, achieving a very musical recreation, attractive and enjoyable for hours.
Treble
The mid-range is also the grace of the treble. And it is this aspect that TinHiFi continues to focus on, repeating the pattern in up to 4 models, with only subtle differences. In this case, except for a more enhanced presence in the second half of the mids, the treble is very similar to the T4 Plus. But here, the emphasised tuning in the sub-bass benefits the final set. And, in this case, I consider the overall musical fit of the C3s to be more positive than that of its bigger sibling.
Again, the treble starts with a good initial representation, but restrained and controlled by that little roll-off, which is giving TinHiFi such good results. The consequence is that the initial sparkle, contained in projection, feels relaxed as well as stretched, the result of this relatively balanced rise and fall. The good relationship between power and persistence remains, enriching the sound, providing a brightness that enjoys good projection and presence, not that I can say it is soft, but remarkable. In no case is the sound vigorous or overtly bright, but the presence is adequate, subtly vivid, relatively crisp and with a more than decent extension for the price range. Thus, the upper range performance is more than satisfactory, in keeping with the rest of the range, enjoyable, both individually and overall, as well as valuable to the overall sound of the C3s.
Soundstage, Separation
It is one of those times when the U-tuning manages to represent the scene in this way. There is a closer presence at the edges of the image, generating a concave scene, eminently frontal, of notable laterality and very good stereographic representation. The details are splashy, but respectful of the general timbre of each instrument and voices, without them predominating over the fundamentals. The mix is in tune, achieving a remarkable blend of naturalness, warmth and neutrality. The sound offers remarkable dynamics and feels separate, remarkably so for its price range. There is no congestion, a good level of transparency, cleanliness and clarity, but none of these are overly predominant. In fact, I don't really miss anything, technically speaking, and the overall package is very much in keeping with its value, if not better.
The sound is not analytical, but neither does it fall short in the execution of detail or nuance. It doesn't reach a micro level, but it achieves a range that doesn't lack more insightful expressiveness. In this way, the macro and midrange detail, the separation and the cleanness of the sound, manages to amplify the perception of the tiniest nuances above its price. Very good.
Comparisons
QKZ x HBB Khan
The QKZ Khan's are $10 cheaper, have a 3D printed capsule, slightly more compromised ergonomics than the excellent C3's and eloquent tuning. Without a doubt, my advice would be to invest that $10 in the C3. It is clear that they don't have a box, but the cable, after all, a fundamental part of the set, is far superior.
It is clear that I have not been able to fit the sound of the Khan and I prefer the more traditional Harman curve of the C3. But they also do it better in many ways. Balance, midrange, treble, clarity and technical aspects are superior in the C3s. The sound is different in the Khan's and perhaps that may be their advantage. But when it comes to music enjoyment, the C3s are much more all-rounders than the QKZs.
On a quick change, with the QKZs in my ears, I miss the fuller sound of the C3s, as well as their balance, greater coherence and presence in the midrange. I also miss their technical level, detail, greater separation and presence in the upper treble. I should clarify that the QKZs require more power to sound at the same volume. The only quarrel the QKZs might present is in the low end. They have more texture, but at the cost of a more unreal LFO sonority. In complex situations, the C3 is more resolute, recreating a more complex low end, with better resolution and better resolved than the QKZ, which in difficult passages, can be more overwhelming and tends to simplify both the bass lines and compact the layers.
In my opinion, the mid-range of the QKZ is more unbalanced. I think that the remoteness of the first half creates a sense of hollowness that gives an incomplete feeling of the music in this range. Even though there is also a distance in the first half of the C3 midrange, it is not comparable and the result is much more harmonious and realistic than in the QKZ. The midrange is fuller, more detailed, transparent and cleaner in the C3s.
Over time, the QKZs' treble has opened up and the sound no longer seems as shaded as it did in the beginning. Now, it feels that higher punch in the mid-treble. But I still prefer the studied coherence of the C3s. To describe the result I again appeal to realism and naturalness, that's enough.
The scene was simply adequate for the QKZs, in the C3s it is more remarkable, more air, more separation, better detail, better dynamics, better positioning, more transparency, they manage to widen the scene and present it in a concave and wider way.
Conclusion
I think I'm repeating myself, but I think TinHiFi is still going round in circles about the right tuning. Maybe I am as redundant as the brand, but the result is not to be criticised. On the contrary. On their own, the C3s seem to me to be a remarkable product, which I recommend if you are looking for a Harman target.
The capsules are very comfortable and the cable is remarkable for the price. The sound is good across the whole range. It has an emphasized sub-bass, it is capable and very solvent in the lower range. The second half of the midrange is very pleasant, closer, clear, crisp and transparent, achieving very attractive female voices. The relative distance of the first half of the midrange leaves me wanting more, due to its good work and performance, which could have been taken advantage of by bringing it closer and adding more body to this part. The treble repeats the successful formula of TinHiFi's latest top models, even adapting it more appropriately. Without presenting an analytical sound, the C3s enjoy a very good level of detail, resolution, definition and dynamics. Without being excellent, there is little or nothing more I can ask for at this price. So I can say that this is a very high grade.
Sources Used During the Analysis
- Aune X8 XVIII Magic DAC + EarMen ST-Amp.
- TempoTec Serenade X + iFi Zen Can.
- Earmen Angel.
- TempoTec Variations V6.
- ACMEE MF02s.
- xDuoo XD05 BAL.
- Hidizs AP80 PRO-X Red Copper Limited Edition.
- Aune Flamingo.
Ratings
- Construction and Design: 85
- Adjustment/Ergonomics: 94
- Accessories: 65
- Bass: 85
- Mids: 78
- Treble: 82
- Separation: 83
- Soundstage: 82
- Quality/Price: 92
TinHiFi offered me this model, in exchange for writing an honest review. I want to make it clear that all my opinions written in this review have not been conditioned by this fact, nor will I ever write anything that I do not really think or feel here. I will only write about my personal opinion in relation to the revised product.
Purchase Link
You can read the full review in Spanish here
The review sample was kindly provided free of charge in exchange for an honest review.
I didn't receive monetary or any other kind of compensation and I don't use affiliate links.
The price of C3 is $49 and you can buy it from the TinHifi online shop.
TINHiFi C3
The C2 and C3 are two brand new, budget friendly, earphones by TINHiFi that have been launched simultaneously.
The C3 uses a 10mm PU+LCP composite diaphragm with very strong elasticity.
It realizes higher accurate high-frequency vibration and excellent transient response.
It is also equipped with a KAIKOKU-CCAW 0.035mm light weight sound unit imported from Japan.
lt has the effect of a wide sound range and high-frequency transparency, which optimizes the high-frequency extension of the sound and presents richer detail.
N52 ultra powerful magnet and full internal dual magnetic circuit design provides unmatched low frequency performance and transient response.
Build quality and fit
The C3 earshells are made using 3D-printing technology, capturing the contour of the ear canal in a semi-custom shape through a computer model simulation database of the human ears.
The resin compound that is used is environmentally-friendly and harmless to the skin for long-term contact.
The anatomically shaped earshells are quite compact and lightweight (4.4g each) so they offer a very comfortable and stress free fit that is suitable for long term use with the added benefit of the very good passive noise attenuation.
Build quality is excellent, the earshells have a nice looking black shiny finish with a carbon fiber, gray square, pattern at the front plate.
Cable and accessories
The C3 comes with a 2-pin detachable cable that is made from a 4-core 270C silver-plated wire.
The cable is of high quality and beautiful looking with aluminum plugs and splitter, it has low microphonic noise and it doesn't get easily tangled.
You also get six pairs of one type of eartips and that's it, no carrying pouch, no some extra fine-tuning eartips.
Listening impressions
The C3 was left playing music for about 60 hours before listening evaluation.
The impedance of the C3 is 32Ω with a sensitivity of 106dB and they are actually pretty easy to drive even from a phone but as always an entry level USB DAC dongle is highly recommended.
I have mostly used the iFi Go link, FiiO KA1 and iBasso DC03 Pro.
If you are a fan of a looser approach to the Harman target curve then you are going to love the C3 because it is a fine example of such a tuning without overdoing it and in fact it is more tonally correct than hardcore Harman approaches.
Good sub-bass extension, mildly boosted bass without too much of a mid-bass hump, clear and well defined mids that don't get masked by the low end and a smooth but not subdued treble that has plenty of energy and airiness.
The technicalities are surprisingly good for an entry level earphone, the bass is tight and controlled, fast and precise with good body weight, not dry or lean and with ample dynamics.
Mid-range transparency is also very good, voices and instruments sound crystal clear and well articulated with plenty of harmonic wealth and a natural timbre.
The treble is smooth and fatigue free with an easy going nature without any harshness and brightens but at the same time it can provide plenty of energy and sparkle as to sound lively and airy.
The C3 is mildly warm and very musical sounding without being dark or veiled, an earphone that feels at home with all kinds of music as long as you don't have very specific expectations.
You can listen to modern stuff but don't expect a bass-head experience and classical music alike as long as you are willing to forgive some minor lower end tuning inaccuracies and a relative lack of fidelity.
Don't expect any miracles regarding overall resolution and texture refinement or detail retrieval and the treble is slightly lacking in bite and presence but for the price the C3 is a very good performer and provides an all inclusive and well integrated listening experience.
Soundstage is quite spacious and extended, not that layered or holographic, nor the last word in imaging accuracy but still satisfying enough with large scale works.
I found the C3 quite competent with classical music, at least for the price point, and in fact it sounded more tonally accurate than similarly tuned earphones like the FiiO JD7 when listening to Mozart's early symphonies.
Compared to the FiiO JD7 ($99)
The price difference between the two earphones is quite substantial, the JD7 is $50 more expensive but in exchange you get a slightly higher quality cable, two sets of different eartips, a pair of memory foam eartips and a hard carrying case.
The JD7 has a full metal construction and is slightly more compact with a rounded profile.
They are both comfortable but the C3 is more effective at blocking outside noise.
Their overall tuning is quite close but the JD7 follows the Harman target curve in a more precise fashion and has slightly deeper sub-bass and a more emphasized bass / mid-bass that makes it the more fun sounding with non acoustic music but at the same time is less accurate in low end tonality.
Mid range and treble are on the same level of transparency, present and smooth with a quite realistic and natural timbre but the JD7 has the upper hand in resolution and texture finesse.
The TinHifi is better suited for critical listening while the JD7 is the party animal.
In the end
The TinHifi is a fine example of a well tuned and balanced sounding earphone that is equally suited for critical and casual listening alike without lacking too much in technicalities.
It could benefit from a couple more eartips and a carrying case but in the end, it's all about the sound and the C3 is %100 worthy of the asking price.
Test playlist
Copyright - Petros Laskis 2023.
I didn't receive monetary or any other kind of compensation and I don't use affiliate links.
The price of C3 is $49 and you can buy it from the TinHifi online shop.
TINHiFi C3
The C2 and C3 are two brand new, budget friendly, earphones by TINHiFi that have been launched simultaneously.
The C3 uses a 10mm PU+LCP composite diaphragm with very strong elasticity.
It realizes higher accurate high-frequency vibration and excellent transient response.
It is also equipped with a KAIKOKU-CCAW 0.035mm light weight sound unit imported from Japan.
lt has the effect of a wide sound range and high-frequency transparency, which optimizes the high-frequency extension of the sound and presents richer detail.
N52 ultra powerful magnet and full internal dual magnetic circuit design provides unmatched low frequency performance and transient response.
Build quality and fit
The C3 earshells are made using 3D-printing technology, capturing the contour of the ear canal in a semi-custom shape through a computer model simulation database of the human ears.
The resin compound that is used is environmentally-friendly and harmless to the skin for long-term contact.
The anatomically shaped earshells are quite compact and lightweight (4.4g each) so they offer a very comfortable and stress free fit that is suitable for long term use with the added benefit of the very good passive noise attenuation.
Build quality is excellent, the earshells have a nice looking black shiny finish with a carbon fiber, gray square, pattern at the front plate.
Cable and accessories
The C3 comes with a 2-pin detachable cable that is made from a 4-core 270C silver-plated wire.
The cable is of high quality and beautiful looking with aluminum plugs and splitter, it has low microphonic noise and it doesn't get easily tangled.
You also get six pairs of one type of eartips and that's it, no carrying pouch, no some extra fine-tuning eartips.
Listening impressions
The C3 was left playing music for about 60 hours before listening evaluation.
The impedance of the C3 is 32Ω with a sensitivity of 106dB and they are actually pretty easy to drive even from a phone but as always an entry level USB DAC dongle is highly recommended.
I have mostly used the iFi Go link, FiiO KA1 and iBasso DC03 Pro.
If you are a fan of a looser approach to the Harman target curve then you are going to love the C3 because it is a fine example of such a tuning without overdoing it and in fact it is more tonally correct than hardcore Harman approaches.
Good sub-bass extension, mildly boosted bass without too much of a mid-bass hump, clear and well defined mids that don't get masked by the low end and a smooth but not subdued treble that has plenty of energy and airiness.
The technicalities are surprisingly good for an entry level earphone, the bass is tight and controlled, fast and precise with good body weight, not dry or lean and with ample dynamics.
Mid-range transparency is also very good, voices and instruments sound crystal clear and well articulated with plenty of harmonic wealth and a natural timbre.
The treble is smooth and fatigue free with an easy going nature without any harshness and brightens but at the same time it can provide plenty of energy and sparkle as to sound lively and airy.
The C3 is mildly warm and very musical sounding without being dark or veiled, an earphone that feels at home with all kinds of music as long as you don't have very specific expectations.
You can listen to modern stuff but don't expect a bass-head experience and classical music alike as long as you are willing to forgive some minor lower end tuning inaccuracies and a relative lack of fidelity.
Don't expect any miracles regarding overall resolution and texture refinement or detail retrieval and the treble is slightly lacking in bite and presence but for the price the C3 is a very good performer and provides an all inclusive and well integrated listening experience.
Soundstage is quite spacious and extended, not that layered or holographic, nor the last word in imaging accuracy but still satisfying enough with large scale works.
I found the C3 quite competent with classical music, at least for the price point, and in fact it sounded more tonally accurate than similarly tuned earphones like the FiiO JD7 when listening to Mozart's early symphonies.
Compared to the FiiO JD7 ($99)
The price difference between the two earphones is quite substantial, the JD7 is $50 more expensive but in exchange you get a slightly higher quality cable, two sets of different eartips, a pair of memory foam eartips and a hard carrying case.
The JD7 has a full metal construction and is slightly more compact with a rounded profile.
They are both comfortable but the C3 is more effective at blocking outside noise.
Their overall tuning is quite close but the JD7 follows the Harman target curve in a more precise fashion and has slightly deeper sub-bass and a more emphasized bass / mid-bass that makes it the more fun sounding with non acoustic music but at the same time is less accurate in low end tonality.
Mid range and treble are on the same level of transparency, present and smooth with a quite realistic and natural timbre but the JD7 has the upper hand in resolution and texture finesse.
The TinHifi is better suited for critical listening while the JD7 is the party animal.
In the end
The TinHifi is a fine example of a well tuned and balanced sounding earphone that is equally suited for critical and casual listening alike without lacking too much in technicalities.
It could benefit from a couple more eartips and a carrying case but in the end, it's all about the sound and the C3 is %100 worthy of the asking price.
Test playlist
Copyright - Petros Laskis 2023.
My thanks to HiFigo for the review sample: https://hifigo.com/products/tinhifi-c3-1?variant=43618427928815
"My opinions are mine and I am not paid, influenced by anything other than my love of music and this hobby."
The TinHiFi C3 comes in at a competitive price range, and there are so many good IEMs in that range. The Tin C3 follows in the Harman target making it pleasant with no rough edges.
Inside the box you will find probable the best-looking silver cable that Tin has made to date in my opinion, you will also find a large selection of tips and the IEM but sadly no case or pouch.
I find the construction well done with an ergonomic, smooth and rounded shape, so many will find it comfortable as I did. Isolation was good with proper size tips.
Features: -
>Composite LCP Super-Linear Diaphragm.
>Classy Carbon Fiber Textured Face Covers.
>Premium KAIKOKU CCAW Ultra-Thin Voice Coil.
>3D Printed Ergonomic Ear Shells.
>N52 Neodymium Powerful Magnetic Architecture.
>High-Quality Silver-Plated Cable.
>Tuned Following the Harman Target.
>Lightweight & Ergonomic.
Technical Specifications: -
>Impedance: 32Ω±15%.
>Max Power: 5mW.
>Frequency Response: 10Hz-20kHz.
>Sensitivity: 106±3dB.
>Gold-Plated 2-Pin Connectors.
Sound:
Bass Mid-Sub:
Bass present with a typical Harman punch while not as speedy as some it maintains a decent thump and with control and a fair quality as well. Sub-Bass hits with a nice depth and texture but I find Mid-Bas steals the show with just a little more presence and power. Bass in general has a natural timbre that is very pleasant with rock and pop music.
Midrange:
Mids present with good details and clarity there is little bleed from the Bass and only slight recession. The separation of instruments is decent. Vocals both male and female sound full and have good weight and emotion, they can be very engaging.
Treble:
Highs are quite pleasant. Having a natural openness and extension to them with better than average details and clarity.
I found it had just enough sparkle to make vocals and instruments to shine.
Soundstage ETC.:
Soundstage is moderately open with a width and depth of almost equal proportions. I think the C3 improves much on the T3+ here with better separation. Details and accuracy are still very good.
Afterthoughts:
The TinHiFi C3 is an improvement on the really nice T3 plus sharing a similar shape and a nice-looking shell I found good looking. I think that its pleasant natural and Harman tuning, make it a good match for an all arounder and daily driver IEM. I love the look and that cable is simply well done.
Audio Review - TinHiFi C3
Hello all: Thanks for reading my feedback.
I share my impressions as I hear them with my ears.
As all our ears are different shapes & sizes so what I hear as bright or bass heavy -you might hear as dull and Vise-Versa; just something to be mindful of.
What makes my ears happy as a sound signature is slightly more aggressive U shape. I love my Bass Sub and Mid Bass love it all actually; and in quantity. With the Bass I prefer a faster decay the faster the better as to not bleed into the mids., I am treble sensitive and prefer a darker warmer replay with good extension.
I prefer the fast speedy bass of the Nano Carbon Driver of my LetShuoer EJ07M and GS AUDIO SE12 ( Love my Sonion 38D'S BA Sub Bass. ) Of course there are exceptions in the market - as I also find the bass of the Bio Diaphragm used in the Yanyin Canon special - has some special sauce like a 8" subwoofer that feels like a 12" Has the slam and some serious sub bass! And the super cool Copper Alloy Shell IKKO Obsidian OH10 - Only IEM I never considered selling!
That dripple being said:
And as such here is my take on the: TinHiFi C3 (This one was sent to me by KeepHiFi - Thank you.)
Sources: E1DA SG3, Shanling UP5, Geshelli JNOG J2 with AKM4493 chip.
DAP/TRASPORT: From Lenovo Laptop with Amazon Unlimited ULTRA HD, iBasso DX160 ,Samsung S22 Ultra with DSD Files.
Amps: LoxjiP20 tube amp and Topping A90D
Tips Used for Best Result and subjective: KBEAR 07 L tips and KBEAR Hazy 6N Graphene Cable (Paid)
PRO'S:
- Fit absolutely the most comfortable IEM I have tried for my ears.
- L & R in large letters on bottom - Nice touch.
- Smooth unfatiguing sound signature.
- Bass has nice bottom end not the fastest but musical.
- Can be driven off anything from phone output to high end amps.
- Single DD coherency
- Nice warm mids Male & Female vocals sound natural , Sting / Fleetwood Mac all correct.
- Stock Cable is fully useable and a nice include.
CON'S:
- No Cable termination option.
- Not the same speed of bass like a Beryllium Coated One ( Cadenza ) Some mike like this more so not really a con but for my preferences.
- Stage is fairly compressed not very wide and stage is on a single plane not much depth or height but again maybe not a serious negative as some prefer a intimate stage. At his price point this is what to expect. I prefer a spastic wide deep and with
good height differential.
NOTHING ELSE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT FOR $50 CDN! - No Case who cares. Cable Upgrade helps but not needed.
My Cable take as a generalization; is this - as I detest cable shillers: I can hear a difference not so much in cable to cable but in the materials used. For this I think cables are first and foremost #1 EYE CANDY and #2 distant second If I can hone the sound signature a tad then great. IEM/SOURCE MATERIAL/TIPS/FLOWER STRAIN/DAC-SOURCE/AMP/CABLE that’s my order of importance to what I think makes the most difference.
It has been observed the Pure OFCC Copper gives a nice bottom end and seems to not enhance the high frequencies.
Silver Or SPC seems to enhance the highs. The Golden element seems to make the sound a bit warmer. Palladium, Rhodium and Frozen Litz - Ummm this BS smells a lot like Psychoacoustics kind of funny.
EVALUATION SCORE FOR SOUND IMPRESSIONS: 1-10 ( 1 Lowest - Poor 10 Highest - Mind Blown )
OVERALL SCORE: Out of possible 130 Points : 100.5 / 130 77% Old School Grade B+
BUILD QUALITY: 10 Light & Flawless nice shell smooth no flaws and fantastic shape best of all the sub $50 I have tried.
SUB - BASS Quantity: 8.5
SUB - BASS Quality: 9.0
MID - BASS Quality: 8.5
MID - HIGH Quality: 7
TREBBLE: 7.5
EXTENTION: 5
STAGE: 5
- WIDTH: 5
- HEIGHT: 5
- DEPTH: 5
COHERIENCY (Drivers Blend in together) : 10
MICRO DYNAMICS: 6
- (How well does the IEM convey a emotional and skillful use of change of volume in the musical piece your listening to make it interesting and bring a tear to your eye.)
MICRO DYNAMICS: 6
- Elements of good Micro-Dynamics (Drums have the snap and impact your feel in your chest and this was observed to be best achieved with a slower attack on the bass notes to add weight and blend the proper attack relative of the rest of the mix; Also how does the IEM express its ability to replay the song mix in a way you can enjoy the dynamics in different volumes not only with the various different instruments ; but as well as give you a sense of space of whether or not your listening to a live recording or a large , medium, small recording studio.
- (How well does the IEM give you the sense of emotion in the overall relay: Does the emotion of the entire song change tone with verses having various rises? Did the engineer make the choruses feel more powerful?)
SOURCE & RECORDING PLAYBACK QUALITY MAKES A MASSIVE DIFFERECE. AND ONLY GOOD IEM'S CAN GET HIGH MARKS ON ABOVE!
MY VALUE SCORE: 18 Easy to rec this one as blind buy for the price it is excellent value if this fits your library and sound preference.
100% I AGAIN I BASE THIS ON MY PRECIEVED - PRICING / VALUE EQUASION
1-20 ( 1 Nobody Should Buy This - 10 Good Value as over-all package this IEM will appeal to some who will love It - 20 ( SOUND/WALLET/EMOTION/FIT/COMFORT )
- ( My score purely subjective to current selling price and competition at time of review)
SUMMARY FOR : Tin HiFi C3
I HAVE SPENT MANY HOURS WITH SOME MINDFULL THOUGHT ABOUT THIS QUESTION:
Not sure If I am the only one who wondered why anyone would buy a cheap IEM when we have or something closer to our TOTL collection already? - I MEAN IT'S CHEAP HOW GOOD COULD IT BE?
ANSWER : Like the Cadenza and Now 2023 Truthear Hola, The C3 and MANY OTHER IEM'S that came out in 2022 broke the mold really; the sound you can get vs the cost keeps resetting weekly.
All the way up the scale for the sheer joy you can get for so little money without to many faults: Makes you ponder the diminishing return scale and where the bar is now set to!
"Hard to believe how far the market has come for the Value / $ Equation" I have heard continuously by many; in all the forums it has been noted many times by many different people.
COMPARISIONS:
- KiwiEars Cadenza
○ Slightly more recessed vocals like just a hair - me preference female vocals are better.
○ Bass over the C3 wins hands down with speed and attack and quantity
○ Male vocals again nicer for me cleaner with the faster mid bass and less bleed than the C3
○ Highs are nicer , cleaner nicer sparkle with-out any glare or sibilance the C3 sometimes for me was a bit ummm nope , I ended up putting a 350 Level balanced filter on C3 nozzle to help but the Cadenza just did it better without help.
○ Better stage than C3 wins hands down.
○ Cadenza would easily me rec over the C3 for less you get more!
- Truthear Hola
○ Less bottom end than either the C3 and Cadenza but nice texture and weight and I prefer the faster bass to muddy thump of the C3
○ Excellent stage width and height for $20 Crazy you can tell it’s a lesser priced IEM but its fun and easy to listen to. The Cadenza still has significantly better stage.
○ Female vocals better than C3 but Male vocals are more weighty on C3 if that’s your preference.
○ Shell shape they are almost too small for me.
○ More forward vocals and presentation than either C3 or Cadenza , maybe cleaner than those 2 but my preference is on the warmer side not the cooler forward vocals in the mix the Hola give.
FINAL THOUGHTS:
The TinHiFiC3 , played my very mixed library nicely and I If I did not have the Cadenza in my arsenal I would be happy. Love the fit of the C3 very much and really wanted this IEM to trump the Cadenza…. But alas not a chance! Price, stage and just overall the Cadenza is a better sounding and the better purchase thus the 3***
The C3 is great and good value purchase for $50 but it traded blows with others in the same or less price bracket and lost out on the most important factor for me the sound.
If you like fatter less snappy bass you will be happy with the C3 as a whole very nice package do your research see if this one's for you.
Cheers TheDeafMonk.
Hello all: Thanks for reading my feedback.
I share my impressions as I hear them with my ears.
As all our ears are different shapes & sizes so what I hear as bright or bass heavy -you might hear as dull and Vise-Versa; just something to be mindful of.
What makes my ears happy as a sound signature is slightly more aggressive U shape. I love my Bass Sub and Mid Bass love it all actually; and in quantity. With the Bass I prefer a faster decay the faster the better as to not bleed into the mids., I am treble sensitive and prefer a darker warmer replay with good extension.
I prefer the fast speedy bass of the Nano Carbon Driver of my LetShuoer EJ07M and GS AUDIO SE12 ( Love my Sonion 38D'S BA Sub Bass. ) Of course there are exceptions in the market - as I also find the bass of the Bio Diaphragm used in the Yanyin Canon special - has some special sauce like a 8" subwoofer that feels like a 12" Has the slam and some serious sub bass! And the super cool Copper Alloy Shell IKKO Obsidian OH10 - Only IEM I never considered selling!
That dripple being said:
And as such here is my take on the: TinHiFi C3 (This one was sent to me by KeepHiFi - Thank you.)
Sources: E1DA SG3, Shanling UP5, Geshelli JNOG J2 with AKM4493 chip.
DAP/TRASPORT: From Lenovo Laptop with Amazon Unlimited ULTRA HD, iBasso DX160 ,Samsung S22 Ultra with DSD Files.
Amps: LoxjiP20 tube amp and Topping A90D
Tips Used for Best Result and subjective: KBEAR 07 L tips and KBEAR Hazy 6N Graphene Cable (Paid)
PRO'S:
- Fit absolutely the most comfortable IEM I have tried for my ears.
- L & R in large letters on bottom - Nice touch.
- Smooth unfatiguing sound signature.
- Bass has nice bottom end not the fastest but musical.
- Can be driven off anything from phone output to high end amps.
- Single DD coherency
- Nice warm mids Male & Female vocals sound natural , Sting / Fleetwood Mac all correct.
- Stock Cable is fully useable and a nice include.
CON'S:
- No Cable termination option.
- Not the same speed of bass like a Beryllium Coated One ( Cadenza ) Some mike like this more so not really a con but for my preferences.
- Stage is fairly compressed not very wide and stage is on a single plane not much depth or height but again maybe not a serious negative as some prefer a intimate stage. At his price point this is what to expect. I prefer a spastic wide deep and with
NOTHING ELSE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT FOR $50 CDN! - No Case who cares. Cable Upgrade helps but not needed.
My Cable take as a generalization; is this - as I detest cable shillers: I can hear a difference not so much in cable to cable but in the materials used. For this I think cables are first and foremost #1 EYE CANDY and #2 distant second If I can hone the sound signature a tad then great. IEM/SOURCE MATERIAL/TIPS/FLOWER STRAIN/DAC-SOURCE/AMP/CABLE that’s my order of importance to what I think makes the most difference.
It has been observed the Pure OFCC Copper gives a nice bottom end and seems to not enhance the high frequencies.
Silver Or SPC seems to enhance the highs. The Golden element seems to make the sound a bit warmer. Palladium, Rhodium and Frozen Litz - Ummm this BS smells a lot like Psychoacoustics kind of funny.
EVALUATION SCORE FOR SOUND IMPRESSIONS: 1-10 ( 1 Lowest - Poor 10 Highest - Mind Blown )
OVERALL SCORE: Out of possible 130 Points : 100.5 / 130 77% Old School Grade B+
BUILD QUALITY: 10 Light & Flawless nice shell smooth no flaws and fantastic shape best of all the sub $50 I have tried.
SUB - BASS Quantity: 8.5
SUB - BASS Quality: 9.0
MID - BASS Quality: 8.5
MID - HIGH Quality: 7
TREBBLE: 7.5
EXTENTION: 5
STAGE: 5
- WIDTH: 5
- HEIGHT: 5
- DEPTH: 5
COHERIENCY (Drivers Blend in together) : 10
MICRO DYNAMICS: 6
- (How well does the IEM convey a emotional and skillful use of change of volume in the musical piece your listening to make it interesting and bring a tear to your eye.)
MICRO DYNAMICS: 6
- Elements of good Micro-Dynamics (Drums have the snap and impact your feel in your chest and this was observed to be best achieved with a slower attack on the bass notes to add weight and blend the proper attack relative of the rest of the mix; Also how does the IEM express its ability to replay the song mix in a way you can enjoy the dynamics in different volumes not only with the various different instruments ; but as well as give you a sense of space of whether or not your listening to a live recording or a large , medium, small recording studio.
- (How well does the IEM give you the sense of emotion in the overall relay: Does the emotion of the entire song change tone with verses having various rises? Did the engineer make the choruses feel more powerful?)
SOURCE & RECORDING PLAYBACK QUALITY MAKES A MASSIVE DIFFERECE. AND ONLY GOOD IEM'S CAN GET HIGH MARKS ON ABOVE!
MY VALUE SCORE: 18 Easy to rec this one as blind buy for the price it is excellent value if this fits your library and sound preference.
100% I AGAIN I BASE THIS ON MY PRECIEVED - PRICING / VALUE EQUASION
1-20 ( 1 Nobody Should Buy This - 10 Good Value as over-all package this IEM will appeal to some who will love It - 20 ( SOUND/WALLET/EMOTION/FIT/COMFORT )
- ( My score purely subjective to current selling price and competition at time of review)
SUMMARY FOR : Tin HiFi C3
I HAVE SPENT MANY HOURS WITH SOME MINDFULL THOUGHT ABOUT THIS QUESTION:
Not sure If I am the only one who wondered why anyone would buy a cheap IEM when we have or something closer to our TOTL collection already? - I MEAN IT'S CHEAP HOW GOOD COULD IT BE?
ANSWER : Like the Cadenza and Now 2023 Truthear Hola, The C3 and MANY OTHER IEM'S that came out in 2022 broke the mold really; the sound you can get vs the cost keeps resetting weekly.
All the way up the scale for the sheer joy you can get for so little money without to many faults: Makes you ponder the diminishing return scale and where the bar is now set to!
"Hard to believe how far the market has come for the Value / $ Equation" I have heard continuously by many; in all the forums it has been noted many times by many different people.
COMPARISIONS:
- KiwiEars Cadenza
○ Slightly more recessed vocals like just a hair - me preference female vocals are better.
○ Bass over the C3 wins hands down with speed and attack and quantity
○ Male vocals again nicer for me cleaner with the faster mid bass and less bleed than the C3
○ Highs are nicer , cleaner nicer sparkle with-out any glare or sibilance the C3 sometimes for me was a bit ummm nope , I ended up putting a 350 Level balanced filter on C3 nozzle to help but the Cadenza just did it better without help.
○ Better stage than C3 wins hands down.
○ Cadenza would easily me rec over the C3 for less you get more!
- Truthear Hola
○ Less bottom end than either the C3 and Cadenza but nice texture and weight and I prefer the faster bass to muddy thump of the C3
○ Excellent stage width and height for $20 Crazy you can tell it’s a lesser priced IEM but its fun and easy to listen to. The Cadenza still has significantly better stage.
○ Female vocals better than C3 but Male vocals are more weighty on C3 if that’s your preference.
○ Shell shape they are almost too small for me.
○ More forward vocals and presentation than either C3 or Cadenza , maybe cleaner than those 2 but my preference is on the warmer side not the cooler forward vocals in the mix the Hola give.
FINAL THOUGHTS:
The TinHiFiC3 , played my very mixed library nicely and I If I did not have the Cadenza in my arsenal I would be happy. Love the fit of the C3 very much and really wanted this IEM to trump the Cadenza…. But alas not a chance! Price, stage and just overall the Cadenza is a better sounding and the better purchase thus the 3***
The C3 is great and good value purchase for $50 but it traded blows with others in the same or less price bracket and lost out on the most important factor for me the sound.
If you like fatter less snappy bass you will be happy with the C3 as a whole very nice package do your research see if this one's for you.
Cheers TheDeafMonk.
TINHIFI C3
10mm PU+LCP Composite Diaphragm HiFi Wired In-Ear Monitor
- LCP Superlinear Composite Diaphragm
- Light-weight Ergonomics Design
- The Harman Target Curve of According Audiophile Target
- HIFI Grade Silver Plated Cable
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
- Driver Unit: 10mm PU+LCP Composite diaphragm
- Interface: Gold-plated 2P connector
- Cable: 1.25m 4 strands transparent pvc stranded wire
- Impedance: 32Ω
- Max Power: 5mW
- Frequency: 10-20000Hz
- Sensitivity: 106±3dB@1kHz 0.179V
- Single weight: 4.39
Get them here for $49.00
https://www.linsoul.com/products/tinhifi-c3
Linsoul website: https://www.linsoul.com/
Linsoul Aliexpress Store: https://ddaudio.aliexpress.com/store/2894006
Linsoul USA Amazon Store link: https://www.amazon.com/s?i=merchant-items&me=A267P2DT104U3C
Disclaimer:
I want to thank Kareena of Linsoul for the love and the TinHiFi C3 Universal IEM review sample.
Disclaimer:
These are one persons ideas and concepts, your results may vary.
Equipment Used:
Sony WM1Z Walkman DAP MrWalkman Firmware 4.4mm and 3.5mm
Sony WM1A Walkman DAP MrWalkman Firmware 4.4mm and 3.5mm
Sony TA-ZH1ES DAC/AMP Firmware 1.03
Electra Glide Audio Reference Glide-Reference Standard "Fatboy" Power Cord
Sony Walkman Cradle BCR-NWH10
AudioQuest Carbon USB
UA3 Dongle DAC/Amplifier 4.4mm and 3.5mm
Samsung Android Smartphone 3.5mm output
TinHiFi and more TinHiFi
So just to reiterate here. I have been sent a bunch of TinHiFi gear. I didn’t ask for it, but it just showed-up. It seems they kind-of shot-gun market the business. Meaning instead of making a few products, they make a bunch of gear. I can only guess what the original T2 was like when it came out? In my personal IEM trajectory.......... I was really into budget stuff in 2016-2018. But when the T2 hit the market (running) I was already into more expensive gear. Still if you were around at that time there was a lot of talk about it, you could say it was a phenomena. Z Reviews made a video about the T2 on on February 4th, 2019. He literally fell in love with the T2. Now I actually remember when that video came out, I still remember seeing it in 2019 and still feel his emotion from that time. And now that I have been sent this TinHiFi gear, I wish I would have purchased a T2 back then as I'm simply curious what all the fuss was about. It’s not like TinHiFi makes bad products now……..it’s just Z Reviews made the T2 sound like it was revolutionary? And maybe it was revolutionary, I mean the shape was, that's for sure! Yet, I can’t just get an old T2 now and listen (to get an idea of the qualities) because a whole lot has gone on in the market since February 2019. In some ways TinHiFi is still sticking with the shape of the T2, and they have recently introduced the T2 DLC, but looking at graphs, it really isn’t like the original T2 at all. The first TinHiFi I ever heard was the TinHiFi Giant Panda P1 Max Planar IEM. In fact it was the second planar I ever heard. It was actually a bunch of money when it debuted in April 2021 for $169.00. Now it goes on sale every one in a while slightly over $100.00. Really as my introduction to TinHiFi the P1 Max was a great start……and while it took a while to totally understand what the P1 Max was doing, I finally totally understood. So even though it’s a little reserved in stance it still has a personality different than any planar made, also it’s built very different. The next TinHiFi I was exposed to was the TWS Tin Buds 3……..this was in-fact a wireless semi-custom IEM that was also totally unique to me. So what I'm trying to say is TinHiFi does put out unique stuff.........at least in my personal experience, anyway?
https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/tinhifi-tin-buds-3-tws-iems.25964/reviews#review-28909
When the Tin Buds 3 came out.........my friends who just wanted a pair of TWS IEMs would ask to try it. And for $89.52 it was very good for the money, supplying incredible bass for what it was. My friends would always comment as to the level of bass provided. TinHifi is simply gaining market share by offering even more of what consumers maybe would like? They continued to reintroduce single DD full-range IEMs. Don’t forget the Tin Buds 3 was also a full-range DD IEM, but really Tin-HiFi’s claim to fame is the T2. Trying to out-do themselves TinHiFi just released the T4 PLUS. This was an elaborate affair with brass rings on the edges set-up to hold mahogany wood resonator end-caps. Does the T4 PLUS look like the original T2?
https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/ti...dynamic-driver-iem.26287/reviews#review-29963
Now I just rated the T4 PLUS 4 stars, mainly because I liked what they did as an improvement over the TinHiFi T2 DLC. They got a slightly more natural an engaging sound than the slightly sterile T2 DLC. Those end-caps must have done something? That or driver updates, what-ever they did the upper soundstage was reintroduced having better itemization of sound objects. Still the overall soundstage isn’t that great. And TinHiFi in their attempts at success know the barrel shape of the original T2 was both iconic and controversial. Still the original T2 was a hit IEM. But the reality is the shape never touches any part of your ear, so you are dependent on tips to hold the whole shebang in place. Depending who you are, this can be a good or bad thing. In fact I owe it to getting really good fit with the new “orange” tips, that truly made the TinHiFi T4 PLUS workout for me in the end. Finally, ear-tips that would hold the IEMs firmly in place at the correct insertion depth. In the past TinHiFi has come out with other IEMs to garner this barrel-shape too. The history of TinHiFi is mesmerizing to say the least. Why am I rambling on about the T2, T2 DLC and T4 PLUS shape? The reason I bring this up is partially to cover some history about TinHiFi, but also to come to the conclusion this new C3 shape……..it’s amazing.
I mean if the original T2 shape didn't fit everyone, why not give the world the greatest fitting IEM shape ever if we can, right?
So to start this review on the right foot, we have to simply talk about the form-factor of the C3. Yep. The C3 feels absolutely great in your ears, and it’s not just me. As individualistic as fit is, this sucker feels great for everyone. Truly it’s one of the nicest fitting IEMs I have ever tried, and I have tried a few. And the crazy part was they actually started feeling even better the more I used them? So spending over 16 days trying different styles of music, different amplifiers and different tips…..I have gone through the due diligence to arrive at a complete review. During that amount of time I have liked the C3 less then more, and then more again, as I try other IEMs and just basically get a feel for how it sounds. Maybe you think reviewers have the almost objective idea of how an IEM sounds right off the bat, and they simply have to write it down? Nothing could be farther from the truth, as at times it’s a rollercoaster of emotion arrived at through time spent with the IEM........just like everyone else. I will say that the fit was spectacular from day one. It’s one of those fits that has you wonder why every IEM is not made exactly like the C3. I mean seriously, they just need to copy exactly how this fits and continue to make new models as a refinement on sound quality only. Supposedly this is the update to the TinHiFi C3 PLUS. So it comes in at $49.00 instead of the C3 PLUS being $79.00. I haven’t heard the C3 PLUS so I can’t comment.
Comparisons:
Kiwi ears Cadenza Universal IEM
https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/kiwi-ears-cadenza.26226/reviews#review-29985
Coming in slightly cheaper, in many ways they share the same tone. Though at 3.5 kHz to 5.4 kHz the C3 pulls away with slightly more upper midrange and treble. This is exactly how it sounds, where the C3 is approaching with an overall brighter and more airy stance but also a deeper drop at the anti-sibilance region. Note how the C3 also continues with this brightness adding extra energy from 10 kHz all the way to 13 kHz. And again that bit of extra air is noticeable. While at first I liked the Kiwi ears Cadenza better, as it seemed to offer a different style of bass texture (maybe due to Beryllium?) yet at the end I found myself enjoying the TinHiFi C3 much more. One thing I will do for these comparisons is take 2 days off from listening, so my ears are fresh. Then I will end up picking a single cable, in the case was the C3 cable.......to use on both IEMs. Then I will use the same DAP, songs and ear-tips and really try and find differences. Here my major things to overcome was transients and note-fall offs, being a form of reduced resolution in the Cadenza and C3. Yep……..after the dust has settles both IEMs are guilty of such fault in technicalities, I still liked the C3 slightly better. The extra frequencies (you see graphed) helped add a slight boost to the overall character. Still from 2.6 kHz these two IEMs could be looked at as brothers. Seemingly working the same angle in that they offer this thick slightly blurry idea of a response. Yet the extra up-top 3.5 kHz to 5.4 kHz boosts truly add a smidge of resolution that simply adds harmonic complexity to the replay. Still once again I am given a single full-range dynamic driver that attempts a variation of the Harman target. These two IEMs don’t do anything necessarily wrong FR wise, but they also proclaim very little originality in playback. So in that sense the two IEMs, the Cadenza and the TinHiFi C3 are the same.
Build:
Offering the 10mm PU and LCP diaphragm the C3 is vented both with a single port as seen in the photographs. Weighing in at just over 4 grams, the 3D printed shells are a marvel of modern age build values. Completely black, this resin does not give a glimpse into the inner working of the C3. Even the nozzle is 3D printed offering a set-back screen with the perfect angle. As has been mentioned by other reviewers and will be presented in future reviews, the C3 is the epitome of comfortable. A 0.78 2 pin is formed flush with the sidewalls and the faceplate made of carbon fiber is a first for this reviewer. Note too how the nozzles have a perfect lip to hold ear-tips on. Looking closer we see the inset screens offering protection from any possible damage. Such nozzle length and angle go the extra part to just dial-in perfect fit! This silky smooth touch needs to be felt to be believed.
Cable:
This is truly a nice cable, second best from TinHiFi only to the included cable that came with the T4 PLUS. Both sharing brown anodized hardware, the 4-core 270C silver-plated cable takes the cake here. Truly this is one unexpected cable for the under $50 category, just the look, feel and style….not to mention sound is truly a value at this price. And while I found other cable to work as an improvement in their ability to access 4.4mm balanced, the 3.5mm single-ended performed fine in regular use.
The box opening experience:
Offering 6 sets of ear-tips, the QC stamp shows up (saving paper) stamped into the bottom of the box. While not quite the same as the $19.00 Wan'er S.G box opening experience........nothing is. Still the included cable is the cat’s meow. What till you are holding the cable in your hands, everything else wanted extra in the box will seem secondary. That and of course the build of the IEMs themselves. Which would you rather have? A secondary IEM build and secondary cable and a nice box of extras, or would you want them to put the effort into the important things? I already know your answer.
General thoughts on sound:
While not really giving the feeling of a low end roll-off or a high roll-off, the note weight is there and effective. The overall tone would probably come-off to most listeners as thick. It’s this thickness combined with relatively correct timbre is what seems to work here.
Yet the real surprise for me happened through a choice of variables in playback. Meaning often there is no rhyme or reason reason to this stuff, and you can’t guess the outcome no matter how much experience you have. Meaning changing-up your regular methodology in testing often provides fresh new results. Now this wasn’t a giant change, but using the regular ear-tips provided slightly better transients, which is something I would not have guessed before hand. Also rotating in the Shanling UA3 was great sounding with the C3. Meaning once in a while simply trying a different set of ear-tips and Dongle is a route to success not foreseen or planed. Most of these changes have to do with tone but at times tone can lead the way to even perceiving slight changes in technicalities not guessed. Narrow-bore ear-tips it seems can generate a better perception of balance with the C3 tone where wide bore will allow a deeper view into the stage, but create pace issues. Hence the provided tips are a clue as to a style of win with the TinHiFi C3! Where my only explanation as to the reality of these findings has to do with the V signature being enhanced due to the tips generating better pace, I guess? This obviously could have a lot to do with your personal hearing, none the less, pace issues and the lack there of, is often a reoccurring theme with single full-range drivers. On the contrary balanced armature drivers rely on fast transients (a inherent quality) of BA driver architecture. BA architecture while short on natural tone, brings about a pace clarity due to enhanced transients. Here in replay we need to consider overall balance as a way to perceive better transients in replay. Often this will be a listener by listener effect, yet if you do buy the C3, simply experiment with tips and realize that what makes pace for another set, by cleaning-up the bass character, may not always work for the C3.
Bass:
You probably heard this style of bass response before. Thus the Harman everyman’s tune. The trick here is that timbre is correct, though definition is compromised being one driver is doing everything. So there is always a trade-off. While providing the bass goods it’s not always separated from the mix and almost seems too close to home. To tell you the truth I love the way hybrids will dislocate the bass into its own zone. Where here is a perfect example of single full-range DD display. Seemingly almost behind it all and not anywhere off to the side. Centered, yet of great tone and timbre. And you know where this is going, yep…..the bass, the midrange and the treble somehow all seem joined at the hip?
Midrange:
Vocals are just enough in relief against the backdrop of the rest. Neither really buried and nether pronounced in display. Yet with-in the captivity there are often embellishments which are starting to be of loss. This in fact is perceived as a river of soup coming at you, yet never truly offing aspects individualized. And in fact there is little you can do as a listener to find a way out, seemingly just part of this style of driver. Take it or leave it, I always say.
Treble:
Even though most of the time graphical response curves are questionable after 10 kHz, there is a final peak rise after 10 kHz which is noticeable. This is TinHiFi attempt to provide air and accentuation into the perception of treble. And for the most part it works, yet there is still both smearing and slight crunchiness to this add.......almost the antithesis of detail? It’s there and all, but arrives as a sloppy blanket of entertainment. Yet once you have acquired this sound acceptance as a departure from basic replay, it’s kinda OK? Where trebles are thrown around into this almost myst of character? Thus TinHiFi attempting to make this DD do it all despite the drivers inherent inadequacies. As such this is simply what you get for the price you have put out. And while looking for reference I ended switching IEMs quickly to the 7Hz Salnotes Zero...........searching as to why I was experiencing such treble. And low and behold part of it was the recording, part of it WAS the C3 driver response and part of it was the computer and UA3. If all this makes sense to you is because really this style of perception is always synergy, and the existence of that synergy. It can be good synergy or bad synergy depending on the mix of equipment and sound file. And yep, a style of synergy is found and almost every price point. Yet some obviously show greater or lesser points of response.
The 7Hz Salnotes Zero V the TinHiFi C3
Free-falling into more side-by-sides, there is truth to be found here just by looking. Yep the $19.00 Salnotes against the $49.00 TinHiFi C3.
Dead Can Dance
Anastasis
“All In Good Time”
44.1 kHz - 24 bit
So the bass isn’t always the center theme of the Zero, yet heavy bass tones like "All In Good Time" provide a satisfying replay with the Zero! And I hear a smoothness in the treble? Yet there are still images into the stage? Really now going back to the C3 proved a bunch of stuff. As this album is a reference here at Redcarmoose Labs and for good reason. And amazingly compared to the prior, the differences in replay are primarily due the song file used! So to reiterate, the Zero and C3 are very close to the same actual output but after multiple side by side testing........truly the C3 started to offer slightly more contrast and imaging out into the stage than the Zero. After 4 back and forth attempts it was clear the C3 in many ways offers a slight departure from the Zero, being what appears to be a sightly more efficient character as well as offering better constructed musical elements. Most of this was due to getting the C3 the best song file source.........yet still surprising none-the-less. And while in many ways they in-fact share the same tune, the C3 goes about it’s business offering better clarity though contrasts and technical skills. Yep, the technicalities are really not terrible in the end!
Conclusion:
Once more reality is found through side-by-side tests, as sound memory is fickle and not to be trusted. A big part of IEM reviews is psychology and what we think is reality, when after multiple side-by-sides a form of truth is discovered that could be offered here as objectivity. That while IEM response (quality) is at times tricky to achieve, objective clues as to various IEM abilities are often found and remain inarguably true. This review was a journey and a story in and of itself. To summarize here the C3 offers a fabulous fit, a dynamite cable and a great sound. While it’s not perfect, often in side-by-side tests a reality of C3 value can be seen, possibly apart subjectivity. What this test also proved, was despite the C3s lack of resolution, file qualities and the choice of music was super important! The better file quality was parlayed into correct sound, it’s just with a bright and distorted treble offered by inferior file quality......the C3 simply makes with it what it can!
With better equipment, while still using the provided cable, a form of ultimate success was achieved. This provides two very critical answers in this review. 1) That the C3 can not be underestimated in it’s ability to show file quality, and 2) The C3 is not as forgiving as expected for a $49.00 IEM.
The TinHiFi C3 over the 7Hz Salnotes Zero
In the final battle of IEMs, the Kiwi ears Cadenza was brought back from the start of the review, and once again the bass aspect was of a slightly different flavor, but once again the C3 wins out of slightly better pace, yet the two IEMs are very close to the same. Out of the 3......the 7Hz Salnotes Zero, Cadenza and TinHiFi C3....... I would still chose the 7Hz Salnotes Zero and C3 as the better IEMs. I also would suggest to get the C3 as an upgrade to the 7hz Salnotes Zero if you were to ask me for recommendations. A surprise to myself, but that’s the risk you take by doing side-by-sides.
Comfortability
One of the single greatest learning experiences here relates with comfort. Meaning comfort is always important, yet at times the exact feel of the IEM transcends any ideas as to comfort, showing you once more just how important of a quality it truly is once more. Now here is the wild thing.......this level of comfort somehow goes to add to the sound quality even more. The comfort level increases wearability and adds to the experience just one more level. Such build increases natural outside noise occlusion as well as keeps the IEMs physically in your ears during action.They literally feel good inside you ears.......I don't know how to exactly reiterate this single advantage further? But just realize a lot af IEMs cross my desk, and this one has a stand-out build.
The look of the C3 as well as the cable far surpasses the asking price. These are little art pieces and a tribute to just how far $49.00 goes to provide a competitive product in 2023. While this Harman tune is both user friendly and slightly less surprising due to its originality, it still provides a correct idea of just what playback is suppose to be like. Harman arrived at the sound profile by testing speakers in a room then corrected the results for IEMs. Literally hundreds and hundreds of tests let the people involved chose this tone! Still........the resulting playback is simply one companies idea as to a possibly of an endearing sound profile. And while such a frequency response profile is used industry wide, we have to wonder wear the originality is? Meaning since this Harman Curve was invented, companies like TinHiFi has taken the ball and ran with it, seemingly saying that we will provide what is uniformly liked by the masses. And in that concept.......both the everyman/everywoman has found their (possible) FR, as well as a kind of generic sound profile which doesn't ruffle any feathers. Truly there is nothing offensive to this playback, if its got character enough to float your boat, is another story? Yet the TinHiFi does have a character of sorts. And strangely more of that character became apparent when starting to do back-to-backs. When putting the humble C3 against two other popular sellers, somehow a sonic personality started to emerge. That the sound was actually slightly more vivid than the rest, that in truth the C3 did do technicalities somewhat correct.
That playback did offer (small) character and a subtle pizzaz, if pizzaz can truly be subtle?
It's this slight difference in sound, this slight way that the C3 is unique combined with the glorious comfort that makes it a value. There is a style of understated charm that begins to emerge. And that my friends is my impressions. I absolutely can recommend the C3 as a purchase, but more than that, I can assure you that there will be no quality which overly surprises you. Well.........the fit will be special, that's for sure. And the overall look, well that's unique. And the tone........well it's already been scientifically proven before hand to be what most listeners want/prefer. Technicalities are a mixed bag as in many ways they are correct, but at the same time I wonder just how many people would be happier finding a used pair of BGVP DM6s in the classifieds? And to say I did my final disclosed side-by-side even comparing those two. So you could imagine a 2018 5 BA set called the DM6 against the 2022 single full-range TinHiFi dynamic driver. What did I find?
BGVP DM6 v The TinHiFi C3
The DM6 was slightly better separated into imaging as expected by 5 single (BA) point sources. Where the C3 offered better sound coherence , but also actually better timbre. While I definitely like the C3 and its 0.78 two pin better, they were both about the same weight in ear, though the C3 fit better. The risk here is wondering if buying a used pair of MMCX connections will provide lasting quality to the cable hook-up. Meaning there is something about new that establishes a level of trust, when making purchases. But sound wise there could almost never be two playbacks so different. Where the DM6 offers the transients, the C3 does not exactly, I mean they are just OK......and just at the level of acceptability. Where the DM6 is critical timing into playback, the C3 is almost offering pillows of tone playback, just swaying with the songs and going about its business never changing or veering off-course. I mean the BGVP DM6 was $199.00, and you can actually still order a new $199.00 pair if you snoop around a bit. If anything today the comparisons here gave me just that much more information to decide about the C3, showing its character for both the positives and the negatives. And along with this write-up I have bestowed upon you the critical information to possibly make a purchase. But of course just like everything around here at Head-Fi, my opinions are my own, and what objective value is to be found may vary per individual. With that said, take all you read here with a grain of salt.
The C3 is simply another example of TinHiFi putting out another flavor on another day, in a few months they will make more, and in a week or two after that they will even make more IEMs to entice you with. And while offering a frequency response I'm sure we will hear again, I'm not so sure they will ever get another IEM to feel this good in your ear? Cheers!
The Tin Hifi C3 were sent to me by in Linsoul in exchange for the publication of this review. The usual disclaimer applies, I have not received any specific comments or requests but it is always good to consider the fact that these IEMs have not actually cost me anything.
You can find a non-affiliate link to the T4 Plus via Linsoul in the version of this review published on my blog (link at the end of this post).
Intro…
As I mentioned in my review of the C2, Linsoul sent me three sets of Tin Hifi IEMs, the C2, the C3 and the T4 Plus. After deciding, for no specific reason, to follow the number sequence, todays review is of the C3, which is currently available from Linsoul for just under 50€. This places it inside what I consider to be an extreme budget set, however, it is quite a bit more expensive than the C2, which comes in at under 30€.
While I will judge the C3 on its own merits, a few comparisons to the C2 along the way are inevitable.
Presentation…
The packaging of the C3 is almost identical to the C2, just without the robot. A simple square white box that opens to reveal the IEMs sitting in the top half and another smaller box containing the accessories in the bottom.
Inside the accessories box we find the cable and 5 sets of silicone tips. Again, nothing to really praise but nothing to complain about either.
Build and Aesthetics…
The build and aesthetics of the C3 are very different to the little brother, with Tin reverting back to a style that is much more common (for them and others). Using 3D printed resin shells in a much more generic shape, they are much more reminiscent of something like the T3 Plus.
The face plate features the Tin Hifi logo in silver over a carbon fiber weave background, simple but by no means ugly (at least in my eyes).
The more generic shape will mean that it should be quite a comfortable fit for most people and while I didn’t have any issues with the fit of the C2, the C3 shape is probably a safer bet for the majority of users. They are also lightweight and I have to say that I haven’t experienced any discomfort from them even during longer listening sessions.
The included cable is a step up in quality, at least as far as hardware is concerned, opting for metal connectors, splitter and chin slider, which features the Tin logo. I am actually quite fond of the cable. It is not my favourite cable ever but I have absolutely no complaint about the build or ergonomics of either the cable or IEMs.
Sound…
All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Spotify, etc.)
Here is the usual look at the graph, comparing it to both my personal preference curve and the the C2 for reference:
Starting off with the subbass, we can already see that it is quite a bit north of my preferences in this regard, however, I don’t find it too overpowering in this regard. Using the obligatory (for me) test of “Chameleon”, there is a lot of presence in these lower areas and the control is not the best but it is not the worst either. The C3 seems to defend itself fairly well even in the more populated areas of the track and while I do find it to be a little loose when overworked, I have heard much worse in these frequencies.
Moving on to the midbass, we can also see that the presence is very similar (slightly reduced) to the C2 and I complained about the C2 being far too focused on the bass. Well, the C3 is a good example of how the presence of subbass can actually mitigate the issues I have with midbass. Yes, it is still too present for me in the midbass range but as the subbass takes a little more of the spotlight, along with that (ever so slight) reductuction in the higher part of the midbass, I find that it doesn’t cause me the fatigue that the C2 does.
The midbass doesn’t really bleed over into the lower mids and I feel that the performance is similar to the C2 but that, as the focus is shifted away from these specific frequencies, it comes across as being more coherent. One of the main tests that proves this to me is the low end of the guitar in “Crazy” by Daniela Andrade. In the case of the C2, the guitar becomes very boomy, which is part of my fatigue. Yet the C3, while still having a slight bit of boominess, it is far from the point of the C2, making for a much more pleasant low end for me personally.
The center of the mids has a slight dip but nothing really worth noting and as we climb into the higher mids, the presence of vocals and other instruments is quite nicely balanced.
From around 2kHz to 5.5kHz is where I find a huge difference between the C2 and the C3. As I mentioned in the C2 review, I found the presence in this range to extend too far, giving things a sensation of being compressed. With the C3, there is a bit of an extra boost around 4kHz that can make some tracks become a little harsh, yet it rolls off about 1000Hz before the C2, giving things much more life and making them seem much more dynamic in this range.
I know others have really liked the C2 and I understand that we are all different, listening to different music and having different tastes, so I can only speak for myself but I much prefer the upper mids and lower treble on the C3.
Moving up into the higher ranges, things do seem to roll off more than on the C2, while still presenting some peaks that can cause a little imbalance in these areas, yet, as the 2k to 5.5k frequencies are more dynamic to my ears, I find that I actually notice the treble more on the bigger brother.
Detail I would say is similar between the two, which is to say decent. Saying that, due (again) to that lack of “compression” and the reduction of those high peaks to some extent, I find that I can appreciate the details much more on the C3.
Soundstage is around average for a set of IEMs and while the image placement may not be perfect, I do find it to be a step up from the previous model, or at least the way it is presented.
.png)
The isolation of the C3 is very good above the 1kHz mark, much better than the C2 and way above average.
Conclusion…
The Tin Hifi C3 are a good set of IEMs in my opinion. I don’t think that they are going to break any molds yet the performance is still above average for a budget priced set. In comparison to the C2, I find that they work much better for me in just about every category.
That doesn’t mean that they are better than the C2, as I have seen a lot of love for the C2, it means that they work better for me personally and that I enjoy them much more. I find them more dynamic and that I can appreciate the music much more, both in the low and higher ranges.
As I keep saying in what seems like every review lately, the budget section is full of good choices at the moment and while I don’t think the C3 is to be considered king, it is still a very valid option.
_________________________________
This review can also be found in Spanish both on my blog (www.achoreviews.com) and on YouTube (www.youtube.com/achoreviews)
All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on achoreviews.squig.link
All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on achoreviews.squig.link/isolation
TINHIFI is taking up an audacious step in releasing new models from their new line-up series, The C series in last quarter of 2022. I have previously done a review of its cheaper companion model, The TINHIFI C2: Mecha Warrior on which that I have some mixed impression about it.
This is TINHIFI C3, this serves as more of an accompaniment to the TINHIFI C2. But the C3 takes a different design philosophy and a slightly different tuning compare to its cheaper-priced sister.
Like its sister, TINHIFI C3 has the transducer set-up which is a single dynamic driver with composite materials consisting of Polyurethane (PU) and Liquid Crystal Polymer (LCP). With these composite materials, this will give a more fluidity on vibrations on drivers to achieve a better transient performance and better dynamic range response. The transducers were encapsulated in a resin-like material in a UIEM-style shell chassis with a carbon-fiber finish faceplate that reminds me of a hypercar. The said resin-like material shell chassis undergoes in a 3D printing moulding process to give a best possible fitting to all ear sizes via software aid.
Another significant feature on C3 was its removable stock cable which is quite unusual within its price range. It is a solid and an yet supple 4-core silver-plated copper wiring cable in a 2-pin connector with a straight, 3.5mm termination plug which in my opinion is of up to the high quality standard.
As for fitting and comfort, with its smooth contour shell design, it perfectly match and rest well into my lug holes without any hint of discomfort and it also has a fairly good passive isolation that block external noises from outside. It is quite balanced when it comes to its weight as you will feel a solid built quality on this set.
The product packaging of TINHIFI C3 is rather simple and pretty basic by all any means. The packaging box is identical to C2 but the difference was the front design which only a model name in a stylistic huge bold font place at the center and small brand logo of TINHIFI at the top-left.
The inclusions are the following:
■ A pair of TINHIFI C3 IEMs
■ A high quality, 4-core pale silver-coloured stock cable.
■ 5 pairs of extra black ear tips in different sizes.
■ Contact card.
■ Instruction manual/ warranty card.
When it comes amplification and scalability on audio sources, TINHIFI C3 is quite versatile on handling power output as it can easily driven even by a decent power output from a smartphone as it can give a better amplitude rating and more dynamic sounding. Putting them in a quality DAC/Amps seems doesn't have any changes at all that might affects the overall sound quality as remains invariable to my lug holes.
As for tonality, it seems that TINHIFI C3 has U-shaped sound profile which has a similar sound curvature target of C2 but more balanced as it has less recession on midrange, a more emphasis on the midbass and more balanced but still noticeable raised upper midrange to presence treble.
Here are some of my observations on sound characteristics in the overall frequency range spectrum.
LOWS/BASS:
Punchy, thumpy and with a good depth level, that's my initial impression on the bass quality of TINHIFI C3. It focuses on mid bass texture than the sub bass as it has a more substantial texture on it.
It has a decent sub bass presence that I can still discerningly hear the reverberations of electronic drums, synthesisers and low tone bass guitars either from synth-pop or old school hip-hop tracks. Because of the mid bass' considerable fair amount of texture, it gives a tad warmer sound in the overall frequency range spectrum. It gives a gravelly growl on bass guitar to have sustaining and earthy sound, a thudding sound on bass kicks and a decent heft and authority on bass-baritone vocals.
MIDRANGE:
The midrange of C3 is rather a tad recess in the overall presentation but it takes pretty-well balanced, ample note weight and transparency that give vocals and instruments a more pristine and uniform sound. Both male and females vocals are benefited on ample texture that it gives an deep, authority and steely on other type of baritones and tenors then on females vocal like contralto has deep, smoky and sweet sound while soprano with high note registry has these rich, vivid and emotive sound.
When it comes to the sound quality on instruments, all classes and types of instruments seem to have an organic tonality but on strings and woodwinds, it has some added brightness on it. Let me start on percussives, snares have this penetrating and sharp sound while Toms have hard, resonant and sonorous sound. Piano has a vibrant and rich tone and Celeste has this shimmering and ethereal sound to give that heavenly vibe. Brass instruments like trumpets and trombones have an intense and brassy sound; it's somewhat overpowering. Then when it comes to woodwind instruments, flutes seem to have this brilliant and silvery sound while saxophones have these lustrous to expressively intense sounding.
HIGHS/TREBLE:
The C3 takes a more balanced approach in tuning the treble region, it has a sufficient brightness to give a crisp, shimmer and ample details on females vocals, cymbals and other mid-treble focus other percussions like glockenspiel and xylophone.
It has an emphasis on upper-mids then quite a some smoothening (probably a dip) on between presence to brilliance treble to give a less airy response on which other reviewers will translate it as roll-off on their vocabulary.
SOUNDSTAGE, IMAGING & TECHNICALITIES:
The sound/speaker stage on C3 is quite interesting as it has an above average on perceive wideness, with good height and a more balanced depth in distance between front and back. In regard of this subject, these proportion gives me a quite sense of spacious spatiality within my headroom.
Imaging is rather a two-dimensional, performing on a typical stereo panning presentation which I can able locate the placements of vocals and instrument. It has a good spacing that it has some gaps of the elements and these elements seems to have its own individual frequency and dynamics within the sonic canvas which gives a good mark on separation and layering.
Coherency-wise, the drivers perform pretty fast and responsive to deliver on such envelop performance on amplitude and modulation of sound.
On resolution capability, it has keen and sharp definition on micro-details as on macro-dynamics have tidy note weight on texture and transparent that it might give an impression to sound on the leaner side. Timbre colour seems on the natural point with just tad of brightness.
PEER COMPARISONS:
KIWI EARS CADENZA
● Both products are quite comparable in any means, from pricing to build quality though Cadenze is a bit cheaper. It also uses a proven and impressive Beryllium-coated dynamic driver on its internals.
● They have taken a similar sound profile which is U-shaped which is quite a norm in last year's profile tuning. Cadenza has warmer and richer tone but it has a less airy treble compare to C3. Its has rather a laid back sound.
● Technicalities-wise, Cadenza has just a mere average average technical performance as it has narrower soundstage, exhibits a mediocre separation and layering quality. It has also blunted definition but it has a more organic sounding on tonal colour.
TINHIFI T2 DLC
● This is a more pricey cousin of TINHIFI C3, It uses the same metal shell casing of the already familiar T2 regular. It uses a DLC drivers as its transducers.
● Both employed a U-shaped sound profile on their tonal aspect. To be honest, they sound both very similar if you don't taking more critical listening on comparing these sets but T2 DLC takes a more balanced and less recess midrange and at the same time, it has a better treble air extension.
● Technicalities-wise, they perform very similar from soundstage to timbre but on nitpicking, it seems the T2 DLC have better detail retrieval and more solid macro-dynamics.
To sum up this review, all I can say that TINHIFI C3 performs fairly well that TINHIFI deliver once again on such a product with good tonal balanced sounding with fairly valid technical performance. It is also noted that TINHIFI seems to take up the current trend of tuning which is U-shaped, Harmanish target curve with just some slight deviations on tuning that was already saturated in the under US$50/£42 price segment as other audio companies were also adopting this kind of tuning on some of their models.
I'm looking forward to other TINHIFI products in the future with different flavours of tuning that will impress me and not to utterly say "Jack of all trades, Master of none" again.
TINHIFI C3 is now currently available on KEEPHIFI, Just click the link below (Guaranteed Non-affiliate link)
◆KEEPHIFI TINHIFI C3◆
And also in LINSOUL too.
◆LINSOUL TINHIFI C3◆
SPECIFICATION:
MODEL: TINHIFI C3
IMPEDANCE: 32Ω
SENSITIVITY: 106dB
FREQUENCY RESPONSE: 10Hz – 20KHz
CABLE LENGTH: 1.2M
PIN TYPE: 2-PIN CONNECTOR (0.78MM)
PLUG TYPE: 3.5mm
DRIVER UNIT(S): (1) DYNAMIC DRIVER
Some Tracks Tested: ( * = 16-bit FLAC, ** = 24-bit FLAC, *'* = MQA, '*' = DSD, *'= .WAV)
Alison Krauss -When You Say Nothing At All *
Jade Wiedlin - Blue Kiss**
Led Zeppelin - When The Levee Breaks **
Mountain - Mississippi Queen *
Queen - Killer Queen **
Guns N' Roses - Patience *'*
Eric Clapton - Tears in Heaven '*'
Sergio Mendes- Never Gonna Let You Go '*'
Pearl Jam - Daughter **
Roselia - Hidamari Rhodonite *
Assassin - Fight (To Stop The Tyranny)*
Celtic Frost- Visual Aggression *
New Order - Blue Monday *
The Corrs- What Can I do (unplugged version) *
Jimi Hendrix Experience - Voodoo Child *
The Madness- Buggy Trousers *
Metallica - Motorbreath **
Mariah Carey- Always Be My Baby *
Destiny's Child - Say My Name *
Malice Mizer- Au Revoir *
Mozart - Lacrimosa *
New York Philharmonic Orchestra - Dvorak- Symphony 9 " From the New World." *
Eva Cassidy - Fields of Gold (Sting cover)*
Michael Jackson - Give In To Me *
Exciter - Violence and Force *
Diana Krall - Stop This World **
Debbie Gibson - Foolish Beat *'*
The Sisters of Mercy – Lucretia My Reflection**
Suzanne Vega – Luka **
Lauren Christy – Steep *
P.S.
I am not affiliated to TINHIFI nor receive monetary incentives and financial gains as they provide me a review unit for an exchange of factual and sincere feedback from yours truly.
Once again, I would like to KEEPHIFI providing this review unit. I truly appreciate their generosity towards me and other reviewers.
Tinhifi C3 Review!
Good day! After 5 days of casual and critical listening, here’s my written review for the Tinhifi C3. The C stands for Carbon!
Disclaimer:
- Keephifi sent this unit to me in an exchange for an honest, unbiased review. Rest assured that this review will do its best to devoid from any bias/es as much as possible.
- The following remarks and observations shall be made and owned only by me.
- No monetary compensation is/was involved before, during, and after the period of creation of this review.
- Your mileage may (and always, will) vary.
Burn-in time: 4-8 hours per day, 5 days.
Source/s used:
- Hiby R3 Pro Saber
- Tempotec Sonata HD V
- Venture Electronics Megatron
- Non-HiFi smartphone (Infinix Note 12 G96 Samsung Galaxy A6 (2018))
- Local Files via Foobar, YouTube Music, Deezer, and Qobuz with UAPP.
IEM/Earbud/Setup configuration: stock medium preinstalled normal bore eartips, stock cable, any form of EQ or MSEB off, 40-60% volume, low gain, without extra amplification.
Sound signature:
- In a nutshell, I consider the Tinhifi C3 to be a refresh of the Tinhifi T3 Plus, which was released a year ago. When compared to the T3 Plus, there is a slight difference in sound, particularly in how "more neutral" it presents itself. Don’t get me wrong, it is still a balanced-warm, or u-shaped, sounding unit, but it is noticeably less warm when compared and has a bit more treble presence up top.
- It is still elevated, but not to the point where I can call it a basshead IEM. It is elevated whenever the tracks want it, to keep things somewhat alive and upbeat. It is less impactful and chunky than the T3 Plus when compared, but retains its composure and control even on bassy tracks. Its subbass is a bit more dominant than the midbass. Decay is on the average side of the spectrum and decay and can keep up easily depending on the track.
- Moving on the mids, it is still mildly recessed but is noticeably a bit more upfront to my ears in a specific test track of mine (Everglow by Coldplay, same web file and streaming platform). It is still warm and lush, just like its year-old brother, but is less thick. The lower mids are still bodied, with good texture and detail. Upper mids are slightly elevated, but not significantly, while maintaining good clarity, air, and sparkle. Again, Tinhifi managed to avoid any harshness, peaks, or sibilance on this IEM, which is a plus point for me to recommend it to upper-frequency sensitive folks.
- As for the treble, it is again naturally extended, not too bright nor too dark. It has a good amount of air but not enough to be called "airy." Cymbal crashes still sound satisfying, but I would’ve preferred a bit of a bite, which might be achieved with eartip rolling. Detail retrieval is average to above average and can pick up most details in a track easily.
- Hearing the T3 Plus before made me conclude that the technical performance you’ll get here in the C3 is nearly the same. The soundstage is still the same, as it exhibits wide width with average expansion. Separation seems to be a bit better here when compared to T3 Plus, as it suffered less congestion on my busy test tracks. Imaging is more or less the same and is still accurate.
Pros:
- A very good T3 Plus refresh.
- A more “neutral” sounding T3 Plus.
- All-rounder, non-fatiguing sound.
- Chunky, controlled lows.
- Warm, lush mids.
- Naturally-extended treble.
- Very good technical performance for its price.
- Elegant, minimalist design (subjective)
- Easy to drive.
- Excellent fit and comfort.
- Very good cable and eartips quality when compared to T3 Plus.
- Cheaper than the T3 Plus for nearly having an identical sound.
- While it does have some differences to the T3 Plus, it isn’t that big and some may find this as a “visual and accessory refresh only” for the most part.
- Oddly priced in my opinion because this is cheaper than the T3 Plus while keeping 90% of its sound, but with better cable and eartips.
- A pouch or a case would’ve been a great treat for everybody (subjective).
Verdict
The Tinhifi C3 is a worthy refresh of the T3 Plus at a cheaper price. Aside from its non-metal nozzle, I do not see or hear any compromises or any serious flaws. There are even some instances where this is better and more aligned with what I prefer, particularly because it has less bass impact, a bit better separation, and more open upper frequencies. However, I will leave the decision to you on whether I will recommend this IEM to you or not due to it having the same DNA and experience as its year-old brother but with better cable and a subjectively better visual appearance. But if you don’t have a T3 Plus yet and you want an all-round, competent-sounding IEM for 50 USD, this will be one of my top recommendations within that price range, along with the Tinhifi C2.
Pairing recommendation/s:
- Source: I find the Tinhifi C easy to drive. However, I do recommend using a 2vrms dongle or a dedicated DAP for good measure.
- Eartips: The eartips are soft and comfy enough for daily usage. However, you may use your preferred third party eartips.
- Cable is more than enough for the most part, but you can always use your preferred cable.
Thank you for reading!
Additional Photos Here:
