General Information

From official site:
Compatible with High-Resolution Audio. Expert acoustic tuning. Delivers full, concert-like ‘live’ sound.
  • Highly rigid metal body combined of two materials, quality-confirmed through meticulous listening tests.
  • Ultra-compact 6 mm (1/4”) driver customised for High-Resolution Audio sources.
  • Detachable cable featuring MMCX connectors.
  • Serrated cable surface reduces friction noise.
  • Optimum wearing comfort as well as stylish, unobtrusive fit ― thanks to adjustable 4-angle connection for setting cable direction.
  • Specially designed dual-flange eartips create a secure fit for superior sound insulation.
  • Smart cable holders (patented) prevent cable tangling / bending during storage and carrying

Latest reviews


100+ Head-Fier
Pros: Clean sound with great clarity and separation. Perfect mid-bass quantity, great soundstage, fatigue free highs
Cons: Sub-bass could use a bit more definition
Simple Man’s review – Yamaha EPH-200 (~130 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
: 6mm Single dynamic driver
Impedance: 22 Ohms; Sensitivity: 101.5dB/mW@1kHz
Cable: 4 foot MMCX detachable cable
Shell: Aluminium housings
Nozzle: ~5.5mm
Preferred eartips: Stock small size.
Release year: Oct 2017
Price: ~130 USD (bought from Amazon Japan)

Box spec.jpg

Build – 5/5
Solid Aluminium metal housings, with very hard plastic cable connectors. I don’t see these breaking with any kind of rough use.
Cables are of decent thickness and are super light. They feel a little plasticky and get a little stiff. I would have preferred them to be a little more flexible and smooth.
The MMCX connectors used here are a little special. They are enclosed within a plastic bridge that locks the cables in place with the housing connectors. This prevents any free cable rotation. I like the design, but, these cables will mostly not be compatible with other MMCX earphones. However, most aftermarket MMCX cables can be used with the EPH200s sans locking feature.


Nozzle: The nozzles are pretty large in diameter and are lengthy as well. Wave good-bye to any tip rolling possibilities.

Accessories – 4/5


We get the necessary stuff. Love the big spacious carry case. These can easily hold any IEM.


Fit – 5/5
The preferred wearing style is over-the-ear with a very deep insertion using the smallest sized eartip. We get incredible isolation this way.
Wearing them straight down forces a relatively shallow fit, and one would have to use a bigger sized eartip to get a proper seal.

Eartips: They are not your standard eartips. The stem is long, and the diameter is large as well.
For comparison, (L to R) IEM housing, Stock size-S, Stock size-M, Spinfits-M, JVC Spirals-M

Isolation and leakage – 5/5
Over the ear with a deep insertion isolates, seriously, as much as Etymotics! Once these are plugged in I can’t hear a thing, even without music playing in my ears.
Wearing comfort is surprisingly great since these don’t use pointy eartips like Etymotics. The cylindrical tips rest comfortably on certain non-sensitive parts of my ear.

Microphonics – 4/5
Over the ear , not a problem! Straight down, one can hear the wires easily.

Drivability – Very easy to drive, i don’t go more than 50% volume using my HTC10s.

Sound –
Clean sounding is what comes to mind when i listen to the EPH200. The mids are clear without any interference whatsoever from mid-bass. They have great body, and space. Treble is smooth, yet nicely detailed. Soundstage and instrument separation, positioning are especially great! Overall, they go for a very balanced musical tuning with a nudge in the sub-bass.

Yamaha EPH-200 measurements
Yamaha EPH200 LR.JPG

Bass: The sub-bass rumbles authoritatively when invoked. They don’t shy away from showing how deep they can go. They could do with a little more definition though. Mid bass, in contrast, is extremely clean and quick without any sense of bloat or smear. Timbre is incredibly real, and there is absolute no bleed whatsoever into the mids. Bass is near perfect, and would be touted as the winning quality of these earphones, if not for their exceptional mid range.
Mids: Mids are simply perfect! They are really clear and sound very real. These, i must say, are one of the best mids i’ve heard out of a single dynamic earphone. Vocals are really special and no matter who sings they are presented in the best possible way. They don’t go for that lush, warm sound, like final E4000. Instead they impress with their clean, well separated presentation using just the right amount of body.
Highs: Highs are more about body and texture than detail retrieval and splash. They sound very mature, and i really love them for this reason. The treble plays around with the staging and positioning, and do not try to take over or dominate the sublime mids. Details are presented in a tasteful manner rather than shoving them down the listeners throat.

Timbre: I must say the instruments and vocals throughout the FR sound very real, and timbral authenticity is up there with the best!

Soundstage and positioning of these earphones are also very special. The stage is wide and high, and the depth is also very impressive. They have a very rounded soundstage, with a lot of treble action playing over the head.


Round 1 – Vs MEE Pinnacle PX (~110 USD)
Single Dynamic with a balanced tuning. I rate these at 8.2 in my ranking list.These lie very close to the price i paid for the EPH200s. Let’s see how EPH200s do against these in the first round.


Pinnacle PX has a little more treble detail. But, they sound very thin and metallic. Treble is also forward in the PX; and when there are some continuous chimes going on in the track, that is pretty much all you hear, they are so up front. Mids are a bit recessed and not as resolving. The EPH200s sound more real and authentic. Treble has better body and texture, and i can’t pick a single aspect where the PX really wins this round.

Yamaha EPH200 prances to meet the iBasso IT01s in the next round

Round 2 – Vs iBasso IT01s (~179 USD)
I rate these higher than the PX, at 8.5. Let’s go!

EPH200 Vs IT01s.JPG

Moving to the IT01S after the PX is greatly relieving, and shows how good the IT01s is in comparison. The sound is grand, and there is a good amounth of warmth in the mids. IT01S is a full sounding IEM and they really fill the soundstage with musical goodness.

Switching to the EPH200s, we immediately notice that the brightness is turned down a notch. The sub-bass rumble is also accented, giving it a nice dark touch when the music reaches deep. Mids are less warm in comparison, but they never sound thin or dry. They really nailed the mids in the Yamahas. I guess this is an effect of actually nailing the mid-bass quantity. The stage is more spacious with the EPH200s, and we see a lot of room between the instruments. Details and treble information is a little up-front with the iBasso, whereas in the Yamahas, they play a nice supporting role to the mids.

The difference is not big in terms of technicality. For me, though, the cleaner and more roomy presentation with subtle highs make the Yamahas a better and more musical earphone. The IT01s don’t do anything wrong, really. It is just that they don’t impress me the way EPH200s do.

Round 3 – Vs JVC FXT90 (discontinued)
I rank these just above the IT01s, with 8.8, for their fun and aggressive signature. I don’t know which way this round will go. Let’s get to it.


God damn! Every time, everytime, i pick the FXT90s i’m seriously impressed by their dynamic sound! Amazing detailing, surround soundstage. Fun signature done right! After all, these were the very IEMs that got me into this hobby! Let’s switch and see where the EPH200s stand.

After the head-banging, foot tapping, fun sound of the FXT90s: coming to the EPH200s appear like stepping from a loud night club into the peaceful night outside. The EPH200s soundstage height and width are actually equally to the FXT90s. The Yamahas have a little more depth to the stage as a bonus. And, similar to the difference against IT01S, there is a lot more room in the stage with the EPH200s. Everything is better separated and have their own space to rock about. Positioning is clearer. Voices are more authentic and real in the EPH200s, a bit forward too. Detailing is subtle and the presence and treble region really plays a supporting role to the magical mids. The bass impact is better in the FXT90s due to the punchier mid bass delivery. Driver speed seems similar. The sub-bass of the FXT90s are better in impact and quality than the accented, slightly lesser defined sub-bass of the EPH200s. Except this point, i would say the EPH200s really show the FTX90s that they are playing at a more mature level.

And so, the Yamahas emerge as a winner in this dramatic round!

Round 3 – Vs Sennheiser IE40 Pro (~99 USD)
Competitively priced monitor IE 40 Pros are up next. They are rated at 8.9, and have a similarly boosted sub-bass, with a bright and detailed treble. Let’s see if the finesse of EPH200 takes them higher into the 9.0 club!

EPH200 vs IE40 Pro.JPG

Let me first say, that the IE 40 Pros sound great!

Super detailed with a really wide soundstage. They have a very monitoresque presentation with their lateral arrangement. The stage does not have much height. But positioning in the x-axis is impressive. They strike a nice balance between fun and balanced sound.

Moving to the EPH200s we see a couple of new dimensions added to the stage. The highs float above in a mesmerizing manner as opposed to the distinctly forward positioning of the highs in the IE 40s. The Sennheiser bass has more perceivable quantity, but they do appear slightly slow in comparison. Due to this, the snappier mid bass attack of the EPH200s sound cleaner and more resolving. The treble details in the IE40s, although clear and up-front and better detailed, kind of loses to the tastefully subtle, but clear, presentation of the EPH200s. The Senns also come across as bright and they do tease along the sibilance regions. We see no harshness whatsoever in the Yamahas

The overall cleaner and snappier presentation of the EPH200s takes them ahead of the Sennheiser IE40 Pros.

Round 4 – Vs Co-Donguri Brass (~40 USD)
The superbly detailed, true audiophile grade, dirt-cheap diamonds, Co-Donguris are up next! The Brass is as good as it’s brother, Shizuku. I rate them at 9.0! To beat the Donguris, one has to play a different game and take a completely different approach to presenting sound. Somewhat like the Final Audio tunings, for example. The EPH200s are in fact tuned differently. Let’s see if the Yamaha’s can stand their ground and maybe inch ahead of the Donguri Brass!

EPH200 Vs Brass.JPG

The upper-mids of the donguris are really special. Their airy delivery of this region is also very distinct and amazing. In this aspect, the EPH200s lacks some of that air, and magic surrounding the bells and chimes. But, they do make up for this with better note weight and texture in the treble. Donguri driver is faster throughout and churns out more micro-information in the track across the FR. As opposed to the aggressive detailing of the Donguris, the subtle approach works well with the EPH200s. And without doubt, the EPH200s can be enjoyed for a longer period of time without any detail fatigue. The mid-range of the EPH200s also have more room between instruments, and the vocal body is somewhat better than the airy, feather-light delivery of the Donguris. They both have these distinct traits, like apples and oranges.

Although the Donguris are not clearly beat, I would say the Yamahas easily hold their ground with their own special prowess.

Tie! This calls for extra comparisons!

Injury Time – Vs Sennheiser IE 400 Pro (~350 USD)
The bigger brother comes now, to stop the progress of Yamaha EPH200. These are rated at 9.1.

EPH200 vs IE400 Pro.JPG

The IE400 Pros are quite bassy, even more than the IE 40 Pros, due to greater mid-bass quantity. The rumble and impact is thumpy and punchy. The drivers are faster than IE40, yet i’m not sure if they match or beat the speed of EPH200s. The IE400 Pros are also warmer sounding, all that bass gives a lush tint to the mids. They also sound more cohesive. The EPH200s sound sublime in comparison due to their perfect mid-bass quantity. Timbre is definitely better in the EPH200s. Stage is again spacious, and we see better separation and room for instruments with the Yamaha unit. Some micro-information does not come across as easily with the EPH200s.

The IE 400 Pros sound big and grand in comparison. If you like bass, then you will lean towards IE 400 Pro. If you like a cleaner sound, then the EPH200s do sound better in that regard.

Slightly lesser mid-bass in the IE 400 would have made them a clear winner. Anyway, that is IE 500 Pro, which is rated much higher :)

This round, against the IE 400 Pros, i must say, for my own tastes, the Yamaha’s inch ahead of the IE 400 Pros.

Injury Time – Vs ATH CKR100 (~350 USD)
Pet favourite IEM! These do everything perfectly in my humble opinion. I rate these at 9.2
Let’s see if EPH200s can play at this level.

EPH200 Vs CKR100.JPG

The CKR100s are another clean sounding IEM, which has the perfect bass impact and quality. Vocals are amazing, and super clear. They also sound very refined and are not very aggressive within the treble. Switching to EPH200s, to my surprise, i find that i’m not missing much of anything here. The stage depth is evidently better in the CKR100s. I think CKR100s are just a hair thicker in their delivery, with slightly better weight to their treble. The CKR100s are full-er sounding, a bit more cohesive. They also slightly lean towards the splashier side, just a bit. Separation and positioning is equally convincing in both the IEMs.

Both of them are equally good. The CKR100s inch ahead as a better technical performer.

Injury Time – Vs Etymotic ER2SE (~130 USD)
Okay, this is almost impossible to beat by a single dynamic. Neutral dynamic Etys. I rate them alongside CKR100s with 9.2.


So much details in the ER2SEs! They are so incredibly transparent. Detail retrieval is at a whole new level compared to all the earphones we compared so far. They are also significantly brighter and the neutral sub-bass does not help much with impact or rumble as in the EPH200. This gives the EPH200 a certain reverb quality that is missing in the ER2SEs. They have more attack.. EPH200 also has a pitch-black background which helps in clear positioning and localisation. ER2SE fill the soundstage with micre-details. ER2SEs come across as a little high-nosed, looking down upon bassy sounds.

Of course, Etys are much more detailed and they pay their due by letting go of some sub-bass fun. The EPH200s, on the other hand, have a little more sub-bass than really needed.

Ultimately, i must say ER2SE's neutral, mature tuning makes them superior.

Overall Sound rating of Yamaha EPH-200: 9.1 / 10
Vocals 5/5
Soundstage 4.5/5
Instrument Separation 4.8/5
Positioning/localisation 4.8/5
Details 4.4/5
Timbre 4.8/5


Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve struck gold! The EPH-200 is one of the most perfect sounding earphones I've ever heard. They are not detail monsters, neither are they fun sounding. They aren’t neutral, aren’t bassy, not middy, nor trebly. All they do is impress, in every way you see them! They are tuned with long-listening sessions in mind, and they work well with all genre of music. It’s a shame no one talks about these little gems. I did a blind-buy and am now gifted with a daily IEM.
Last edited:
Thanks for the detailed review. I'm so close to getting one. Am I right to say that compared to the ER2SE it has more bass presence, more upper mids & treble, and slightly less detailed sounding in the mids?

I have to the ER2XR now, and the EPH200 sounds like something I would like. I'm guessing these are going to be slightly easier to fit and take out of ears? TIA!
@axhng EPH200 fit is more comfortable than Ety. Isolation is nearly the same.
About sound, yes, EPH200 has much greater sub bass quantity. Mids are very clear as well. The ER2SE has more micro details in the mids due to lesser bass. The treble details and presence is also more forward in the Etys. The upper regions of EPH200 are a bit subdued, and might come across as very slightly dark - whereas ER2SE is a bit brighter.
  • Like
Reactions: axhng
Thanks for the comparison! The more comfortable fit sounds good for sure! I should be receiving mine tomorrow, excited try them out. Thanks again!


There are no comments to display.