TinHiFi C Series Impressions (C2, C3, C5)
The TinHiFi C series includes several recently released budget in-ear monitors (IEMs). The TinHiFi C2 and C3 both feature 10mm liquid crystal polymer diaphragm dynamic drivers, and the C5 features a 10mm square planar magnetic driver. The C2 is $29, the C3 is $49, and the C5 is $79. The C2, C3, and C5 were sent to me by TinHiFi. I am not being compensated for writing these impressions, and my thoughts are my own.
SOURCES:
I have used the TinHiFi C2, C3, and C5 with the following sources:
- Qudelix 5K
- Truthear Shio
TinHiFi C2
TinHiFi C2 — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews
The C2 is the brightest sounding of the three and is my personal favorite. The C2 is Harman-inspired in its tuning and nearly mirrors the Moondrop Aria from the sub-bass through the lower midrange. Like the Aria, the C2 features a plateau-style pinna gain region which is broadly elevated from 2 kHz to 6 kHz. The C2 has a slightly steeper rise into this plateau than the Aria and places more emphasis on the presence region. The C2 avoids the Aria’s sharp upper treble drop after 10 kHz, which helps its upper register to sound more natural.
Bass articulation is in line with my expectations for the price point and is competitive with similarly priced options released over the last year like the 7Hz Zero. There is plenty of punch and impact to percussion hits, but bass texture is a bit lacking.
The midrange is tuned for clarity and does a great job of intelligibly rendering both male and female vocals. On the other hand, there is too much presence for distorted electric guitars, which take on a buzzsaw-like quality. Male vocals are also on the thin side, and there is a bit of sibilance to female vocals. On the other hand, I do not hear any glaring timbre-related anomalies, like plasticky analog percussion or overly metallic cymbal crashes.
I think the C2 does a great job of delivering a brighter-than-average treble response, especially for the price. There is more lower treble than I would ordinarily prefer, but the C2 generally avoids sounding harsh. The C2 also has the best upper treble extension of the three TinHiFi IEMs and has excellent detail retrieval for a $30 IEM. In addition, the C2 has a remarkably three-dimensional soundstage for a budget single dynamic driver design, with noticeably more depth to its soundstage than the Zero. Instrument separation is adequate but not exceptional.
TinHiFi C3
TinHiFi C3 — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews
Compared to the C2, the C3 has more sub-bass emphasis, less presence in the upper midrange, and a more relaxed treble response with worse upper treble extension.
The additional sub-bass aids the audibility of bass guitars in heavy rock music but accentuates kick drum hits to the point of being distracting. The C3 fares better than the C2 in terms of bass texture while retaining the C2’s excellent bass articulation and impact.
The C3’s midrange is less clear than the C2’s but is better suited for music involving distorted electric guitars. There is a deliberate dip in the presence region beginning after about 4.5 kHz which keeps the distortion from sounding exaggerated. Male vocals have more body but can be shouty sounding. Female vocals are vibrant without sibilance. Like the C2, the C3 has a natural-sounding timbre.
The C3 has a much more relaxed treble response than the C2. I find it boring in comparison, and I perceive much less detail. The C3 also has worse instrument separation and a more two-dimensional soundstage than the C2.
Overall, while the C3 comes with a much nicer cable than the C2, I do not feel that it justifies its higher price tag relative to its sibling.
TinHiFi C5
TinHiFi C5 — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews
The C5, which is the most expensive of the three, is unquestionably the worst sounding. It is one of the worst IEMs I have heard in a long time. This is mostly because the C5 has even poorer treble extension than the C3, to the point where there is very little frequency response above the lower treble region. Detail retrieval is nonexistent and the soundstage is a one-dimensional lateral smear. Instrument separation is below average for the price point.
The C5’s bass response is quick in terms of articulation, which might be the only positive thing I can say about this IEM. On the other hand, bass delivery is limp with no punch, impact, or dynamics.
Despite the absence of mid-bass bleed, the midrange is muddy and indistinct. Despite the appearance of a distinct pinna gain region in my measurements, male vocals are half-submerged beneath the vaguely attempted reproduction of midrange instrumentation. The same female vocals that sounded vibrant on the C3 sound nasal and stuffy here. In contrast to the C2 and C3, the C5 has a dry, plasticky timbre.
AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCE PAIRING:
I did not find any of the three IEMs particularly difficult to drive.
CLOSING WORDS:
The TinHiFi C2 is a great budget IEM that ably competes with similarly priced alternatives on technicalities and offers a well-executed take on a less common tuning. The C3 fails to pair its higher asking price with improved technical performance but may be more suited to certain genres than the C2 due to its more restrained presence region. The C5 is a bad IEM at any price and should be avoided.
The C2, C3, and C5 can be purchased below: