DISCLAIMER
I would like to thank Linsoul for providing this review unit.
The TinHIFI C2 205 can be gotten here: https://www.linsoul.com/products/tinhifi-c2-2025 (no affiliate links).
I would like to thank Linsoul for providing this review unit.
The TinHIFI C2 205 can be gotten here: https://www.linsoul.com/products/tinhifi-c2-2025 (no affiliate links).
SPECIFICATIONS
- Driver configuration: 10 mm LCP + PU dynamic driver
- Frequency response: 10 Hz - 20000 Hz
- Impedance: 32 Ω
- Sensitivity: 104 dB/V
- Cable: 2-pin 0.78 mm; OFC cable; 3.5 mm termination or USB-C
- Tested at: $35 USD for 3.5 mm version; $43 USD for USB-C version
ACCESSORIES
Other than the IEM, these are included:
- 6 pairs of silicone eartips
- Cable
For a $30ish USD set, the accessory provision is on the disappointing side. We have only 1 variation of silicone tips (which are duplicated in S/M/L sizing), and there is no pouch or carrying case.
The sole type of silicone eartips are nevertheless comfortable and decent sonically.
The stock cable is an OFC 2-pin one. There's nothing to write home about it, as it is thin and microphonic. There's a chin cinch, but strangely it is positioned below the mic on one side of the cable, so it cannot be used to secure the IEM at the back of neck.
In a sea of underaged waifus gracing IEM packagings, TinHIFI has gone against the grain with a mecha motif - this is not unappreciated.
The rest of this review was done with the stock cable and stock silicone eartips. No aftermarket accessories were used, so as not to add any confounders to the sound.
BUILD/COMFORT
The rest of this review was done with the stock cable and stock silicone eartips. No aftermarket accessories were used, so as not to add any confounders to the sound.
BUILD/COMFORT
The chassis is fashioned from aerospace-grade aluminum, and is well-fitting in terms of ergonomics.
Sadly, the shell design is a doppelganger of the Campfire Andromeda - featuring angular cut-outs classical of this housing - and that isn't too cool from an intellectual property perspective.
Being a vented IEM, isolation is average, albeit there is a slight element of driver flex.
Being a vented IEM, isolation is average, albeit there is a slight element of driver flex.
INTERNALS
The C2 2025 utilizes a 10 mm LCP + PU dynamic driver.
DRIVABILITY
I tested the C2 2025 with the following sources:
- Apple dongle
- Cayin RU7
- Chord Mojo 2
- Fiio KA15 dongle
- Fiio KA17 dongle
- Khadas Tone Board -> Schiit Asgard 3 amp
- Questyle M15 DAC/AMP dongle
- Sony Walkman NW A-55 DAP (Walkman One WM1Z Plus v2 Mod)
- Sony Walkman NW WM1A DAP (Walkman One WM1Z Plus v2 Mod)
- Smartphone
This IEM is relatively easy to drive, with no hard requirements for amplification.
SOUND & TECHNICALITIES
Graph of the TinHIFI C2 2025 via IEC711 coupler. 8 kHz is a coupler artefact peak.
The C2 2025 sports a crowd-pleasing Harmanish tonality. This is considered safe, but may be a bit too mundane for CHIFI enthusiasts who have been around the block and back.
Bass is focused at the sub-bass, but this is no basshead set, with some roll-off. In terms of quality, basslines are not too textured, with some bleed and sluggishness. Unfortunately, the C2 2025's bas flops with rapid bass movements.
The lower mids are a tinge scooped-out, in keeping with the Harmanish signature. The upper midrange hits 9 dB for ear gain, which is right at the edge of shoutiness for female vocal shoutiness (this is more emphasized at louder volumes as per the Fletcher Munson curve).
The C2 2025 has a smooth treble; this should be a good pairing for treble-sensitive peeps. There is minimal sibilance, but we don't have an extended treble, so trebleheads will be alienated. The tuning choices results in some loss of resolution and clarity as a trade-off.
Timbre is pretty organic, as per most single DD types, though note weight is on the thinner side.
Technicalities is one area where the C2 2025 drops the ball badly. Micro-detailing and note definition is veiled, and imaging is blunted. The C2 2025 struggles to keep up with complex tracks with competing riffs - music degenerates into a nebulous blob with poor separation - and soundstage is bang average.
COMPARISONS
The C2 2025 will be compared against other single DDs residing at the $30ish USD bracket. BAs, hybrids and planar are left out, as the different transducer types have their own pros and cons.
Bass is focused at the sub-bass, but this is no basshead set, with some roll-off. In terms of quality, basslines are not too textured, with some bleed and sluggishness. Unfortunately, the C2 2025's bas flops with rapid bass movements.
The lower mids are a tinge scooped-out, in keeping with the Harmanish signature. The upper midrange hits 9 dB for ear gain, which is right at the edge of shoutiness for female vocal shoutiness (this is more emphasized at louder volumes as per the Fletcher Munson curve).
The C2 2025 has a smooth treble; this should be a good pairing for treble-sensitive peeps. There is minimal sibilance, but we don't have an extended treble, so trebleheads will be alienated. The tuning choices results in some loss of resolution and clarity as a trade-off.
Timbre is pretty organic, as per most single DD types, though note weight is on the thinner side.
Technicalities is one area where the C2 2025 drops the ball badly. Micro-detailing and note definition is veiled, and imaging is blunted. The C2 2025 struggles to keep up with complex tracks with competing riffs - music degenerates into a nebulous blob with poor separation - and soundstage is bang average.
COMPARISONS
The C2 2025 will be compared against other single DDs residing at the $30ish USD bracket. BAs, hybrids and planar are left out, as the different transducer types have their own pros and cons.
Simgot EW200
The EW200 furnishes a bright Harmanish profile. It has less bass but a more pronounced upper frequency band. As such, the EW200 may be a bit more fatiguing if you are treble sensitive, compared to the smoother C2 2025.
The EW200 plays in a different playground when it comes to technical chops, killing the C2 2025 in soundstage, imaging, instrument separation and micro-detailing. The EW200's bass is much cleaner and faster than the bloated one on the C2 2025.
EPZ Q1 Pro
The Q1 Pro is also Harmanish, but has less bass than the C2 2025. The bass is a bit tighter and more textured on the Q1 Pro though.
The Q1 Pro has better timbre, and also has improvements in technical areas, with better soundstage, imaging and micro-details.
CONCLUSIONS
The EW200 furnishes a bright Harmanish profile. It has less bass but a more pronounced upper frequency band. As such, the EW200 may be a bit more fatiguing if you are treble sensitive, compared to the smoother C2 2025.
The EW200 plays in a different playground when it comes to technical chops, killing the C2 2025 in soundstage, imaging, instrument separation and micro-detailing. The EW200's bass is much cleaner and faster than the bloated one on the C2 2025.
EPZ Q1 Pro
The Q1 Pro is also Harmanish, but has less bass than the C2 2025. The bass is a bit tighter and more textured on the Q1 Pro though.
The Q1 Pro has better timbre, and also has improvements in technical areas, with better soundstage, imaging and micro-details.
CONCLUSIONS
Approaching 2025, we are arguably in the golden age of IEMs, where the price-to-performance ratio of even $30 IEMs shoots through the roof. To be brutally honest, the ironically-named TinHIFI C2 2025 doesn't cut it, and is an utterly forgettable set compared to other 2024 budget single DDs.
I won't even consider the C2 2025 as a sidegrade, as it is inferior technically to some benchmarks at $30ish, and the bass is slow as a snail, sounding very one-noted. Embracing the cliché but supposedly safe Harmanish curve, there is however, a peakish upper midrange and lower midrange scoop-out. Timbre is performed adequately, and is probably one of its redeeming traits, in addition to a smooth treble (though we lose resolution and turn away trebleheads).
In terms of non-sonic aspects, the accessories are meh, with a clone design of the Andromeda adopted here, coupled with slight driver flex. Thankfully, the C2 2025 is easy to drive, with decent ergonomics.
In conclusion, the C2 2025 is sub-par in today's context, and there are more cons than pros. You can do much better for the asking price of $30 USD nowadays and I can't recommend this IEM.
I won't even consider the C2 2025 as a sidegrade, as it is inferior technically to some benchmarks at $30ish, and the bass is slow as a snail, sounding very one-noted. Embracing the cliché but supposedly safe Harmanish curve, there is however, a peakish upper midrange and lower midrange scoop-out. Timbre is performed adequately, and is probably one of its redeeming traits, in addition to a smooth treble (though we lose resolution and turn away trebleheads).
In terms of non-sonic aspects, the accessories are meh, with a clone design of the Andromeda adopted here, coupled with slight driver flex. Thankfully, the C2 2025 is easy to drive, with decent ergonomics.
In conclusion, the C2 2025 is sub-par in today's context, and there are more cons than pros. You can do much better for the asking price of $30 USD nowadays and I can't recommend this IEM.
$27