>>I am brazilian and I speak portuguese, so forgive my english, I’ll use translator tools to help.<<


Tin HiFi is the earphone company that I listened and evaluated to the most until today, in all there were 8 reviews and 9 IEMs listened. Now, we come to the tenth earphone listened, the Tin HiFi C5. The C5 is an IEM that uses the SPD – Square Planar Driver, the same type of driver used by Celest and TRN. The IEM also has a BA in its composition.

TIN HIFI reviews: C2 Mech Warrior, C3

Price: $79 USD
Colors: Silver
Cabe: No Mic







(1) 10mm SPD – Square Planar Driver
(1) Balanced armature (BA)
Frequency range: 10Hz – 20kHz
Sensitivity: 101±3dB
Impedance: 9Ω±15%
Max power: 5mW
Termination Plug: 3.5mm (straight)
Cable size: 125cm (detachable)
Cable material: Copper silver-plated
Connectors: 2Pin 0.78mm
Shell: Aviation aluminum
Weight: 4.41g (one side)


Eartips. The product came with 6 pairs of silicone eartips in white color, sizes S/M/L (two pairs of each size), and 1 pair of foamtips (the famous blue foamtips from Tin). Let’s start with the foamtips. As usual, I no longer use foamtips, I know they can provide a more anatomical fit, but I don’t have the patience to keep pressing the tip to insert it in the ear, and this type of eartips it wears out and gets dirty more easily, not to mention that I already had a little irritation in the ear canal with this type of eartips (foamtips). As for the silicone ones, they are very good for me, every time the company has put this model on, it has served me well. The silicone of these white eartips I think is very soft, so I don’t feel any discomfort.

-The evaluation was made with the silicone eartip (white) in size L.

The price of the IEM is officially $79 USD, so it’s not that cheap – the C2 is going for almost $20 dollars – so I think they could have put some extra model of eartips (wide bore or other material), anyway, in my opinion more eartips is never too much. Even so, I don’t think there’s any need to opt for eartips from third-party companies, like SpinFit, Azla, etc (subjective).

Cable. The cable on the C5 is very good, it reminds me a lot of the cable on the C3, although I thought that the cable on the C3 was more refined than this one. The C5 cable is very light, beautiful, easy to roll up for storage, doesn’t present “memory” (waves), doesn’t present microphonics, and doesn’t tangle so easily (this varies a little according to use). Perhaps the only point to be criticized here is that this cable has that kind of style if you push the braid in the opposite direction, the braid opens. It comes with a chin slider, and the piece worked, but I don’t think it’s 100% effective, at some point the piece might slide, especially if you shake it. I finish this part thinking that the C3 cable – for me – is better than this one, and if we compare the value of each product side by side, the cost-benefit on the C3’s cable increases even more.

Earhooks. Here I also found it very good, they are very malleable and have a good curvature, the plastic coating is one of the softest I have ever tested. I prefer when there are no ripples, because at some point it could cause some discomfort – in my opinion – but these ones didn’t bother me, no discomfort. Positive point.

Connectors. The connectors on the C5 are 2-pin 0.78mm style. At first, I was surprised by the sum of the connectors and the place where they fit in the body of the IEM, it seemed to me that was something very big, very tall, however, after I tested it here in my ears, I realized that this is just a detail, it didn’t compromise the fitting. The connectors don’t have letters (L and R) to indicate the fitting side, but it’s possible to orient yourself by the colors, red and transparent (red side corresponds to the right side). The body of the IEMs has the letters.

The fit. A very subjective part in the review, for example, in the case of the C2, the IEM divided opinions regarding the fit, some had no problems and others did. Here with the C5 for me it was just happiness, the stability was 100% in my ears, I only need to put in once and that’s it, no need to adjust more. It’s very discreet in terms of size, without protruding parts, it was well hidden in my ear. This IEM is very anatomical and I believe it will fit well with a wide variety of people. The insertion in my ear canal I found average, and the isolation I found good/okay.

Comfort. The comfort in the C5 is excellent, it’s very similar to the design of the T2+, but even smaller and more rounded, that is, even more comfort. The IEM is very light (not like a plastic IEMs), the surface is very polished, very curvy. It didn’t generate any pressure points in my ears, fits well in my shells. The only detail that generated a certain amount of concern for me was that the nozzle is oval, so I was immediately worried about what this could cause. I say this because in my review of the IKKO OH1S there was a little problem with the oval nozzle. Now, fortunately when I test it, this question of the nozzle being oval didn’t imply anything bad here. I have my thoughts that there’s no need to make IEMs with oval nozzles, this could go bad at some point, better to go with the round nozzles like usual. According to my tests here, I was able to stay for a long time (about 2 hours without pauses) and I didn’t feel uncomfortable. When it’s like this, the IEM can be indicated for long sessions (partly subjective).

The C5 comes with a fabric bag that serves to store the IEM. In my opinion, at this price, the product should have a rigid or semi-rigid case, these fabric bags aren’t useful for me to store the IEM, the act of putting a wired IEM inside a flaccid container is very bad (my opinion).


The sound of the Tin HiFi C5 I considered as a Mild-V-Shape. It can also be seen as a variation of the Harman Target (Harman International compensation curve), although it doesn’t necessarily follow the curve exactly, but has the same goal as the Harman target, which are: emphasized bass, recessed mids, upper mids more enhanced, and more relaxed treble. The C5 is an IEM that I particularly consider as having a very pleasant and clean sound, that is, without excesses or absences (maybe it could have a little more treble for my personal taste). As I understand it, C5 has a little more resolution than C2 and C3 (although I didn’t compare them side by side). And it’s also the best IEM with the SPD driver I’ve heard (so far and in my opinion). Keep in mind that this IEM has an important detail in terms of amplification, so I suggest you take a look at the Amp paragraph.

The bass of the C5 in quantity. Here comes the amplification question, and even so I consider that the level here was moderate. Attention bassheads, this IEM maybe couldn’t be your cup of tea. But don’t worry, the IEM aren’t devoid of bass either, it’s just my projection that more authoritative bass lovers might be dissatisfied, and sure from my taste too, I’ve certainly heard other IEMs in which the bass was more present. The C3 itself has a bass that I find much more physical and fun, however the bass of the C5 is more on the technical side. In terms of sub-bass and mid-bass, I understand that they are “in line”, that is, without overlapping one frequency over the other. Both regions are audible in sound. The extension is good.

In qualitative terms, the C5’s bass is clean, controlled, fast, has texture (but not too much). I think it’s a leaner kind of bass, it’s not too much of the physicality, like it doesn’t displace too much air, just enough. Anyone who can already heard another IEM with this type of driver certainly makes it easier to understand, for me all of them so far have very similar characteristics (from those I heard). The impact is not very strong, it has a dry character, the bass drum hits more defined. The C5’s bass doesn’t bleed into the mids, it’s not boomy, it’s not muffled, it’s not muddy. The definition is good, but I don’t think it reaches the level of some magnetic planar or dynamic driver (in my opinion). For those who enjoy a bass that accompanies the recording, the C5 is a good example, it doesn’t let the presentation get boring, nor does it generate excess.

The mids of the C5. The mids are recessed at first, and the upper mids have a slight extra emphasis there. The pinna gain has presence but isn’t “in the face”, that is, it doesn’t make the sound aggressive or hard, a snare drum for example, never sounds dry or harsh, on the contrary, here the sounds are more focused on the soft side, to the sweet, and all while offering a nice dose of clarity. A soprano sax plays quite pleasantly without being intrusive.

The voices in C5. Here I thought there was an equal technical performance between the types of voices, so for me, both the female/high voices and the male/low voices were good, a balance… Of course this also affects excellence in a voice type in exclusive, will not extract the greatest potential in a given type. Then the person has to evaluate the type of voice that appears most in their music library, in my case for example there are more male/low voices than female/high voices. The C5 it’s a half term between the C2 and the C3 here in this regard, because I thought that the C2 combined well with the female/high voices, and the C3 combined more with the male/low voices, the C5 is the middle of the path.

The treble in terms of quantity. This really is the lowest region of the IEM, I understand that it was at a moderate to low level. Fortunately, the C5 doesn’t join the ranks of dark IEMs, as I said in the first paragraph, I thought it lacked a little more treble, the C2 for example, is an IEM that has more presence in this region. But it’s that thing, we’ll get into a matter of taste, because you can listen to everything easily. This IEM is great for those who don’t like very high treble, it avoids hearing fatigue. It has a slight roll-off feel in the higher trebles, but it doesn’t affect the reproduction of the sounds, you’ll just hear them a little lower, that’s ok that could be a subjective question, but from my music library I heard everything, just with a lower intensity. That’s why I think the extension is good/ok (certainly my hearing doesn’t reach 20kHz more).

In qualitative terms, the treble of the C5 are calm, smooth, soft, “sweet”, without the presence of peaks or coloring. The sparkle is consistent with the real side, the sound isn’t thin, but I understand that for my taste it could have a little more energy here, since I have a little more tolerance for treble. The IEM has a good level of details, but not at the level of micro detail, something I think the P1 does better. The definition is also good/Ok, what will really lacks is the airy (in my opinion). The treble aren’t shrill, they aren’t harsh, they aren’t sharp, and they don’t have sibilance either. Hi-hats are well polished and without harshness, without that “psshhh” sound that irritates, chime is smooth and without excessive shine, ride cymbals don’t pierce.

Soundstage. The soundstage feel I found good/average. In depth I found it medium, in height and width I thought the sound develops well. It’s not something so spatial, nor so compact, it’s a middle term. I think Tin C3 has a slight advantage in this regard. Here on the C5 I don’t feel that “echo” sensation, of the sounds being “lost”, but I also didn’t think it made the sounds be close to the eardrum.

Imaging. The instrumental separation I thought was good. All the songs I listened to the IEM showed a good ability to separate the instruments, better when listening to live recordings or with several instruments playing at the same time, the IEM have a “clean” feature that makes the instruments easier to listen to ( remembering that this can also vary according to the recording and other processes during the production of the song).

Driver Flex Test. The Tin C5 is an IEM with the SPD driver, and from what I’ve seen, it’s not a driver that has been showing the driver flex noise. So, I did the test here and the IEM really didn’t show the noise when I put it in my ear.

Amplification. I used the Questyle M15 DAC/AMP dongle connected to my computer to do this evaluation. The output used was the 3.5mm SE and the device with the selector in “High” mode, that is, with gain. The volume used was the 40% level of the 100% available by the Windows volume scale. The Tin HiFi C5 I thought needs a source with an amplification power greater than the trivial, or that has some feature to apply a gain can also help. It’s possible that someone listens without more amplification and thinks that the sound is good, because who am I to say how each one listens to music, right? But, in my opinion, the sound of the C5 changes a lot when you amplify with a more powerful source, in fact not very powerful, because I only needed to turn on the gain of the M15 and the sound was already right.

Music is subjective, so below is the list of some musical genres that I personally think that was better with this IEM. Remember that were only few genres and few artists tested. If I describe that one genre was better and the other don’t, it doesn’t mean that you can’t listen to your favorite music genre with this IEM and love it. So, here goes:


Hip Hop

Bossa Nova*

*Brazilian musical genres.

Not so much:



Graphs by Tin HiFi:

Thank you so much for being here!

Consider follow us on Facebook and Instagram to get all the news!

Crie um site ou blog no WordPress.com

Acima ↑