BUDGET
IN-EAR

RX8s

REVONEXT

Rating

Price

7.6

30 €

Review published:

03/2019

Driver

3

per Side

1

Dynamic

2

Balanced

Impedance

23 Ohm

Piezo

0

Sound

8

Bass

7

Mids

7.5

Trebles

Sensitivity

110 dB

7.5

Handling

8.5

Haptic

B

Value

0

Daily Life

Frequency

7 - 40000 Hz

Intro

The RX8s is the further development of the RX8, which is expressed in a BA driver more and a finer tuning. Since the RX8s has more, very strong sound similarities with the new QT5 despite the one driver, I also refer here to the review of the QT5.

Handling

In contrast to the RX8, the case became thicker and the sound openings somewhat wider, since they now accommodate 2 BA drivers. This doesn't have a negative effect on the wearing comfort.
This is basically the same as the RX8, even if they are flatter and therefore better suited for sleeping, if you have in-ears in mind.

Just like its predecessor, the RX8s is also made of plastic, with a transparent case, where you can see the PCB under the front panel.
The cable is colored bound to the in-ear, depending on which case color you choose, there is also the matching cable. This is unfortunately not the very best for my taste when it comes to wearing comfort and haptics, but there are definitely worse ones. This is the standard cable, which is also supplied with all other new models at the moment.

The isolation is, as usual with REVONEEXT, averagely good (exceptions here are the QT2 & QT3, where this is even better).

Sound

The RX8s is very similar to the QT5 in its tuning and of course to its predecessor. This again confirms my assumption that a REVONEXT In-Ear can always be identified by its sound, as there is a basic sound characteristic throughout all products, which is more or less changed. This is certainly not reprehensible, as REVONEXT has already laid a very good foundation stone with its first in-ear, the QT2, on which they can build with confidence.

The bass is fast, precise with a fine texture. It has a very dry character and sometimes looks a bit dull, because it doesn't linger very long and has its preferences for the midrange bass, which in comparison to the QT2, loses some of the pressure, depth and warmth, but improves the level of detail and accuracy. I find it a little bit more powerful than the QT5 do.

The mids didn't get a separate BA driver, but both are the same for the mid and high frequencies. I don't dare judge whether they are driven differently by the crossover, because the mids sound almost the same as those of the RX8, or QT5, which can manage with a single BA driver. This means that the mid-range of the RX8 also sounds very good! Clear, detailed and very well separated. Voices are natural and neither too far back in the room, nor do they jump in your face.

But where is the difference to the RX8 noticeable? In my opinion, that's what happens at the high frequencies. As with the QT5, these are extremely detailed and airy light, with compression for more demanding music or poor source material. They tend to distort a bit, or cymbals don't sound too natural anymore, but this is due to the recording. I really enjoy the highs of the RX8s and I think that some trebleheads will be happy here. In the beginning, the sibilants are emphasized a little bit, but with time this is getting less and less important.

The stage here, no different from the QT5, is really very impressive. The layering of the individual sound layers is astonishing for the price class and I see it improved compared to the QT2/3. This provides a location that goes far beyond the head dimension, especially with regard to the highs.

Outro

The RX8s seems like a QT5 in a different guise. Too similar is the tuning and signature. Nevertheless, I see the RX8s a mu in front of the QT5, because for me the transition between bass, midrange and treble is a bit softer, which makes the RX8s more dynamic. But that can also be imagination, because in the A/B comparison it was hardly possible for me to distinguish the two. Nevertheless I still go with the QT2, or the QT3s, because I have a similar, if not the same quality and extension in the highs, but the basses are richer and the mids sound fuller, which is simply an advantage for rock or hip-hop. When it comes to acoustic music, singer-songwriters, etc., I might even be more attracted to a QT5 or RX8s.
I'll stick to the fact that you can't do anything wrong with a REVONEXT product! (an exception for me is the QT3, because of the too sharp highs)

Legend

Haptic:

Here the processing plays a role and the usability of the scope of supply. Additionally the appearance, wearing comfort and robustness.


Value:
Here I evaluate for me subjectively the price/performance ratio - does not flow into the evaluation!

Z: No Brainer

A: money well spent

B: all right, you can do

C: gives better for less money

D: overpriced

E: collector's price

Daily life:
Here, I focus on the long-term audibility and whether I can hear it well out of the box. This is of course very subjective and therefore only a minimal deduction or bonus. 

(-0.1, 0, +0.1)

BL-03.jpg

Rating in Letters

S: 9.5 - 10

A: 9.0 - 9.4​

B: 8.0 - 8.9​

C: 7.0 - 7.9

D: 6.0 - 6.9​
E: 5.0 - 5.9​

F: 0.0 - 4.9​

NEX202

NEX202

QT3

QT3

RX8

RX8

NEX602

NEX602

QT3s

QT3s

RX8s

RX8s

QT2

QT2

QT5

QT5

QT2s

QT2s

RX6

RX6

Second Opinion

KLOGOWhite.png

CHI-FIEAR © 2020 by David Hahn

  • Facebook
  • Instagram