BUDGET
IN-EAR

NO.3

TFZ

Rating

Price

8.3

99 €

Review published:

03/2020

Driver

1

per Side

1

Dynamic

0

Balanced

Impedance

20 Ohm

Piezo

0

Sound

8.5

Bass

8

Mids

8

Trebles

Sensitivity

105 dB

8.2

Handling

9

Haptic

A

Value

0

Daily Life

Frequency

5 - 40000 Hz

Intro

The TFZ No.3 is a single-dynamic IEM that has already gained a certain amount of popularity, especially among bass lovers.
I also enjoy it, but it is always a bit on the borderline in the mid and high range.
For me it is, if at all, only a slight improvement to the T2 GALAXY and also not a life-changing experience, but an allrounder IEM that does a lot of things right.

Handling

The packaging design and content of the majority of TFZ products is always quite similar, if not identical. Also here you get an oblong, rectangular packaging with a tip selection of silicone and a transport bag. A positive thing I notice here is the cable. This is not the daily standard mash we usually see, but something different and still very user-friendly.
It does not tend to get tangled up, falls well and is very durable. It consists of two strands, which are completely enclosed by a transparent coat. The cable also feels good. The 2-pin connection is not universal, but the cable can also be used with other in-ears that have the 2-pin connection turned outwards.

The TFZ No.3 is very light (in contrast to the GALAXY II) and is also very comfortable to wear. The isolation is completely sufficient for normal everyday use and is also suitable for stage use.

Sound

The No.3 is often called a basshead-friendly IEM, which I can understand, but I don't want to limit it to that. The bass is clearly accentuated, but nevertheless it harmonizes well with the mids and trebles. It has a good punch and appealing sub-expansion. Nevertheless, it's not obtrusive or overpowering, but has itself under control for the most part. Rarely, however, it can also hum a bit.
The bass is fun to play, but also knows how to please with details and mostly accurate playing. To the absolute basshead level I miss the ear massage and also the tightness.
It does interfere with the mids, but doesn't overlay them negatively. It gives them body and warmth, which makes voices more emotional, but also leaves the lower mids some room to breathe.

Basically, the mids are relaxed, natural, and tend to be brighter.
At higher volumes the mids become somewhat borderline in the upper range, which leads to hardness and increased sibilant emphasis.
The fluctuating level stability at high volumes I often observe with single dynamic drivers or multi drivers without good or missing crossover.
With the ORIVETI OH500 as a positive example, I can turn up the volume until my ears bleed. But even then, the OH500 still plays very homogeneously, so that I don't push single frequency ranges but the entire frequency response. With the No.3, I tend to emphasize the upper midrange/bass with a volume increase and this becomes unpleasant at some point, also depending on the music material. This is not an individual problem of the No.3 but can be observed often and is easier to handle at a moderate volume. Admittedly, the frequency response of the ORIVETI is also flatter, which naturally favours a more linear level increase.
Nevertheless, the tendency of hardness in the midrange of the No.3 can be heard independent of volume and is also somewhat tiring in the long run.
In addition, the mids are not always completely clean if the No.3 is not fed with high-quality files.

In this case, the trebles also have a clang and a certain strictness. In other words: the No.3 does not forgive everything. Especially because of its brighter signature, bad material is not necessarily smoothed out.
Apart from that the trebles have a good extension that offers enough space for the sound to unfold and make the stage more airy. However, this is more extended in width than in height. That's why the No.3 seems to be more limited, probably also due to the emphasis on the upper mids, lower trebles, which direct the focus more to voices and make the stage a bit more intimate. The separation of voices and instruments works very well and only becomes more limited during hectic music.

Outro

The TFZ No.3 is a very good and well tuned dynamic in-ear. In direct comparison with the equally expensive STARFIELD, I go, by the somewhat more natural and harmonious tuning, with the STARFIELD. The No.3, however, has the higher fun factor. Only the sporadic peaks of the No.3 cause me more problems, but the STARFIELD is also not completely free of them.

If you focus on bass, but also on a lively and natural sound reproduction in a V-signature, as well as a good portion of details, this is a good choice. In addition, one gets a very good wearing comfort and an appealing cable.

https://www.linsoul.com/products/tfz-no-3-no-3ti

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​

LIVE 1

LIVE 1

NO.3

NO.3

T2 GALAXY

T2 GALAXY

Second Opinion

KLOGOWhite.png

CHI-FIEAR © 2020 by David Hahn

  • Facebook
  • Instagram