Fit and Comfort

Seen above is the right channel of the HIFIMAN Svanar Wireless earphones placed into an artificial ear mold with the double-flange silicone size M ear tips installed. I have average-sized ears, and the ear mold above represents my own experiences well enough as a proxy. Size M silicone tips are my go-to for testing since foam tips are not included by some, and ultimately you need to decide on the type of ear tips based on how good a fit and seal you get with the ones provided here. As with the wired Svanar, I had an excellent fit with the Svanar Wireless with the double-flange tips but your mileage may vary. The shells are obviously larger than usual but the actual section sitting in the concha is small and molded to where the bulk outside doesn't matter as much unless you have smaller ears in general. The center of gravity is not set within the concha this time though with the lighter carbon fiber on the inside as opposed to the brass chamber used in the wired Svanar. Thankfully the excellent fit as well as the multiple points of contact outside meant these were firm and not moving at all once installed. At ~8 g per side, the Svanar Wireless is on par with typical metal-shell wired IEMs too so there should not be physical fatigue either. The stem naturally points towards the mouth to better pick up your voice and minimize external noise.

Battery life is.. interesting, to say the least. This is the first time that the ANC mode is not the least efficient operating mode with all of 6 hours of battery life promised, which bumps up to 7 in transparency mode. However, the main reason to use this set and not the even more affordable Svanar Wireless Jr is to go for the Hi-fi mode that uses the included R-2R DAC/amp inside rather than the one on the Bluetooth SoC itself. This gives you a rated battery life of 4 hours which thankfully seems to have been tested with LDAC itself at a reasonably high volume level. I got 4 hours consistently with LDAC and 50% volume on my phone, which increased to ~4 hours 20 min with SBC. Incidentally, the Svanar Wireless Jr goes for a Class AB amplifier and seems more like the TWS800's successor so the naming scheme feels potentially confusing. Either way, the Svanar Wireless is not the best option for a long flight and you need to be aware of the relatively shorter battery life if that is a deal breaker. The case provides an additional 12-21 hours (three charge cycles) depending on the operating mode and it takes ~2 hours to charge the earphones and closer to 2.5 hours for the case itself. There is no quick charging support for the case or IEMs and only wired charging for the case.

Audio Performance

Audio Hardware

HIFIMAN doesn't outright say the driver used in the Svanar Wireless is the same as in the wired Svanar. I'd be shocked if this was the case given wired IEM drivers tend to be more complicated and thicker at least compared to those in TWS earphones that need space for other things. This is all the more apparent in the Svanar Wireless where there's also a separate DAC/amp in the chain. As it stands, you might see some other reviewers mention the use of a 9.2 mm dynamic driver here but all I can tell you is there is a single dynamic driver of unknown size used here with a version of the topology diaphragm HIFIMAN uses in all its dynamic drivers be it the smaller ones for IEMs or the larger ones for headphones—this involves a deliberate coating of nanoparticles to provide a controlled distortion. There's no mixed metal chamber as in the wired Svanar where the brass inner chamber was chosen to influence sound resonance but instead we have the aforementioned DAC/amp. HIFIMAN is using its Hymalaya (I guess they finalized on the spelling finally) R-2R DAC/amp module inside and this should add some of that R-2R warmth and heft to the notes, especially in the mids. There is plenty of power to get the Svanar Wireless very loud at full blast so most people are likely to listen closer to 50-60% volume levels I suspect. We don't know the identify of the other components such as the Bluetooth SoC but at least I can tell you the microphones used for voice pick-up work quite well for online calls etc. ANC worked decently well until ~500 Hz to cut down persistent noise—it doesn't do as well with inconsistent sounds—and is complemented by good passive isolation. I'd place ANC and transparency on par with mainstream TWS sets from a generation ago though, especially the transparency mode where you still have that annoying hiss in the background and things get worse if there's a breeze.

Frequency Measurement and Listening

I will mention that I have a general preference for a warm-neutral signature with a slightly elevated bass, smooth treble range, detailed mids, and good tonal separation. I also generally prefer instrumental music over vocals, with favored genres including jazz and classical music.


Our reproducible testing methodology begins with a calibrated IEC711 audio coupler/artificial ear that earphones can feed into enough for decent isolation. The audio coupler feeds into a USB sound card, which in turn goes to a laptop that has ARTA and REW running and these TWS earphones connected to the laptop through Bluetooth. I begin with an impulse measurement to test for signal fidelity, calibrate the sound card and channel output, account for floor noise, and finally test the frequency response of each channel separately. Octave smoothing is at the 1/12th setting, which nets a good balance of detail and noise not being identified as useful data. Also, the default tuning was used for testing, and no app-based settings were chosen unless specifically mentioned. Each sample of interest is tested thrice with separate mounts to account for any fit issues, and an average is taken of the three individual measurements for statistical accuracy. For those products that get a full review, I am also using the appropriate ear mold fitted to the audio coupler for a separate test to compare how the IEMs fare when installed in a pinna geometry instead of just the audio coupler. The raw data is then exported from REW and plotted in OriginPro for easier comparison.


The IEC711 is such that you can't really compare these results with most other test setups, especially those using a head and torso simulator (HATS). The raw dB numbers are also quite contingent on the set volume, gain levels, and sensitivity of the system. What is more useful information is how the left and right channels work across the rated frequency response in the HIFIMAN Svanar Wireless which is seen above. The left channel was separately tested from the right one, and colored differently for contrast. I did my best to ensure an identical fit for both inside the IEC711 orifice, so note how the review unit shows very good channel matching—especially for TWS sets. The ~1-1.5 dB offset in the upper mids frequencies didn't feel obvious to the ears and continued to be so even after I was looking for it after having measured the set. Also, keep in mind that measurements taken after the resonance peak matched at 8 kHz are best taken with a grain of salt. The response with the anthropomorphic pinna in place matched the ideal scenario in the coupler fairly well and this is an indicator of how good the fit and seal was when installed in the artificial ear.



Here is the average frequency response for both channels of the HIFIMAN Svanar Wireless plotted against my personal target taken from VSG.squig.link, which also gives you an idea of my personal preferences to better correlate any possible biases. The tuning of a set of headphones or earphones does not have to match my target as long as it is tuned with some direction, makes sense, and is executed well. After all, no one set will appeal to everyone, and having different options is what makes this hobby so interesting and hard to quantify. This is in addition to a second graph using a newer target that's based on a more scientific methodology involving a -10 dB tilt (-1 dB/octave) applied to the diffuse field target for the newer, more reliable B&K 5128 but then compensated for my exact 711 coupler instead. Do scroll down to the targets in my database linked above and see the new 5128 section to the left where you can click on the yellow question mark for a brief primer. The bottom line is this target is closer to what many people are likely to prefer out of IEMs and headphones alike. I have chosen to plot this graph with the frequency response normalized/compensated to the target to make it easier to see where the Svanar Wireless deviates from this target. This helps visualize the various elements of the set's tonality—elevated bass, mild V-shaped tonality with recessed lower mids and peaky upper mids, decently well extended—for TWS—treble.

Everyone who heard the Svanar Wireless at its launch event and then again at Munich High End seemed to focus primarily on its impressive bass. As with the wired Svanar, the bass is the defining feature here with lots of good quality bass. It's one of the more detailed sets in general, so much so that I can actually see people comparing the Svanar Wireless to wired IEMs too without having the "but its TWS" tag associated with it. The V-shaped sound means the bass is plenty elevated too but not enough to make it one-note. Sub-bass extension is good too allowing this to be the first TWS set I've tried which manages to give you that nightclub feeling with plenty of slam and impact for electronic music. Mid-bass is well presented too for bass guitars and drums alike and this is where you will also start to get that R-2R weight to the tones in that notes hit harder than the frequency response suggests. The set works for classic rock and metal genres too, maybe even country music depending on vocal preference, although things start to get awry thereafter.

There is a tonality concern with the Svanar Wireless in that the upper mids and lower treble are highly elevated and this is emphasized all the more with the recessed mids beforehand. It's also peaky with multiple dips and rises giving a compressed feeling to songs and female vocals too. This also hurts the tonal balance of songs which have presence here since it's rare that you only have the lower frequencies represented. Unfortunately this takes away from the impressive start so far by potentially making the Svanar Wireless one of the more fatiguing sets on the market which may also be unpleasant to listen to depending on your HRTF. I didn't have as bad a time as many others I know but at the same time I didn't get the same love for most instrument classes that I wanted to get. The warmer R-2R sound helps somewhat but the end result is string instruments, percussions, piano keys all feel slightly muddy and not as detailed. Imaging is affected by this to an extent although hilariously this kinda helps make for a wide and tall soundstage. Timbre is less natural sounding than a single DD set might make you think too. The only consolation is the higher frequencies are back to being favorable and help add some air and definition via harmonics in addition to helping with enough energy for the likes of harps and cymbals without making anyone cringe. This is a set to play around with EQ but even so note that it's harder to EQ the upper mids and lower treble by ear and that's also what you should be doing rather than relying on measurements.


To explain why I was far more impressed with the wired Svanar than the Svanar Wireless, here's a comparison of the frequency response of the two sets. The two are tuned very similarly except in the 2.5-10 kHz region where the Svanar Wireless simply has too much going on. The Svanar already was testing the limits for many and the Svanar Wireless unfortunately goes past it and sounds compressed as previously mentioned. Keep in mind that this TWS set costs 25% the cost of the wired Svanar IEMs though, so you can get a taste of that bass and an R-2R DAC/amp in addition to the wireless experience for a lot less. Knowing there are two other versions of the Svanar Wireless which cost less, I'd probably recommend checking out the Svanar Wireless LE to save another $200 while still retaining the R-2R feature.


The HIFIMAN Svanar Wireless is the most expensive set of TWS earphones I've reviewed to date, but it's far from being the most expensive TWS set out there. Even ignoring the ridiculous ones using precious stones and metals, I've tried on multiple TWS sets in the $600-1000 price range in the last few months at different trade shows and audio stores. Somehow all of these have poor tonality in common, and the Svanar Wireless isn't escaping that trend either. Even if you go with sets I have here which cost less, we find them to be tuned all over the place. There's the ZE8000 from final which went from an acceptable but peaky tonality with the shipped firmware to not having any ear gain or upper mids at all—what's up with that? That set also uses an impressive dynamic driver in a large, specifically designed shell, but is let down by the most important part of the sound signature. You do get an app and arguably better technological features there although the fit is not as good and the inner part is even larger! Then there's the Campfire Orbit which seems to have recently been discontinued—thankfully—although you can still find remaining stock for sale. This goes even worse by having negative ear gain to where you feel nothing for so many instruments and vocals, almost as it they are playing through a balloon. There is plenty of potential here with EQ though and the app even supports it, except the app crashes more often than not. I was really hoping for this to work out with app and firmware updates but unfortunately with Campfire Audio seemingly throwing in the towel there's no way I can recommend it anymore. The Status Between 3ANC costs a lot less now that it's seemingly on a permanent sale and yet is the easy recommendation for most people reading this review. It's also the most complete set in that you get a nice looking comfortable pair of TWS earphones with decent battery life, a good app with lots of customization, reliable touch controls, and multiple listening and ANC modes to try out. It might feel overwhelming at first but the sound signature works with a lot of music genres and you can go from V-shaped to Harman which is quite rare for wireless IEMs even if it's become a menace for wired sets. The Svanar Wireless still bests the Status Between 3ANC for bass impact and detail though so I suppose bassheads still have something going for them with HIFIMAN.