Fit and Comfort

I was in two minds about whether or not to have all four tip types represented here, at least in size M, which is the size I typically use. Except for the single-flanged white tips that are quite firm and do not mold as easily to openings as the others, there isn't much to distinguish them. In fact, even that huge double-flanged tip set contours better around slight angles as experienced with inner ear canals. This makes that white tip set my least favored of the lot, and I have to say the double-flanged set in size M might be the best one for me, enough to where I went from mildly amused at the inclusion of multi-flanged tips with a TWS earphone set to appreciative, with the large size of the buds effectively resting outside the ear concha anyway. The multi-flanged tips provide extra depth, if you will, for a more secure fit Etymotic fans will no doubt be familiar with.

There is no getting around the fact that the HIFIMAN TWS800 has an extremely large form factor, so much so that it may well be too large for many ears. But knowing that it actually rests above the concha means that all the silicone lining and molding for the housing comes into play, and the relatively low density makes these quite comfortable if the very first physical obstruction can be overcome. Indeed, my concern was not that these would be too tight in my ears, but that they may fall off due to size. The multi-flanged tips solved that for me, and the end result was one I was quite happy with. At 6.9 g with 23 dB rated passive noise isolation, it works out just as well as with the IPX4 water and dust resistance—decent, but not to where it challenges outdoor-oriented TWS buds with ANC.

Battery life is a key metric for TWS earbuds, and these promise up to 4.5 hours of use when fully charged, which tends to be the best-case scenario with medium volume on AAC/SBC codecs. Given there are no other codecs available, I suppose I should congratulate HIFIMAN for consistently hitting closer to 4.5 hours even at full volume on all the tested sources. This is less than average for good TWS devices today, and I had to plan my testing around this constraint accordingly. The included charging case provides for another 26-28 hours across charge cycles, which helps significantly considering the earphones charge fairly quickly (1 hour), and the case itself takes 1.5-2 hours to charge on top. This means you can get away with a fully charged case and ear buds for a long vacation without worry of charging it much, but I do wish HIFIMAN had included a larger battery inside the earphones considering their size.

Audio Performance

Audio Hardware and Microphones

Ah, and now things make more sense as to why we don't have a large battery in the earphones despite their large size. Remember how I teased that the HIFIMAN TWS800 is quite different from the norm of true wireless earphones? This is not your typical small single dynamic driver configuration that can be driven by gnat blowing on the diaphragm. Nay, HIFIMAN went against the grain with a relatively massive 150 Ω impedance voice coil for the diaphragm. High impedance earphones are not really a thing anymore, and seeing this with a TWS set is all the more surprising given everything has to be powered inside. The reason to go with a high impedance voice coil generally tends to be better control over what you ultimately hear so long as it is paired with a properly powered source, as unwanted noise will more likely be throttled by the resistance it meets. This can in turn make for better-quality sound, a decent example of which comes from the beyerdynamic lineup of studio monitor headphones in 2-3 different impedance options.

Given an external power source cannot be used with TWS earphones, HIFIMAN has a dedicated amplifier module for the high impedance voice coil, which is why the TWS800 is so large physically, making for a set that is truly unique among its contemporaries. HIFIMAN pairs the voice coil with its topology diaphragm, which has been used successfully with its flagship-class planar magnetic headphones. The company acknowledges that all diaphragm materials flex during operation, so controlling the firmness of the diaphragm can only go so far. What this 6.4 mm large topology diaphragm does is effectively coat the base to control the way it will flex as opposed to minimizing it. The company understandably did not reveal more specifics about the coating materials and application process, but confirmed that the coating was done with the target tuning in mind.


Keeping things to itself continues with the actual Bluetooth module, stating that it would rather let the final product speak for itself. The Qualcomm monopoly here did not sit well perhaps, and the justification for the absence of aptX/aptX HD codecs is that these codecs don't really make a big difference with TWS earphones. What it does practically result in is no first-party app for customization, so this can be a potential dealbreaker if you absolutely need first-party EQ, for example. There are platform-wide options now, so I am not that hard on HIFIMAN for this. What also helps is a well-laid-out set of touch controls, which works very well owing to the larger surface area. These include volume control and media playback in addition to pulling up the smart assistant on your platform, so if you don't mind the default configuration, I suspect you will leave happy with an actually functional set of onboard controls instead of the usual finicky ones.

Frequency Measurement and Listening

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


Our current testing methodology begins with a calibrated IEC711 audio coupler/artificial ear that ear buds can feed into to where you have 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 5.0 (aptX). 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 1/6th 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. The raw data is then exported from REW and plotted in OriginPro for an easier comparison. This time, I did go ahead and test the set with the artificial ears as well since it was reliable enough to report here.


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 TWS800, or at least the useful part of it. 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 two channels are within +/- 1 dB throughout the lows and mids proper, after which there is some noticeable channel imbalance in the upper mids before things are again synchronized. This imbalance happens in the region where you typically see compensation for in-ear resonance and pinna gain, so whether or not you will actually hear it will depend on your unique ear structure. I did notice it, but not to where it was a distraction. The response with the artificial pinna in place is quite impressive for how similar it is to the coupler itself. There was no measurable burn-in effect even though I let a mix of white/pink noise go through these for ~25 hours and checked to be sure. Keep in mind that with TWS earphones, the fit is quite important, as is the connectivity and signal strength from the source.

So how does it actually sound? Pretty good actually, and the tuning is more like a set of IEMs than your typical single dynamic driver TWS. Even beyond having nothing else on hand that is close price-wise, the HIFIMAN TWS800 is in fact tuned very differently from the mainstream appeal, not having a clear V-shape tuning. Aside from the elevated 4–5 kHz response here, this reminded me a lot of the excellent DUNU FALCON PRO IEMs with the mid-bass emphasis. It's not as balanced, but let's start with the bass response, where we see added warmth without it coming off bloated. It would even be better had it not been for one thing: the maximum volume out of these not satisfying people who like to listen at 80+ dB. I tried with multiple paired sources, but think the amp module is perhaps hungry for power, and the high impedance voice coil is holding things back. There is little in terms of dynamics here, but if you are the type to listen to less "head-banging" music, as myself, then this is not really an issue since it allows for long listening sessions without fatigue while appreciating the nuances of the various notes.

There is a lot of detail in the lows and mids, and tonal separation I never before imagined would come from a TWS set. In fact, I am once again led to compare to wired IEMs, which is a massive compliment to HIFIMAN. The tuning is mature to where audiophiles now have the option to go with a TWS set that appeals to different music genres, including pop, jazz rap, and effectively anything with a good mix of vocals and instruments. EDM, classic rock, and metal are where these won't be impressive, but the upper mids here are also an issue. This is even beyond the pinna gain region, with that highly elevated 4–5 kHz region causing some harmonic distortion. The lower volume threshold makes it worse since you don't have much room to EQ things up even if you want to. It's not sibilant, but opera music with higher-pitched vocals gets shouty relative to the rest. At this point, the lower maximum volume is a blessing in disguise, it not being shrill and uncomfortable, but it remains a tuning issue nonetheless. This hurts imaging with instruments. The soundstage seems adequate by itself—not closed off, but not wide or deep. It's interesting then that the upper treble response is back on track, with decently positioned peaks that keep things from getting fatiguing while also being fast and energetic enough to appreciate the notes.

I did find myself getting Poweramp for EQ, as the TWS800 delivered an impressive enough experience everywhere but in the upper mids/lower treble. In fact, it made me forget all about the lack of aptX/aptX HD codec support since that isn't really holding things back here. The tuning needs a few tweaks, and I would have liked to see what a more powerful amp module could have possible done, though HIFIMAN is already running a fine balance between battery life and sound output to where there is no perfect solution. All this also combines to make any other TWS comparison a non-starter since I have never before tested anything remotely like the HIFIMAN TWS800. Tuning-wise, I would have loved to have HIFIMAN tone down the prominent treble peak too, but no TWS set really comes close.