Updated 19 September 2026 · XCHIFI analysis
CHU III should be evaluated as a different option, not an automatic upgrade for every CHU II owner. A useful buying decision starts with what you want to change: fit, bass balance, vocals, accessories or the overall listening experience.
This is a source-based comparison, not an XCHIFI hands-on review or teardown. Published specifications and other reviewers’ impressions are attributed below.
What is the CHU III made of?
Linsoul’s product listing describes a 10 mm dynamic driver with an aluminum-magnesium alloy composite diaphragm, a zinc-alloy housing and a CNC-machined brass acoustic nozzle. It lists a detachable 0.78 mm two-pin cable with a 3.5 mm plug, 16-ohm nominal impedance and sensitivity of 118 dB/Vrms at 1 kHz. The displayed price was US$24.99 when checked; regional pricing can differ.
Those details explain the construction and connection format. They do not, by themselves, establish that this generation sounds better. We would not use a metal name or driver diameter as a substitute for a controlled comparison.
What do reviewers like, and where do they disagree?
SoundGuys: a reasonable first IEM, a limited upgrade case
In its 15 September review, SoundGuys praised comfort, value and the replaceable cable. Its comparison described CHU III vocals as more prominent relative to CHU II. It was less enthusiastic about isolation and competitive FPS positioning, and did not see a strong upgrade case for someone who already enjoys CHU II. These are that publication’s test results and impressions, not our measurements.
The same team also published a video comparison, with the CHU II discussion identified at 03:50 in its chapter list.
MetalDeep329: more mid-bass, but not a compelling replacement
In a first-person review, MetalDeep329 describes stronger mid-bass emphasis, reduced sub-bass emphasis and less upper-range sharpness relative to CHU II. The reviewer likes the compact fit but questions the upgrade value and reports that the brass nozzle is not removable. The post discloses a review sample supplied by Shenzhen Audio. The nozzle observation is worth checking before purchase; it is not evidence of a measured long-term failure rate.
Listener opinions are not unanimous
A separate owner discussion includes listeners who strongly prefer CHU III. Those accounts are individual experiences, not a representative survey. They are enough to show why “everyone says it is worse” is too broad a conclusion.
Is CHU III worse than CHU II?
Our answer: the sources above do not establish a universal winner. They raise a more useful distinction: an enjoyable first purchase can still be an unnecessary replacement for an earphone you already own.
- Already happy with CHU II? Identify a specific shortcoming before paying for another set. A new model number is not a listening requirement.
- Considering your first IEM? Compare total cost, including any phone adapter, and check fit and return options.
- Looking for a different sound? Compare the same music at matched volume. Write down whether you want more bass impact, clearer vocals or a less intense upper range.
- Concerned about maintenance? Ask the seller about filters, nozzle servicing and replacement parts for the exact version you will receive.
The product-development question
The interesting question for a new earphone project is not simply whether to beat CHU III. It is which listener’s problem to solve. A project brief could prioritize compact fit, a chosen bass balance, serviceability or a particular connection format, then define how those choices will be evaluated.
That is the perspective we want to bring to launch coverage: connect the debate to concrete product choices. Brands and creators can share an OEM / ODM brief. Online customization is a future direction for XCHIFI, not an available ordering feature today.