Short answer: the BQEYZ Winter. It ranks #910 of 1291 in-ear headphones by sound quality, rated 3.3/5, at $239; the FatFreq x HBB Deuce ranks #1000, rated 3.0/5, at $239. The price gap is small enough that the sound-quality ranking should decide it.
The case for the BQEYZ Winter: Lower mids sit within about 0.5 dB of target, keeping voices and guitars natural. Watch for: Presence sits about 4.6 dB low with an 8 dB dip near 10.0 kHz, so vocals and instruments lose some bite.
What the FatFreq x HBB Deuce does well: Lower mids sit within about 0.5 dB of target, keeping voices and guitars natural. The catch: A Harman score of 61 places it in the lower part of the in-ear rankings.
Buy the BQEYZ Winter. It is rated higher for sound quality than the FatFreq x HBB Deuce at the same price, so it is the default pick unless a specific strength of the other one matters more to you.
Looking for alternatives? See the complete Headphones rankings.
Lower mids sit within about 0.5 dB of target, keeping voices and guitars natural.
Amazon $239.00 eBay
Lower mids sit within about 0.5 dB of target, keeping voices and guitars natural.
Bloom Audio $239.00 eBayPrices on this page were last checked October 16, 2026 at 5:46 PM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Specifications Side By Side
| BQEYZ Winter | FatFreq x HBB Deuce | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $239.00 | $239.00 |
| Ranked | #910 of 1291 in In-Ear Headphones | #1000 of 1291 in In-Ear Headphones |
| Form Factor | In-ear | In-ear |
| Back | Closed | Closed |
| Connection | Wired | Wired |
| Driver Type | Hybrid | Dynamic |
| Drivers | 1 x 12mm dynamic + 1 x 11.6mm bone conduction | 2 x dynamic |
| Impedance | 38 ohms | - |
| Frequency Response | 5Hz - 40kHz | - |
| Weight | 0 lbs (14.5 g) | - |
| Harman Preference Score | 65 (median of 12 squig.link measurements, calibrated to AutoEQ) | 61 (median of 22 squig.link measurements, calibrated to AutoEQ) |
| Deviation From Target | 2.90 dB standard deviation | 2.82 dB standard deviation |
| Tonal Tilt | -0.11 (negative is warmer, positive brighter) | -1.30 (negative is warmer, positive brighter) |
| Sub-bass Extension | Within 6 dB of target down to 20 Hz (-5.2 dB at 30 Hz) | Within 6 dB of target down to 20 Hz (+6.3 dB at 30 Hz) |
Frequency Response Compared
Both headphones’ measurements overlaid on the Harman target. Above the target sounds louder in that range, below it quieter. Each curve is the median of several independent measurements, shifted so its 500 Hz to 2 kHz average sits at 0 dB, so only the tuning is compared.
Measurement data: the BQEYZ Winter from ankramutt, arn, cammyfi, cqtek, fahryst, hbb, ianfann, musicafe, practiphile, pw, soundcheck39 and timmyv; the FatFreq x HBB Deuce from aden, adri-n, aftersound, audioamigo, bassaudio, bassyalexander, bloomaudio, ducbloke, eliseaudio, harutohiroki, hobbytalk, jaytiss, joycesreview, koi, kr0mka, pw, sl0the, soundignity, superreview, theaudiostore, therollo9 and tonedeafmonk, all via squig.link.
Related Headphone Comparisons
More worthwhile head-to-heads for BQEYZ Winter: