Short answer: the Juzear Harrier. Both are rated 3.6/5 for sound quality (#702 and #755 of 1291 in-ear headphones), and the Juzear Harrier costs $329.99 against $360 for the Tipsy Dunmer Pro 4, so with nothing between them on sound quality, price settles it.
What the Juzear Harrier does well: The median of 18 hobbyist measurements gives it a solid Harman preference score of 69 with a 2.15 dB spread, and its mids sit within about 0.8 dB of target, so vocals and instruments sound natural. Watch for: Presence sits about 3.9 dB low with an 8.1 dB dip near 10.6 kHz, so vocals and instruments lose some bite.
Why pick the Tipsy Dunmer Pro 4: A broadly balanced tuning with a preference score of 69 against the Harman target. The tradeoff: An uneven response, 2.3 dB standard deviation from target.
Buy the Juzear Harrier. Both are rated the same for sound quality, and it costs $30.01 less than the Tipsy Dunmer Pro 4.
Still deciding? The full Headphones rankings cover every ranked option.
The median of 18 hobbyist measurements gives it a solid Harman preference score of 69 with a 2.15 dB spread, and its mids sit within about 0.8 dB of target, so vocals and instruments sound natural.
Amazon $329.99 eBay
A broadly balanced tuning with a preference score of 69 against the Harman target.
e-earphone (JP) 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
| Juzear Harrier | Tipsy Dunmer Pro 4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $329.99 | $360 |
| Ranked | #702 of 1291 in In-Ear Headphones | #755 of 1291 in In-Ear Headphones |
| Form Factor | In-ear | In-ear |
| Back | Closed | Closed |
| Connection | Wired | Wired (3.5mm) |
| Driver Type | Tribrid | Hybrid |
| Drivers | 1 x dynamic + 6 x balanced armature + 2 x planar | 1 Dynamic, 3 Balanced Armature |
| Impedance | 32 ohms | - |
| Sensitivity | 112 dB/mW | - |
| Frequency Response | 20Hz - 20kHz (Manufacturer specified) | - |
| Harman Preference Score | 69 (median of 18 squig.link measurements, calibrated to AutoEQ) | 69 (median of 3 squig.link measurements, calibrated to AutoEQ) |
| Deviation From Target | 2.15 dB standard deviation | 2.32 dB standard deviation |
| Tonal Tilt | -0.98 (negative is warmer, positive brighter) | +0.56 (negative is warmer, positive brighter) |
| Sub-bass Extension | Within 6 dB of target down to 20 Hz (+1.3 dB at 30 Hz) | Within 6 dB of target down to 20 Hz (-2.8 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 Juzear Harrier from aftersound, atechreviews, awsmdanny, bassaudio, bloomaudio, boizoff, ducbloke, eliseaudio, flare, gadgetgenerations, hobbytalk, jaytiss, obodio, practiphile, precog, soundcheck39, superreview and tonedeafmonk; the Tipsy Dunmer Pro 4 from atechreviews, jaytiss and pw, all via squig.link.
Related Headphone Comparisons
How Juzear Harrier compares with other leading options: