1More Evo Review

Sound Signature

The EVO features a fun sound signature with slightly boosted bass and upper treble ranges. It sounds engaging, vivid, and dynamic. The EVO’s response is not flat, however, it is not completely V-shaped either. The midrange has a good amount of presence and the slight boost over the bass keeps the sound dynamic and easy to listen to, without significantly hindering the technical capability of the IEMs. The EVO has a 10mm DLC dynamic driver that is responsible for lows and midrange. As for the treble range, the EVO uses a balanced armature.

Let’s dissect the sound quality subject into a few sections and take a closer look, together.

Low

The lows of the EVO are punchy, bold, and impactful. The 10mm DLC driver does a great job of dishing out a rounded, visceral, and fun bass response. Quantity-wise the bass may be too much for the flat signature lovers out there, however, the increased fun element of the EVOs help with the bass-heavy tracks. The transition between the lows and the mids is smooth, the bass does not bleed into the midrange. The note weight of the EVOs gets a big boost from this range.

Mid

The midrange of the EVOs sounds slightly recessed, especially compared to the rest of the spectrum. However, the midrange sounds detailed and has an adequate amount of presence. The midrange feels articulate and sweet, thanks to the bolder note weight of lower ranges. The vocal reproduction does not feel artificial or thin, the instruments have an adequate body and sound fairly resolving. The presentation has a good amount of air but it does not have the most relaxed presentation we’ve heard in this price bracket. The upper midrange is slightly boosted and contributes to the fun factor of the IEM’s signature. The hi-hats and cymbals sound energetic and vivid without sounding too sharp or sibilant-prone. 

High

The treble range feels energetic, crisp, and open with a good amount of extension. It does not feel sharp or strident. The tuning of the treble contributes to the overall spaciousness of the signature. The control is quite good too, crashes sound realistic without any shrill. The detail retrieval capability gets a major contribution from this range. The attack and decay are impressive, the balanced armature feels snappy and it enhances the feeling of PRaT.

Technical Capability

The technical capability of the EVO is impressive, especially for its price bracket. The EVO has a dynamic, vivid signature with the increased fun factor, making it quite easy to listen to. The EVO is a good all-rounder and its tonality being on the sweeter side works well with many music genres. Let’s talk about the soundstage and separation. The EVO’s soundstage is not so wide, but it has good depth. The instrument separation is great for the price, allowing you to track individual instruments with ease. However, the EVO feels slightly congested during complex and fast passages with multiple instruments on stage, especially when the ANC is toggled on. Overall, I think that for the sub-200 bracket, the EVO performs very well and should be on your list of IEMs to check out.

Comparisons

Lypertek Z3 2.0 / TEVI ($89 USD)

The Z3 (a.k.a. TEVI) is one of my go-to TWS IEMs when it comes to the sub-100 dollars price bracket. I am including it because it performs above its price bracket and it offers an excellent tuning for audiophiles. It is a capable TWS earphone with punchy bass, clear mids, and good highs. It offers great resolution and clarity for the price and it can tackle some earphones that are double the price. Apart from the sound quality, TEVI is IPX7 water-proof, has easy-to-push physical buttons, great fit, apt-X support, and amazing battery life. On the other hand, the EVO has a superior build quality and also comes with a much more compact charging case.

Apart from those, the EVO has LDAC support and ANC capability. Feature-wise, the EVO is the clear winner here, however, comparing these two IEMs’ sound signatures, the Z3 feels much more flat, more balanced, and slightly more spacious compared to the EVO. However, you lose the visceral bass response. If you are an audiophile who does not need ANC or good quality mic and is also fond of the flat signature, you can go for the Z3. If you like visceral bass, ANC technology, and looking for a fun yet detailed signature, go for the EVO.

vs. Noble Audio FoKus Pro ($349 USD)

The FoKus Pro is truly an incredible TWS IEM. In addition to being the best TWS earphone I’ve heard in terms of sound quality, it is a solid candidate to be the industry leader in material quality, craftsmanship, and design. Compared to the EVO, the FoKus Pro sounds cleaner, more spacious, more resolving, and technically superior. It holds the crown when it comes to pure sound quality, however, it is not as feature-packed as the EVO. The EVO has better microphone quality and offers a complete ANC experience.

The EVO’s app supports OTA updates and more control over the IEM compared to the FoKus Pro. The FoKus Pro’s signature is slightly more balanced with much better detail retrieval. Do note that the FoKus Pro costs two times more with fewer features for you to fiddle with. If you are only looking for the absolute best wireless sound quality, the FoKus Pro is an easy pick.

Last Words

The EVO is a feature-packed TWS with an engaging and fun sound signature. The EVO has earned our HFN Recommendation award for several reasons. First of all, it offers a solid ANC experience with useful modes and it comes equipped with great quality microphones and a well-designed mic layout. Secondly, it supports the LDAC codec and offers a stable signal without any hiccups. The EVO has a great build quality and the compact form and factor of the case mean that it is easily pocketable. 

Overall, 1More’s new flagship ticks my boxes and offers a complete TWS experience altogether. 

The 1More EVO ANC TWS is now featured on our Recommended Buy list where it’s in good company.

Page 1: 1More, EVO TWS, Packaging & Accessories, Design & Fit

Page 2: Connection Stability, Battery Life, Hybrid ANC with QuietMax Technology, Call Quality, App Support & Features

Page 3: Sound Signature, Low, Mid, High, Technical Capability, Comparisons, Conclusion