Tanchjim Bunny. Re-review. Explained simply.

Product reviewed

Tanchjim Bunny IEM (3.5 version — not the DSP version).

Key points / features mentioned

Tuning

• Described as a “bright slanted” presentation overall.
• Very sibilant.

Vocal behavior

• Female vocals: B grade
  • Generally nice and full
  • Sometimes slightly recessed when the music covers them
  • A specific complaint: female vocals can sound like they were captured with a lower-quality microphone—less studio-quality and more like a cheaper mic.
• Male vocals: C grade
  • Thin
  • Brighter
  • Lacking “heft/manliness” (described as puny sounding)

Bass

• Bass grade: C
• Mid-bass
  • Initially sounded “pretty good” with a bump
  • But quality drops
• Sub-bass
  • Viewed as weak/anemic
  • Sometimes described as below correct to the point of being unacceptable

Harshness / volume interaction

• Harsh instruments are a major issue.
• Reviewer had to drop the volume twice by a hefty amount.
• Doing so causes a trade-off:
  • Vocals suffer, or
  • Harsh instruments become unbearable
• Described as a “tug-of-war” effect.

Separation

• Explicitly skipped
• Reason: reviewer’s rule is that if an IEM fails on instrument harshness, separation doesn’t matter for their scoring.

Soundstage

• Described as average to bad
• Not immersive—more like a poorly recorded version of a place (e.g., forest/street).
• Characterized as fake spatial realism.

Sibilance by volume

• Pretty bad overall.
• At low to low/medium volume: not too bad.
• When cranked: becomes extremely unpleasant (described as “very high” / “not a fun time”).

Ear tips used (important for this re-review)

• Reviewer did not have stock tips, so the re-review uses KBear 7 ear tips.
• Justification: they are the closest to stock (as claimed).
• Reviewer notes that different ear tips could change bass, soundstage, vocals, and related scoring—so the results are tied to this tip choice.

Pros (as stated)

• Female vocals sound good overall (B): full/pleasant tonality most of the time.
• Mid-bass presence: initially “bumping,” suggesting some impact early on.

Cons (as stated)

• Weak sub-bass (sub-bass described as unacceptable/anemic).
• Overall brightness + strong sibilance, especially at higher volume.
• Male vocals thin/bright and lacking heft.
• Harsh instruments create a bad listening trade-off (volume must be reduced heavily, hurting vocals).
• Soundstage feels fake/recorded, not immersive.
• Separation not evaluated due to harshness failure driving the reviewer’s scoring rules.

Ratings / grades given (explicit)

• Bass: C
• Female vocals: B
• Male vocals: C
• (Other categories like separation were skipped; soundstage was described negatively without a grade.)

Comparisons made

• Female vocals microphone analogy

  • Compared to expensive studio mics (e.g., Neumann U87/U47/TLM 103) vs cheaper mics (e.g., AT2020).
  • Claim: Bunny makes singing resemble a cheaper mic capture.

• Soundstage realism comparison

  • Contrasted with other IEMs that feel immersive (“holy fuck … you’re right there”).
  • Bunny is described as sounding like a bad recording rather than a believable space.

Verdict / recommendation

Not recommended for listeners sensitive to brightness/sibilance or who want strong sub-bass and realistic soundstage.

It has:

• Decent female vocal quality (B)
• Some mid-bass impact

…but the combination of:

• Weak sub-bass (C)
• Harsh/high sibilance when loud
• Thin male vocals (C)
• Poor/impostor soundstage

…makes it hard to enjoy overall—especially at higher volumes.

Speakers / perspectives

• Single primary speaker/reviewer covering tuning, grading, ear-tip methodology, and the harshness/soundstage complaints.
• No distinct additional speakers were mentioned.