Why is Bowie MC2 better than HP-C28BTF?
- Battery life11.5 h vs 3.5 h3.3×
- Hi-res codec (LDAC / aptX HD / LHDC)Yes · HP-C28BTF: No
- Water resistance (IPx)IPx7 vs IPx4+75%
- Highest frequency40,000 Hz vs 20,000 Hz2×
- LDACYes · HP-C28BTF: No
- Bluetooth version6 vs 5.3+13%
- Driver size11 mm vs 6.1 mm+80%
Why is HP-C28BTF better than Bowie MC2?
HP-C28BTF has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Sound | ||
| Fit | Open-ear | In-ear |
| Ear cup design | Open-back | — |
| Driver type | Dynamic | Dynamic |
| Driver size | 11 mm | 6.1 mm |
| Lowest frequency | 20 Hz | 20 Hz |
| Highest frequency | 40,000 Hz | 20,000 Hz |
| Impedance | — | 16 Ω |
| Sensitivity | — | 90 dB |
| Hi-Res Audio | Yes | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery life | 11.5 h | 3.5 h |
| Charging time | — | 1.5 h |
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | Yes | Yes |
| Bluetooth version | 6 | 5.3 |
| Bluetooth codecs | LDAC, AAC, SBC | AAC, SBC |
| Hi-res codec (LDAC / aptX HD / LHDC) | Yes | No |
| aptX | No | No |
| LDAC | Yes | No |
| Multipoint (two devices) | Yes | — |
| USB-C | Yes | Yes |
| Design & build | ||
| Earbud weight (each) | — | 3 g |
| Protection rating | IP67 | IPX4 |
| Water resistance (IPx) | IPx7 | IPx4 |
| Dust protection (IP) | 6 | — |
| Features | ||
| Touch controls | — | Yes |
| Hands-free calls | Yes | Yes |
