Sony WH-CH520

Mostly agreement on 'balanced for the money': the bulk of reviewers hear an even, mildly warm, easy-going consumer tuning that is less bass-heavy than Sony's over-ears, and many say the app's EQ improves it further. A minority — Fnac's lab, Frandroid before EQ, and some owners — find it bass-tilted, muffled or hard in the upper mids. How the parts land is where the camps form — see bass and treble.

“There’s no shortage of animation to their sound, though, and their overall tonality is convincingly neutral.”

What Hi-Fi?

“Out of the box they have kind of the "signature" Sony sound, which is going to be boosted low end, scooped mids, and smooth highs with a little sparkle on top.”

Reddit r/headphones (u/JarickL)

“le casque est bien trop porté sur les basses et néglige par trop le reste du spectre audio”

Fnac Labo (Jean-Charles Frelier) — "the headphone leans far too much on the bass and neglects the rest of the spectrum"

Sources split three ways: most reviewers hear a solid, controlled low end that is present without swamping the mids; a smaller group hears it as boomy, muddy or over-emphasised; and a third finds it too light, lacking impact and sub-bass (several of them reach for the app's Clear Bass slider). Fit matters more than usual — the bass depends heavily on how the on-ear pads seal.

Mostly positive with dissent: most reviewers find the midrange forward, clear and intelligible — vocals and podcasts come through well — though few call it truly detailed. Fnac's lab and SoundGuys measure it as uneven (a lifted low midrange and recessed upper mids), and Les Numériques hears voices that are intelligible but slightly pinched.

“The mids are full and forward, letting vocals and instruments shine”

TechGearLab (Genaveve Bradshaw)

“The midrange itself lacks ultimate clarity, but by prevailing price standards it’s informative and actually quite eloquent where vocalists are concerned.”

What Hi-Fi?

“Le repli des hauts-médiums impacte aussi le rendu des voix, qui sont certes bien intelligibles, mais qui manquent de naturel et ont un aspect pinçant.”

Les Numériques (Louis Paillat) — "The recessed upper mids also affect voices, which are clearly intelligible but lack naturalness and sound a little pinched"

Sources split three ways: the largest group hears smooth, controlled treble with enough shine and no roll-off; a second group hears it as dark, dull or masked unless EQ'd; and a third, led by Les Numériques, hears it as harsh, sibilant and imprecise. The measurements explain why both 'dark' and 'harsh' are possible — a deep trough around 4–7 kHz sits next to a peak near 8–10 kHz.

Mostly negative: as expected from a small on-ear, most sources describe a narrow, frontal, somewhat congested stage with little depth. Frandroid is the clear dissent, finding it wide with well-ordered layers, and What Hi-Fi? hears a small but definite space around voices.

“the soundstage is distant; voices sit among the instruments rather than on top, which adds to that congested feel”

Trusted Reviews (Kob Monney)

“Due to the on-ear design, there isn’t much soundstage as everything is pushed forward and fairly flat.”

RecordingNOW (ODi Productions)

“La scène sonore est d’une belle largeur et la profondeur dans l’axe central suffisante pour que les plans sonores semblent bien agencés.”

Frandroid (Tristan Jacquel) — "The soundstage is nicely wide, with enough central depth for the layers to feel well arranged"

Thinly covered but mostly adequate: TechGearLab, Frandroid and kopfhoerer.de find instruments easy enough to place, while GYMCADDY hears limited separation, with instruments getting lost behind bass and vocals.

“The 520s provide adequate space to locate instruments, differentiate textures”

TechGearLab (Genaveve Bradshaw)

“they don’t have the best instrument separation cause they can sound a little narrow, and the instrumentals can get lost a little bit… so these headphones are mostly bass and vocals.”

GYMCADDY (YouTube)

Sources split: one camp finds it surprisingly detailed for the price — 'closer than it should be' to far pricier sets, in one owner's words — while the other finds it blurry, short on definition and clearly beaten by similarly priced rivals such as the SoundMagic P23BT.

Sources split almost evenly among the four that address it: Trusted Reviews and Frandroid hear decent energy and good dynamic contrast, while TechRadar and What Hi-Fi? find the sound constrained and a little inhibited — the very area What Hi-Fi? says the WH-CH530 successor improves.

Sources split: a majority — and most owners on Amazon — find it light and comfortable for an on-ear, good for an hour or two; a large minority say the on-ear pressure and pleather heat make it sore within 15–60 minutes, with glasses wearers and larger heads complaining most. Everyone agrees on the 147-gram weight; how firm the clamp feels, and whether it falls off during exercise, varies by head.

Sources split: many reviewers find the all-plastic frame sturdier than its price suggests, and Stiftung Warentest rated its durability 'very good', while others call it cheap, hollow-sounding and bendy, and owners report a steady run of snapped hinges and swivels, failed power buttons and one-side dropouts after months to two years. The pads detach and can be replaced.

Agreement that it isolates poorly for commuting: with on-ear pads and no ANC, it cuts high-pitched noise reasonably but leaves engine rumble, traffic and voices largely audible. Frandroid and Fnac's lab are kinder, calling passive isolation decent for an on-ear, and Fnac notes it leaks little to people nearby.

“They're decently comfortable but can't passively isolate you from much background noise due to their on-ear design and lack of active noise cancellation (ANC).”

RTINGS

“Pour autant, l’isolation passive du casque est plutôt bonne et atténue convenablement certains bruits parasites.”

Frandroid (Tristan Jacquel) — "Even so, the passive isolation is fairly good and properly attenuates some unwanted noise"

“i was baffled when i found out i was hearing everything in the car more than the music itself”

Reddit r/SonyHeadphones (u/Diligent_Assistance1)

Broad agreement that it is very good value at its usual $33–45 sale price — for most reviewers the best-sounding, best-featured on-ear at that money — with two caveats: it looks much less compelling at its $59–70 list, and TechGearLab argues much of the price is the Sony name. Its successor, the WH-CH530, sounds better for roughly the CH520's list price.

“The Sony WH-CH520 are simply superb value.”

TechRadar (Matt Bolton)

“Personally, I think it makes for a much better value closer to $45 and below, as opposed to that full $70 retail price.”

RecordingNOW (ODi Productions)

“So much is lacking that it makes us feel like the price is mainly for the Sony name, rather than a product worth the price.”

TechGearLab (Genaveve Bradshaw)