CCA C10 vs AKG N40 (2016)

The CCA C10 makes for a mediocre In-Ear Monitor and should be avoided by the majority of people.

In the case of the AKG N40 (2016), however, we were unable to find enough data to come to any meaningful conclusions.

We strongly suggest that you take a look at some alternatives to these two products.

If you're still interested in reading more about the CCA C10, however, here's a quick summary of what we know about it:

The reviewers at Head-fi have featured the CCA C10 in their CCA C10 review roundup. However, it fell short of making it to the top of their list.

As for the AKG N40 (2016) analysis - it impressed reviewers at Gear Patrol, a source that's known for its objective testing and well-thought-out methodology - it performed great in its "5 Great In-Ear Headphones for Hi-Fi Sound" roundup and earned the "Ranked 3 out of 5" title.

When we thoroughly analyzed their review scores, we learned that all of the sources that tested both In-Ear Monitors, including Head-fi, preferred the CCA C10 over the AKG N40 (2016).

We also took a look at which sources they managed to impress the most. The CCA C10 was liked best by Head-fi, which gave it a score of 9.1, while the AKG N40 (2016) got its highest, 10, score from What Hi-Fi?.

Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other In-Ear Monitors on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by In-Ear Monitors being 7.7 out of 10, whereas the CCA C10 and AKG N40 (2016) managed averages of 9.1 and 9.0 points, respectively.

Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct CCA C10 vs. AKG N40 (2016) comparison might not be entirely fair - some sources don't take value for money into account when assigning their scores and therefore have a tendency to rate more premium products better.