Find the best product and price, effortlessly.
Discover deals on the best products
JVC Flats HAS160 vs Audio-Technica ATH-AR3 (2016)
Audio-Technica SonicFuel ATH-AR3BT (2016)
The JVC Flats HAS160 is a great On-Ear Headphone for its $18 asking price.
The Audio-Technica SonicFuel ATH-AR3BT (2016), however, while a reasonable product for $103, doesn't stack up against its competitors quite as well. If you're considering On-Ear Headphones in the $110 range, you might want to check out some better options.
The JVC Flats HAS160 was loved by reviewers at CNET, a trustworthy source that performs objective hands-on testing. It did great in their "Best cheap earbuds and headphones" roundup - in fact, they named it their "Best cheap wired on-ear". That, by itself, points toward it being a noteworthy On-Ear Headphone.
Taking a look at the Audio-Technica SonicFuel ATH-AR3BT (2016), it got featured in roundups from two reliable sources that conduct their own testing - TrustedReviews and Tech Advisor - but it fell short of earning a top spot in either.
We couldn't find any sources that tested both of these On-Ear Headphones, so we only analyzed how they performed in reviews from different sites.
We first examined which sources rated each of these best and found that the JVC Flats HAS160 got its highest, 8, rating from CNET, while the Audio-Technica SonicFuel ATH-AR3BT (2016) earned its best, 9, score from TrustedReviews.
Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other On-Ear Headphones on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by On-Ear Headphones being 7.4 out of 10, whereas the JVC Flats HAS160 and Audio-Technica SonicFuel ATH-AR3BT (2016) managed averages of 8.0 and 9.0 points, respectively.
Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct JVC Flats HAS160 vs. Audio-Technica SonicFuel ATH-AR3BT (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.