If you want a feature-rich pick for a kid who swims or trains across different settings, choose RTAPL Bone Conduction; if you need a simpler, sweat-resistant open-ear option for running and everyday workouts, choose Pupabiflor Bone Conduction Headphones（Graphite. RTAPL’s standout advantage is its stated IP68 rating and built-in music storage, while Pupabiflor keeps the pitch focused on an open-ear fit, a flexible titanium frame, and straightforward Bluetooth listening. Neither sheet gives enough detail to compare sound quality directly, so the practical choice comes down to water exposure, playback flexibility, and fit priorities.
If you want a feature-rich pick for a kid who swims or trains across different settings, choose RTAPL Bone Conduction; if you need a simpler, sweat-resistant open-ear option for running and everyday workouts, choose Pupabiflor Bone Conduction Headphones（Graphite. RTAPL’s stated IP68 rating and built-in music storage make it the more versatile option on paper. Pupabiflor keeps the focus on an open-ear fit, a flexible titanium frame, and everyday Bluetooth listening.
• RTAPL’s biggest strength: IP68 waterproofing, plus Bluetooth and 32GB onboard music storage. Trade-off: its feature set is more involved than a basic Bluetooth-only pair.
• Pupabiflor’s biggest strength: an open-ear design with a flexible titanium frame for workouts and outdoor awareness. Trade-off: its IPX5 protection is for sweat and moisture, not the deeper-water use RTAPL specifies.
• RTAPL suits: a buyer who wants swimming and land-workout flexibility, stored music, and several listening modes.
• Pupabiflor suits: someone who mainly runs, cycles, or exercises on land and values an open-ear design with simple wireless use.
• Both use bone conduction and leave the ears open, so they can appeal to people who want to hear some surrounding sound while listening. The stated features draw a clear line elsewhere: RTAPL lists swimming-oriented waterproofing, 32GB memory, EQ modes, and up to 15 hours of playback. Pupabiflor lists IPX5 sweat and moisture protection, a titanium frame, touch control, and up to 12 hours.
• Those differences matter for family use, too. A child’s routine might include a pool session one day and a walk or gym activity the next. RTAPL’s extra playback mode and water-protection claims give it broader stated use cases. Pupabiflor is less complicated on paper, but its protection level is aimed at exercise sweat rather than underwater listening.
How We Research
We compare products from their published specs and features; the verdicts below are our independent editorial opinions.
RTAPL is the more feature-packed choice. It combines an open-ear bone-conduction design with Bluetooth 6.0 and a stated 32GB of built-in storage. That storage is useful when a phone is inconvenient, such as during swimming or an activity where carrying another device is awkward. The sheet describes Bluetooth and MP3 as dual modes, so buyers can consider it for both connected listening and stored audio.
Its IP68 rating is the key distinction for water use. RTAPL describes use up to 10 meters underwater, which makes it the more relevant option for swimming among these two products. For dry-land sessions, the four EQ settings—Bass, Balanced, Vocal, and Swimming—offer ways to tailor the listening profile. The stated battery life is up to 15 hours, with a 220mAh battery, and the listed charge time is one hour. Those figures point to less frequent charging than Pupabiflor’s stated 12-hour life, though actual playback will depend on use.
The listed weight is 26g, and the design uses a liquid-silicone neckband and ear hooks. That combination is intended to keep the headphones in place without pressing on the ears. It may be worth considering for a kid who dislikes earbuds or needs an option that leaves the ear canal open. At the same time, the product information describes the age range as adult, so a buyer should check fit suitability rather than assume the frame is sized for children.
Who should skip it: Skip RTAPL if the intended use is only ordinary land workouts and you do not need its onboard storage, EQ modes, or swimming-oriented protection.
Pupabiflor is a simpler fit for someone who wants open-ear listening during runs, cycling, or gym sessions. Its bone-conduction design leaves the ears uncovered, which can help the wearer remain aware of nearby sounds while exercising outdoors. The sheet also describes a flexible titanium frame and a secure fit intended for longer wear and movement.
Its Bluetooth 6.0 connection is the main listed wireless option. A built-in microphone is described for calls, and controls use touch input. These details make it a plausible everyday headset for someone who wants to move between workouts and calls without switching to a different style of headphones. There is no stated onboard storage, however, so the described use centers on Bluetooth rather than independent playback from the headphones.
The stated IPX5 protection is for sweat and moisture during exercise. That supports a land-workout role, but it does not match RTAPL’s stated underwater rating. Pupabiflor’s battery life is listed as up to 12 hours, which may be enough for regular workouts and daily listening, though it is shorter than RTAPL’s stated maximum. Its color is listed as Graphite Black, and its enclosure material is titanium.
Who should skip it: Skip Pupabiflor if you need headphones for swimming or want built-in music storage for listening without a Bluetooth-connected device.
Side-by-Side: Which Should You Choose?
• Best for stored music → RTAPL Bone Conduction. It lists 32GB of memory and Bluetooth/MP3 modes. Pupabiflor’s sheet describes Bluetooth listening, not onboard storage.
• Best for longer stated playback → RTAPL Bone Conduction. Its listed maximum is 15 hours, compared with Pupabiflor’s 12 hours.
• Best for a straightforward land-workout routine → Pupabiflor Bone Conduction Headphones（Graphite. Its feature description focuses on running, cycling, gym sessions, and open-ear awareness.
• Best for adjustable listening profiles → RTAPL Bone Conduction. It lists four EQ modes, including one labeled Swimming.
• Best for a titanium-frame design → Pupabiflor Bone Conduction Headphones（Graphite. Its product information identifies titanium as the enclosure material and describes a flexible titanium frame.
• Best for calls as an explicitly listed feature → Pupabiflor Bone Conduction Headphones（Graphite. Its sheet specifies a built-in microphone for calls.
• Best for a lighter listed body weight → RTAPL Bone Conduction. It gives a weight of 26g; Pupabiflor’s sheet does not provide a weight figure.
Start with the setting, not the feature count. If swimming is part of the plan, RTAPL is the more relevant choice based on its stated IP68 rating and underwater-use description. Pupabiflor’s IPX5 claim covers sweat and moisture during workouts; the sheet does not describe it as suitable for submersion. For a child, be especially deliberate about matching the headset to the activity and checking the fit, since the listed age-range description for RTAPL is adult and Pupabiflor’s sheet does not specify a child age range.
Next, decide whether the headphones should depend on a phone. RTAPL’s 32GB storage and MP3 mode address situations where a connected device may be inconvenient. Pupabiflor’s listed strengths are its Bluetooth connection and microphone, so it fits a routine where a phone is already part of the setup. If you are comparing options under 150 on ear headphones, these product sheets alone cannot establish whether either model falls within that budget; check the current price on Amazon rather than relying on an assumed price.
Fit and listening expectations also deserve attention. Both are open-ear bone-conduction designs, but neither sheet provides enough comparable information to declare one’s sound quality superior. RTAPL lists a custom transducer and four EQ modes, while Pupabiflor describes HD sound without giving matching technical detail. People searching for wireless earbuds for glasses wearers may find an open-ear format worth considering, but the sheets do not say how either headset interacts with glasses, so frame comfort should not be assumed.
For gifting, think about the recipient’s routine rather than the label. A wireless headset fathers day gift for someone who runs or works out on land may suit Pupabiflor’s focused design. Someone who swims or wants onboard music may have a stronger reason to choose RTAPL. For either product, check the current price on Amazon if that affects your decision; the features described here do not establish which one is the better value.
My Verdict
FAQ
RTAPL is the more suitable choice based on the specifications provided: its sheet lists IP68 protection and underwater use up to 10 meters. Pupabiflor lists IPX5 protection for sweat and moisture, not underwater listening.
RTAPL lists 32GB of built-in storage and an MP3 mode alongside Bluetooth. Pupabiflor’s sheet describes Bluetooth listening but does not list built-in music storage.
RTAPL lists up to 15 hours of continuous playback, while Pupabiflor lists up to 12 hours. These are stated maximums, not a guarantee of identical playback time in every situation.
Their open-ear designs may appeal to a child who does not want earbuds, but the product sheets do not establish that either one is sized specifically for children. RTAPL’s age-range description is adult, so check fit suitability before choosing for a child.
• best lightweight wireless earbuds for construction work
• Califone Headset ON-Ear W/GOOSENECK vs Bulktech 10: On the
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
When you buy through links on this page, we may earn a commission from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon or its affiliates. This site is an independent third-party review and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Amazon or the product brands mentioned.