[size=medium]Review: q-JAYS by JAYS[/size]
[size=small]Gallery[/size]
[size=small]Introduction/Specifications[/size]
Driver: Dual Micro Armatures
Sensitivity: 95 dB SPL @ 1 kHz
Impedance: 39 Ohm @ 1 kHz
Frequency Response: 20Hz - 20 000 Hz
Isolation: JAYS Sound Isolating System
Cord lype: PVC coated with Kevlar filling
Cord length: 60 cm (24 in)
Cord diameter: 2/1.5 mm (0,079/0,059 in)
Weight: 8 grams (0.46 oz)
Plug: Straight, Gold-Plated Stereo Mini-Plug 3.5 mm (1/8 in)
Only a week ago Peter from JAYS sent me the new q-JAYS, a dual-driver for only 179$ - fresh and sealed, perfectly and simply boxed. Something reminded me of unwrapping an Apple product: I just had to break the seal on the upper side of the box, which is an invention you may find on almost every cereals' packaging, and then slide out the main plastic part – only 4 welding spots guarantee the monitors verginity instead of Shure's/Westone's/Ultimate Ears's 'full-plastic-jacket'. After cracking two of these spots you can remove the equipment and the monitors from it's enclosure. But that is maybe the hardest part because there's lots of stuff to put out of it; so take your time – you might need some. ...and, before I forget, the q-JAYS's pack even smells like it's equivalent by Apple.
[size=small]Equipment/Package[/size]
q-JAYS Dual Armature Earphones
I-shaped extension cord, 90 cm (~35 inch)
L-shaped extension cord, 90 cm (~35 inch)
7 Pair of Silicon Rubber Sleeves (L, 2 x M, 2 x S, XS, XXS)
4 Pair of Canal Filters
Airline Stereo Adapter
Stereo Splitter
Leather Carrying Case
User Guide (English, Swedish, French, Italian, German, Spanish, Japanese, Korean and Chinese)
Let's get started with all this nice equipment: The first things I really like about the selection of additional stuff are the two extension cords, of which you get one with an L-plug and another one with an I-plug to make sure it will fit to your audioplayer or maybe iPhone – yes, from what I've heard the q-JAYS's extension cable works with it pretty well. But as you know there's always a verso: 90cm extension + 60cm q-JAYS-part = 150cm. That's pretty much as long as Shure's stage versions of their E-Series and not very handy when walking down the street with a cord hanging down till the level of your knees. (Only to remove ambiguity: I'm about 1,83m tall and not a Lilliputian!) Not only cables are annoying when using the q-JAYS daily, but also the missing cleaning wipe and the not really 'sturdy' carrying case, although it isn't too bad if you just want to put the monitor's part of the q-JAYS in for transport. As some kind of a correction you get a stereo splitter and an airline adapter, which has to be seen as an outstanding special because there's no other brand giving you those two adapters as a part of the standard-equipment. As already mentioned in the list above, the q-JAYS come with 4 pairs of replacement filters that should last for at least 4-5 months. In addition to that you also get five different sized silicon sleeves, which makes it even more possible that the Q's will fit nearly all audiophile customers. (short annotation: For me the Q's fittet well right after unwrapping – that's something I've never experienced before with any earphone!) At the moment I'm only missing the option for foamies, but Peter from Jays already told interested head-fi-members that they will be included in the 2008-packages and will be available soon as an additional accessory. Until these will be in stores the only chance to use the Q's with foamies is to widen the plastic-canals of the olive/black ones by Shure, which is of course a quite complicated procedure. Apropos: You can use the q-JAYS with (cut down) triple flanges from Shure/Etymotic. Because of their flexibility they handle the Q's wider tube.
[size=small]Comfort/Design/Durability[/size]
After all that talk about equipment I'll go on with something more interesting. The main questions might be: 'How do you like the Q's design? Do you think they survive everyday life on the streets?' ...or: 'Do they provide any microphonics? ...and are they comfortable?' In the following paragraphs I'll answer all of these questions, so keep on reading!
First of all I really love the q-JAYS's design. It's not very intrusive and shiny, but the use of the very conservative colors black and white makes them look a lot more valuable and so the price of 179$ seems to be justified analyzing the optics. Using 'freaky' colors like it's done with the d-Jays wouldn't perform quite as good. The Q's are a very small and sleek canalphone, unlike the competitors by Ultimate Ears. Thanks to their small and compact shape they are even hard to see in your ears when inserted correctly. Also their weight of only 8g is a blessing – especially when using Shure's E4 as the alternative IEM, which weigh heavy with their nearly 30g.
Secondly I'm sure they will survive everyday life when carefully handled like you should do with everything you own. The monitors' cable connectors are fixated with a small 'rubber-damping-device' to absolve some of the energy that might occur when pulling on the cables by accident. Another really cool thing is using Kevlar filling up the room between the PVC-cable-enclosure and the conducting wires, instead of just making the wires bigger and bigger in diameter (like Shure does) – other manufactures found themselves twisting and turning the cables into each other, which isn't a bad idea either, because this would also reduce microphonics.
And there we are: thirdly. Microphonics aren't really bad with the q-JAYS, but there is still some improvement needed. Although JAYS is a very innovative company, they should think about 'doing the twist' like e.g. Westone and they should also offer a shorter extension cord, which would lead to less contact with the thigh and consequently less cable-bouncing. Until these ideas might be converted into real product-extensions we'll all end up wearing the Q's over the ear like we do it with all other IEM's, too (...but of course this doesn't protect our ears from skimpier microphonics).
Forthly I have to admit the Q's are the most comfortable canalphones I've ever had. As annotated in the last paragraph you can use them over-the-ear-style or let them hang down like every other standard-earbud. It's your choice – fitting is outstanding anyway.
[size=small]Soundcheck[/size]
Before you think letting you wait is a lot of fun for me, let us start talking about how the q-JAYS sound. The two most important things you have to know about the Q's are: 1. They're very detailed all over the spectrum – full frequency-range from 20Hz to 20kHz is the truth. And 2. These are neutral balanced canalphones with a maybe slightly laid back midrange, which makes vocals and acoustic guitars sound a bit recessed when switching from a midlevel-accented IEM. The q-JAYS provide a very emphasized treble, so that they might sound kind of harsh when listening to them for the first time. While my ears had to manage this extraordinary treble-energy after a listening-session with my E4, the q-JAYS seemed to be unnatural, but that's just because of the rolled-off treble-version of the E4. If you might experience the same effect just stick with the Q's for some hours; next time this won't happen again and you'll love the detail-revealing, gently analytical treble. Now I want to talk about the counter-part: bass. The q-JAYS aren't bass-faking canalphones! What you hear is what you really get and that perfect response from lower frequencies around 30-50Hz. The deeper bass is 'boosted' remarkably, so that the punchy mid-bass is just used where it's really needed to display the information in an audio-file and not as a replacement for the lower bass. This is extremly helpful listening to electronic music where you have to feel the bass to make it alive.
WARNING: DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT USING THE Q-JAYS WITH BADLY ENCODED AUDIO-FILES! THIS IS DANGEROUS!
That's not just a joke, but a serious problem if only having bad audio-files – even more serious than with any other canalphone in this price range. My iPod played a 128kbit/s AAC-file in VBR-mode (variable bit rate) and it was just horrible. The Q's reveal ALL artifacts! So please use a minimum of 192kbit/s AAC VBR, 192kbit/s OGG or 256 kbit/s MP3 VBR. I personally use 256kbit/s AAC VBR, which seems to work with the q-JAYS smoothly.
Here's the last topic of this review referring to the subject 'sound': It's of course 'soundstage'.
One thing I have to annotate is that the soundstage of canalphones can't be compared to headphones. Aware of that I'll try to rate the Q's comparing them to other canalphones I've already listened to. Since I know the whole Shure setup very well, I'll start here. Firstly I think that q-JAYS's soundstage is amazing for a 179$ product using balanced armatures. Although vocals are placed right in the middle of your head instead of being slightly in front of you, as I experienced with my E4, I'm very happy with the Q's because all instruments are placed outside the head either on the right or left side stretching the stage in it's two-dimensional size. Too bad they don't provide a better three-dimensional soundstage, which results in an one-layer reproduction of sound. However, live recordings do still sound better with the q-JAYS than with my E4, which might be too warm to divide up the stage clearly.
Special: I tried to compose a realistic frequency-response-chart just by listening to the Q's and comparing them to my Shure E4. Between 16 and 20kHz might be some smaller bumps up to -3dB, but it's just some kind of a prototype-chart. For a more detailed measurement wait for the guys from Headroom – I'm sure they'll go for it soon.
[size=small]Conclusion[/size]
Overall the q-JAYS are a pair of nicely balanced, restrainedly stylish and extraordinary comfortable canalphones, which are worth its price of 179$ in any aspect – whether it's about optics, haptics or just pure audio-quality (only soundstage could be way better to cover all three demensions). Not only that these are quite cheap for a dual-driver, they can also cope with higher priced competitors. The only thing I have to citisize are the breakdowns at the choice of included equipment and the minor number of additional accessories.
[size=small]Gallery[/size]
[size=small]Introduction/Specifications[/size]
Driver: Dual Micro Armatures
Sensitivity: 95 dB SPL @ 1 kHz
Impedance: 39 Ohm @ 1 kHz
Frequency Response: 20Hz - 20 000 Hz
Isolation: JAYS Sound Isolating System
Cord lype: PVC coated with Kevlar filling
Cord length: 60 cm (24 in)
Cord diameter: 2/1.5 mm (0,079/0,059 in)
Weight: 8 grams (0.46 oz)
Plug: Straight, Gold-Plated Stereo Mini-Plug 3.5 mm (1/8 in)
Only a week ago Peter from JAYS sent me the new q-JAYS, a dual-driver for only 179$ - fresh and sealed, perfectly and simply boxed. Something reminded me of unwrapping an Apple product: I just had to break the seal on the upper side of the box, which is an invention you may find on almost every cereals' packaging, and then slide out the main plastic part – only 4 welding spots guarantee the monitors verginity instead of Shure's/Westone's/Ultimate Ears's 'full-plastic-jacket'. After cracking two of these spots you can remove the equipment and the monitors from it's enclosure. But that is maybe the hardest part because there's lots of stuff to put out of it; so take your time – you might need some. ...and, before I forget, the q-JAYS's pack even smells like it's equivalent by Apple.
[size=small]Equipment/Package[/size]
q-JAYS Dual Armature Earphones
I-shaped extension cord, 90 cm (~35 inch)
L-shaped extension cord, 90 cm (~35 inch)
7 Pair of Silicon Rubber Sleeves (L, 2 x M, 2 x S, XS, XXS)
4 Pair of Canal Filters
Airline Stereo Adapter
Stereo Splitter
Leather Carrying Case
User Guide (English, Swedish, French, Italian, German, Spanish, Japanese, Korean and Chinese)
Let's get started with all this nice equipment: The first things I really like about the selection of additional stuff are the two extension cords, of which you get one with an L-plug and another one with an I-plug to make sure it will fit to your audioplayer or maybe iPhone – yes, from what I've heard the q-JAYS's extension cable works with it pretty well. But as you know there's always a verso: 90cm extension + 60cm q-JAYS-part = 150cm. That's pretty much as long as Shure's stage versions of their E-Series and not very handy when walking down the street with a cord hanging down till the level of your knees. (Only to remove ambiguity: I'm about 1,83m tall and not a Lilliputian!) Not only cables are annoying when using the q-JAYS daily, but also the missing cleaning wipe and the not really 'sturdy' carrying case, although it isn't too bad if you just want to put the monitor's part of the q-JAYS in for transport. As some kind of a correction you get a stereo splitter and an airline adapter, which has to be seen as an outstanding special because there's no other brand giving you those two adapters as a part of the standard-equipment. As already mentioned in the list above, the q-JAYS come with 4 pairs of replacement filters that should last for at least 4-5 months. In addition to that you also get five different sized silicon sleeves, which makes it even more possible that the Q's will fit nearly all audiophile customers. (short annotation: For me the Q's fittet well right after unwrapping – that's something I've never experienced before with any earphone!) At the moment I'm only missing the option for foamies, but Peter from Jays already told interested head-fi-members that they will be included in the 2008-packages and will be available soon as an additional accessory. Until these will be in stores the only chance to use the Q's with foamies is to widen the plastic-canals of the olive/black ones by Shure, which is of course a quite complicated procedure. Apropos: You can use the q-JAYS with (cut down) triple flanges from Shure/Etymotic. Because of their flexibility they handle the Q's wider tube.
[size=small]Comfort/Design/Durability[/size]
After all that talk about equipment I'll go on with something more interesting. The main questions might be: 'How do you like the Q's design? Do you think they survive everyday life on the streets?' ...or: 'Do they provide any microphonics? ...and are they comfortable?' In the following paragraphs I'll answer all of these questions, so keep on reading!
First of all I really love the q-JAYS's design. It's not very intrusive and shiny, but the use of the very conservative colors black and white makes them look a lot more valuable and so the price of 179$ seems to be justified analyzing the optics. Using 'freaky' colors like it's done with the d-Jays wouldn't perform quite as good. The Q's are a very small and sleek canalphone, unlike the competitors by Ultimate Ears. Thanks to their small and compact shape they are even hard to see in your ears when inserted correctly. Also their weight of only 8g is a blessing – especially when using Shure's E4 as the alternative IEM, which weigh heavy with their nearly 30g.
Secondly I'm sure they will survive everyday life when carefully handled like you should do with everything you own. The monitors' cable connectors are fixated with a small 'rubber-damping-device' to absolve some of the energy that might occur when pulling on the cables by accident. Another really cool thing is using Kevlar filling up the room between the PVC-cable-enclosure and the conducting wires, instead of just making the wires bigger and bigger in diameter (like Shure does) – other manufactures found themselves twisting and turning the cables into each other, which isn't a bad idea either, because this would also reduce microphonics.
And there we are: thirdly. Microphonics aren't really bad with the q-JAYS, but there is still some improvement needed. Although JAYS is a very innovative company, they should think about 'doing the twist' like e.g. Westone and they should also offer a shorter extension cord, which would lead to less contact with the thigh and consequently less cable-bouncing. Until these ideas might be converted into real product-extensions we'll all end up wearing the Q's over the ear like we do it with all other IEM's, too (...but of course this doesn't protect our ears from skimpier microphonics).
Forthly I have to admit the Q's are the most comfortable canalphones I've ever had. As annotated in the last paragraph you can use them over-the-ear-style or let them hang down like every other standard-earbud. It's your choice – fitting is outstanding anyway.
[size=small]Soundcheck[/size]
Before you think letting you wait is a lot of fun for me, let us start talking about how the q-JAYS sound. The two most important things you have to know about the Q's are: 1. They're very detailed all over the spectrum – full frequency-range from 20Hz to 20kHz is the truth. And 2. These are neutral balanced canalphones with a maybe slightly laid back midrange, which makes vocals and acoustic guitars sound a bit recessed when switching from a midlevel-accented IEM. The q-JAYS provide a very emphasized treble, so that they might sound kind of harsh when listening to them for the first time. While my ears had to manage this extraordinary treble-energy after a listening-session with my E4, the q-JAYS seemed to be unnatural, but that's just because of the rolled-off treble-version of the E4. If you might experience the same effect just stick with the Q's for some hours; next time this won't happen again and you'll love the detail-revealing, gently analytical treble. Now I want to talk about the counter-part: bass. The q-JAYS aren't bass-faking canalphones! What you hear is what you really get and that perfect response from lower frequencies around 30-50Hz. The deeper bass is 'boosted' remarkably, so that the punchy mid-bass is just used where it's really needed to display the information in an audio-file and not as a replacement for the lower bass. This is extremly helpful listening to electronic music where you have to feel the bass to make it alive.
WARNING: DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT USING THE Q-JAYS WITH BADLY ENCODED AUDIO-FILES! THIS IS DANGEROUS!
That's not just a joke, but a serious problem if only having bad audio-files – even more serious than with any other canalphone in this price range. My iPod played a 128kbit/s AAC-file in VBR-mode (variable bit rate) and it was just horrible. The Q's reveal ALL artifacts! So please use a minimum of 192kbit/s AAC VBR, 192kbit/s OGG or 256 kbit/s MP3 VBR. I personally use 256kbit/s AAC VBR, which seems to work with the q-JAYS smoothly.
Here's the last topic of this review referring to the subject 'sound': It's of course 'soundstage'.
One thing I have to annotate is that the soundstage of canalphones can't be compared to headphones. Aware of that I'll try to rate the Q's comparing them to other canalphones I've already listened to. Since I know the whole Shure setup very well, I'll start here. Firstly I think that q-JAYS's soundstage is amazing for a 179$ product using balanced armatures. Although vocals are placed right in the middle of your head instead of being slightly in front of you, as I experienced with my E4, I'm very happy with the Q's because all instruments are placed outside the head either on the right or left side stretching the stage in it's two-dimensional size. Too bad they don't provide a better three-dimensional soundstage, which results in an one-layer reproduction of sound. However, live recordings do still sound better with the q-JAYS than with my E4, which might be too warm to divide up the stage clearly.
Special: I tried to compose a realistic frequency-response-chart just by listening to the Q's and comparing them to my Shure E4. Between 16 and 20kHz might be some smaller bumps up to -3dB, but it's just some kind of a prototype-chart. For a more detailed measurement wait for the guys from Headroom – I'm sure they'll go for it soon.
[size=small]Conclusion[/size]
Overall the q-JAYS are a pair of nicely balanced, restrainedly stylish and extraordinary comfortable canalphones, which are worth its price of 179$ in any aspect – whether it's about optics, haptics or just pure audio-quality (only soundstage could be way better to cover all three demensions). Not only that these are quite cheap for a dual-driver, they can also cope with higher priced competitors. The only thing I have to citisize are the breakdowns at the choice of included equipment and the minor number of additional accessories.
Are those Etymotic Bi-flanges that you've put on there?
