Pros: -Detail production is really good for price
-Good resolution
-Wide soundstage
-Good imaging
-Good midrange clarity
-Good bass amount and quality
Cons: -Upper mids can be too much sometimes
Disclaimers
I bought this iem with my own money. This review is completely subjective.
Accessories
Q5 comes with a really good box design, carrying case, eartips, cable and iem itself. Good accessories and presentation for the price.
Build
Q5 fully made out of plastic and comes with a metal nozzle. It has a really good quality cable.
Sound-Tonality and Technicalities
I love this IEM because it has a really good tune and driver quality for 50-60 dollars. Q5 have a pretty decent soundstage depth, imaging and bass presentation with clear highs and midrange. Instruments sounding really textured. And it has enough note weight. The only issue is upper midrange sometimes being too much… But i think this is not a problem for that price range.
Conclusion
Overall, this is a really good iem for the price. But you have cheaper and better options like Simgot Ew200…
Treble can have more natural presentation especially cymbals(hi-hats..no problem with rides)
Male vocals can use more heft
EPZ Q5- Replica of an end?
DISCLAIMER:
This was sent by EPZ themselves.
I actually already made a video review of this unit. But I feel like I didn’t give enough justice. I am writing this review to reiterate my findings with the said product. That being said, my impressions are based on my biases and preferences.
Videos review here:
1st impressions
Final impressions
WHAT’S IN THE BOX?
Well, the box I got is actually bigger compared to other competitors. Not that it matters sound wise, but I do feel that it could have been smaller just for the convenience of shipping it. Anyhow, inside you get a standard inclusion of cables, eartips, cables, and ofcourse the IEMS. Nothing much to say really, other than, the box is well thought out, but could be a bit too big for some.
BUILD and COMFORT
They are built quite nice. I am very familiar with the fit because it has a bean shaped design which is similar to one of my favorite IEM in my collection, the Acoustune RS One. It is worth mentioning that this does have an MMCX pin connector. Personally, I don’t mind because I don’t cable roll that much recently. I also think that the design works better with a rotating mmcx than a stable 2 pin, at least for my ears.
Comfort is good and I think I can wear them for hours on end.
SETUP:
-Shanling M3X using UAPP, Hiby ang stock player
-stock cable
-stick eartips don't work for me so I used aet07s
A contender at $50-$100
I honestly think that the DD they are using is of good quality. When people ask suggestions about which IEMS to buy in this price range, I can only give a few, and this includes the EPZ Q5. I am confident that the fit is good for everyone, and the sound quality they get is pretty decent.
The overall tonality is leaning to a U shaped signature with emphasis in upper mids to lower treble. Bass has enough presence to support male vocals and instruments. Probably not slamming and punchy bass, but just enough to keep you engaged.
The mids are natural but with a tinge of brightness. I think there is a peak around 7-8k, and it can be overbearing in some tracks, especially when female vocals reach a certain high note. However, I do find the vocals to be very mature and pleasing sounding with the right volume.
The quality that I like about this is set is probably its technical ability. It extracts a lot of detail making you think they sound Hi-Res. I mean, they really are technical in a way that, it also gives you enough stage proportion. The upper mid peak might be the biggest contributor to its “resolution” but I don’t think that is the only reason.
EPZ house sound
As mentioned above, it might not be the peaks but a house sound from EPZ. I heard the EPZ K1, and I felt the same way. Although the K1 has a different sound signature, but how the details are presented is similar. It’s like, my ears hear the peak, my mind knows they can be bright, but they are not piercing, or probably just edging it.
The extra energy that EPZ gives in that region is enough for it be remembered. Heck the EPZ Q5 sometimes feels like a hybrid of 1DD+2BA. That is how good it separates instruments and layers things.
The treble isn’t particularly peaky, but I can see that it needs some refinement. It has enough sparkle, or however you may call it haha. But yeah, it has this incisive quality to it. Cymbals sound fine, well actually above average in that regard.
What's there to fault?
I know, I know. The graph says otherwise. But I believe my ears more than what I graph. The measurement does have some accuracy in determining its sound signature. But what I am baffled is the quality of sound it presents. Drums sound more textured, guitars sound screechingly good, if that is even a word lol, and just the overall feel to it sounds spacious and well layered.
Maybe the only CON I can find is the peak at 7-8k from the graph, other than that, I think it is really hard to fault this IEM with the value proposition.
PROS
Good balance in bass and treble
Natural sounding string instruments
Good detail retreival
Good stage proportion especially stage depth
CONS
Upper mids can be shouty
Treble can have more natural presentation especially cymbals(hi-hats..no problem with rides)
Male vocals can use more heft
SCORING
-Please be reminded that my scoring is always based on its price range.
TUNING - 2.5
BASS - 2.5
MIDS - 2.5
TREBLE - 2.5
TECHS - 3
Final SCORE = 13
A rank
-generally better than other sets. Very good for the price but the tonality might not match your preferences
This is inevitable. When I heard the EPZ Q5, the EW200 came to my mind. The tuning is similar in a way that, the drivers used on these sets are of high quality. Clarity might be on par, but I think the Q5 strikes a better balance in bass and treble. Both have upper mid peaks, so in a way, the Q5 mitigates that peak with its bass. On the other hand, the EW200 might suit for people who looks for a more forward treble presentation
Celest Pandamon
This set might be a bit old, relative to how fast Chifi has been releasing IEMS. But I still think that the Pandamon is still relevant. Although tonally, they might not be comparable, I do think that technically, the Pandamon can have more nuance with its presentation. They have different drivers to begin with, but if you were to choose, the Pandamon leans to a more natural and neutral tuning. Pick the EPZ Q5 if you want a more balanced sound
Crinacle Red
The crinalce red presents a Dual DD setup. Does it mean it is better? I might think otherwise. Although tonally, the Red is much smoother and more correct sounding, but at times, I just don’t feel the music. I would probably pick the Q5 if I want a more fun sound.
FINAL THOUGHTS
When the Q5 was released, there were mixed feelings about it, if I remember correctly. There were criticisms about copying a design from another brand, while people who initially heard them, praised the Q5 for its cost performance.
This is ChiFi, and I won’t be surprised when one day, moondrop copies KZ designs. I am not saying it is likely to happen, but I hope you get what I mean.
Other than the design criticisms, I do think EPZ deserves some praise with this budget offering. Having heard of their other models like the G10 and K1, EPZ continues to surprise the market with its price to performance ratio, tuning direction and the quality of sound each model offers.
Is EPZ a copycat? Well in my opinion, they might have made a replica of a possible endgame set for folks who are budget constrained.
Pros: Explicit, clear, evident, clear and transparent sound.
- Very perceptible macro detail.
- Volatile, gaseous and open scene.
- Precise, technical, dry and fast bass, with very little aftertaste.
- Good cable and good zipped case.
Cons: Peak at 5khz quite explicit and energetic, which may become unpleasant over time.
- Midrange uneven, split, with a tendency to brightness.
- Bass slightly coloured.
- Unoriginal design.
Introduction
EPZ is a new brand to me, established in 2019. It's not a new brand to the public though, as it has a good catalogue of IEMS, cables, TWS, even dongles to its credit. And that's not a one day thing. Although it is true that it is now becoming better known to the general public. Manufactured by Shenzhen Jiuzhou Electronics, EPZ has its own shop on AliExpress and it is there where you can corroborate what I have said and see the number of models they already have. It is true that there is not much more information about it and that is why I will focus on the model to review in this article. This is the EPZ Q5, an IEM that uses a dual-cavity dual magnetic circuit and a self-developed carbon nanocomposite ceramic diaphragm. Its ergonomic design is reminiscent of another famous model. It is made of skin-friendly resin and uses MMCX interface. It is priced at around $80, although it is currently available at a slightly lower price. Let's take a closer look at this promising new model called EPZ Q5.
Specifications
Dynamic driver: Dual-cavity nano piezoelectric carbon ceramic diaphragm and dual 10MM magnetic circuit.
The EPZ Q5 comes in a relatively large, matt black box with dimensions 192x132x60mm. All lettering and inscriptions are done in gold ink. On the main side there is a circle with strands forming a kind of spiral. In the centre is the name of the model and surrounding it is a phrase that refers to the fact that the brand started in 2019. At the top left is the brand logo and at the bottom is the brand slogan. On the rear face, at the top are the characteristics of the model. In the centre is the frequency response. It is quite similar to my measurement, but without the peak at 5kHz. At the bottom is the brand name and to the right a sticker indicating the model, i.e. black, MMCX interface and 3.5mm SE plug. It is also available in white, but I don't think a balanced connection is available. The box has no protective outer cardboard and opens like a sealed box. The inside is separated into two parts: the left part is a black foam mould containing the IEMS with the cable in place. On the right side is a small black cardboard box with gold concentric circles, which contains the accessories. The complete contents are as follows:
The IEMS EPZ Q5.
One cable with silver-plated 4-core monocrystalline copper conductor.
Three pairs of black silicon tips.
Three pairs of white silicon tips with black core.
One zippered carrying case.
One black cleaning cloth.
One instruction manual in several languages, including English.
One certificate of guarantee.
The box is relatively large for the contents. The case is classic but with a very nice dark grey faux-leather surface finish. There are two sets of silicone tips, one black, flatter and cylindrical. The other is more conventional and larger. The cable has a quite acceptable quality and I find that the accessories are in accordance with the price of the product.
Construction and Design
The EPZ Q5 is made of skin-friendly resin and uses MMCX interface. I have to say that I am not a big fan of the MMCX connection and clearly prefer the 2Pin connectors. But I have to say that I have no complaints about the MMCX connection during the time I have used them during this review.
The capsule design is oval with a spiral connection interface. It has a concave, gold-plated disc on one side of the outer face. This shape is undoubtedly reminiscent of another famous model. In the centre of the golden disc is a hole with a grille at the bottom. Around it is the same legend as on the lid of the case. The surface of the capsule is smooth and polished. The inner face is inscribed with gold lettering indicating the model name, the channel lettering and the numbering 0307. The base of the mouthpieces is slightly inclined and at the very source there is a small hole in the base. The nozzles themselves are metallic and gold-plated and have two diameters. The lower one is 5mm and the upper-outer one is 5.7mm. Each is protected by a perforated metal plate. Finally, the MMCX interface is gold-plated.
The cable is 1.2m long and consists of a silver-plated 4-core monocrystalline copper conductor. It consists of two strands twisted together, which are shielded with transparent plastic. The connector is gold-plated and is a 3.5mm SE connector. Its sleeve is gold-plated, matching the outer concave disc of the capsules. It is a cylinder with a metal housing depressed in the centre. The splitter is the same, but shorter. The same design is repeated for the sleeves of the MMCX connectors, with the difference that they have a white lettering to indicate the channel. The fitting piece is a ring with two holes joined in the middle, through which the two cables pass. The cable has a Velcro strap with the brand name on it to hold it in place.
As already mentioned, the design of the capsules is not original. The cable is slightly stiff and has a subtle tendency to get a shape. In my opinion, I would have preferred a copper cable for the sound profile of the Q5s. On the other hand, I would have liked to be able to choose a balanced connector. Finally, the model in this review is black, but it is also available with white capsules.
Adjustment and Ergonomics
The capsules are relatively small and their weight is very low. The shape fits very well in my pinna. The inclination of the nozzles is quite appropriate. They have a length that could allow a medium insertion, but their diameter may prevent this. As usual, I have used my large silicone tips filled with foam that I make myself. With them, the insertion is shallow and the insulation is quite good. The diameter of the mouthpieces and their length means that the insertion is deeper and this means that, despite the good ergonomic shape of the capsules, they are not as comfortable for my morphology. On this occasion, I require a less thick foam padding to make the whole thing more comfortable. Even so, I don't get the same comfort as with other IEMS, despite the low weight and the good shape of the capsules. Although, I insist that it may be due to my own ergonomics.
Sound
Profile
The EZP Q5s have a V-profile with a dual tendency towards sub-bass and initial brightness. The peak is between the high-midrange and early treble, with a peak at 5khz that can be abrupt, insistent and persistent, depending on the music being listened to. The midrange feels contrasted, due to the unevenness between the first and second half of this range. The transition between bass and midrange is relatively clean, although the general tendency is towards thinness of sound.
Bass
The lower end feels emancipated although it has some colour. It is not perceived as completely deep or dark, but has more of a sonorous than a sensory behaviour. It loses some realism and naturalness. But it also suffers from a certain physical bulk because it is more compact and faster. On the upside, its execution is precise and concise, the hit is fast and there is hardly any aftertaste. It has a certain roughness, albeit slight on its surface, not too noticeable throughout its curve, but enough to counterbalance the colour by means of that light texture that gives it realism. All this is reinforced by the pure tone test. The lower tone is more audible than perceptible. In this way, the colouring is noticeable from the beginning of the audible tones. Having less physical sensation and more vibrational than sensory behaviour, the end result becomes more obvious. And the translation of this way of proceeding to real music is as I said: more audible, without too much power, volume or punch, yet clean, strict, dry, slightly rough, but with good descriptive capacity.
Overall, I'd say its level of presence is above neutral, but it doesn't quite satisfy my bass-lover's demands, lacking personality, power, punch, volume and depth. Despite this, it is good on the technical aspects, able to follow complex, unfiltered bass lines accurately, quickly and efficiently. It is not very adept at creating layers and stratifying bass, though, because it feels a bit thin and not very voluminous. In fact, the bass it demonstrates doesn't produce much volume, remaining borderline neutral and somewhat bland despite the good technical performance.
Mids
The transition to the midrange is clean, the product of a bass that does not overreach or cross the border. I would even say that sometimes it doesn't even go as far as that. But that's usually good news for the midrange. In this sense, the first half of the midrange feels very limpid, without a hint of haze and far removed from any muddy feel. On the contrary, the appearance of this first phase is rather thin. It suffers from a certain groundedness and there is no perceived warmth, but instead brightness and high nuances are more predominant. The male vocals are lean, though they feel very clear, even evident. I thought they would be presented in a more distant way, but they have a certain vigour that projects them. Or, rather, that projects their edges, nuances and details. In this respect, the timbre veers towards brightness, while the body is wiry and the physicality low.
The transition to the second half is more abrupt, it is the change that unequalises the sound and splits it in two. This generates a sense of hollowness in the first part, as well as a sonic preference that gives more importance to high notes, nuances, details and harmonics. As a result, the sibilances are more evident and the sound takes on a vivid, splashy, persistent, more piercing nuance, which can counteract the musicality of the whole, even though the first half of the sound is relatively good, on the whole.
I still miss body and base even in the female vocals, where hisses are more prominent. But also in the rest of the instrumentation. The Q5s manage to make the mix clear, polished, relatively pure and transparent, at the cost of losing the physical part of the midranges. In this way, it seems that the music is sustained on a thin and thin base, which is not badly developed, but which is projected more than necessary, loaded with an energy that can be tiring due to its predominance and the lack of balance with a more testimonial first half.
Treble
The treble begins excited and sharp, and then immediately relaxes slightly. Even so, the sum is concentrated and energetic. The high notes are perceived as close, present, vigorous, fine, even piercing. Yes, they are crisp and sparkling, but they work quickly. It's not a lingering glare, but it can be lacerating over time, to sensitive ears, due to its predominant character. As I mentioned, despite the moderation in successive frequencies, the energy level enters a plateau phase where the build-up makes the range feel extended, even into the air zone. Moreover, this aspect is distinctly elevated, becoming slightly surprising for a single dynamic driver. In this way, the sensation of air is perceived in every sound.
Soundstage, Separation
With such a clean and transparent sound, the scene feels open, steamy and gauzy. Details are evident and the thin base makes the sound feel more fluid, dynamic and with more movement. The size of the soundstage has good headroom, it is wider than it is deep, and this aspect is perceived more by the distance ratio between the nuances and the base, than by the depth provided by the shallow bass. It is true that the low end has a certain roundness, texture and a punch that goes beyond neutrality. But the result does not counterbalance the presence and energy in the second half of the frequency range.
The remarkable definition of the notes, as well as their level of separation, finesse and thinness, creates a clean, clear, discernible, descriptive and richly nuanced sound. The edge of the sounds is evident and in the foreground. In this way, the macro detail is accentuated, but the micro detail is relegated to a background that can be barely perceptible.
The image is not dispersed, but this sensation of volatility, together with the lack of a base, makes the origin of the weaker elements more perceptible, leaving the musical mass, which should be more corporeal and physical, on a freer plane. Even so, the image is correct despite this light positioning.
On the other hand, it is worth noting that the music never feels congested, unless the treble presence is too abundant. This can be useful as monitor headphones for observing obvious details in the foreground, without the timbre suffering too much.
Comparisons
NS Audio NS3
I like to compare IEMS similar in price, performance and FR. On this occasion I thought that the NS Audio NS3 could be a good rival for the EPZ Q5. By no means are the NS3s new, I reviewed them in September 2019. Do they still make sense? In my opinion they do. They may not be the highest resolution IEMS at the moment, but for $70 I still think they have a special charm, both for their stabilised wood outer panel and for their smooth, warm and musical analogue sound. In terms of construction, the NS3s stand out for the wooden panel placed on their external face. Internally, the capsules have a very ergonomic shape, although the mouthpiece is somewhat short, which may limit the best fit or insertion. In my opinion and despite the good shape and size of the Q5s, the NS3s are more comfortable in the long run. Their size and shape fits better in my ear. In terms of accessories, the NS3s do not come with a zippered case, but with a cloth pouch. Both cables are silver plated, but the NS3 cable has 4 coiled strands, while the Q5 has two and is thicker overall. But the NS3 cable is less stiff and more manageable.
In terms of sensitivity, the Q5s are easier to move around with.
In terms of sound, despite the similarity in the graphs up to 2khz, the big difference is in the peak at 5khz that the Q5s have, while the NS3s have a marked valley right at those frequencies. On the other hand, that higher energy difference at 3.5kHz is not noticeable for clarity. The NS3s have a bit more bass overall, they feel warmer, but also darker and softer. And that bass is also more natural, deeper, realistic and better executed. It is free of colouration and in the very low frequency pure tone test its behaviour is more natural and sensory. The Q5s have that more vibratory colour and behaviour that elevates the reproduced frequency result. The punch is somewhat superior in the NS3s, with a rounder bass, more volume, better texture and a more pleasant and realistic behaviour. It is not as dry, clean and fast with the Q5s, but more enjoyable, even lush in its development. In the overall sound of both, the bass and midrange are more predominant in the NS3s, while the mid-highs and highs are the protagonists in the EPZs.
In the midrange the Q5s have more clarity and transparency, their notes are lighter, thinner, but also more defined and separated. Notes have more weight and thickness in the lower midranges of the NS3s. This gives the base of the instruments and voices a fleshier, more physical and voluminous body. That gives it that point of lushness and fullness, which pushes the midrange to a closer, more present and elevated stage than the Q5s. Above all, the male voices take on a much more elaborate and emphatic presential physicality, as well as possessing a richer and more descriptive texture. The thinness of the male voices contrasts with the greater presence of the high-pitched nuances, as well as their hiss. But there is no trace of the flesh, of the body of the base, something that limits its enjoyment and its resemblance to reality. On the other hand, the smoothness and that distinctly darker spot does not detract from the NS3 midranges. They clearly don't have that transparency. But listening to vocal music with the NS3s is a much more evocative experience than with the Q5s.
Female vocals are not as clear and evident on the NS3s, they are also thicker. Perhaps here one could argue the naturalness of the timbre in favour of the EPZs. But I still think the greater energy of detail and hiss works against them.
Instrumentation is distinctly thicker and smoother on the NS3s, while on the Q5s it is leaner, even piercing in more cases.
The big difference is in the treble. Whereas the NS3s almost start out omitted or nuanced, the Q5s have much more energy, extension and air. It's clear that all this gives more explicit macro detail, more light, transparency, clarity, but also more separation, thanks to the better resolution and finer notes. The scene is more open and volatile in the EPZs. Whereas the NS3 has more depth, but also more closeness and proximity, a somewhat more intimate scene, which allows the details to feel close. Not as high resolution as the Q5s, macro detail is not as evident. At the micro level, though, neither is too explicit. It seems that the Q5 allows more of it to be glimpsed, although, at times, the macro detail covers up the micro detail, obscuring it.
Conclusion
The EPZ Q5 has an excited V-profile that veers towards brightness, placing the emphasis on the nuances rather than on its base, although it is quite resolute and correct in the first half of the frequency range. In this initial phase it is technical, efficient, relatively neutral, descriptive, even moderate. But, from this point on, the energy level rises more than necessary, generating a lot of clarity and transparency, although with side effects that can be unpleasant for delicate ears. Despite this, it has remarkable presence and extension in the upper area, as well as a high level of separation and distance between elements, creating an open, gaseous and volatile scene, where macro details are evident.
The Q5 is based on a design inspired by an existing model and takes up its ergonomic quality, although it is necessary to emphasise the search for the most suitable tips to make the most of these aspects.
The accessories package is quite adequate, including a customised zipped case and a silver-plated cable with gold-plated sleeves that match the capsules.
Although, for the initial price the Q5s are in a price range with too much competition to rival other established models, the current offerings allow their price/performance ratio to improve thanks to their technical abilities and accessories.
Sources Used During the Analysis
ifi hip dac 3.
Aune Yuki.
Burson Audio Playmate II.
Tempotec V3.
MUSE HiFi M3 II.
Hidizs SD2.
Aune X8 XVIII Magic DAC + EarMen ST-Amp.
Linsoul Audio Store, offered me this model, in exchange for writing an honest review. I want to make it clear that all my opinions written in this review have not been conditioned by this fact, nor will I ever write anything that I do not really think or feel here. I will only write about my personal opinion in relation to the revised product.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
DISCLAIMER:
1st impressions
WHAT’S IN THE BOX?
PROS
Good balance in bass and treble
CONS
Upper mids can be shouty
EW200
FINAL THOUGHTS
Rock-Alternative-Metal
