I have an affinity for IEMs equipped with micro-drivers (6mm or smaller). It seems that dynamic micro-drivers that are well tuned can deliver surprisingly good resolution and sometimes surprisingly deep bass with great texture. The MEMT X5 is one such in-ear.
About me:
I tend to prefer a relatively neutral sound signature with a slight emphasis in both bass and lower treble, which is basically a mild "U" shaped sound signature where midrange frequencies are left intact and unaffected. I find that an absolute neutral sound signature usually lacks enough energy for the genres I enjoy most, which are Classic Trance and Progressive (early Tiesto, Markus Schulz, Otello, DT8 Project), Chill Out, Breakbeat (Hybrid & Burufunk Remixes) and 80's & 90's (New Order, Secession, The Cure, Siouxie & The Banshees, Depeche Mode). Sure I listen to Verve, Verve Remixed, Sade, Bach, Ella Fitzgerald and everything in between, but as of late the bulk of my listening pleasure is focused on the aforementioned genres.
About IEMs:
Take note when you read IEM reviews that when the reviewer gives his/her opinion regarding the sound that there are many factors that shape the final sound an IEM delivers to one's ear.
Those factors include:
1 - Shape & size of reviewer's ear canals. (shallow/deep, wide/narrow)
2 - Shape & size of eartips (round/cone, single, double or triple flange)
3 - Materials of eartips (silicone/foam)
4 - Shape of IEM (and/or angle of nozzle) can cause fitment issues for some.
5 - Source (quality of DAC in smartphone, laptop, digital audio player)
6 - Source (power rating) is it amplified/unamplified.
7 - The IEM itself (driver flex/trapping air in canal causing muffled sound.
8 - The Reviewers ability to hear all frequency ranges (age plays a factor).
Most consumers are unaware of how much weight each of these factors hold in rendering a final verdict. This is why there is such a wide variance in not only ratings, but the description of an IEMs sound. An unaware consumer purchases a perfectly fine IEM but has difficulty keeping the IEM in the ear or he/she does not satisfactorily seal the ear canal with the included silicone eartips (this is a common occurrence) and the consumer summarily dismisses the IEM as sub par. Another consumer purchases the same IEM but experiences a perfect fit and seal and has nothing but praise for the same IEM. Sealing the ear canals AND HAVING THE EARTIP FIRMLY AFFIXED to the IEM nozzle is the only proper way to use in-ear monitors. I can think of no audio equipment that is subjected to such praise or ridicule as the in-ear monitor. As if that's not enough, there is no "one-size-fits-all" when it comes to IEM eartips.
Materials (silicone/foam) have different dampening effects on final sound.
Shape of the eartips (olive-shaped, cone-shaped or other-shaped) can have different dampening effects on final sound based on how much space is between the IEM nozzle and your eardrum and how well the eartip has sealed the ear canal.
The aperture of the eartip's opening (wide-bore/narrow-bore) will have dampening effects on the final sound.
The easiest way for you to experience the different effects I am discussing is to take your current on-ear earphones or over-ear earphones, pick a song full of energy, put the earphones on and let them sit naturally over or on your ears. Listen to the music for two minutes. After two minutes, using your hands, slightly press the headphones closer to your eardrums. Notice the change in the sound. Is there more/less bass? Is there more/less treble? Did the vocals slightly slip forward/back?
Consider that on-ear and over-ear headphones have a driver that sits approximately 1 1/2 inches to 2 inches from your eardrums and by pressing the headphones 1/4" closer to your eardrums the sound changed. Now consider that an IEM driver sits anywhere from 3/4" to 1/4" from your eardrums and the slightest changes (angle, depth, shape, material) can have up to three times more of an effect due to the proximity of the IEM to the eardrum.
For this reason, I think it is wise to invest a nominal dollar amount on different eartips to find an eartip that works well for your particular ear's anatomy. This way you experience everything the earphone tuner intended for you to experience. Some IEM manufacturers supply multiple sizes (S/M/L) and/or materials (silicone/foam) of eartips to increase the odds that the consumer achieves a satisfactory seal, but even this is not foolproof. If this information holds any interest for you, there are a plethora of aftermarket eartip brands to look into, such as "JVC Spiral Dots", "Spinfits", "Comply Foam Eartips" or "Znari Foam Eartips", "Creative Aurvana" and others. If you really want to fine tune things, then you might find yourself doing what I do, which is scouring Amazon or AliExpress for inexpensive earphones that appear to have silicone eartips that have a shape that typically work well with my ear's anatomy.
Those factors include:
1 - Shape & size of reviewer's ear canals. (shallow/deep, wide/narrow)
2 - Shape & size of eartips (round/cone, single, double or triple flange)
3 - Materials of eartips (silicone/foam)
4 - Shape of IEM (and/or angle of nozzle) can cause fitment issues for some.
5 - Source (quality of DAC in smartphone, laptop, digital audio player)
6 - Source (power rating) is it amplified/unamplified.
7 - The IEM itself (driver flex/trapping air in canal causing muffled sound.
8 - The Reviewers ability to hear all frequency ranges (age plays a factor).
Most consumers are unaware of how much weight each of these factors hold in rendering a final verdict. This is why there is such a wide variance in not only ratings, but the description of an IEMs sound. An unaware consumer purchases a perfectly fine IEM but has difficulty keeping the IEM in the ear or he/she does not satisfactorily seal the ear canal with the included silicone eartips (this is a common occurrence) and the consumer summarily dismisses the IEM as sub par. Another consumer purchases the same IEM but experiences a perfect fit and seal and has nothing but praise for the same IEM. Sealing the ear canals AND HAVING THE EARTIP FIRMLY AFFIXED to the IEM nozzle is the only proper way to use in-ear monitors. I can think of no audio equipment that is subjected to such praise or ridicule as the in-ear monitor. As if that's not enough, there is no "one-size-fits-all" when it comes to IEM eartips.
Materials (silicone/foam) have different dampening effects on final sound.
Shape of the eartips (olive-shaped, cone-shaped or other-shaped) can have different dampening effects on final sound based on how much space is between the IEM nozzle and your eardrum and how well the eartip has sealed the ear canal.
The aperture of the eartip's opening (wide-bore/narrow-bore) will have dampening effects on the final sound.
The easiest way for you to experience the different effects I am discussing is to take your current on-ear earphones or over-ear earphones, pick a song full of energy, put the earphones on and let them sit naturally over or on your ears. Listen to the music for two minutes. After two minutes, using your hands, slightly press the headphones closer to your eardrums. Notice the change in the sound. Is there more/less bass? Is there more/less treble? Did the vocals slightly slip forward/back?
Consider that on-ear and over-ear headphones have a driver that sits approximately 1 1/2 inches to 2 inches from your eardrums and by pressing the headphones 1/4" closer to your eardrums the sound changed. Now consider that an IEM driver sits anywhere from 3/4" to 1/4" from your eardrums and the slightest changes (angle, depth, shape, material) can have up to three times more of an effect due to the proximity of the IEM to the eardrum.
For this reason, I think it is wise to invest a nominal dollar amount on different eartips to find an eartip that works well for your particular ear's anatomy. This way you experience everything the earphone tuner intended for you to experience. Some IEM manufacturers supply multiple sizes (S/M/L) and/or materials (silicone/foam) of eartips to increase the odds that the consumer achieves a satisfactory seal, but even this is not foolproof. If this information holds any interest for you, there are a plethora of aftermarket eartip brands to look into, such as "JVC Spiral Dots", "Spinfits", "Comply Foam Eartips" or "Znari Foam Eartips", "Creative Aurvana" and others. If you really want to fine tune things, then you might find yourself doing what I do, which is scouring Amazon or AliExpress for inexpensive earphones that appear to have silicone eartips that have a shape that typically work well with my ear's anatomy.
The MEMT X5:
This is my very first encounter with MEMT. I typically scour Amazon earphone listings trying to find unique silicone eartips that are shipped with inexpensive in-ear monitors (IEMs). I do this because the audio output that is delivered into my ears (or yours) via an IEM can vary greatly depending not only on tip selection, but in particular, the eartips depth in the ear canal. This simple truth became very real with the MEMT X5.
The MEMT X5 is packaged well and the driver housings are made of a sturdy metal alloy. However, the silicone eartips that MEMT included with the X5 just ruined the X5's presentation for me, hence the eartip hunting on Amazon. The X5's are shipped with double-flanged silicone eartips which rarely fit my shallow ear canals. To my surprise, these double-flanged silicones actually did fit my ear canals and I was visibly excited that I found a double-flange that I would be able to test on multiple IEMs in order to fine tune the audio output of any IEM in my vast collection. The first IEM to undergo testing would of course be this X5. I had heard good things about the MEMT X5 and I was anxiously waiting to get a pair to find out if the hype is justified.
So how do the X5's sound?
Well, with the included eartips, not so great. The soundstage was congested and the overall presentation was muddy. To my ears it sounded as if all of the instruments were smeared together with no sense of spacial cues for instruments or anything else. It was worse than one of my very first inexpensive IEMs, the Creative EP630.
The only reasonable thing to do was to pull those double-flange eartips off of the X5 and install a wide-bore silicone eartip, which is exactly what I did.
WHAT A HUGE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE THE X5 CAME ALIVE!
The X5 presentation is quite natural though it is undoubtedly a "V" shaped sound signature. With different eartips the soundstage opened up considerably giving a much better sense of width and depth. As is typical of "V" shaped sound signatures the midrange is recessed and slightly hollow compared to the elevated lower treble and bass. It's not off-putting, just noticeable (to me).
Treble:
When you receive your MEMT X5 take note of the treble extension on the following tracks which have a bit of energy up top. Notice how much detail is displayed despite the X5's rolled-off upper-treble for a fatigue-free session.
Midrange:
The midrange is the X5's weakness, so to speak, because it sits behind the lower and higher frequency ranges. Fleetwood Mac's "Dreams" is one of my go-to tracks to judge vocal positioning and the MEMT X5 fails here. Stevie Nicks voice is lost in the "thunder though you will be able to pick out which of the two recordings below sound more analogue and less "digitized". Just remember that the X5 is all about the "fun" and definitely not for critical listening.
Lately, I've acquired an addiction for micro-details and soundstage and the X5 mostly delivers on both accounts. The X5 can give a detailed presentation, but it eschews taking things to the "Nth"degree in the treble region, which means you'll get plenty of detail but your listening sessions will remain fatigue-free.
Bass:
The low end comes through with surprising authority for a micro-dynamic driver. I really like the heft and body of the overall presentation. The lion's share of the bass is mid-bass but there is just enough rumble and punch to keep me happy.
Casting aside the included double-flanged eartips and refitting the X5 with wide-bore silicone eartips transforms them and cleans things up noticeably. The end result of using two different types of eartips is that you wouldn't recognize the two different presentations as coming from the same exact IEM.
An unintended fringe benefit with the MEMT X5 is that they can be worn while sleeping because they are so small, so if you want an IEM that can pull double duty by working graveyard shift, then "ding...ding...ding"... you've just hit the jackpot.
There's a lot of competition in this price bracket, but there is alot to like for your $20 with the X5, especially if you'd like something comfortable and unobtrusive when your head hits the pillow.
The difficulty for the MEMT X5 in the current marketplace is that you can get whichever sound signature you prefer WITH DETACHABLE CABLES from KZ Acoustics for less than $20.
Ouch!
Hope this was helpful.
Only thing I have to ask, did you find any part of them to be sharp? i've read that i think...