[abitdeef]

I agree, rather seems like a loss to me, but hey just like you said if they prefer using a DAP rather than stacking with a DAC/Amp and they're happy with their R3 then that's all that really matters

Hey I'm not trying to be a dick, really all that matters is YOU are happy with your gear. There was a time when I too was perfectly happy with R3, but then I heard ap80 and though wow it sounds clearer and sharper.

Then I was happy with ap80, but then I heard sr15, and I was like wow that's got a wider sound stage and it sounds fuller and then I was completely happy with sr15, until I heard zx300.... and now I've got m11 and I'm looking at q5s and am3d because wow it's like the m11 and it has thx aaa tech.

And on and on it goes, and I'm ok with that . But, I can tell you if you're happy with your gear, stay the **** off here, and you will save money and your sanity

 

[abitdeef]

Wait, the M11 has all the features of the Q5s?

Is there a comparison table?

I already have the M11.

No lol of course not, I'm assuming it sounds similar based on the components. And hbb saying it sounded the same. More future proof with the interchangeable amp modules.

But of course it's not a dap, but you had to know that right

 

[Cevisi]

Hey I'm not trying to be a dick, really all that matters is YOU are happy with your gear. There was a time when I too was perfectly happy with R3, but then I heard ap80 and though wow it sounds clearer and sharper.

Then I was happy with ap80, but then I heard sr15, and I was like wow that's got a wider sound stage and it sounds fuller and then I was completely happy with sr15, until I heard zx300.... and now I've got m11 and I'm looking at q5s and am3d because wow it's like the m11 and it has thx aaa tech.

And on and on it goes, and I'm ok with that . But, I can tell you if you're happy with your gear, stay the **** off here, and you will save money and your sanity

Try es 100

 

[abitdeef]

Try es 100

Tried it nice but I've got Sony bluetooth headphones so uneccesary. And it's not even in the same ballpark as m11, thus hopefully q5s with thx. And I always use balanced out. M11 is the best I've heard besides the Sony wm1z and ak sp1000. Oh the ibasso dx220 sounded good too, but was too laggy for me.

Oh colorfly u8 sounds amazing, but it has pretty lame support. Tried topping nx4 dsd ifi xdsd and dragonfly red too. All nice but I still like the sound of m11 better- imo of course. thought dragonfly and the topping sounded too digital and the xdsd had kind of a smallish sound stage, which is imaginary but it was boxed in a bit- hard to explain.

I'm sure cayin n8 sounds divine, and lpt sounds heavenly but I'm not spending 2 or 3 grand on a dap.

Oh and a quick funny story. .... I was just running around yelling at my dog with m&ms in my left hand eating them. Well I took an aleve out of the cupboard to take when I went upstairs and put it in my left hand and proceeded yelling at and chasing the dog and you guessed it ... I chewed up an alieve with the m&ms ... nasty.

Of course I blame the dog!

 

[sinquito]

Not sure how power hungry they are but to fully drive my DT 1770 pro I had to get the AM5 for the X7ii.

Yes, I am pretty sure that the issue is the Amp module and not the DAC, I have read tha the AM5 is the one module with more output power, so maybe that is one way to go with this DAC. I have not heard the DT1770 but from memory the DT770 and DT880 (both 250 ohms) needed more volume on the pot to sound as loud as the HD600.

The E5 has ouput buffers that work best with high impedance headphones, it will have the edge against most other amps when it comes to making HD6x0 and 250-ohm/600-ohm Beyers sing as well as they can out of portable gear.
A quick search of the thread brings up no results for the particular buffer, so I assume Q5(s) uses a different buffer if any, likely best suited to low impedance cans like most people use with portable setups.
Indeed, this amp probably isn't for you.
You're stuck with the E5 as far as I know.

I detest the sound of that buffer used in the E5. There a number of cheaper amps and some desktop amps that use it. Yuck.

Actually the NX4 DSD that I got two weeks ago sounds just as full and loud as the E5, maybe the E5 is a bit louder, but there is zero hiss on IEMs on the Topping, plus it sounds less colored.

Dear friend,

1. Although Q5s is the update version for Q5, it is sharing the same device authorization including RF authorization and USB DAC driver. So when working as Bluetooth receiver or USB DAC, the list shows Q5 still. However, Q5 and Q5s are using different MAC address . So in FiiO Music app, they could still be distinguished to Q5 and Q5s.
2. We are sorry that we sent the wrong module to you. But what you order is with am1 promotion bundle.You just add one usd to get the module no matter am1/am0/am3. We will send a new one am1 via post but it doesn't means we need refund you 100usd. Thanks for your understanding!

best regards

Once I get the AM1 I will close the dispute on Aliexpress, I know that I did not pay a difference of 100 dollars, but that is the cost of a new Amp module right?

Maybe there is something wrong with your unit? My Q5 drives the HD 6XX very good on balanced (never go past 12 o'clock) and on the SE the volume moves one hour more in terms of power... So what is 11 o'clock on balanced is about 12 o'clock single ended.
But these are loud volumes, I generally listen on 11 o'clock balanced with my HD6XX.
It is also true that "loud" is a very relative term when not properly measured. I found that many people listen at what I would call "scary" volumes. I'd go deaf after one song...

I would consider myself a quiet listener. On high gain I can get a quite loud listening experience on the Q5s with the HD600 but there is not much left on the pot, see, 12 o'clock is not half of the volume as the pot will only reach something like 4 or 5 o'clock.

If you want to drive open and (somewhat) power hungry headphones using only SE outputs, maybe what you need is not a portable device but a stationary one, maybe something like the JDS Atom or the DX3 Pro (for a DAC/Amp combo) would be more suited for you.

Saludos compa!

I thought about the DX3 Pro, but I want to be able to use the DAC laying on my bed listening to music, so battery power was a most. Actually the LG G5 HiFi Friend DAC/AMP sound on my PC pretty lound on the HD600 at 35%, so I know that is not an issue with seize, also, like I said before the NX4 and E5 sound also louder being battery power and portable (the NX4 is smaller).

Salu2 cali2 !

 

[actorlife]

Hooray winner announced tomorrow. Good luck everyone.

 

[Timoteew]

Can’t really call this a review, but having listened to it for a couple of days now I am starting to become a bit more familiar with the Q5S.

I have been streaming Spotify over bluetooth and listening to my B&W P7s, a headset I like so much I bought a second pair when it was removed from their lineup. For those who are not too familiar with this one it isn’t the most neutral one out there, but somewhat warm sounding if that serves as a description, which suits my preferences perfectly. So what did I learn about the Q5S - simply put I’m in love. It sounds as though a veil has been lifted from the music, and the P7s are truly shining. Gone is the slightly lush and indesticint bass, replaced by a crisp tight slam that I never thought my headset capable of. Vocals are natural without ever becoming sharp, it feels as though the singer has taken a step closer, slightly more emphasized, but without ever becoming exaggerated or tiring. For someone who has a thing vocals, and female singers in particular, this is heaven.

I was worried this would make it less versatile and not handle a wider range of genres, but not so. No matter what I throw at it I end up smiling and simply enjoying the music. I have hardly touched the bass boost other than to test it out, it simply isn’t needed.

I do not have an extremely wide range of references to compare the Q5S to, but this is by far the best I have heard. I may even have vanquished the urge to constantly upgrade, because I am not sure I need anything but this one. Like I said - I am in love, and probably a bit blinded by it, but my portable music has never been closer to my main system than this, which is good enough for me


Need more pictures in this thread

Hi thanks for your observations! I noticed you have a Fiio E12? How would you say it compares to the AM3E amp onboard the Q5S? I'm attracted to the high power output of the E12/A5 for the Tin P1, though of course I'm sure the balanced output of the Q5S would be plenty sufficient for driving them.

 

[Leetransform25]

Has anyone shared some sort of comparison between the Q5s and the M11? I figured someone would have already but haven't seen any as of yet

 

[Senna]

Hi thanks for your observations! I noticed you have a Fiio E12? How would you say it compares to the AM3E amp onboard the Q5S? I'm attracted to the high power output of the E12/A5 for the Tin P1, though of course I'm sure the balanced output of the Q5S would be plenty sufficient for driving them.

Without any other amp modules available for comparison it is very hard to tell exactly how good the AM3E is, not to mention that both my P7s and my Fidelio X2s (my other preferred headset) are quite easy to drive. Even so I never found the Q5S to run out of breath. It might lack the raw power of the E12, but to me it feels more refined and simply higher end. Even when I crank up the volume I never feel there is a shortage of power, and all those alluring traits present and lower listening volumes remain intact. Again a trickier load might change this, but with the gear I use I'd say it keeps up with the E12 in regards to power, and that is a pretty solid compliment.

 

[Sonic Defender]

I would also suggest that while in general I do not hear differences in DACs to any significant degree, two recent experiences have me at least wondering if I am hearing differences. I was using the Q5 as my DAC with my NAD M3. I really enjoyed the signature as both devices are slightly mellow with an emphasis on listenability and less on absolute detail retrieval. At least that is my take. I decided to grab an affordable DAC that measures well and by all accounts sounds very good, the SMSL SU-8. I felt at once that it was more focused on detail retrieval, less soft sounding than the Q5. It seemed pretty obvious, but I did absolutely no testing so that is just a sighted listening impression.

As per the poster above with his P7 experience (I owned and loved the wireless P7) noted, I actually find the Q5s to be more detail retrieval sounding than the Q5 (I know the other poster didn't say that, but the lifting of the veil was what I was keying in on). As we know, the whole is the sum of the parts so while it seems unlikely that the DAC chips should be in anyway audibly different than the DAC chips in the Q5, perhaps with the other changes the Q5s simply reveals something different? I do not know, nor am I posting this as fact, just a general and early impression. When I have time to compare the Q5 and Q5s head to head more in depth I will. I would be curious if anybody else is hearing the difference. It could all be in my mind and I fully acknowledge that.

 

[pstickne]

Well of course it does, otherwise all daps would sound exactly the same. Just clarifying that all DACS do the exact same thing, and the output specs (without load) can't be audibly improved upon. That extra 3 or 4 decibels of snr in the new dac model, won't be audibly realised, because it would deafen you

If you take brand x dac and brand y dac and put them in the exact same circuit configuration with the same LPF you're not going to hear any difference.

I wonder if there might be even other DPS settings or tweaks routinely employed by various designs employ to .. purposefully uhh, tint or 'add house character to', the sound.

My (and I'm likely going to get some flak for this) preference on "subjective sound" is iPhone 6 SE > Q5 > ES100 :}

The ES100 has at least one 'proprietary' DSP option, and I've no idea how roll on/off filters (or are these the same low pass filters?) fit in. Then as soon as any EQ

 

[abitdeef]

I would also suggest that while in general I do not hear differences in DACs to any significant degree, two recent experiences have me at least wondering if I am hearing differences. I was using the Q5 as my DAC with my NAD M3. I really enjoyed the signature as both devices are slightly mellow with an emphasis on listenability and less on absolute detail retrieval. At least that is my take. I decided to grab an affordable DAC that measures well and by all accounts sounds very good, the SMSL SU-8. I felt at once that it was more focused on detail retrieval, less soft sounding than the Q5. It seemed pretty obvious, but I did absolutely no testing so that is just a sighted listening impression.

As per the poster above with his P7 experience (I owned and loved the wireless P7) noted, I actually find the Q5s to be more detail retrieval sounding than the Q5 (I know the other poster didn't say that, but the lifting of the veil was what I was keying in on). As we know, the whole is the sum of the parts so while it seems unlikely that the DAC chips should be in anyway audibly different than the DAC chips in the Q5, perhaps with the other changes the Q5s simply reveals something different? I do not know, nor am I posting this as fact, just a general and early impression. When I have time to compare the Q5 and Q5s head to head more in depth I will. I would be curious if anybody else is hearing the difference. It could all be in my mind and I fully acknowledge that.

Well besides the dacs they upgraded the caps and reworked the power supply and LPF and have a new clock system. Kind of like what they did to the m11 which is a big upgrade from the previous m series daps.

So they did put quite a bit of work into the q5s.

I mean look at the power out schematic of the Q5- sorry wrong schematic


Now look at the power output circuit of Q5s

 

[Senna]

As per the poster above with his P7 experience (I owned and loved the wireless P7) noted, I actually find the Q5s to be more detail retrieval sounding than the Q5 (I know the other poster didn't say that, but the lifting of the veil was what I was keying in on).

The "veil comment" was a bit of a cliché, but I very much agree with what you are saying here. There was a distinct feel of "more" of the music being revealed, each individual instrument becoming more audible, the subtle nuances of the sound stage becoming more evident...details. BUT never compromising the joy of the music. I very much subscribe to the school of listenability, and to my ears the Q5S still delivers that.

 

[abitdeef]

I would also suggest that while in general I do not hear differences in DACs to any significant degree, two recent experiences have me at least wondering if I am hearing differences. I was using the Q5 as my DAC with my NAD M3. I really enjoyed the signature as both devices are slightly mellow with an emphasis on listenability and less on absolute detail retrieval. At least that is my take. I decided to grab an affordable DAC that measures well and by all accounts sounds very good, the SMSL SU-8. I felt at once that it was more focused on detail retrieval, less soft sounding than the Q5. It seemed pretty obvious, but I did absolutely no testing so that is just a sighted listening impression.

As per the poster above with his P7 experience (I owned and loved the wireless P7) noted, I actually find the Q5s to be more detail retrieval sounding than the Q5 (I know the other poster didn't say that, but the lifting of the veil was what I was keying in on). As we know, the whole is the sum of the parts so while it seems unlikely that the DAC chips should be in anyway audibly different than the DAC chips in the Q5, perhaps with the other changes the Q5s simply reveals something different? I do not know, nor am I posting this as fact, just a general and early impression. When I have time to compare the Q5 and Q5s head to head more in depth I will. I would be curious if anybody else is hearing the difference. It could all be in my mind and I fully acknowledge that.

I wonder if there might be even other DPS settings or tweaks routinely employed by various designs employ to .. purposefully uhh, tint or 'add house character to', the sound.

My (and I'm likely going to get some flak for this) preference on "subjective sound" is iPhone 6 SE > Q5 > ES100 :}

The ES100 has at least one 'proprietary' DSP option, and I've no idea how roll on/off filters (or are these the same low pass filters?) fit in. Then as soon as any EQ

There are programmable filters built into dacs that engineers and designers can mess with, along with LPF filters and roll off filters. And I'm sure in some units there is dsp going on behind the scenes.

Ouch lol, man an iPhone sounds so digital and congested even compared to something like ap80 or m9, let alone q5s.

Well what I imagine q5s to sound like. I'd return it asap and save yourself some money and just use iPhone and ess.

I'm sure balanced would sound better but even the se should sound weightier and more natural and less congested than an iPhone 6SE. With 2 dacs and all those caps and power it should leave that cirrus soc in the dust. Unless you're talking about using it with a separate amp or dac- because it sure isn't going to drive the senn 600s

But then again, I've never really listened to the se out of the m11, maybe the q5 se is weak. I know if the q5s plus the am3d doesn't sound better than m11- back she goes.

 

[K0r3Uptd]

Would I get much benefit from stacking the Q5s with my M11? Or would that be pretty much redundant? I do like the idea of that bass boost switch on the Q5s.