[james444]

Quote:

Pianist you are not going crazy. The e-Q5 is more neutral and polite than the e-Q7 and some people value that. I for one actually prefer the e-Q7 for its unique coloration of sound which makes it sound very natural and exciting. The e-Q7 draws you into the music and engages you with it, whereas the e-Q5 presents it technically more "accurate". The bass on the e-Q5 is not as deep as the e-Q7, and while the e-Q5 is still mid-oriented, in comparison with the e-Q7 it can feel like a takes a step back. It's not a big difference, but was noticeable at first listen for me. The general consensus seems to be that the e-Q5 is more neutral, and for some people that's exactly what they're looking for. Others, like myself (and likely you), are looking for a more natural, engaging, and colored sound which makes the listening experience unique and exciting. Some people value neutrality, while others value a sound that engulfs you with lush and intimate music.

Depends on what you perceive as more natural and engaging. For me the e-Q5's slightly better highs are more engaging with classical music than the e-Q7's. As for deep bass, the roll off below 30Hz is about the same between my pairs, it's just that the e-Q7 seems to have a bit more impact, but that in turn (as dfkt noted in his review) could be due to it's more rolled-off treble. The e-Q5 also sounds a tad smoother and airier to my ears, so it really comes down to personal preference what you perceive as more natural and engaging.
 
Btw are you talking about Pianist's e-Q5 or a different one? And did you A/B the e-Q5 and e-Q7 side by side?

 

[Inks]

Surprised to read that the EQ7s bass extends further than the EQ5s have been reading otherwise throughout. 

 

[EraserXIV]

I'm sorry I misspoke by saying "deep bass". I didn't mean that it extended more, I meant that the e-Q7 has more impact. I agree that the e-Q5 is definitely airier and smoother as well, especially in the treble.
 
I didn't have a chance to A/B them directly, but I listened to my e-Q7 extensively and almost up until right before the e-Q5 arrived. I had to package them to be shipped since I sold them. I had a very clear memory of the e-Q7 and knew exactly what to look for when I opened the e-Q5 to listen to them.

 

[Inks]

In that case yes, EQ5s have less impact and presence on bass but with slight more extension. 

 

[brendon]

Quote:

BTW, I also just received a pair of the new RE262 by Hifiman and my impressions of them are also very different from those of most people - most say they sound good unamped and have some of the best mids out there in universal IEMs on par with SE530. To my ears they sound bland and dull unamped with poor instrument separation, very little sense of space, slight muddiness, shallow bass with little depth, suppressed treble, somewhat compressed dynamics you name it. And like I said my HD555 and FA-003 and UE Super.fi 3 still sound just fine to me, so nothing is wrong with my ears. Must be something mental I guess. Am I going nuts then?

 
I think you are facing problems with fit. Instrument separation, middiness, shallow bass are not terms I would use to describe the RE262 even when used unamped.
 
What tips do you use ?
 
I would suggest trying the head-direct biflange tips or the Sony hybrid tips. I have slightly small ears and have fit issues with a lot of IEMs. However either of the two tips help me get a good fit in most cases.
 

 

[Inks]

Actually you may be onto something. Fit wasn't mentioned and I'll say that RE262s are VERY tricky to get a good fit with but once it's found it's easy to get and works wonderfully with tips that aren't too big as insertion is fairly deep. I had results with the little stem that connects to the cable facing outwards (ie pointing back but slightly downwards). What I do is place them over the ear slightly but then push forward and twist them back until the stem touch my ear  in a 45 degree angle. 

 

[james444]

Same goes for the-Q5, like with any other IEMs fit is crucial for their sound. Today on a freezing morning my shortened Hybrids unexpectedly refused to stay firmly in my cold ears. Whatever I was trying (under scrutinizing looks from bypassers) they constantly kept backing out for just the few millimeters that made all the difference between a gorgeous and crappy sound.
 
Thankfully I remembered a pair of CKM50 that I keep in my backpack for emergencies like these and I swapped their trusty old grey UE silicons with the Hybrids, so the story had a happy end.
 
Speaking of which, that's the one big advantage the GR10 have over the Ortofons, fit is so much easier with them.

 

[db597]

I'm seeing the e-q5s going for below JPY16K in Japan now. Was trying hard to decide between them and the FI BA-A1, but at the current price the choice is a much easier one to make.

 

[Pianist]

Guys, I just got Etymotic ER4 and in my humble opinion, they destroy the e-Q5. I don't want to start a war here, but if anyone heard both, I would be really curious if you can tell me what e-Q5 does better than the ER4, because I just can't think of anything. Now, ER4 does lots of things better than the e-Q5 IMO - deeper, tighter bass, better clarity, better refinement and definition, wider soundstage, better instrument separation, more accurate timbre, better extended highs, better speed, better detail...

 

[EraserXIV]

Haven't heard the ER4 but I was under the impression it was a colder and more analytical IEM as opposed to the warmer, mid-centric, musical signature of the e-Q5. It's hard to say one is better than the other, just different signatures for different preferences...?

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Haven't heard the ER4 but I was under the impression it was a colder and more analytical IEM as opposed to the warmer, mid-centric, musical signature of the e-Q5. It's hard to say one is better than the other, just different signatures for different preferences...?

Well, to my ears, ER4 sounds more accurate and natural than e-Q5. It is not cold at all, especially ER4p. It is actually more mid centric to my ears than many people say. It has WAY more detail and separation to my ears than the e-Q5. It's not even close. I can hear detail with the ER4 that wasn't even there with the e-Q5. The bass also hits deeper on ER4 and is tighter as well. I think even dynamic range is wider on ER4 - it sounds bigger and more powerful to my ears than e-Q5, which sounds boxy and flat by comparison.
 
Just my 2 cents of course.

 

[Magitek]

Hey, is there another site than Musica Acoustics that sells these and ships international?

 

[mywallethurts]

@pianist: maybe your e-q5 was defective. the bass only rolls off after 30hz in a smooth manner. the etys simply cannot match the eq5 imo

 

[james444]

Quote:

Guys, I just got Etymotic ER4 and in my humble opinion, they destroy the e-Q5. I don't want to start a war here, but if anyone heard both, I would be really curious if you can tell me what e-Q5 does better than the ER4, because I just can't think of anything. Now, ER4 does lots of things better than the e-Q5 IMO - deeper, tighter bass, better clarity, better refinement and definition, wider soundstage, better instrument separation, more accurate timbre, better extended highs, better speed, better detail...

 
Quote:

Haven't heard the ER4 but I was under the impression it was a colder and more analytical IEM as opposed to the warmer, mid-centric, musical signature of the e-Q5. It's hard to say one is better than the other, just different signatures for different preferences...?

x2. Tbo any claim of IEM A destroying IEM B among top tiers makes me highly sceptical. As for different preferences, just read both Pianist's and Mark's take on the DBA-02.
Says it all IMO...

 

[yello131]

Quote:

Hey, is there another site than Musica Acoustics that sells these and ships international?

iheadphones.co.uk