Sharing my impressions EPZ Q5!
EPZ Q5 - Rooting for the Underdog
Greetings fellow audiophily affictionados, today we will be taking a deeper look and listen into EPZ's new single 10mm dynamic driver with a dual cavity and dual magnetic circuit design - the Q5!
This unit was a gift from the well known and community recognized reviewer, Akros (António Teixeira), a fellow countryman of mine who has taken the extra step to support and motivate me, a beginner audiophile.
I will take this chance to challenge you to a similar attitude, introducing a fellow friend or audiophily beginner to a IEM set you own and can borrow/gift.
EPZ is a well established brand that I believe deserves more attention and credit, given their low key ingenious designs. The Q5 has been quite the surprise for me, suiting me as a daily driver option, as an antithesis to the more shouty and Mid fatiguing units as of nowadays, like the Simgot Ea500 and, for such reason, I shall compare them both.
Before dwelling into the sound of the EPZ Q5, I must give credit to the unboxing experience which is rather unique. The box opens up frontally, as if it was exposing its heart, in an "arms opening" motion (as a warm welcoming hug).
Onwards to what matters.
Sub-Bass
Generous in amount, just enough to enhance the perception of depth, without becoming unnatural.
It is Rumbly on the instruments and tracks that are supposed to rumble, and its decay is acceptably quick for the price range.
Doesn't distort.
Textured and nicely extended, however it doesn't act creamy nor gritty when the track demands for it.
MidBass
Here we have a great balance of intensity and decay. Whilst the decay is merely average, the slam is clean and non intrusive. Kicks aren't notoriously boosted but also aren't hindered.
It isn't enough for bassheads, it sits closer to a neutral bass, however it is lightly seasoned with "salt and pepper" just so it brings joy in dynamics and note weight. A very light coloring that is welcomed.
In my opinion this kind of Sub Bass and midbass is just enough to feel immersed in any genre, without masking details or affecting the remainder of the frequencies in a distracting way.
Bass guitars feel punchy, full bodied, thus Motown-like Basslines are a delight to listen to, a cool remark.
Lower Mids
Slightly boxed. Percussion timbre feels hollower than the rest of the signature, by a slight margin. This is more evident on lower resolution 80's sampled drums.
Cellos are present but lack exposure and sound leaner than either bassier or higher register strings.
Sometimes male vocals and background alto choirs sound overly distant, especially on busier tracks. Don't get me wrong here, they are still clear and defined, but they are comparatively less intense.
Overall, any instrument that has a wide frequency range presentation, extended throughout numerous harmonics (down and up the frequency range), like the piano, harp, accordion, guitars, they feel leaner, with less note weight, as they "venture" through the lower mids interval.
It isn't a deal breaker but it could do better at glueing the two frequency range extremities.
Upper Mids
Forward but never uncomfortable from shoutiness nor harshness. Only in older tracks with very intense horns and strings do you get your ears pierced. Can also happen with old recordings of female vocals.
A very healthy forwardness that the listeners have been accustomed to, yet this time it doesn't feel like the main focus of the set.
Lead instruments like synths and guitars are mix cutting, lush and vibrant but don't steal the spotlight. String pluckings are snappy, alto saxs have grain and rich transients.
Snares sound natural and quick, non-piercing, even the higher pitched ones on R&B and Golden-era Hip-Hop.
Treble
Defined, extended but not sparkly.
High hats and cymbals have texture but when tracks get busier, they lose the extra clarity and are pushed further away.
Violins on upper registers cut through the mix but aren't very textured.
It isn't a tame nor uninteresting treble, as all the information is there, displayed in a smooth way that doesn't offend neither the bright-heads nor the treble-sensitive ones. It is actually the first time I hear a treble that seems balanced and versatile for taste and every genre.
Technicalities
Details are above average for the price range. You can clearly pick on earcandy, however less evident if they are in the treble region.
Layering is above average, however on very busy tracks, like Jazz big bands or Orchestral Music, the Q5 gets convoluted. It's as if the more instruments you add to the equation, the more you proportionally lose in each instrument clarity and separation between them. In this situation, the detail retrieval is also affected
I feel it's on the lower mids that it dips the most, affecting the overall clarity.
Soundstage is rather wider than taller, non claustrophobic, very acceptable and comfortable. No complaints considering the price point, but keep in mind that if this was 2021/2022, this would be an above average spaciality, however, by this year's standards (considering the price range) it matches the market price point.
Fit and Comfort
This is a big plus, as the fit is immaculate - the shell just houses itself perfectly on my ear, keeping its seal constant. Its shape is much like Sennheiser's IEMs, which is a plus, and it is super light as well, so I often kept forgetting I had IEMs on. For these reasons, it makes a great gym/sports companion.
The only downside, which is mostly a joke, is that, given the MMCX connection, some cables allow for the IEM to spin over the connection, sometimes rendering me confused on which one is the left and right side. I never seem to get it right the first time.
Accessories
The original cable MMCX's termination I got didn't securely connect with the IEM, not clicking when pushed in, but I was the only one having this issue, so I'm sure this is a dud.
Other than that it looks premium, stylish and comfortable, definitely a step above when compared to other units within the same price range. Can't comment on performance.
Comparisons to Simgot EA500
Given the fact they graph similarly, the comparison seems feasible to me.
Tuning wise the Q5 is a tad warmer with less emphasis on the Upper Mids and Treble than the EA500, just enough to mitigate the pinna gain to bearable levels, and the treble is smoother on transients.
Upper Mids are more natural on Q5, way more comfortable, however the EA500 embellishes vocals and brings an extra dose of lushness that can be as overwhelming as distracting.
In the other end, the Midbass is slightly more intense in slam and the SubBass is more powerful and deeper.
Keep in mind these tuning comparisons are not abysmal, rather a 10% difference in tuning overal, just enough to make the Q5 an alternative for pinna sensitive people or someone who needs a bit more bass out of the box.
Technicalities wise I can notice the Ea500's driver has the upperhand, with finer details, a wider and taller soundstage as well as superior layering.
Final Words
I sincerely wish this model gets the deserved attention, as it strikes me as beautifully engineered daily driver material. It ticks a lot of boxes for both indoor and outdoor use. It is a comfortable, non-fatiguing bang-for-buck wonder and suits me well when I need to take some rest from Mid and Treble Fatiguing IEMs, without sacrificing much on the detail retrieval. The timbre is mostly natural so it is also very versatile, capable of multiple music genres.
It isn't easily upgradable up to the 100$ mark, and even if you do, I'm sure you'll come back to these when you need to carry something cheaper.
This one is definitely a keeper!
Miguel Esteves
)
