[AudioDHD]

Well, I suppose the only thing I have not tried is cranking them up and "unlocking" them in that way. I am not sure how high is safe, but I do have equipment that can really blast the volumes to the sky. Is this something I should try? Perhaps on the verge of distortion? 

I have spent a few hours today A/B'ing (and the rest of the alphabet) these earphones against all my others. I do not own another pair that have the mids recessed and veiled/muffled as much as these QT5s so there is something still definitely wrong. My list includes: MRD-EX1000, XBA-A3, T-Peos Altone200, Dunu DN-2000J, LZ A2, LZ A3, HiFiMan RE-600 and Yamaha EPH-100. While the sound signatures are wildly different between all those, none have the same muffled vocals I'm experiencing. 

I'm sure there are those who still think I'm an idiot and while that is likely true, please trust me when I say I am giving these every fair shot I possibly can and do not wish to ever spread misinformation. 

-Collin-

Nothing should be recessed on QT5s Colin. I wouldnt crank them up past comfortable listening volume. How many hours in are you? Bhazard and Paulus are right m8 you may very well be the first to have recieved a pair with manufacturer fault. Am dissapointed for you . At least Jim @HCK will be all over this and send you a replacement.

 

[soniccali]

I'm curious now. Does anybody think there are more people with defective pairs than there are owners with normal pairs?

 

[bhazard]

I'm curious now. Does anybody think there are more people with defective pairs than there are owners with normal pairs?

There are more with normal pairs based on aliexpress feedback, but still, it would be good if ZhiYin addressed this.

I remember back when I got a pair of Carbo Tenores that were way darker than what everyone else had. Wasn't an enjoyable experience when something has QC issues.

If mids sound muffled and veiled, they aren't working right. Try what I tried or get a replacement, otherwise you'll get the wrong impression of what these sound like. I was almost in the same boat, so I know how it feels.

 

[soniccali]

There are more with normal pairs based on aliexpress feedback, but still, it would be good if ZhiYin addressed this.

I remember back when I got a pair of Carbo Tenores that were way darker than what everyone else had. Wasn't an enjoyable experience when something has QC issues.

If mids sound muffled and veiled, they aren't working right. Try what I tried or get a replacement, otherwise you'll get the wrong impression of what these sound like. I was almost in the same boat, so I know how it feels.

Thanks for the response man. I'll keep it in mind when I do eventually order my pair.

 

[SeeSax]

Thanks everyone. It's somewhat comforting but also concerning to hear another member say the mids are recessed and the clarity isn't great.
 
I think the best thing for me to do is get a replacement pair and then judge them once and for all. 
 
-Collin-

 

[John2e]

Has anyone tried comparing 1 ear at a time with a mono recording ?
 
Seams if it's a quality control issue it would show itself in one of the ear phones (maybe two if you are really unlucky or the manufacturer was having a really bad day  

 ) and there would be a dramatic difference in sound between the Left and right ear phone.  

 

[GambL]

What size comply tips did you get to fit on these and are you happy with them?

 

[SeeSax]

Has anyone tried comparing 1 ear at a time with a mono recording ?

Seams if it's a quality control issue it would show itself in one of the ear phones (maybe two if you are really unlucky or the manufacturer was having a really bad day    ) and there would be a dramatic difference in sound between the Left and right ear phone.  

I did this, albeit with a stereo recording, and both sides sound identical. Maybe my ears are defective rather than the IEMs

 

[RedJohn456]

sucks for the people who got defective units I know that feel all too well  

 

[omastic]

Now, I will not go ahead and call the QT5's mid recessed but I can easily see someone describing them as such as there is indeed a dip in the upper mids. I have the Z5 (similar to A3) and the FLC8s (somewhat similar to the DN 2000j). Compared to these iems the QT5 is a lot thicker and warmer and in direct A/B comparison sounds veiled and lacking in clarity. There does not seem to be any information missing in the sound really but it is a MUCH more colored earphone that can lead to the impression of a "veil".
 
On the topic of driver initialization and crossover not working properly, no offense but I don't think a loose cable connection can cause "one" driver not firing or the crossover network not working properly. A loose connection is a loose connection, all it means is that the proper transmission of analogue electrical signal from the source to the earphone is not there. 
 
Same case for the topic of burning in. The burn in game is just too strong in this thread to be honest. It is something fundamentally impossible. If it works for you, great. But suggesting others that the QT5 sound will change drastically with some magic numbers of usage (without actually listening to them, even) is ridiculous. Yes the brain might get used to it, but its frequency response isn't changing one bit. 
 
Also, for those thinking of jumping in on the QT5 bandwagon because its a direct upgrade to the FLC8s/DN2000j, I believe its worth mentioning that the QT5 has a wildly different sound signature. It may be an upgrade only if you are looking for something entirely different and don't really like the FLC8s/DUNU signature, even then I am hesitant to call it an upgrade. QT5 is a good sounding earphone with a thick, lower mid forward signature (think the old westone UM3X/ Earsonics SM3). So if someone is expecting the linearity and clarity of the DUNU or FLC iems, QT5 is not quite there. 

 

[stenog]

Thanks @omastic for a very informative post. I am also guilty of jumping the hype bandwagon

, partly because of lack of knowledge. I have the FLC8s and my initially impression was, wow the QT5 are way better. But with more eartime and a/b with FLC8s i understand what you mean. Depending on the track/album and my mood i sometimes preferred the FLC8s over the QT5 and vice versa. 
 
We live and learn every day

 

[harpo1]

  Now, I will not go ahead and call the QT5's mid recessed but I can easily see someone describing them as such as there is indeed a dip in the upper mids. I have the Z5 (similar to A3) and the FLC8s (somewhat similar to the DN 2000j). Compared to these iems the QT5 is a lot thicker and warmer and in direct A/B comparison sounds veiled and lacking in clarity. There does not seem to be any information missing in the sound really but it is a MUCH more colored earphone that can lead to the impression of a "veil".
 
On the topic of driver initialization and crossover not working properly, no offense but I don't think a loose cable connection can cause "one" driver not firing or the crossover network not working properly. A loose connection is a loose connection, all it means is that the proper transmission of analogue electrical signal from the source to the earphone is not there. 
 
Same case for the topic of burning in. The burn in game is just too strong in this thread to be honest. It is something fundamentally impossible. If it works for you, great. But suggesting others that the QT5 sound will change drastically with some magic numbers of usage (without actually listening to them, even) is ridiculous. Yes the brain might get used to it, but its frequency response isn't changing one bit. 
 
Also, for those thinking of jumping in on the QT5 bandwagon because its a direct upgrade to the FLC8s/DN2000j, I believe its worth mentioning that the QT5 has a wildly different sound signature. It may be an upgrade only if you are looking for something entirely different and don't really like the FLC8s/DUNU signature, even then I am hesitant to call it an upgrade. QT5 is a good sounding earphone with a thick, lower mid forward signature (think the old westone UM3X/ Earsonics SM3). So if someone is expecting the linearity and clarity of the DUNU or FLC iems, QT5 is not quite there. 

I found your description of these spot on.  I've been burning them in for 50 plus hours now and the signature hasn't changed one bit.  I was A/B between these and my delta VII and at first thought the QT5 sounded veiled and lacked clarity.  However, after exclusively listening to the QT5's now for the better part of the day that is not the case.  These are definitely on the warmer side and a great complement to the delta VII.

 

[RedJohn456]

  Now, I will not go ahead and call the QT5's mid recessed but I can easily see someone describing them as such as there is indeed a dip in the upper mids. I have the Z5 (similar to A3) and the FLC8s (somewhat similar to the DN 2000j). Compared to these iems the QT5 is a lot thicker and warmer and in direct A/B comparison sounds veiled and lacking in clarity. There does not seem to be any information missing in the sound really but it is a MUCH more colored earphone that can lead to the impression of a "veil".
 
On the topic of driver initialization and crossover not working properly, no offense but I don't think a loose cable connection can cause "one" driver not firing or the crossover network not working properly. A loose connection is a loose connection, all it means is that the proper transmission of analogue electrical signal from the source to the earphone is not there. 
 
Same case for the topic of burning in. The burn in game is just too strong in this thread to be honest. It is something fundamentally impossible. If it works for you, great. But suggesting others that the QT5 sound will change drastically with some magic numbers of usage (without actually listening to them, even) is ridiculous. Yes the brain might get used to it, but its frequency response isn't changing one bit. 
 
Also, for those thinking of jumping in on the QT5 bandwagon because its a direct upgrade to the FLC8s/DN2000j, I believe its worth mentioning that the QT5 has a wildly different sound signature. It may be an upgrade only if you are looking for something entirely different and don't really like the FLC8s/DUNU signature, even then I am hesitant to call it an upgrade. QT5 is a good sounding earphone with a thick, lower mid forward signature (think the old westone UM3X/ Earsonics SM3). So if someone is expecting the linearity and clarity of the DUNU or FLC iems, QT5 is not quite there. 

Fantastic post bud. Really nailed it, I think the burn in factor is being given too much importance. I owned the Z5 some time back and I found it to be thick and dark, are you saying the QT5 is warmer and thicker than the Z5?
 
Guess I will find out soon enough

 

[ezekiel77]

I'll weigh in when mine arrives, hopefully next week. As of now The FLC8 is the pinnacle of mid-fi for me.

 

[omastic]

 
Fantastic post bud. Really nailed it, I think the burn in factor is being given too much importance. I owned the Z5 some time back and I found it to be thick and dark, are you saying the QT5 is warmer and thicker than the Z5?
 
Guess I will find out soon enough

Yes mate, I will say it is a good deal thicker than the Z5. Not really darker though, as the QT5 has comparable treble presence (may be just a tad less). QT5 is unique in this sense, it has a thick, boomy sound but with excellent treble extension.
 
Z5 sounds a lot more natural to my ears though.  

  I'll weigh in when mine arrives, hopefully next week. As of now The FLC8 is the pinnacle of mid-fi for me.

 
Looking forward to your impressions! Yes the FLC8s is one tough fella to beat.