[Bribo]

  My thoughts on the QT5 - http://www.head-fi.org/products/zhiyin-qt5/reviews/16328

Brooko,
Thanks for the informative review.  As one of those that fell for the hype, I really appreciate the science behind your review, Ill likely never buy another IEM that you have not reviewed first. However, since I already own them, and don't really want to purchase another IEM for a while after this somewhat painful learning experience, I applied the EQ recommendations that you based on your measurements.  Wow.... when I turn on and off equalization, I can really hear what you are writing about in your review.  
 
I have been using the following best guess of your settings below, if you have any further recommendations (or could provide a numerical table) it would be appreciated.  
 

 
 
Thanks Again for the work you put into this to help us out.
 
Bribo

 

[bhazard]

It's better to cut than boost on an anti-curve. If the chart shows it needs a 10db boost for example, an actual 10db boost may cause more harm than good. Adjust to what you think sounds best.

 

[Brooko]

  Brooko,
Thanks for the informative review.  As one of those that fell for the hype, I really appreciate the science behind your review, Ill likely never buy another IEM that you have not reviewed first. However, since I already own them, and don't really want to purchase another IEM for a while after this somewhat painful learning experience, I applied the EQ recommendations that you based on your measurements.  Wow.... when I turn on and off equalization, I can really hear what you are writing about in your review.  
 
I have been using the following best guess of your settings below, if you have any further recommendations (or could provide a numerical table) it would be appreciated.  
 

 
 
Thanks Again for the work you put into this to help us out.
 
Bribo

 
That looks pretty good to get it back to what would be considered a normal curve.  Now just tweak to you liking.  Probably the areas to tweak for personal pref will be the slider around 100 Hz for mid bass, 50 hz sound for sub bass, and the 2-3 kHz area if you want more vocal presence.

 

[Brooko]

Thing is, even as is, I still like it and preferred it over the Shockwave 3 and my other sub $100 sets (did anyone measure that yet?). Would I recommend it still? Hell no. I don't really care about how something looks, as I cared more about getting a silver plated 8 core cable. Insertion was fine to me. Not ideal at 7mm, but not sliding out of my ears either.

Why I still like it, I have no idea. I still think the separation and soundstage is there even without EQ. Measuring is vital now, as I didn't catch the lower mids/upper bass, but felt it was somewhat W shaped, and that was a head smack moment. Kind of embarrassing and will change how I approach reviews from now on. I did spend 3+ weeks with them as a daily, so it wasn't a one night thing. If I can go back and edit, I would change it to 4 stars, as it's still very good on a technical level to me with EQ to smooth out those problem areas. I'd still be interested to see if in fact the majority of ours are duds.

I do need to spend more time with $500+ sets though in comparison. Even the HE-500 didn't engage me enough to keep it more than a year without modding though.

 
Don't knock yourself Vince - we all make the same mistakes.  Easiest thing is to find a relatively flat or natural sounding reference, and then while you are evaluating, compare that to the new IEM you are reviewing.  So I normally give at least 5 days or so exclusive to get used to the signature, and then after that introduce my preference point so that I still have perspective.  And if you like the QT5 - that is fine.  I'd imagine you must like the EQ's version better though - huh?

 

[bhazard]

   
Don't knock yourself Vince - we all make the same mistakes.  Easiest thing is to find a relatively flat or natural sounding reference, and then while you are evaluating, compare that to the new IEM you are reviewing.  So I normally give at least 5 days or so exclusive to get used to the signature, and then after that introduce my preference point so that I still have perspective.  And if you like the QT5 - that is fine.  I'd imagine you must like the EQ's version better though - huh?

Well yeah, the curve I built initially based on the measurement was enough to see things I should have noticed. HTC 10's Boomsound correction (FR) does a lot of the same.
 
Metal normally has a tendency to scoop mids, and 36 Chambers is one of my favorite rap albums of all time, yet isn't exactly the most detailed master... Classical music would be an excellent way to test, but I'd probably lose any enjoyment listening.
 
I got that good feeling when listening that doesn't happen often, yet didn't notice things that weren't exactly right.. kind of like dating someone you think is perfect but people start seeing things you can't.

 

[avitron142]

It's weird to see such polarizing views on the same IEM, with potentially the same measurements. @Brooko have you used them with any of the metal songs @bhazard used? And @bhazard , have you tried Tundra and Brooko's other testing tracks?
 
Different genres can go a long way here people. Paul's taste for the midrange can perhaps help understand these sound horrible to him, while Vinny's metal tastes understandably welcome a boosted bass.
 
@Brooko I'm not familiar with all your testing tracks, but just to try to figure out what's going on, how many of them are non-vocal? From your review, it seemed that most of the testing was of midrange, clarity, and soundstage. The QT5 can suck in these areas but perhaps sound good in other, instrumental tracks.
 
I would personally try out Vinny's pair (and I actually might, I think he gave me the thumbs up), but I'm on the fence due to some pretty delayed reviews and actuary studying.
 
I hate the fact everyone else sees Paul's review and easily call the other reviewers "paid advertising", "liars", and "overhyped". If Brooko's trying to figure out what's going on, and he heard the horrible thing, so should everyone else. 

 

[Brooko]

  It's weird to see such polarizing views on the same IEM, with potentially the same measurements. @Brooko have you used them with any of the metal songs @bhazard used? And @bhazard , have you tried Tundra and Brooko's other testing tracks?
 
Different genres can go a long way here people. Paul's taste for the midrange can perhaps help understand these sound horrible to him, while Vinny's metal tastes understandably welcome a boosted bass.
 
@Brooko I'm not familiar with all your testing tracks, but just to try to figure out what's going on, how many of them are non-vocal? From your review, it seemed that most of the testing was of midrange, clarity, and soundstage. The QT5 can suck in these areas but perhaps sound good in other, instrumental tracks.
 
I would personally try out Vinny's pair (and I actually might, I think he gave me the thumbs up), but I'm on the fence due to some pretty delayed reviews and actuary studying.
 
I hate the fact everyone else sees Paul's review and easily call the other reviewers "paid advertising", "liars", and "overhyped". If Brooko's trying to figure out what's going on, and he heard the horrible thing, so should everyone else. 

 
With due respect Avi - I've been doing this for a long time now.  I state my preferences clearly, I state my set-up clearly, and I go through multiple genres every time I review.  I have standard tracks I check (they are listed).  Virtually the only genre I don't do is metal - but I have some hard rock tracks which border on metal presentations (eg Diary of Jayne). I would suggest you again look at the measurements - take a really good look at them - and then apply them to any neutral headphone you have and listen to the results.
 
My personal credibility on these forums is way too important for me to not try to judge things objectively.  I also know what reference sounds like - owning the HD600, T1, and previously the K701, DT880, SRH 1840 etc.
 
One of the comments in my review spoke volumes - from another reviewer (HiFiChris) who I also find very objective and fair when reviewing.  His comment was

Whoa, that's a horribly skewed tonality and especially midrange - I've never seen something this horribly looking and can just barely imagine how coloured and unnatural vocals would sound.

 
Contrast that with the other reviews. This has nothing to do with my "mid-range bias: - this is just an awful tuning - completely unnatural sounding.
 
I'll look forward to your further thoughts - after you hear them

 

[avitron142]

   
With due respect Avi - I've been doing this for a long time now.  I state my preferences clearly, I state my set-up clearly, and I go through multiple genres every time I review.  I have standard tracks I check (they are listed).  Virtually the only genre I don't do is metal - but I have some hard rock tracks which border on metal presentations (eg Diary of Jayne). I would suggest you again look at the measurements - take a really good look at them - and then apply them to any neutral headphone you have and listen to the results.
 
My personal credibility on these forums is way too important for me to not try to judge things objectively.  I also know what reference sounds like - owning the HD600, T1, and previously the K701, DT880, SRH 1840 etc.
 
One of the comments in my review spoke volumes - from another reviewer (HiFiChris) who I also find very objective and fair when reviewing.  His comment was
 
Contrast that with the other reviews. This has nothing to do with my "mid-range bias: - this is just an awful tuning - completely unnatural sounding.
 
I'll look forward to your further thoughts - after you hear them

 
Sure! If I wasn't clear, I apologize. I wasn't trying to attack your tracks or preferences; we all have preferences and you state them quite clearly. Just please understand though that I have a hard time concluding that the other reviewers' ears (or anyone's ears) are totally off and they have no idea what they're talking about.
 
I have your track list favorited, and I've been taking looks at them slowly to familiarize myself with your reference songs. I did not see metal, like you said - perfectly understandable, I can't listen to metal either.
 
But I also didn't see any electronic music, just worth noting. This is why I'm asking you, as someone who knows these songs better than me, how many of them are non-vocal. I don't doubt you when you say these sound horrible. But then it boggles my mind how these could have gotten amazing reviews in the first place. Couple that with different takes on the soundstage (which admittedly is more subjective), and I'm trying to see if there's another picture to all this.
 
I'm just trying to figure out what's at the bottom of this, and would rather have a solution more likely than "they're overhyped". Overhype tends (AFAIK) to be towards mediocre products - not horrible ones. And I've spoken with some of the reviewers before and they don't seem to have horrible ears. Again, I could be wrong, but I just want to know.
 
Is it so bad that I'm trying to find the answer to all this? I'm not doubting you, them, or anyone here - that's the point.

 

[Paulus XII]

   
With due respect Avi - I've been doing this for a long time now.  I state my preferences clearly, I state my set-up clearly, and I go through multiple genres every time I review.  I have standard tracks I check (they are listed).  Virtually the only genre I don't do is metal - but I have some hard rock tracks which border on metal presentations (eg Diary of Jayne). I would suggest you again look at the measurements - take a really good look at them - and then apply them to any neutral headphone you have and listen to the results.
 
My personal credibility on these forums is way too important for me to not try to judge things objectively.  I also know what reference sounds like - owning the HD600, T1, and previously the K701, DT880, SRH 1840 etc.
 
One of the comments in my review spoke volumes - from another reviewer (HiFiChris) who I also find very objective and fair when reviewing.  His comment was
 
Contrast that with the other reviews. This has nothing to do with my "mid-range bias: - this is just an awful tuning - completely unnatural sounding.
 
I'll look forward to your further thoughts - after you hear them

 
Ok, we all know by now that this is not your signature. Which is odd, but understandable. I think you've told us once you have some kind of hearing related issue? Isn't it possible that this could be the reason why you need more clarity/hot treble to compensate that deficiency, or the IEM won't sound good to you? Like the DUNU DN-2000J that was your perfect sound signature and several others can't tolerate the hot treble/clarity? By the way, I loved the 2000J, but I'm a treble-head and not sensitive to hot treble at all. Because the QT5 is unlike all that, it's a dark IEM, yet extremely resolving.
 
Don't take me wrong for asking you this, I always had this doubt.

 

[RedJohn456]

  It's weird to see such polarizing views on the same IEM, with potentially the same measurements. @Brooko have you used them with any of the metal songs @bhazard used? And @bhazard , have you tried Tundra and Brooko's other testing tracks?
 
Different genres can go a long way here people. Paul's taste for the midrange can perhaps help understand these sound horrible to him, while Vinny's metal tastes understandably welcome a boosted bass.
 
@Brooko I'm not familiar with all your testing tracks, but just to try to figure out what's going on, how many of them are non-vocal? From your review, it seemed that most of the testing was of midrange, clarity, and soundstage. The QT5 can suck in these areas but perhaps sound good in other, instrumental tracks.
 
I would personally try out Vinny's pair (and I actually might, I think he gave me the thumbs up), but I'm on the fence due to some pretty delayed reviews and actuary studying.
 
I hate the fact everyone else sees Paul's review and easily call the other reviewers "paid advertising", "liars", and "overhyped". If Brooko's trying to figure out what's going on, and he heard the horrible thing, so should everyone else. 

 
The bolded part is what I don't get from the earlier reviews. And I see one review has already had its stars lowered as well. 
 
As Shakira likes to say her hips measurements don't lie mate. The measurements of multiple units have all proved to be the same and none of the measurements match up to the earlier reviews (no knock against anyone). And for metal, I personally need more treble and midrange rather than boosted bass, as that brings out the guitar and drum textures but ymmv. 

 

[RedJohn456]

   
Ok, we all know by now that this is not your signature. Which is odd, but understandable. I think you've told us once you have some kind of hearing related issue? Probably why you need more clarity/hot treble to compensate that deficiency, or the IEM won't sound good to you? Like the DUNU DN-2000J that was your perfect sound signature and several others can't tolerate the hot treble/clarity? By the way, I loved the 2000J, but I'm a treble-head and not sensitive to hot treble at all. Because the QT5 is unlike all that, it's a dark IEM, yet extremely resolving.

 
Talk about reaching for straws mate... For one thing he has had trouble with treble in past, like with the VE Duke for example, which admittedly is a bright sounding headphone, and also peaky for most. 
 
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, you keep reiterating QT5 is resolving yet you are not exactly in a rush to get it measured either...Kind of odd behaviour considering you are a reviewer. Just my observation thats all, not meant as a slight. 
 
I got no horse in this race personally, but this sort of disparity is something I have yet to witness since discovering head-fi and I am sure many would like to know just what is at  the heart of all this! 
 

 

 

[bhazard]

   
Talk about reaching for straws mate... For one thing he does has had trouble with treble in past, like with the VE Duke, which admittedly is a bright sounding headphone, and also peaky for most. 
 
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, you keep reiterating QT5 is resolving yet you are not exactly in a rush to get it measured either...Kind of odd behaviour considering you are a reviewer. Just my observation thats all, not meant as a slight. 
 
I got no horse in this race personally, but this sort of disparity is something I have yet to witness since discovering head-fi and I am sure many would like to know just what is at  the heart of all this! 
 

 

The only way is to see for yourself how off yet appealing these can be at times. Curiosity tour of my pair before I perform surgery on them for "science"?

 

[Djinnenjous]

Two days ago I was elated to learn that my QT5 had shipped. Now they're hours away from my home and I already have buyer's remorse. I haven't even seen the packaging yet and all of this sudden negativity has left me feeling like I should have just replaced my broken FLC8S with another pair.

I just went from feeling like it's Christmas Eve, to Judgment Day.

 

[RedJohn456]

  The only way is to see for yourself how off yet appealing these can be at times. Curiosity tour of my pair before I perform surgery on them for "science"?

No need to sacrifice/operate on your unit Vince, I trust that you really are enjoying them, thats all that matters in the end. I have followed your reviews from the beginning, and I used to spend most of my time in the chinese thread back in the day. 
 

 
 
But I am sure people would be really interested in hearing the QT5, and if there are enough canadian members in said tour, I might join in

 

[avitron142]

   
The bolded part is what I don't get from the earlier reviews. And I see one review has already had its stars lowered as well. 
 
As Shakira likes to say her hips measurements don't lie mate. The measurements of multiple units have all proved to be the same and none of the measurements match up to the earlier reviews (no knock against anyone). And for metal, I personally need more treble and midrange rather than boosted bass, as that brings out the guitar and drum textures but ymmv. 

One review lowered it's rating by half a star, probably today. It could be he genuinely feels it deserves it, and it could be because of peer pressure. I know I would feel either.
 
One thing your (and everyone, pretty much) is missing is that it's possible (not likely, not for sure, but possible) that there was a bad batch, or that they changed the tuning for a batch (there's different versions on their website). This would explain the same measurements multiple units being the same. And this is probably why @Brooko wants all the units measured - to rule out this possibility.
 
Did Golden Ears (or the other happy reviewers, other than @bhazard) have their unit measured? Sorry if this was answered, I just joined the thread.