EPZ Q5

EPZ Q5 Review: The Kingslayer​

WATCH FULL REVIEW HERE:​

PRICE: $50​

PROS:​

Well-done Bright U-Shaped Sound signature
Clean but deep-reaching low end
Open, clean midrange
Energetic but smooth and well-extended treble region
Fantastic technical ability
Comfortable fit
Good accessories

CONS:​

Not for treble sensitives
Mids sound a little thin and dry
The design might seem a little unoriginal
Not the most stable fit
MMCX (bias)

WHO THIS SET IS FOR:​

Trebleheads
People who want a very technical sounding set for under $100
People who like MMCX connectors (a rarity nowadays)
People who like a very clean and lean sound
People who want a very lightweight and comfortable IEM

WHO THIS SET ISN’T FOR:​

Treble sensitives
People who want bodied lower mids
People who don’t like MMCX connectors
People who want a more stable fit
People who want a more original design

RECOMMENDED GENRES:​

Classical
Vocal Pop
Jazz

SHORT REVIEW:​

EPZ has made a statement in the budget scene with the Q5 proving itself to be a proper contender against the likes of the Simgot EW200. Bright neutral to give your listening sessions extra spice, the Q5 is a very technical set for the price that doesn’t skimp out on tonality. It might be a little too bright for most people and it may not be the best for music with lower midrange emphasis, but there’s much to love about the Q5 if you’re a treble-seeking, technical-focused sound. RECOMMENDED WITH CAVEATS!

FULL REVIEW:​

In the land of the Chi-Fi, many climb the treacherous mountain of “Value”. Reviews and consumers alike argue that IEM is the best IEM or what brand is the best brand. With new brands popping out faster than my acne, how can a brand stand out from the market? Be bold and weird? Be safe and generalist. Or put out so many sets to overwhelm the market into picking one.

EPZ is a brand many have come to love, not for providing weird sets alone but neither for playing it safe. They live in that middle ground of making safe yet focused sets depending on their target demographic, whether it’d be gamers or hardcore audiophiles. So when they created a set that rose to become the competitor to one of, if not, the biggest budget IEM in the market today, how did it fair?

DISCLAIMER: The EPZ Q5 was sent over by EPZ in exchange for my honest thoughts.

PLAY IT SAFE, BUT PLAY IT COOL​

EPZ has been a brand that I’ve been paying close attention to for a while. They’ve put out very interesting sets in the past and have garnered quite the following recently. So when I got the opportunity to review their products, specifically the Q5, I was stoked. The Q5 made waves last year and now is the perfect time to see how this $50 truly fairs in today’s hyper-competitive market

UNBOXING​

The unboxing experience of the EPZ Q5 is pretty bog standard for this price range. Coming in a rather large longitudinal box that features the FR graph, the layout of the inclusions are pretty nice and easy to find.

Here are the full list of inclusions:

• EPZ Q5 IEMs
• 6 pairs of eartips
• Carrying Pouch
• Paperwork

For $50, the inclusions seem just about acceptable. A nice, spacious case with 3 sets of unique-looking ear tips is more than enough for me, but definitely not beating the competition in accessorizing.



More on the eartips, these look like a stubbier Dunu S&S tip and depending on the IEM, these could genuinely fit fantastic. On the Q5, they fit quite nice but prefer a set with longer, deeper nozzles to really fit well.



The rest of the eartips are your basic 07 style tips that are tried and tested. You either love it or hate it. No in-between.

BUILD & FIT​

If you are in any way knowledgeable about different kinds of in-ear monitors, you can probably a very distinct similarity between the aesthetics of the Q5 to another set.



But before diving into that, let’s talk internals. The Q5 features a single Ceramic Carbon Nano moving coil dynamic driver housed in a DLP 3D printed resin shell and features an MMCX connection. Not common we find MMCX in the budget realm nowadays, but this serves as an option for those who like MMCX connectors. I do not like MMCX connectors myself, but I can respect those who do. I want to put a little bit of focus on that Ceramic Carbon Nano dynamic driver as this is not common to find in this price range. A set that comes to mind with a similar configuration is the NiceHCK N3 which features a 7-layer piezoelectric ceramic tweeter on top of the 10mm carbon nanotube dynamic driver. Most sets at this price go with LCP, DLC or a mixture of both (SCP of EW200) so this is certainly interesting to see.



But let’s cut the chitchat. Yes, this looks VERY similar to the Meze Advar with the little sinkhole in the center and the overall rounded shape that gives it a very prestige and premium look. The difference. My unit in particular has less in common with the Advar as it is in a white and gold color but the black and gold are particularly similar. Regardless, I’m not here to claim that they stole the design. Other aspects such as the overall size, the inner shell and the shape are different from each other. But I thought it was interesting to see the similarities, especially with the little butthole-looking faceplate both feature. Nonetheless, the build quality feels REALLY good for a resin build. It feels more like ceramic due to the white finish and if it wasn’t for the fact that it doesn’t make any sound when I clack, I would’ve been fooled to think it was a glassy material.



Anyways, the fit is thankfully pretty good. It’s a little shallow depending on the eartips you use, but the stability and seal are surprisingly impressive for the form factor. This is similar to the EW200 in a way due to the small, lightweight and fatigue-free fit that comes at the cost of seal and stability. In the Q5’s case, it improves upon all aspects but, depending on your ear anatomy, may have brought in a rather nasty case of driver flex. Personally, I haven’t experienced issues with Driver Flex, but I know people have noted that they’ve experienced Driver Flex with the Q5.



You might think I’m gonna talk about how much I hate the MMCX since the Q5 is one of the few IEMs in the budget space released recently with MMCX, but I also know that some people have had the same experience I had with MMCX but with 2-pin. And at the end of the day, if you don’t cable roll every single day, you’re fine. If you do, well, my point with MMCX still stands.

The cable is alright, but admittedly on the thinner side. It’s very lightweight and does not irritate my sensitive skin, but it’s even thinner than the cable that comes with the likes of the EW200. I like how soft the cable is, but this also leads to being quite tangle-prone due to the combination of the thinness and the softness. Pair that with the fact that it’s terminated to MMCX guarantees that if I get the chance, I am 100% cable rolling the Q5.

SOUND​

Sound Signature​

The EPZ Q5 features a bright u-shaped sound signature with a boosted low end, slightly recessed and thin midrange, and very sparkly and energetic treble. As someone who finds bright v or u-shaped IEMs as their guilty pleasure, the Q5 was quite the treat when I first put them in after spending days on the rather chill Dunu Falcon Ultra. This follows the tried and tested bright u-shaped sound signature that many of the highly-acclaimed sets have been featuring (and will compare to later)

Drivability​

The Q5 is quite easy to drive with a sensitivity of 109db and an impedance of 26ohms. But there’s something about that Ceramic-Carbon diaphragm that makes this thing sound considerably better with better sources, more than other sets I’ve tried in this price range. I highly recommend using a cleaner, more powerful, and warmer (personal preference) source to balance out the brightness and bring out the best of this set.

Bass​

As a bright u-shaped IEM, you’d expect the bass of the Q5 to take the immediate back seat in the overall tuning. But the Q5 doesn’t throw the bass out for the sake of the sparkle. The bass of the Q5 is clean, and tight but kicks when it needs to. It doesn’t force out the bass like another u-shaped set, instead giving it a cleaner and deeper bass that allows for it to be quite versatile depending on the genre. It’s not the most tactile bass which saddened me nor did it provide sufficient note weight for low midrange vocals and instruments, but it did act as the perfect balance to keep the mids from sounding overly thin and distant with the deep, rumbly, and impactful low end on the tracks that call for it and a clean and tight bass on tracks that don’t.

Listening to Umbrella by Penthouse was quite a treat, albeit lacking in the texture. Especially during the start with the slow but very groovy bassline, the Q5 was able to present the bass with such finesse to make a man cry. The texture was the biggest turn-off for me though as the midbass lacked the punch and tactility that I looked for in this track

Mids​

U-shaped sets have a very distinct midrange quality that sounds neither recessed nor forward (at least in the lower registers). The Q5 is no different as the brighter tone affects the vocals by making the lower frequency vocals sound a little bit thin on some more balanced tracks, but sufficiently warm on warmer tracks. I loved how clean the vocals on the Q5 sounded overall. It’s not really the best for male vocals or bassy instruments, but upper vocals and higher frequency instruments like violins, flutes, and the like sound wonderful. The beautiful of bright u-shaped sets like the Q5 is that when you listen to female vocal-centric or instrumental tracks, the balance of the deep low end and the emphasis in the upper mids give it such a harmonious sound that my usual midbass-focused tastes can’t really do.

Listening to the likes of Laufey, Diana Krall and Samara Joy were quite the treat. Their vocals are on the lower registers, around contralto to mezzo-soprano and the leaner nature of the midrange give their vocals the much-needed leanness to make their vocals sound ethereal. However, Earth, Wind & Fire showcases the weakpoint of the Q5 when it comes to male vocals with Maurice White’s vocals often sounding quite thin and dry, lacking engagement but keeping vocals sounding clean

Treble​

The highlight of the Q5. This is what will make you fall in love with the Q5 or what’ll turn you away. The treble is sharp, snappy and energetic, moreso than your usual neutral tuned set in this price and follows a similar level of energy as the likes of the EW200 and Qingluan Z4. The difference is that while the Q5 sounds bright, it’s a smooth kind of bright. Low to mid treble have such a smooth overall balance that doesn’t sound overly sharp but is definitely hot depending on the track. I think it’s obvious but just to be sure everyone’s on the same page, this is not for treble sensitive people. This is for the trebleheads like myself who absolutely LOVE this level of sparkle. The only thing I would like to point out is the rather aggressive upper treble presentation that might come across as overly airy for some people. This reminds me of the treble of the Ziigat Nuo and TRN Conch, but not at the same level thanks to the contrast with the upper mids.

Listening to Toto’s IV showcases the hot refinement of the treble that the Q5 can produce. It’s hot, but it’s a smooth level of hot. It’s not stabbing, moreso that it brings out the treble detail a lot. And listening to this on DSD is quite the treat as you get a lot of that detail without going deaf thanks to the brighter tuning. This also makes the Q5 perfect for darker tracks like Shooting Star by Penthouse. The brightness gives the track the much needed upper frequency energy that most sets can’t really give.

Technicalities​

Arguably the biggest reason you’d even consider getting this set, the Q5 is an absolute technical beast for the price. This is a $50 set that puts $100 IEMs to shame with how absolutely amazing the technical ability is.

First, separation and layering is top notch. Listening to complex tracks is a breeze with this set, even with metal tracks like the Constellation album by August Burns Red. Instruments have a sufficient spacing from one another that doesn’t sound too wide and distracting but not cramped in any way Imaging and headstage is wonderful with instruments with a very tall and wide perceived stage. This thing is also insanely resolving as the brightness doesn’t sound forced and gives that “hi-res” sound. The only thing that this suffers in is dynamics as, especially in the low end, the tactility and note definition can get a little bit soft and smoothened out. But it does still maintain superb detail retreival in the top end, making it sound almost like a hybrid set.

REAL WORLD USAGE​

Casual Use​

Unfortunately, I don’t fancy this set for casual use. It all stems with the fact that the treble energy can distract and push back the lower-frequency sounds a little bit too much that makes the overall sound a little unengaging, particularly in movies. Watching YouTube content sounds pretty nice, but depending on how the voices were mixed, can also be a little pushed back and bring the harsher sound up. The fit, while great, is not the ideal fit for commutes as it has the tendency to slip out over time. But sitting at your desk and working is perfectly sufficient.

Gaming Use​

Similar to casual use, the gaming performance of the Q5 is solid but not what I’d really go for. The lack of a midbass emphasis makes it quite poor for playing games like Valorant that need midbass to bring out some of the nuanced lower midrange sounds and the brighter nature can give certain guns a little bit of a sharp tinge that might become unbearable over a long period of time. It fairs worse with environmental games with the only thing going for it being the fact that it can bring out nuances in the high frequencies of the sound design. It sounds a little dull on the lower frequencies and might come across a little boring sounding.

COMPARISONS​

vs Simgot EW200​

You can’t talk competitive bright u shaped sets under $100 without mentioning the Simgot EW200. The EW200 sports a more engaging, richer, tactile and impactful bass with a warmer low end overall with a more defined overall sound. The Q5 on the other hand has a cleaner, smoother and snappier sound with better separation and headstage. It’ll come down to whether you want a more engaging or cleaner sound. But you can’t go wrong with either set.

vs EPZ Q1 Pro​

The little brother who isn’t that much cheaper than the Q5, the Q1 Pro has a leaner, thinner but less bright overall tone with more emphasis on the upper midrange. It’s overall more bass shy with a flatter but oddly better-sounding timbre midrange compared to the Q5. The tamer treble contributes a lot to this as the Q5’s boosted treble can make the overall sound thinner compared to the Q1 Pro. However, the Q5 has better overall technical ability compared to the Q1 Pro and makes the Q1 Pro sound closer to $20 than $50.

vs CCA Duo​

Another bright u-shaped set that is closer to sounding neutral, the Duo has a better overall tonal balance but a worse extension on both the bass and the treble. The Q5 is more technical than the Duo, but the Duo has better midrange timbre and balance that makes both male and female vocals sound balanced and clean. The Q5 is more technical sounding compared to the Duo overall.

vs CCA Rhapsody​

The Rhapsody is a considerably more fun, engaging, and impactful sounding set overall due to the massive bass boost complimented with the forward upper mids. As a whole, the Q5 is the more coherent sounding set as the Rhapsody suffers from having a slower bass and faster treble. The Q5 is more technical and dynamic sounding overall but the Rhapsody has a richer and deeper sound overall.

CONCLUSION​

The Q5 is arguably the set that put Q5 in people’s mouths. The Q5 is undoubtedly one of the best sounding IEMs you can get under $100 if you seek that bright, technical and analytical sound that doesn’t compromise on fun. This is the perfect competition for the king of the budget, the EW200 with its similar bright U-Shaped sound signature that took the market by storm last year.

But just like the EW200, the Q5 is not for everyone’s ears. No set is, but the Q5 is especially unforgiving for treble sensitives as it has the tendency to sound even sharper in the upper treble. The lower mids also sound a little thin due to the treble emphasis and leaner midbass and the tactility leaves more to be desired. The shape and the MMCX connector may also turn some people away who prefer a larger shell and a 2-pin connector.

However, there’s very little to fault about the Q5 as a whole. For $50, you get a small, lightweight, and comfortable IEM that sparkles unlike anything else. If you’re a treblehead like me and like a proper bright U-shaped IEM that focuses on being analytical, the Q5 is a must-buy!

Thank you for reading my review on the EPZ Q5. If you would like to order one, consider using the non-affiliated link below: https://www.aliexpress.us/item/1005005790619423.html?gatewayAdapt=glo2usa

Disclaimers

I bought this iem with my own money. This review is completely subjective.



Accessories

Q5 comes with a really good box design, carrying case, eartips, cable and iem itself. Good accessories and presentation for the price.



Build

Q5 fully made out of plastic and comes with a metal nozzle. It has a really good quality cable.



Sound-Tonality and Technicalities

I love this IEM because it has a really good tune and driver quality for 50-60 dollars. Q5 have a pretty decent soundstage depth, imaging and bass presentation with clear highs and midrange. Instruments sounding really textured. And it has enough note weight. The only issue is upper midrange sometimes being too much… But i think this is not a problem for that price range.




Conclusion

Overall, this is a really good iem for the price. But you have cheaper and better options like Simgot Ew200…

EPZ Q5- Replica of an end?




DISCLAIMER:

This was sent by EPZ themselves.

I actually already made a video review of this unit. But I feel like I didn’t give enough justice. I am writing this review to reiterate my findings with the said product. That being said, my impressions are based on my biases and preferences.


Videos review here:


1st impressions




Final impressions





WHAT’S IN THE BOX?


Well, the box I got is actually bigger compared to other competitors. Not that it matters sound wise, but I do feel that it could have been smaller just for the convenience of shipping it. Anyhow, inside you get a standard inclusion of cables, eartips, cables, and ofcourse the IEMS. Nothing much to say really, other than, the box is well thought out, but could be a bit too big for some.




BUILD and COMFORT


They are built quite nice. I am very familiar with the fit because it has a bean shaped design which is similar to one of my favorite IEM in my collection, the Acoustune RS One. It is worth mentioning that this does have an MMCX pin connector. Personally, I don’t mind because I don’t cable roll that much recently. I also think that the design works better with a rotating mmcx than a stable 2 pin, at least for my ears.

Comfort is good and I think I can wear them for hours on end.




SETUP:

-Shanling M3X using UAPP, Hiby ang stock player

-stock cable

-stick eartips don't work for me so I used aet07s




A contender at $50-$100


I honestly think that the DD they are using is of good quality. When people ask suggestions about which IEMS to buy in this price range, I can only give a few, and this includes the EPZ Q5. I am confident that the fit is good for everyone, and the sound quality they get is pretty decent.


The overall tonality is leaning to a U shaped signature with emphasis in upper mids to lower treble. Bass has enough presence to support male vocals and instruments. Probably not slamming and punchy bass, but just enough to keep you engaged.


The mids are natural but with a tinge of brightness. I think there is a peak around 7-8k, and it can be overbearing in some tracks, especially when female vocals reach a certain high note. However, I do find the vocals to be very mature and pleasing sounding with the right volume.

The quality that I like about this is set is probably its technical ability. It extracts a lot of detail making you think they sound Hi-Res. I mean, they really are technical in a way that, it also gives you enough stage proportion. The upper mid peak might be the biggest contributor to its “resolution” but I don’t think that is the only reason.


EPZ house sound


As mentioned above, it might not be the peaks but a house sound from EPZ. I heard the EPZ K1, and I felt the same way. Although the K1 has a different sound signature, but how the details are presented is similar. It’s like, my ears hear the peak, my mind knows they can be bright, but they are not piercing, or probably just edging it.


The extra energy that EPZ gives in that region is enough for it be remembered. Heck the EPZ Q5 sometimes feels like a hybrid of 1DD+2BA. That is how good it separates instruments and layers things.


The treble isn’t particularly peaky, but I can see that it needs some refinement. It has enough sparkle, or however you may call it haha. But yeah, it has this incisive quality to it. Cymbals sound fine, well actually above average in that regard.


What's there to fault?


I know, I know. The graph says otherwise. But I believe my ears more than what I graph. The measurement does have some accuracy in determining its sound signature. But what I am baffled is the quality of sound it presents. Drums sound more textured, guitars sound screechingly good, if that is even a word lol, and just the overall feel to it sounds spacious and well layered.

Maybe the only CON I can find is the peak at 7-8k from the graph, other than that, I think it is really hard to fault this IEM with the value proposition.



PROS

Good balance in bass and treble

Natural sounding string instruments

Good detail retreival

Good stage proportion especially stage depth



CONS

Upper mids can be shouty

Treble can have more natural presentation especially cymbals(hi-hats..no problem with rides)

Male vocals can use more heft




SCORING

-Please be reminded that my scoring is always based on its price range.


TUNING - 2.5

BASS - 2.5

MIDS - 2.5

TREBLE - 2.5

TECHS - 3


Final SCORE = 13


A rank


-generally better than other sets. Very good for the price but the tonality might not match your preferences




Check my scoring here :


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15WhgCgiMzWfF3ccgB8SK5-Cg7m87kpIShtxsyg2u-AI/edit?usp=sharing




COMPARISONS



EW200

This is inevitable. When I heard the EPZ Q5, the EW200 came to my mind. The tuning is similar in a way that, the drivers used on these sets are of high quality. Clarity might be on par, but I think the Q5 strikes a better balance in bass and treble. Both have upper mid peaks, so in a way, the Q5 mitigates that peak with its bass. On the other hand, the EW200 might suit for people who looks for a more forward treble presentation


Celest Pandamon

This set might be a bit old, relative to how fast Chifi has been releasing IEMS. But I still think that the Pandamon is still relevant. Although tonally, they might not be comparable, I do think that technically, the Pandamon can have more nuance with its presentation. They have different drivers to begin with, but if you were to choose, the Pandamon leans to a more natural and neutral tuning. Pick the EPZ Q5 if you want a more balanced sound


Crinacle Red

The crinalce red presents a Dual DD setup. Does it mean it is better? I might think otherwise. Although tonally, the Red is much smoother and more correct sounding, but at times, I just don’t feel the music. I would probably pick the Q5 if I want a more fun sound.




FINAL THOUGHTS


When the Q5 was released, there were mixed feelings about it, if I remember correctly. There were criticisms about copying a design from another brand, while people who initially heard them, praised the Q5 for its cost performance.


This is ChiFi, and I won’t be surprised when one day, moondrop copies KZ designs. I am not saying it is likely to happen, but I hope you get what I mean.


Other than the design criticisms, I do think EPZ deserves some praise with this budget offering. Having heard of their other models like the G10 and K1, EPZ continues to surprise the market with its price to performance ratio, tuning direction and the quality of sound each model offers.


Is EPZ a copycat? Well in my opinion, they might have made a replica of a possible endgame set for folks who are budget constrained.





==========================

WHERE TO BUY: non affiliate links


https://www.linsoul.com/products/epz-q5


Just found this amazing item on AliExpress. Check it out!

US $72.50 | EPZ Q5 Earphones Wired HIFI Ceramic Carbon Nano Moving Coil IEM In Ear Monitor MMCX Detachable Cable Earbuds Gaming Headset

https://a.aliexpress.com/_olPXjJo





MY LIBRARY:

I grew up listening to 90’s music. Alternative, punk-rock, screamo, rap, Philippine OPM, Anime songs, JPOP, KPOP, metal, reggae and a lot more.

The artists I regularly listen to are:


Rock-Alternative-Metal

Incubus, 311, BMTH, Matchbox 20, The Goo Goo Dolls, Paramore, Polyphia, The Calling,, Babymetal, Metallica, Slipknot, Bon Jovi, Coheed and Cambria, Deftones, Red Hot, Green day,


OPM(Original Pinoy Music):

E-heads, Slapshock, Parokya, Urbanddub, Up Dharma Down, Bamboo, IV of spade, Kamikazee, Rivermaya


POP:

IU, Yoasobi, Yorushika, Milet, Reona, Maroon 5, Coldplay, Bruno Mars, Ed Sheeran, Taylor, Dua Lipa, Oliva Rodrigo, Billie Eilish


OTHERS:

Carpenters, Micheal Learns to Rock, Celine Dion, Bob Marley, Sitti, Daft Punk, Pink Floyed, Earth wind and fire, Amber rubarth, Sia, Yosi Horikawa


I listen to more, but I can’t just list them all here.haha. Just giving you an idea on what I listen.


Thanks for reaching here. Hope you enjoyed reading.