esanthosh
Skilled
When I bought the e-Q5, I was interested in a couple of things. First is the technology - this is a Moving Armature IEM, which is a newer technology said to blend dynamic and BA strengths. Secondly, I was very interested about e-Q7. I read that this is better than e-Q7 at a lower price point. Since I don't have a mid-centric IEM in my collection, it made 'sense' to spend a ton on e-Q5, $250 to be precise. I got them as part of the Mega package deal from Musica Acoustics, Japan (FX-700, e-Q5 and Piano Forte II earbuds). At that price point, it is one of the costliest phones in my collection bettered only by SM3 @ $320 and trails FX700 by a few dollars.
Photos:
Build Quality:
e-Q5 was packaged in a Red can that I can think of using in a few applications, none of which involves an IEM. Despite that, e-Q5 has one of the nicest build qualities I've come across. They are better than the much costlier SM3 and simply a class apart compared to most of the lower priced offerings. The cable is thicker, but it neither has chin slider/cord cinch nor strain relief where the cable enters the driver housing. Will the lack of strain relief be an issue? Only time will tell. I have worn them over the ear for the duration of my impressions, which is a few hours.
Sound Impressions:
Initially, when I ran my tracks (mostly vocal based ones), I was greatly impressed by e-Q5 so much so that it became only the third IEM besides Phonak PFE (my first BA), DDM (my first musical IEM) to make me say "wow". While PFE still impresses me and DDM to an extent (since then it has been overtaken by TF10 and FX700), e-Q5 slipped a bit in my opinion.
What I expected was a mid-centric IEM with a bit of bass and treble. After a few initial listens, I am thinking e-Q5 as more of a balanced IEM than a mid-centric one.
Bass of e-Q5 has some texture, but less on impact. It certainly has more body than that of a DBA-02. Bass is not a weak point in e-Q5 unless you are an avid fan of trance/electronica. For most of the other music, it has enough quantity, texture, body and even some string weight to sail through. Personally, I prefer the bass presentations of FX700/TF10 and even DBA-02 more.
Mids of e-Q5 are very forward. As a result, e-Q5 shines with genres I don't usually care about. In that aspect, e-Q5 is somewhat special. It made me listen through vocal albums and Jazz albums more than my other IEMs. Mids are neutral, smooth, but to my ears not rich. I can only call them mellow. It certainly does not appeal as much to me as the mids of SM3, which are warm, nearly as much forward, but are in your face. On the surface, they don't appear as incredibly detailed as some of the other IEMs like RE-252. SM3 too is not as micro-detailed as DBA-02. But, it's somewhat catchy presentation of mids saves it so far from my critique.
Treble of e-Q5 is recessed and lacks sparkle. But, it is said that it's better extended than e-Q7. The treble does not roll off as early as RE1, has a decent body, but not as appealing to me as I am a treble-head :ashamed:. I will not risk talking about extension as I can only hear a few hundred hz above 15 Khz. Sibilance is completely absent from e-Q5, which adds to it's strengths.
The sound stage and presentation of e-q5 is a tad strange. It reminds me a lot of RE-252. In RE-252, the details are spread more in stretched plane from left to right. But, e-Q5 is a tad different from RE-252 in the manner of imaging. The sound stage of e-Q5 is a tad wide than normal, but not incredibly large, spacious or wide by any stretch of imagination. At most times, I find the music between two planes - forward and more forward. But unlike RE-252, e-Q5 does have the height element in it's presentation. It positions instruments more in a height-width plane than the normal width-depth style. Most of the times, I can imagine sounds as points in space like stars in a fake, compressed sky. The depth is similar directly out of Clip+ and S9, but improves a bit with iPod Touch 3G -> LOD -> iBasso T3. I don't find e-Q5 to be as timbre rich as FX700 or even a HJE900 and DDM.
So, what's wrong with e-Q5? In a way, it is balanced, smooth, never sibilant and handles vocal based music very well. But, it lacks the aggression or details which is required for me to enjoy the music and hence tends to get boring with my usual genres. The presentation is unexciting, too smooth and laid-back to my ears. It sounds much closer to a dynamic IEM in more ways than a BA. BAs are mostly known for their good speed and incredible detail, which is not the case here. Dynamics are known for their great musical presentation and bass presentation, which is again not the case here. So, is it an epic fail? Not totally. It made me turn my attention to certain genres (Jazz, Vocals) which I usually do not bother about. In that sense, it's a good IEM. But, it's also a drawback - if you play to it's strengths, it will be a nice IEM. But, if you expect more because it's said to be a top-tier IEM, you'll likely be disappointed.
Is it worth $250? I think I'll reserve that judgment till I am able to compare them head-to-head against RE-262 someday. At this point, I've not given it as much time as I wanted to, because I invariably choose other IEMs over it most of the time. Let's see if my impressions after a few months change, though at this stage, I doubt it.
Photos:
Build Quality:
e-Q5 was packaged in a Red can that I can think of using in a few applications, none of which involves an IEM. Despite that, e-Q5 has one of the nicest build qualities I've come across. They are better than the much costlier SM3 and simply a class apart compared to most of the lower priced offerings. The cable is thicker, but it neither has chin slider/cord cinch nor strain relief where the cable enters the driver housing. Will the lack of strain relief be an issue? Only time will tell. I have worn them over the ear for the duration of my impressions, which is a few hours.
Sound Impressions:
Initially, when I ran my tracks (mostly vocal based ones), I was greatly impressed by e-Q5 so much so that it became only the third IEM besides Phonak PFE (my first BA), DDM (my first musical IEM) to make me say "wow". While PFE still impresses me and DDM to an extent (since then it has been overtaken by TF10 and FX700), e-Q5 slipped a bit in my opinion.
What I expected was a mid-centric IEM with a bit of bass and treble. After a few initial listens, I am thinking e-Q5 as more of a balanced IEM than a mid-centric one.
Bass of e-Q5 has some texture, but less on impact. It certainly has more body than that of a DBA-02. Bass is not a weak point in e-Q5 unless you are an avid fan of trance/electronica. For most of the other music, it has enough quantity, texture, body and even some string weight to sail through. Personally, I prefer the bass presentations of FX700/TF10 and even DBA-02 more.
Mids of e-Q5 are very forward. As a result, e-Q5 shines with genres I don't usually care about. In that aspect, e-Q5 is somewhat special. It made me listen through vocal albums and Jazz albums more than my other IEMs. Mids are neutral, smooth, but to my ears not rich. I can only call them mellow. It certainly does not appeal as much to me as the mids of SM3, which are warm, nearly as much forward, but are in your face. On the surface, they don't appear as incredibly detailed as some of the other IEMs like RE-252. SM3 too is not as micro-detailed as DBA-02. But, it's somewhat catchy presentation of mids saves it so far from my critique.
Treble of e-Q5 is recessed and lacks sparkle. But, it is said that it's better extended than e-Q7. The treble does not roll off as early as RE1, has a decent body, but not as appealing to me as I am a treble-head :ashamed:. I will not risk talking about extension as I can only hear a few hundred hz above 15 Khz. Sibilance is completely absent from e-Q5, which adds to it's strengths.
The sound stage and presentation of e-q5 is a tad strange. It reminds me a lot of RE-252. In RE-252, the details are spread more in stretched plane from left to right. But, e-Q5 is a tad different from RE-252 in the manner of imaging. The sound stage of e-Q5 is a tad wide than normal, but not incredibly large, spacious or wide by any stretch of imagination. At most times, I find the music between two planes - forward and more forward. But unlike RE-252, e-Q5 does have the height element in it's presentation. It positions instruments more in a height-width plane than the normal width-depth style. Most of the times, I can imagine sounds as points in space like stars in a fake, compressed sky. The depth is similar directly out of Clip+ and S9, but improves a bit with iPod Touch 3G -> LOD -> iBasso T3. I don't find e-Q5 to be as timbre rich as FX700 or even a HJE900 and DDM.
So, what's wrong with e-Q5? In a way, it is balanced, smooth, never sibilant and handles vocal based music very well. But, it lacks the aggression or details which is required for me to enjoy the music and hence tends to get boring with my usual genres. The presentation is unexciting, too smooth and laid-back to my ears. It sounds much closer to a dynamic IEM in more ways than a BA. BAs are mostly known for their good speed and incredible detail, which is not the case here. Dynamics are known for their great musical presentation and bass presentation, which is again not the case here. So, is it an epic fail? Not totally. It made me turn my attention to certain genres (Jazz, Vocals) which I usually do not bother about. In that sense, it's a good IEM. But, it's also a drawback - if you play to it's strengths, it will be a nice IEM. But, if you expect more because it's said to be a top-tier IEM, you'll likely be disappointed.
Is it worth $250? I think I'll reserve that judgment till I am able to compare them head-to-head against RE-262 someday. At this point, I've not given it as much time as I wanted to, because I invariably choose other IEMs over it most of the time. Let's see if my impressions after a few months change, though at this stage, I doubt it.
