EPZ Q5 Review 

Intro

Hello, this is my full review of the EPZ Q5 which comes fresh from one of the newer up & coming audio brands… EPZ. If I’m being completely honest, I knew very little about EPZ and frankly didn’t really know that they created as many products as they have. Apparently EPZ is quite well known in China. Well, here in the States we don’t always get the latest and greatest within the audio game. I saw that the Q5 was on sale and was able to pick it up for the low cost of $45-$47. 

EPZ

Located in Shenzen China, the original company was actually founded way back in 2008! That took me by surprise. They specialize in R&D, 3D Resin printing of both universal and custom high-res earphones & true wireless, among other ventures and specialties. Apparently, they have their own independent R&D team and production towards micro-speakers, military earphones, and work closely with many well-known brands for production, supplying finished designs as well as acoustic components. Their team has many years under their belt and expertise in acoustic structure, acoustic device selection, calibration and tuning as well. 

However, it wasn’t until 2019 that the audio brand “EPZ” was actually founded & established. Since then, they have been really doing a fantastic job by the looks of their website in creating unique designs, all 3D printed and gorgeous in my opinion. This is a very condensed view of a company which has been in this game for quite some time and now I am very interested in learning more about them. 

Similar but not the same

I do have to add one little blurb before I move on. It has gone around the audio community that the Q5 has stolen the design of the Meze Advar. I just want to squash this ridiculous gripe before we move on. Basically… I don’t care and really it doesn’t matter much. This is a very common occurrence to which if you are actually paying attention happens all the time. The truth is, it’s a good design friends. Also, it isn’t exactly the same, just similar in many regards. Actually it’s pretty darn close… Lol. Still it’s different enough to easily overlook. Also, again… I don’t care, at all. Okay, can we move on now? Oh, one more thing, I wouldn’t write any of that if the Q5 wasn’t a very nice set. Let’s just get that out of the way and get on with the review. The EPZ Q5 everyone… 

Purchase Links:

–Aliexpress

Q5 Pros🔥🔥🔥

-Price to performance is fantastic 

-Unboxing is very unique

-Ergonomic fit

-Build is not bad for the price 

-Resolution is very nice across the mix

-Clean & warm/neutral sound with good balance across the mix

-Tight & punchy low-end

-Vivid & Transparent Midrange

-Treble is non-offensive and well emphasized 

-Both Separation & Imaging are great

-Detail Retrieval

-Soundstage is open and airy

Q5 Cons🥶🥶

-Bass could use a bit more emphasis for bassheads 

-Midrange is a bit thin

-Treble lacks bite and body

-Some people have taken issue with the design (Meze Advar), I don’t care. 

Gear used for testing 

–Fiio UTWS5 

–Ifi Go Blu

–Hidizs S9 Pro

–Moondrop Dawn 4.4 

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2 

–Shanling M6 Ultra 

Packaging / Accessories 

Unboxing

I have to say, EPZ gives a pretty damn impressive unboxing for $50! I mean, the box alone is impressive. At first, I was wondering how to work it to even open it all up. Thankfully I stepped back before I gorilla-tore the whole thing up. So, the box itself is very impressive as you open from the inside out by pulling both inner halves outward. This will bring the underneath contents to the forefront. Very cool and ridiculously unique at these prices. 

The box is rather large, black and has golden colored writing with a cool looking design (see pictures). Inside you’ll see the slender box containing the reading material with the phrase “Five years of prosperity and glory“. This obviously alludes to the five years that EPZ has been an audio enterprise. Next to the earphones you’ll see the earphones themselves in cardboard cut-outs along with the case underneath that. Inside you’ll see the eartips as well as the cable. Under the earphones there is a smaller box with reading material and a plastic baggy containing a nice cleaning cloth. All in all, the unboxing is much better than I would have thought at this price. Definitely a “pro”… Nice work EPZ! 

Eartips

Included are two sets (S, M, L) of eartips. Both sets are of nice quality I would say. One of the sets is a head scratcher but still nice. I’ll start with the head scratcher. These tips are some ultra-tiny black silicone tips that feel very soft to the touch. The black tips have a semi-wide bore and have an odd shape. They are shallow fit eartip with a flat face to them, or a blunted face. The flange is decently firm, but I wish EPZ would’ve added some larger versions of these tips. They are very small. The other tip set is a white silicone tip with a semi-wide bore, firm stem, & firm flange. It’s much like KBear 07 tips and are actually quite nice. I use the large size white silicone tips and I feel they do well with the EPZ Q5. 

However, after many rounds of going through every eartip in my collection I found some that work. I actually ended up using the KBear 07 large yellow tips. I simply couldn’t get a perfect seal with the white silicone tips without playing with them and fiddling around with them for a while. Using the 07’s I got a seal right away. I just felt the need to bring that up. 

Cable

The cable that EPZ added to the accessory count is a very elegant cable. It is also pretty thin and light with a glossy white color and golden accents on the hardware. Truly a gorgeous little cable. There isn’t much info regarding this cable other than its a 1.2m MMCX Silver-plated Copper cable. Certainly, this is a great cable for stage purposes. It’s very lightweight and won’t pull on the earphones during use. Also, the sound is great with it, and it looks very nice attached to the Q5. However, I decided to use a different cable for balanced purposes. The cable I chose is a 4.4 Balanced FAAEAL MMCX cable which is 4-Cores of OFC Copper. It’s really pleasant looking paired with the Q5 with its nicely braided cloth covering. Perfect for use with balanced sources and looks dope with the Q5 attached. What’s best is the sound is great with the FAAEAL cable. 

Build / Design / Internals / Fit / Drivability 

Build Quality 

The Q5 resembles a nicely ergonomical iem for stage purposes as they’re perfectly built for the human ear. Made completely of “self-developed” skin friendly resin by way of 3D Printing. You’ll notice the trend of “self-developed” when referring to EPZ’s earphones. EPZ actrually develops much of their products in-house and they provide the patent #’s as well. The build is very solid friends. EPZ did a very nice job of creating earphones which don’t feel cheap or weak. Instead, they have a robust feel to them with very nice faceplate areas which I’ll explain later. The nozzles are made with a nice bronze colored alloy and finish with an all-metal grill. The nozzles are of medium length as well. I’m impressed by the build. 

Design 

Now is where we get into the weeds a bit. I’ve already mentioned this but I will again. Many on social media have commented on the distinct look of the Q5. They happen to resemble a very popular iem, the Meze Advar. Let it be known that… I could care less. Truly. This is a common occurrence in chifi as this wasn’t the first time an earphone resembled another. Also, it certainly won’t be the last. Who cares?! Okay, for the second time… Moving on. 

Anyways, the look is pretty dope. The Q5 has that tight fitting design that sits perfectly in the ear. All black except for a very slick looking golden faceplate which features a concave alloy circle which has a vent port in the middle and “EPZ Audio-Started in 2019” imposed around the vent. The contrast is awesome, and the look is all class. Really a well-designed unit that looks good on the ear. No, it won’t win any design awards but it’s nice. Again, good job EPZ! 

Internals

During the process of review, I have come to really respect this company. They develop many of their own materials and the Driver is no exception. In fact, under Chinese utility Patent #: CN201920080514.0 you will see that they developed this driver in-house. The Driver in question is a 10mm Ceramic Carbon Nano Dynamic Coil with a Dual-Cavity & Dual Magnetic design. By all accounts it appears that EPZ knows what they are doing. I find the driver to be of good quality. You don’t hear any distortion or weird artifacts in the edges of music. Again, this is a dual-cavity design which was 3D printed using both resin and metal materials. 

SPECIALLY DEVELOPED DUAL MAGNETIC & DUAL CAVITY DYNAMIC DRIVER
EPZ Q5 adopts a specially developed 10mm dynamic driver unit that features a dual-magnetic circuit and dual-cavity design. This dual-magnetic system of Q5 provides both internal and external magnetic circuits. They are made up of high-quality Carbon-Nano composite (CNT) diaphragm. The dual-Cavity design manages the air-pressure buildup inside the cavity and helps the pair to produce a clean sound with wide extensions and lower distortion.

EPZ Promotional

Fit

The fit is flat-out great. At least for me. Of course, I have to imagine that the Q5 would likely fit the great majority of hobbyists quite well. The shape alone is perfect to sit inside of an ear and does so very snuggly. Isolation is also very good with the Q5 in my ears. Obviously, this may not be the same for you. So, speaking for myself, I have zero issues at all with isolation, sound leakage or fit. Really EPZ nailed this design and build. 

Drivability

I honestly didn’t have a problem driving the Q5 with any source I used. With an impedence of 26 ohms and a sensitivity of 109 dbs; driving them is really no issue. Perhaps my iPad was a bit weak, but it still drove this set well. Even using the Fiio UTWS5 with MMCX adapters I found the driving power to be more than enough. Listening with the Ifi Go Blu was a treat for my ears as they have nice synergy. Not that lesser powerful sources are bad sounding. It’s just that the Q5 reacts great with the warmer and more lush presentation of the Go Blu making this pair fantastic for mobile listening. Especially using 4.4 balanced. 

Dongle Dacs 

As far as Dongle dacs are concerned I really think everyone should give the Moondrop Dawn 4.4 a chance. Boy does it sound wonderful with the Q5 and truthfully it sounds pretty great with anything attached to it. Truly one of the highly under appreciated dongles. I find the synergy between the Q5 really matches well with the Dawn which uses the Cirrus Logic CS43131 dac chip which also happens to be the same chip within the Go Blu. I used the Q5 with a couple other dongle dacs and had somewhat similar results but the Dawn certainly brought upon a great listening session.

Daps

I would have thought that the iBasso DX240 with its amazing ES9038 Pro dac chip and the iBasso Amp8 Mk2 attached would’ve melded better with the Q5, but I did hear some slightly processed timbre up top for whatever reason. So, pairing with the Shanling M6 Ultra was easily my favorite listening method for just lounging and soaking in the music. That velvet chip, the AK4493SEQ is a flagship level chip that is utterly smooth yet completely resolving which is perfect for the Q5. Also, more power seems to bring out the best in the Q5, though it isn’t required. 

In the end

Like most sets, a little more juice helps (to a degree) but like most sensitive iems in this range it isn’t necessarily needed and there is a power-cap to what you will hear. Using a moderately powerful dongle dac is perfectly fine. In fact, I’m sure most mobile phones would do the trick so long as they have at least a decent level of juice or driving power. If the Fiio UTWS5 can drive this set well at 50mw @32 ohms than I’m sure most any dongle will suffice. Still, if you can get your hands on a nicely organic dongle like the Dawn 4.4 then you are in business and also in for a treat. 

Sound Impressions 

Note: I just want to preface this entire sound impressions portion of the review with a few things. First, I burned the Q5 in for roughly 50-60 hours. I don’t always hear a valid difference, but for this set I certainly did. The upper mids had a slight glare prior to burn-in that was all but gone after. I kept checking periodically with the same song (as I do) and the moment I noticed the sound leveling out I stopped the process. Also, I primarily listen using flac or better files which are stored on my devices. I usually listen using UAPP but sometimes with Hiby Player and I do occasionally also use Poweramp as well. 

Condensed Sound report

Now this is where the Q5 earns its stripes folks. Of course, the Q5 will not be a favorable tuning for everyone, let’s just get that out of the way. Still, I do think that anyone who is a fan of a more airy and transparent sound will likely enjoy what EPZ has created in the Q5. What I hear is a mostly U-shaped sound and some may even consider it to be W-shape to a degree as well. One thing is for sure… EPZ knows how to tune a set of earphones with very nice tonal qualities. The timbre is pretty nice as well, though not completely organic, I’d call it “off-natural”. There are slight timbral issues within the midrange, but they are peanuts in the face of the overall tuning. 

Honestly, it’s very pleasant-sounding earphone to my ears with a “technically musical” sound in that the Q5 does have a sense of musicality while not skimping on the finer details. In fact, the technicalities are very well done for a single DD at this price. You have an energetic sound with an unfatty, yet rich note weight and slightly thinner but also full macro-dynamics. I realize these descriptions sound dissimilar and contradictory, but I sat for quite a while trying my best to explain what I hear, and I stand by my words. Let’s put it this way, the sound is certainly not dull, thin, or dry to my ears, but it also isn’t super thick and warmly weighted. 

Between the 20’s

As far as what I hear between the 20’s; I happen to really enjoy the sound of the Q5 in each 3rd of the spectrum, though each 3rd also has some subjective qualms. Predominantly, the bass is tight and brisk with a punchy and nimble type of dynamism. This isn’t an ultra-guttural or ultra-deep, dark or ultra-bellowing type of bass but there is nice density and texture. The bass certainly isn’t devoid of presence as I don’t feel it lacks at all to my ears. More mature than basshead but also not bass lite. The midrange has a forward and ubiquitous presence for both male and females. However, there is the slightest tinge of that processed metallic sound at the note outlines of more energetic passages of music. This is more a rarity and not the norm. For the most part vocals come across sounding nicely represented. The midrange has nice detail retrieval and great transient speed as well with good separation. The treble has pretty nice clarity and also offers a nicely detailed replay with good note definition and a smooth overall body. Not the most pinpoint yet still has decent bite up top. 

If this is all the further you read just know that the EPZ Q5 is not a basshead set, not a treble head earphone, and it isn’t entirely mid centric either. Instead, the Q5 strikes a nice balance across the mix and doesn’t entirely favor any one area. Closer to neutral than anything with some shades of warmth, the Q5 has a breathable sound with air in the mix. Macro-dynamics aren’t going to blow you away but the Q5 still comes across musical while balancing its very well composed technical abilities. This set sounds nice folks. 

Bass Region 

The bass is altogether tidy and pretty stout & not at all overly boosted. You won’t feel the Q5 bumping in the backs of your eyelids. It isn’t made for that type of fun. That said, the Q5 isn’t without some thump. It just hedges more on the side of speed and punch. Clearly the bass is not the focus on this set and clearly EPZ wanted a bass that did its job and got out of the way. For instance, you won’t hear this bass muddying up the midrange. In the same breath you also won’t feel some instrumentation the same as some more emphasized sets down low and won’t get the same fullness of notes as some sets. I feel it’s a nice trade-off but that is just me. If we are simply talking timbre in the nether regions, then I’d say that the Q5 is well to do. There is an evident distinction between sub & mid bass with a layered and macro-detailed approach. 

Sub-bass 

The sub-bass is definitely the focus of the low-end tuning, but it isn’t 100% evident through listening all the time. Listening to the track (that I always use) “Groove” by Ray Wylie Hubbard, I certainly hear a dense enough drone to the bassline which carries this track. It’s decently weighted and there is some haptic feel that is rather nice. Understand that this isn’t a bass that is over elevated. However, I’ve read reports that this is a very light bass. Friends, I really don’t hear that. It just isn’t an ultra-thick Bass-Boi caliber low-end. It’s actually very well emphasized in a mature way. “2040” by Lil Baby & Lil Durk flat out bumps with the Q5. It hits very well. No doubt about it. Granted this track hits hard with most any set, but still… the Q5 certainly doesn’t lack in sub-bass authority and tactile rumble. Again, it isn’t the focus and I think it’s paramount that we understand the distinction before buying. 

Mid-bass 

The mid-bass carries slightly less authority than the sub-bass, but I will repeat just about everything I’ve said in the “sub-bass” category. However, the mid-bass is slightly leaner with a soft leading edge of attack and quicker decay to my ears. Not at all hollow and not fuzzy either. Actually, the Q5 really doesn’t disappoint. I think you begin to see the slight lack in some tracks with some usually beefy bass guitars which may come across a hair less full on the Q5. Again, I think the trade-off is worth it though as the Q5 is tight enough to offer a punchy yet defined sound that handles quicker bass passages really well. Still, I don’t feel the Q5 lacks and on blatantly heavy bass jams the Q5 can rise to the occasion and offer some head-bobbing fun. 

“On Melancholy Hill” by the Gorillaz begins with an energetic bassline that comes across with moderate levels of oomph listening with the Q5. Not as assertive and swollen as some sets but the sound comes across very clean and prominent enough to carry this track nicely. Let me repeat that I am not let down with the bass quantity here. It’s simply not so protrusive and obese as some earphone’s bass. I enjoy that the mid-bass stays in its lane and lets the rest of the mix thrive without drowning the entire spectrum in veil or the inflated plump of too much mid-bass. “All My Life” by Lil Durk actually hits with authority on the Q5, straight out the gate. This track actually hits hard on most sets, but again, the Q5 does this Hip-Hop track justice with a nice boom. 

Downsides to the bass-region

If I were to pick apart the bass region, the clear issue would be with bass head types who want that overtly dominant bass. The Q5 is not that but instead the bass is a part to a nicely tuned whole. Also, I would say that the Q5 could use a bit more concrete density whether it has an emphasized bass region or not. I could say that extension down low could be a bit more extended and robust but that is really a subjective matter for the listener. However, to counter all of that, the bass is not one-noted, it is fast enough for quick basslines yet atmospheric enough too. The bass can slam yet it gets out of its own way and works great for multiple genres. 

Midrange

The midrange comes across pretty crisp with very nice resolution in that it has a clean note edge throughout the midrange, for the price that is. I feel that EPZ tuned the Q5 in a very open and clean manner without the slightest of veil and very nice energy. We have lush-lean & clean macro-dynamics. The sound has air to it. The midrange comes across mostly neutral with a hair more warmth toward the low-mids. I also find the midrange to have very nice separation between instruments and voices while having good note definition for the price. For the most part the Q5 is capable of producing clean vocals that aren’t super recessed and aren’t congested sounding either. Perhaps a hint too thin for some and if I’m really stretching, I’d say some slight metallic timbre in more energetic tracks in the upper-mids. 

Lower-midrange 

Beginning with male vocals I think these can go either way. You’ll either enjoy them or not. Now, I’m not the type who needs ultra thick and weighted male vocals. It’s nice to hear but I can look past it so long as some measures are taken to produce a nicely highlighted and defined male voice. This happens to be the case for the Q5. The sound is mostly uncolored and isn’t really warm or thick in note weight but also…they aren’t thin either. Somewhere in the middle is where the Q5 resides. Thankfully the lower-mids aren’t hazy from bass bleed and don’t sound artificial either. On the track “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For” (U2 acapella cover) by Home Free I can quite literally hear every type of male voice. Baritones are firm and deep enough and tenors sound eloquent with a bit more levity to them. Both sound great and not thin or dry to my ears. They come across “lean-lush” to me. 

To be honest I find no real issues with males as I personally enjoy them listening with the Q5. There is a richness, even in the leaner note structure and the sound is actually close to natural as far as the cadence and dictation of a male voice. Perhaps on some higher pitched males within ballad type songs you may get some very slight coarseness or a metallic type of note edge, but this is in no way something that I’d label a con. Also, for the price this is not out of the ordinary. Honestly, I would probably say that the lower mids are pretty much organic in timbre. Most instruments in this area come across just fine without any exaggerated coloration to my ears. 

Upper-Midrange 

The upper-mids are basically where female vocalists reside, though this isn’t necessarily a constant. You will find female voices range across the midrange. On the Q5, for the most part, I find females more forward than lower-mid males by a pinch and there is more of a shimmer to most females. I find good note cleanliness which can sound soft and honeyed, yet just as easily come across symphonic or elegantly golden & resounding in ballad style tracks. “High” by Caitlyn Smith is one song which covers both. Her voice goes from softly feathery or even velvety as the track gains life to powerful and bold in the chorus section. At the same time there is a ton of commotion in the melody which surrounds her voice. The instrumentation is relatively clean with nice separation while the inflections and modulations in her voice sound very distinct and defined. 

Instruments in the midrange

Most instruments come across fairly naturally except those which reside closer to the upper-mid range, and it depends upon the instrument as well. Generally, the Q5 does a very nice job of recreating instrumentation. Also be aware that my comments about instruments using the Q5 are gross generalizations. So many things may impact the sound and alter your perspective including the type of music, quality of the recording, the source I’m using, heck even the eartips I’m using make a big difference. Again, these are very general blanket thoughts. This review would be much larger if I broke everything down further. 

I find piano plays well and sounds very tuneful and melodious when needed. Strings sound relaxed with nice harmonics to my ears though I could use a bit more of that sharpness and bite. Violin is a hint thin but also edgy and satisfying. Percussion has good punch & pang for stuff like snares, tambourine, timpani and cymbals which attack with a nice wet-edged clang & pap. The Q5 does percussion well in my opinion. Cymbals for instance, I don’t hear anything that comes across splashy or anything odd in timbre & nothing stands out as blatantly bad or artificial or glaring. It stands to reason that a more balanced tuning would have a better chance at a more realistic sound and the Q5 does that. There is some brightness and the Q5 could use a bit more mid-bass rise but in general the Q5 does instruments very well. 

Downsides to the midrange

Some of the gripes I could see folks having about the midrange on the Q5 would be that it can come across thinner in body across the midrange than some may be used to. I’ve already expressed that I think the note weight is fine but I’m sure others may not always enjoy it. Like I said before, I find the Q5 almost “lean-lush”… if that makes any sense. Also, timbre may not be perfectly natural as you climb the midrange. Perhaps a hair more warmth would be a bit closer to organic but honestly folks, we all have different interpretations of what “Organic” or “Natural” is so… Just pretend I didn’t write that. I don’t hear any horrible peaks or glaring areas of shoutiness. I don’t hear any real pronounced sibilance either. It sounds nice. 

Treble Region 

Benefits the tuning

I find the treble region to really benefit the overall tuning of the Q5. It balances very well with the other areas of the mix while uplifting the entire spectrum. I wouldn’t call the treble extremely emphasized but it makes its presence felt and isn’t underwhelming. It isn’t emphasized in a “treble head” way or in an overtly “over-saturated” or “forced resolution” type of manner either. It comes off pretty naturally (there’s that natural word again) and easy on the ears while in the same breath there is some bite to treble notes and a forward presence. There is outstanding detail retrieval for a budget single Dynamic Driver iem. At the same time, it’s also not analytical or dry. There is some wet mixed in there, some tackiness, some bright punch and a good sheen to the upper portions of the mix. To keep perspective, we are talking about a budget set but based on other sets in the price point… EPZ did a very nice job up top. 

Air & Separation 

The treble region has actual separation and air which permeates other areas of the frequency and like I said, it uplifts the rest of the frequency as well. Resolution is pretty good for what it is, but it doesn’t have perfectly knife edged definition as the overall experience is smoother than anything. There is very nice shimmer and shine which adds a different element to the sound. On top of that I hear pretty nice extension past 10k which can be heard in the secondary harmonics of cymbals which don’t come across splashy or tinsley. Trumpet sounds forward and pretty robust or full. Listening to electric guitar is not a wincing affair as the bite and texture in the sound is accompanied by decent weight to notes and not an ear-killer. However, as I said in the beginning of this paragraph, there is air and separation which helps these instruments to not sound like a fuzzy mishmash of treble sheen. 

Examples 

I usually listen to Billy Strings tracks as his banjo play, fiddle, acoustic guitar and mandolin play can all resonate within the treble arena and usually do so at crazy speeds. Take either of the tracks “Ice Bridges” or “Secrets” (among many others, these are the two I mainly used from him) while listening with the Q5 and a decent source and I’m sure you’ll be pleased with the speed at which the Q5 is able to attack & decay at. Granted this is a single DD treble and won’t compete with the likes of some planars or BAs for speed but the combo of agility and timbre is pretty nice to hear. “Bishop School” by Yusef Lateef is another track littered with treble activity and for the most part the Q5 is able to replay everything with good separation and imaging while not blending sounds. 

What you won’t hear is anything truly harsh. I should say that I don’t hear anything that I consider harsh as there aren’t any undue peaks that throw off the overall timbre and tuning. You shouldn’t hear any really egregiously obvious sibilance either. For the most part the treble is pretty smooth in body. It’s crisp when it needs to be and is altogether a non-offensive treble… for me. 

Downsides of the treble region 

If there were some downsides, then I would say that some folks may want even less treble emphasis for a warmer overall sound. We are all very much different and I’m sure that there will be those who would like less brightness up top. Also, in more complicated tracks the Q5 can lose a little bit of its resolution but of course we should expect this. Honestly there isn’t much to complain about, the treble is airy, it sparkles at times, it isn’t too bright or fatiguing, it has a smoother overall sound, and it offers nice details. EPZ did a nice job. 

Technicalities 

Soundstage 

Listening to “Hook” by Blues Traveler it is instantly noticeable that the soundstage of the Q5 has good width with a sense of space and openness. Certainly, above average in that regard. Height is about average I’d say (whatever that means) and there is some depth for layering. Overall, the stage is presented nicely with an open feel which is very well done for a single DD at this price. You have nice separation of elements in that stage, decent to good extension in all directions, with all the sound emphasis in the right places within the frequency to create a psycho-acoustic stage that doesn’t feel congested… at all. Even on complicated tracks I don’t feel the claustrophobia of a small stage.

Separation / Imaging 

Separation is very well done within any track that isn’t ultra congested. There are obviously limitations to any set, even the good ones. I’d say that the Q5 can handle more than most and can fend-off blending of sounds like instruments & vocals better than most. Again, you have a perceivably tight transient attack & decay, a clean and resolute sound, a good-sized stage and it isn’t the thickest note weight in the world. These attributes do help to add some separation of instrumentation while creating pretty nice distinctions providing the recording is of decent quality and the source is adequate. Imaging is the same, as everything (instruments) is where it should be. I would actually consider imaging a “Pro” of the Q5. There’s nice layering brought on by a nice depth of field, good width of stage and very good control for the price. Except in ultra busy tracks. 

Details

The detail retrieval of the Q5 is extremely good for a single Dynamic Driver earphone at this price. I have zero problem hearing the subtleties within my music. Both macro & micro details are able to become illuminated within this very well controlled replay. Whether it be fingers on an instrument, breath in a mic or the person coughing 10 rows back in my favorite live track, the EPZ Q5 does an admirable job at presenting those small details. The Q5 has a nice balance and there isn’t really any one frequency acting as the major. You don’t have bass covering over the mix or treble sheen cascading over everything else. Possibly in extra bass heavy tracks you’ll obviously not hear everything else, but honestly, who cares about detail retrieval in ultra bass heavy songs? For the tracks that really matter, or the tracks that generally attract those who enjoy the finer details… the Q5 will surprise some people. 

Is it worth the asking price? 

For the awesome sale price of under $50 (at the moment) and the MSRP of $77, the EPZ Q5 is priced very competitively to pretty competitively. In truth I don’t feel there are many sets which are similarly tuned that can outright render the Q5 obsolete. Obviously, if you enjoy a different tuning then this is a moot point and the Q5 probably isn’t worth it for you. However, for those who like a warm/neutral technically savvy iem with a penchant for musicality and a great balance… the Q5 may just be the set to get. 

Of course, there are quite a few iems within the price point that challenge the need for a set like the Q5. Sets like the Simgot EA500 (EA500 Review HERE), Fiio JD7 (JD7 Review HERE), Truthear Hexa (Hexa Review HERE), Letshuoer DZ4 (DZ4 Review HERE), Celeste Pandamon (Pandamon Review HERE) and these are just to name a few around the original MSRP of $77. Trust me there are many more. If we are talking about the sale price ($48) then this is a no brainer, I truly don’t think there is much competition around the $50 price point. Being that the price has been around $50 for a long time now, I think this is the price point to judge this set by. Also, obviously the Q5 will not be for everyone, and it does have some drawbacks but ultimately it is a good option among some of the better iems it is priced around. 

The Why… 

Why? Well, first off, the Q5 is a well-built iem that is very ergonomically shaped, featherlight weight with a very appealing and understated appearance that looks dope in the ear and will likely seat well in most anyone’s ears. The unboxing is really creative, and you receive nice accessories too. However, these are just figurative “Icing on the cake” because the true reason the Q5 is worth the cost to own them is that the sound is really well tuned. 

Nothing sounds exactly like the Q5 as the balance across the mix is great with a very organic warm/neutral sound that is just as musical as it is technical. Nothing is left out within this tuning as every area of the mix has representation. Detail retrieval is top notch for what the Q5 is, the soundstage is better than I would’ve expected, imaging is spot on, separation is great, it’s clean, resolute and nothing jumps out as offensive or fatiguing. There are things that could be better and subjective little gripes which won’t jive with everyone but as far as I’m concerned… the Q5 is worth every last penny. In fact, if you can… Buy two. 

Ratings  (0-10)

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the EPZ Q5 ratings below, that would be $40-$80 iems of any driver configuration.  Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5” is exactly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $40-$80 US is a decent sized scope of iems and so seeing a 9 should probably be pretty special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings it will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me. 

Aesthetic 

-Build Quality:         8.2                

-Look:                     8.9

-Accessories:          9.7

–Overall:              8.9                                 

Sound Rating     

-Timbre:                  8.9              

-Bass:                     9.1          

-Midrange:              9.1               

-Treble:                   9.5            

-Technicalities:        9.7                                                                   

–Overall:                 9.3🔥🔥🔥

Ratings Summary:

You should all know how I feel about ratings by now, if ever you have read my reviews, then you know I don’t 100% agree with the efficacy of ratings. So much is left to broad interpretation as nuance, context, and the intricate spirit of my review may be lost to… some numbers. I spend a large amount of time on “ratings” and probably waste too much time debating against myself over a handful of judgments ranging from 0 to 10. Please remember that these are solely my thoughts, based against sets that I’ve actually heard and gotten to know well enough to make an opinionated judgment. With that said, I should at least explain why I gave the Q5 what I did. 

Questionable

First off, the pool of $40 to $80 iems is a large one. This is easily one of the most competitive price brackets in all of audio. That said, one area I may have to explain myself is the “Build” category. I expressed how well built the Q5 is in my review and surely, I believe so. Still, at these prices there are better built sets, even though an 8.2 is still very good. However, for those who take ergonomics into play (which is part of the build), perhaps I could’ve given the Q5 a higher score. Basically, I left out comfort and fit and mostly gauged the “Build” by the actual structural integrity of the Q5. Either way the Q5 build is solid. 

The next thing which I could argue against is the “Bass” category. Honestly for many this could be far too high, and others may say it’s a bit low. If you are a basshead then this might as well be a 2.0. If you love a tight and mature bass with just enough slam, extension, clarity and speed then the score of 9.1 is probably a bit shy in comparison to what is out there. I honestly feel that “Treble” & “Technicalities” are right where the Q5 needs to be. Possibly “Timbre” & “Midrange” could be a few points higher but there is some thinness and metallic artifacts at notes edge in the midrange but a 9.1 is pretty damn good if you ask me. I could see raising the “Timbre” category a bit as well. 

The whole, not the parts… 

In the case of the Q5, I think one of the Key metrics that doesn’t get represented in the ratings is the most important thing of all concerning the Q5. If you ask me, its main selling point is just how well the Q5 pulls all the parts together as one coherent and melodious whole. Breaking the Q5 down to individual parts is not the best way to judge this set. This is a set which truly needs to be heard as a whole. It’s the whole audio salad my friends, and it’s all the parts brought together in a mellifluous coherency of sound which is the real way the Q5 should be judged against its peers. This is what I mean about the efficacy of ratings, they don’t tell you the whole story and this is something I want to try my best at getting right. 

Conclusion 

To conclude my full written review of the EPZ Q5, I have enjoyed my time with this set and feel it’s a good option within the price point. I am very curious to see what else this audio brand has to offer if one of their budget-oriented sets sounds like this. So, thank you to some of my friends in the community for Introducing this brand to me and hopefully I was able to Introduce EPZ to some more folks in the in the hobby too. 

One thing that I always make sure to mention is to please check out other reviews of the Q5. Do not just read mine and stop there. We all have differing opinions, and we all are very much different in how we perceive the auditory abilities of these audio devices. We don’t all have the same gear and sources, we don’t all have the same taste in music and taste in sound and we all haven’t been down the same audio journey, which really matters. Heck, we don’t all have the same hearing abilities. So, it makes sense to read, listen to, or watch other reviews and try to get a firm understanding of what you are getting. In fact, at Mobileaudiophile.com we usually have different “takes” over multiple sets. Pietro also reviewed the Q5 HERE. With that, I thank you, the reader, for clicking onto this review. It always means a lot and my greatest hope is that it helps you. Take care and God Bless!