or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

1964 Ears - Page 448

post #6706 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by acain View Post

Its not even a patent if you ask me, its just using 2 drivers together. Its like if you decided to make a hamburger with 2 patties and bacon in the middle and you patented it. So everyone else could only put bacon on top its crazy.

 

+1. Just like how JHA patents its Freqphase. I'm sure if 1964Ears uses the same technology and calls it something else it would be completely fine. Patent laws are so vague sometimes its not worth patenting anything and just encourage free market. 


Edited by cuiter23 - 3/23/15 at 12:03pm
post #6707 of 7415
I bet half the people that decide on patents don't even know what there looking at.
post #6708 of 7415

I've seen a few posts recommending the V3 over the Qi but no reasons why. The Qi is at the top end of my budget so should I go for it or save $50. What are the main SQ differences. This will be my first CIEMs having had 2 sets of Westone UM1 over the last 10 years. I'm looking for more bass and clearer vocals over the UM1s and want to go custom as I've never had a good fit and have recently got custom ear plugs that fit amazingly well. I mainly listen to rock and acoustic style music.

 

I have my design all sorted its just a case of choosing the model so any help is appreciated.

post #6709 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by acain View Post

I bet half the people that decide on patents don't even know what there looking at.

On the one hand you have patent attorneys, who are very well paid and often also possess engineering degrees, and on the other an overworked patent clerk earning a government wage.

 

You'd be surprised how many patents have been granted for things like perpetual motion machines; a minor IEM design change is far from the worst of it.

post #6710 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by anetode View Post

On the one hand you have patent attorneys, who are very well paid and often also possess engineering degrees, and on the other an overworked patent clerk earning a government wage.

You'd be surprised how many patents have been granted for things like perpetual motion machines; a minor IEM design change is far from the worst of it.

And then you have JHA that would sue you for just breathing.
post #6711 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuiter23 View Post


And then you have JHA that would sue you for just breathing.

Yeah, I've been meaning to cut that out just to be on the safe side.

post #6712 of 7415

To anyone who recently got their IEMs delivered. How long did it take from when they received the Impressions till they shipped it out? Just wondering if it's more on the 4 weeks side or the 8 weeks side. Every day is torture! :popcorn:

post #6713 of 7415

Makes me wonder if 1964 Ears pulled the V6 because of this, maybe it was to close to the patent. I have been looking at the JH Angie Universal but after reading the court Docket I don't know if I want to patronize there company. I have very different feelings about JH now.

post #6714 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by iranintoavan View Post
 

To anyone who recently got their IEMs delivered. How long did it take from when they received the Impressions till they shipped it out? Just wondering if it's more on the 4 weeks side or the 8 weeks side. Every day is torture! :popcorn:

 

1964Ears received my impressions on the 15th of January. 

They shipped out my IEMs on the 25th February. 

So if I'm correct, it's about 6 weeks. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by acain View Post
 

Makes me wonder if 1964 Ears pulled the V6 because of this, maybe it was to close to the patent. I have been looking at the JH Angie Universal but after reading the court Docket I don't know if I want to patronize there company. I have very different feelings about JH now.

Like I said before, it's Apple v the rest of the world all over again

post #6715 of 7415

I ordered mine on march 1st they got my impressions on the 3rd and my impressions were just trimmed on the 20th so they say all the work is done in the last 2 weeks of the waiting period. so if thats true that would expect to see them around week 5.   the wait is killing me

post #6716 of 7415
At least you guys have them ordered already! Im still saving up in my piggy bank!
post #6717 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by acain View Post

Makes me wonder if 1964 Ears pulled the V6 because of this, maybe it was to close to the patent. I have been looking at the JH Angie Universal but after reading the court Docket I don't know if I want to patronize there company. I have very different feelings about JH now.

Bet you're right.

The patient referenced in the lawsuit specifically mentions (among several things) two sound tubes (one combining mid & high and another for the bass). The V6 was a dual tube design.

Thankfully all of the newer 1964 designs are all triple tube/bore and are hopefully safe from the lawsuit.
post #6718 of 7415

The V6 was also known to be there most Neutral sounding custom, I have never heard it myself but many reviews have said this. When are they going to put the Adel on there product page?

post #6719 of 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by acain View Post

I bet half the people that decide on patents don't even know what there looking at.

but they probably know more than us. If vibration/distortion cancelling siamesed BAs originated with JHaudio, it's a validly contested suit. Doesn't mean they will win if 1964 can find an earlier precedent that is applicable but just because dual drivers with a single port are becoming more common, it doesn't supersede a patent and I doubt there's much question that Jerry created this market and design. That they haven't pursued it until now is besides the point and using off the shelf twfks would be in compliance anyway. Note that it's not the dual config that's being contested but the that the 2 drivers are equal and mechanically opposite, at least with the tweeter. For instance, a twfk used as a 2 way or in parallel with different drivers per each 1/2 wouldn't be in violation. I was always a fan of this design but had no knowledge of a patent or feasibility of patentability.

 

If you go to his wiki page, you'll see why he's become protective of his work. The market is now strong enough that others can get drivers made and use them in a way that may infringe. Others may as well but 1964 is US based and easiest to establish a precedent with, especially with a patent filed here.

 

It's not exactly the same thing but if I were 1964 I'd point to products like older Kef 107 speakers and their woofer loading as a prior example but it may also be patented and have different parameters mentioned in the patent as it's vib cancelling is not direct and the config is probably also a bit about band pass.


Edited by goodvibes - 3/23/15 at 7:36pm
post #6720 of 7415

I guess if I came up with a design and other companies had the same exact design I wouldn't be happy if they were profiting off it. Jerry is an innovator and I am sure he puts hard work into his designs. Companies buy there competitors products all the time and rip them apart to see what's inside and make there own version. I am not saying 1964 Ears did this, stuff like this happens all the time in the music industry with artists sampling.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: