New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Review] 1964 Ears 1964-T - Page 2

post #16 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post





I don't think you needed my review to make a decision to go for the quads :P It's pretty obvious which one you would have liked :)



Lol. Indeed.

post #17 of 57
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shane55 View Post

Good review. Piques my curiosity and I just may get impressions done on Saturday by the audiologist who will be at our meet. Could be dangerous. Thanks... I guess. wink_face.gif

 

Well those impressions may possibly be free and will be for a much more expensive custom than these :p
 

post #18 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post

 

Well those impressions may possibly be free and will be for a much more expensive custom than these :p
 


Yes, the impressions they (UE) will keep are free, but for an extra $50, they will give me a second set. That's the worrisome part. wink_face.gif 
 

post #19 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by shane55 View Post




Yes, the impressions they (UE) will keep are free, but for an extra $50, they will give me a second set. That's the worrisome part. wink_face.gif 
 

Shane, I just got impressions done up in Vacaville for $35.  She did some for me a couple of years ago for some Westone hearing protectors, and they fit very well.  These impressions looked great.  There is also Musician's hearing in SF, she charges $90 and is recommended by JH Audio.  $50 seems a decent price for Bay area, I suspect we are a bit cheaper up here in the northeast bay...  Plus, if this audiologist is paired with UE, I would expect he or she to be very competent.

 

Just to stay on topic, my impressions are at 1964 ears right now, eventually to become translucent black quads with the "new, slimmer logo" on the faceplates.  I was all set to have them for the meet, but a short term financial freeze blew that deal...  I think they are now running north of 3 weeks.  I guess it will end up being an early birthday present for me in March.

post #20 of 57

Thanks for the review rawrster.

 


Quote:

Originally Posted by rawrster View Post

I would imagine the difference would be a bit more with that level of custom :) However I never gave a number and don't think I can really give a number on how much better it is.

 

The only thing about customs is that in a way universals are a better value if you do not know what you like yet since you can resell them at little or no loss depending on the universal but that's another story with customs. Typically it's 50% or lower MSRP and then you have to spend money on a cable, impressions and remold cost. In that sense customs are not the greatest value but if you know what you want then your investment may be well worth it as long as you are willing to spend the money. The price of the 1964-T is probably around the sweet spot imo. For $400 or so including impressions and shipping for me it is near the price point of some very good universals and I find it surpasses the top universals that I have heard so it's a no brainer for me.

 

I think for now I'm done buying new gear for portable. I may down the road get an upgraded version of my Livewires through UM as people have reported good things about their upgrading with the W3, UM3X, TF10 and SE530. It's now time for a modest headphone setup which is the plan regardless of what you say :)


I am getting my TF10 reshelled just to test the difference customization makes.  All three of my higher priced customs are a good deal better than every universal I have heard, including the SM3 which has a 10/10 for SQ in joker's thread.  I am curious to see how some of the lower priced customs sound, but I am not sure what the difference is caused by; the manufacturer or the part quality.  For example, how does the JH5 compare with the T?  Is 1964's products truly a good value, or are they about right for their price.

 

I don't think I will be getting a 1964 ears product, so I really won't know.  How does it compare with your LiveWire Trips?

post #21 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post

 I am curious to see how some of the lower priced customs sound, but I am not sure what the difference is caused by; the manufacturer or the part quality. 


I'm sure X-over tuning is a big part of it as well as acoustics like driver and filter placement.  I usually have issues getting past multi-BAs but the ES5 and IERM demos were solid.  I mean that's the major point of the JH3A which is to overcome that shortcoming. 

post #22 of 57

i somehow managed to miss this review.  its a good read rawrster.  basically affirmed my presumption that 1974 makes their sig a bit warm.

post #23 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post


I'm sure X-over tuning is a big part of it as well as acoustics like driver and filter placement.  I usually have issues getting past multi-BAs but the ES5 and IERM demos were solid.  I mean that's the major point of the JH3A which is to overcome that shortcoming. 


Yea, there are probably many things that go into the final sound and change the note decay, response time, frequency response, etc.  I wonder if the better sounding customs are just tuned differently with different filters, or if they use higher grade components.  As far as multi-BA IEMs, I am very happy so far with both my customs as they make my SM3 sound, well, amateur!  And yes, the JH3A could be a real winner some day!

post #24 of 57
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by average_joe View Post


I am getting my TF10 reshelled just to test the difference customization makes.  All three of my higher priced customs are a good deal better than every universal I have heard, including the SM3 which has a 10/10 for SQ in joker's thread.  I am curious to see how some of the lower priced customs sound, but I am not sure what the difference is caused by; the manufacturer or the part quality.  For example, how does the JH5 compare with the T?  Is 1964's products truly a good value, or are they about right for their price.

 

I don't think I will be getting a 1964 ears product, so I really won't know.  How does it compare with your LiveWire Trips?


I think something like that is difficult to answer since I don't know too many people with many entry level customs. As for how the 1964-T and other entry level customs fare I think I would give project86 a PM or at least look at his review of the 1964-T as he owns various customs of different price ranges from entry level to high end custom.

 

As for the comparison with the Trips I think the Trips edges the 1964-T by a small margin. The Trips have the better upper mids and treble region as everything is heard and nothing smooths out like the 1964-T so you hear everything whether bad or good. The Trips also have a noticeable larger sound stage. One of my sound stage tests is with the track is "Markus Schulz - I Am" from the album Progression and the Trips give me an obvious larger stage on all accounts and just not width or depth but the complete stage. Bass is a bit more powerful with the Trips as you get more impact and also more of the feel of the bass and I feel extension is similar with both although I have not tried out any test tones and I don't plan on doing that. The midrange of the Trips is also a bit more engaging as it is a tiny bit more forward and it has more of one of those magical midrange.

 

I believe the 1964-T is a good value and the margin between the two is small. However I feel the 1964-T is the better reference when comparing with other gear since it is more neutral and flat. With the 1964-T you can tell easier when something has recessed or forward, spikes or dips and that kind of thing while the Trips are more engaging to listen to but still more accurate than colored but not as accurate as the 1964-T.

 

 

I do plan to have UM turn my Trips into a 6 driver as UM's reputation speaks for itself and I have faith that they can make it better but that's some time away as I have some other decisions to make on whether I want to start getting a good headphone rig or work on the upgraded custom. When I decide to venture into it I'll probably give UM an email and go over some things. Their various 6 driver upgrades supposedly is just as good as the top customs so I have no reason to believe the Livewires (which I'm assuming should be similar to the UM3X upgraded which a few head-fi members have done) will not be very good. Although I also want their hybrid when it comes out...too many choices and too little money and time :p

post #25 of 57

Thanks for the info.  You are right, it will take someone to own several lower level customs, but the smoothed out treble (I also remember eric saying the same) and deep bass roll off, which I saw on the frequency response charts on the 1964 site made me think twice about any of their customs.  I wouldn't mind hearing them just to hear them, but as you said, the resale value isn't what it is for universals.  I will have to get in contact with project86...

 

Here is where things get confusing, "small margin."  The more I listen to the better stuff the easier it is for me to pick apart the lower end stuff including the higher priced universals.  The three customs I currently have all have a much larger soundstage than any universal I have heard (and the smallest of my three customs, the EM3 Pro just got a larger soundstage thanks to the Whiplash TWag v2!).  How you describe the differences between the two makes me think there would be a large margin when taking everything into account.  Of course, it is also source and track dependent, but for me the little nuances do make a big difference to me.

 

From a reference standpoint, that sounds very reasonable.  I didn't realize the peaks and dips in the EM3 Pro until I had the Fabs, which to me seem ruler flat, yet still have some fun.  And just because I really like the Fabs and think they are amazing for the lower price, not to mention they are the only IEM I have had that has been able to do flat bass and still satisfy me, there is still room in my arsenal for other sound signatures.  So, I can see the T and Trips both having a spot.

 

Then, add 3 drivers per side and that should be nice.  Why are you going for that vs. the Miracle?  

post #26 of 57
Thread Starter 

Well something small to one person may be huge to another. For some people that extra 1% may not be worth it but for another that extra 1% is everything so it's hard to quantify small or large margin.

 

I don't know if the bass roll off is deep as frequency charts is hard especially with a custom imo. There's so many different variations in tube length, driver placement, and then each is made specifically for an ear but there is a roll off in the bottom but not as bad as one would think based on the charts but still there. I might want to compare over the weekend the bass extension of the two. I did a brief comparison some time ago but it was really brief and just to judge the basic differences between the two.

 

My reasonable behind the upgraded drivers instead of the Miracle is simple. I know what the Trips sound like and when I talked briefly to Stephen it was simply that it should have a similar sound signature but improved upon. I also have the option of just providing the drivers which would be 2 TWFK and 2 CI22955 which iirc came out to $150 for both sides. Either way I do want to hear what UM has to offer in their 6 driver models or the hybrid custom when it is released so I can know for myself what entry level and high end custom is like. Impressions from other people (regardless of who they are) are just impressions and I want to hear for myself to know if it's worth it or not and if I choose the latter I can just re shell it and retain that signature and compare the 3 and 6 drivers.

post #27 of 57

Yea, that was the point I was trying to make, your small might be my large, or a good value to me, but not to you.

 

I am sure it sounds great with most music as songs rarely go that deep, but it is with movie soundtracks that some of the deep bass of the Fabs was somewhat surprising because the EM3 Pro seems to have a little bass roll off.  It actually sounds like the T might have a similar frequency response to the EM3 Pro, but the EM3 Pro has a liquid and engaging sound.

 

OK, interesting, thanks for explaining.  I wonder how extensively used the TWFK is in high end customs?

 

post #28 of 57
Thread Starter 

I wouldn't exactly call the 1964-T boring as I have been using them as my main portable rig for the last few weeks. However next to the Livewires it doesn't seem as engaging. It definitely isn't like an IE7 which I found extremely boring.

 

As for the TWFK I think it is used a lot in customs. It's a highly regarding dual driver and used mostly for the upper mids or treble region and I like the way it sounds. I know a couple different customs use them and they are in high regard here so can't be a bad driver :P

post #29 of 57

I haven't heard the IE7, just the IE8, so I am not sure if I would say it is boring.  I rarely find an audiophile headphone boring, but I did find the UM3X to be just that to my ears.  I wonder how the T compares...

 

TWFK is, as I am sure you know, used in many universals including the DBA-02 and CK10, as well as a bunch more.  Maybe taking away all low frequency responsibilities helps, or maybe it is just tuning based, but of my current customs, the one that uses the TWFK (EP-10 Plus) has the worst performance in the upper mids/treble.  Again, could be tuning, but I am not sure.  My experiences have been that my IEMs, both universal and customs, that have used different BAs have performed better than the TWFK BAs I have heard in the mid/treble region (technically speaking).  I am not saying they won't turn out excellent, and if UM recommends using them, I am sure they know what they are doing.  

post #30 of 57
Thread Starter 

I believe ljokerl has heard the UM3X so would be able to compare. I've always wanted to hear them but not put down the cash for them (which is also the same reason I have not heard the SM3 but I was very close once) so he can compare much better than me. The IE7 is quite different than the IE8 and I would not say the IE8 is boring.

 

It's more than just the driver but the implementation. I know the ES3X uses the TWFK and I believe the ES5 does as well but can't confirm but from pictures of the ES5 it sure looks like it. Other universals such as the DBA-02, CK10, CK100 (speculation there based on pics so not sure), UE700, Q-Jays, UM3X as well as many others use the TWFK. I can't comment on them all but I will say that the CK100 probably has the best upper mids/ treble area I have heard in a universal. The ones that I have heard with the TWFK all sound different so with so few differences it has to be the tuning. The DBA-02, CK10, UE700, Q-Jays and more recently the new Brainwavz dual driver all uses the TWFK and ljokerl has tried them all and they all sound different but yet use the same driver. Some are also not even in the same tier in terms of technical ability so with them all using the same driver I would imagine it is up to tuning.

 

Think of it this way. I could be using the same ingredients and tools as a world class chef but I could never make something as good tasting as a world class chef even though we would use the same ingredients. It's more than just the driver but I think the driver should be able to tell you the potential it is capable of.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: