[rawrster]

 
Quote:

I think they are tuned differently @ rawrster, but I'll get clarity on that for you (if you don't beat me to it). My understanding, however, is that the quad has greater bass extension than the triple, not so much that it is a bass monster. Don't get me wrong, there is plenty deep bass in the quad (clear, tight accurate deep bass), but it doesn't drown out the mids or highs at all. I'll try to describe this better when I do my full review.
 
Quote:

If the 1964-T has that amount of bass then the quads must be bass monsters for me at least. It does seem like the triples and quads are targeting different audiences. I wonder if there's any difference in technical ability between the two but I think it will be some time before someone owns both.

 

My guess is that bass monster could mean something different than to you. Something where the bass overwhelms other areas such as my experience with the IE8 or something that just has too much impact for me such as the DDM. I expect the quads to just be the latter where I feel it has too much impact for me but doesn't affect the rest of the spectrum too much.
 
I also suspect that the triples and quads have different tuning but I think the first who will have both will be jermng (sorry if I spell this wrong) since I believe the triples are already ordered and he already owns the quads..and well the ES5 which is something else I was interested in for a bit.  Hopefully early to mid January someone will have something to offer on that subject.

 

[ericp10]

i agree rawrster that our definitions may be different, and agree that someone (other than me) will probably be able to tell us the differences in the very near future.

 

[Sil3nce]

I lol'ed at that guy who said the consensus is to save up and go for the duals/triples/quads.

 

[rawrster]

Quote:

i agree rawrster that our definitions may be different, and agree that someone (other than me) will probably be able to tell us the differences in the very near future.

 
Regarding the triples you very well may get them before I do since I just remembered that I ordered something from mp4nation a few weeks ago that includes some budget iem's that I can sell which means less money out of my bank account which is preferred. Hopefully it arrives mid to late January but you never know with mp4nation.
 
I was listening to my Livewires today and thought it sounded amazing so I'm not in a real rush so I can wait for the package. Hopefully from now till then nothing catches my eye. One item already did but luckily I got a good deal so it wasn't expensive so nothing more than $100.
 

 

[Sil3nce]

Quote:

Quote:

i agree rawrster that our definitions may be different, and agree that someone (other than me) will probably be able to tell us the differences in the very near future.

 
Regarding the triples you very well may get them before I do since I just remembered that I ordered something from mp4nation a few weeks ago that includes some budget iem's that I can sell which means less money out of my bank account which is preferred. Hopefully it arrives mid to late January but you never know with mp4nation.
 
I was listening to my Livewires today and thought it sounded amazing so I'm not in a real rush so I can wait for the package. Hopefully from now till then nothing catches my eye. One item already did but luckily I got a good deal so it wasn't expensive so nothing more than $100.
 

+1

 

[project86]

Quote:

Project86 thank you again for your thoughts and views. And I greatly respect that you feel the need to say whether you purchased something with your hard earned cash or got it for free. I, on the other hand, don't feel that same need as stated before as I'm not following any ethical code on head.fi.org but my own. It smacks of hypocrisy to me when certain people jump on this thread out of the blue to question head.fi members who so graciously give their views on a product that many haven't heard, whether the opinions are negative or positive. Except for Kunlun (I have no issues with his concerns about the FB matter), others who commented and went into long diatribes about ethics and such haven't even been on the thread to say they were interested in 1964 EARS or not. No, they only appeared so they could go into negative rants and cause trouble, as they have done on other threads, probably because of some warped vendetta against certain head.fi members. That's why I felt it was none of their concern how I personally came about my quad. If they want to speculate from that I say feel free. I have no one to answer to except for publications I do reviews for, and trust me when I state I have never been questioned by an editor on what method I obtained an item for review, so no way am I going to allow it in a forum where I give my opinion freely (especially when I usually get paid for giving my opinion). With that said, any reader of what I say has the right to accept that I am being fair, honest and impartial about an item, or reject what I say totally. I wouldn't be offended either way. I have given impressions on every item you see in my signature (and then some), and my impartiality wasn't questioned then (not out in the open anyway), but now that I take a risk on a new company (and like what I am hearing) it is questioned? Give me a break!
 
Like I said, I respect the route you feel is proper and right @ project86. I know one thing, with all the comments about a particular magazine in the UK and how they prove how ethical they are, along with the speculation and innuendo, the great fictional Sherlock Holmes would never have to worry about being displaced in his day job...lol.
 
As much as I am loving (really loving) the quad, you and others keep raising my interest in the triple @ project86. Hmmmm? Decisions.

You bring up a good point. If someone writes up their impressions on all the gear they have heard, do we need them to clarify each time what their relationship is with the product? If you 1) borrow a product from a friend, 2) get a loaner from the manufacturer, and 3) buy a third product, then write up all your impressions on each.... should we question your integrity over (2) but accept your experiences on the others? If not, why not?
 
I can see how it would be a different story if you are a newer user who hasn't done much around here, suddely popping in with praise for some new brand. But that is a totally different situation.

 

[jermng]

Quote:

 
I've got a pair of LCD-2s coming tomorrow which are supposed have "very good bass but recessed treble". I'm very interested to compare the two. It's not going to be a fair comparison at all but they can both be described with the exact same phrase above, so it's gonna be interesting.  

Heard both. Not even gonna start comparing the two. It's totally not a fair comparison.
 
More impressions will come when the Triples arrive - I still haven't paid for mine yet, so many more people here should get theirs before me. Finalizing what I want with Vitaliy before he sends me the paypal invoice.  
 

 

[goodvibes]

I think it's probably not a bad idea to say how acquired but once stated, a reader can take what impressions he wants without comment about bias. Even when we don't know how acquired, that shouldn't come up with a known source. There's always source quality, EQ, preference or spec related issues that will come up for discussion but an attack on credibility should be taken as an insult. I, like all here, am wary of new members and glorious reviews and understand the IEM of the moment effect so take reviews with a grain but they're much appreciated and attacking the credibility of good members will only make less of them..

 

[ericp10]

I wholeheartedly agree @ goodvibes.
 
Quote:

I think it's probably not a bad idea to say how acquired but once stated, a reader can take what impressions he wants without comment about bias. Even when we don't know how acquired, that shouldn't come up with a known source. There's always source quality, EQ, preference or spec related issues that will come up for discussion but an attack on credibility should be taken as an insult. I, like all here, am wary of new members and glorious reviews and understand the IEM of the moment effect so take reviews with a grain but they're much appreciated and attacking the credibility of good members will only make less of them..

 

[ericp10]

I couldn't have stated it better @ project86.
 
Quote:

Quote:

Project86 thank you again for your thoughts and views. And I greatly respect that you feel the need to say whether you purchased something with your hard earned cash or got it for free. I, on the other hand, don't feel that same need as stated before as I'm not following any ethical code on head.fi.org but my own. It smacks of hypocrisy to me when certain people jump on this thread out of the blue to question head.fi members who so graciously give their views on a product that many haven't heard, whether the opinions are negative or positive. Except for Kunlun (I have no issues with his concerns about the FB matter), others who commented and went into long diatribes about ethics and such haven't even been on the thread to say they were interested in 1964 EARS or not. No, they only appeared so they could go into negative rants and cause trouble, as they have done on other threads, probably because of some warped vendetta against certain head.fi members. That's why I felt it was none of their concern how I personally came about my quad. If they want to speculate from that I say feel free. I have no one to answer to except for publications I do reviews for, and trust me when I state I have never been questioned by an editor on what method I obtained an item for review, so no way am I going to allow it in a forum where I give my opinion freely (especially when I usually get paid for giving my opinion). With that said, any reader of what I say has the right to accept that I am being fair, honest and impartial about an item, or reject what I say totally. I wouldn't be offended either way. I have given impressions on every item you see in my signature (and then some), and my impartiality wasn't questioned then (not out in the open anyway), but now that I take a risk on a new company (and like what I am hearing) it is questioned? Give me a break!
 
Like I said, I respect the route you feel is proper and right @ project86. I know one thing, with all the comments about a particular magazine in the UK and how they prove how ethical they are, along with the speculation and innuendo, the great fictional Sherlock Holmes would never have to worry about being displaced in his day job...lol.
 
As much as I am loving (really loving) the quad, you and others keep raising my interest in the triple @ project86. Hmmmm? Decisions.

You bring up a good point. If someone writes up their impressions on all the gear they have heard, do we need them to clarify each time what their relationship is with the product? If you 1) borrow a product from a friend, 2) get a loaner from the manufacturer, and 3) buy a third product, then write up all your impressions on each.... should we question your integrity over (2) but accept your experiences on the others? If not, why not?
 
I can see how it would be a different story if you are a newer user who hasn't done much around here, suddely popping in with praise for some new brand. But that is a totally different situation.

 

[Confispect]

 

[Sil3nce]

Quote:

lol spam :"_)
 

 

[Confispect]

Quote:

lol spam :"_)
 

 I think that's enough...wait one more 

 
 

 

[Sil3nce]

Quote:

Quote:

lol spam :"_)
 

 I think that's enough...wait one more 

 
 

 

[richbass]

Quote:

Okay, just finished doing a three-way head-to-head sound comparison between the 1964-Q, SM3 and FX700. I did this because someone  on the SM3 thread - who hasn't heard any 1964 EARS products - had the audacity to say they didn't believe me when I said the quad bass extends deeper than the FX700...lol. They said my words were just an subjective opinion, which to some extent is true. But it's also an opinion based on fact.
 
So I'm not going to get into much detail (will save it for my review), but I just listened to one track, Radiohead's "Just," through each of the three IEMs. Conclusion? As much as I like the SM3 and love the FX700, neither comes close to the richness and details of the 1964-Q. Of the two universals, the FX700 is knocking at the door with its bass richness, but still isn't allowed in the club next to the quad. FX700 even falls short despite of its wonderful timbre. I have to say the quad is the best sounding IEM I've heard from a technical standpoint, and one of the most fun ones too.

Bass richness for fx700 But how is the bass in quads ? Is it richer/better than jvc like my userid lol ? !!!