[project86]

 
Quote:

I'm just starting out serious headphone listening (hi-fi background) and have decided on custom IEMs as a catch-all home/portable music rig until get more into it. I was looking seriously at JH11's until I happened across the 1964-Q. I was sold on the JH11 as I've heard they best UM Miracles w/ bass level and also appreciated their customer service as I've had a few back-and-forths w/ Brittany and Jaime. Bass level and overall clarity/detail is important, but nothing to up-front or cold. I wasn't a fan of the Grado 325is I listened to once (although it was probably not burned in and came out of a stereo receiver). Mostly I listen to experimental Indie, electronic (not boomy house/dance), and hip-hop w/ a mix of alternative.
 
I would really like to be able to have multi-colored plugs w/ art and at that point the price difference of the JH11(+$100 art) and 1964-Q (+$50 art) is $400! I've never listened to a custom earphone, or really any other high end earphone, but is the SQ difference going to be that much more? Obviously cost upgrade value is always subjective, but I guess I'm just wondering how far apart each are. Is the JH11 in a completely different class? Or is the JH11 better (or worse?) but within the 1964-Q range?

As was already said I doubt anyone has heard both yet, especially considering that the JH11 is not the most popular. People here generally go all the way up to JH13/16 or start at the JH5. Not many takers on the in between models (not that there is anything wrong with them). But as more people get the quads we might end up with someone who has heard both.
 
Judging from my experience owning various customs I can confidently say that the price difference is likely not important with regards to quality of the end product. They probably do each have their own "house sound" and one might fit you better than the other, but I very much doubt that one is a clear winner over the other. JH Audio is able to charge that much based on their name, reputation, history of quality, and just because that's what the market price is with the big companies. 1964 couldn't realistically come to market with a similar product at similar prices and expect people to choose them over JH, UE, and Westone. They NEED to discount their stuff in order to become established. It just so happens that the discount they have chosen is rather large.
 
 


Quote:

I doubt anyone has the both of them to compare.
 
Also it looks like I'll be ordering mid January since I hate to wait much longer than their standard turn around. I've been told that the delay they currently have should be finished around then so that when email I will order. I've been contemplating colors and I think I'll end up going with blue and red for the two sides with clear tips although I'll ask them if they yellow over time but that hasn't been an issue of late compared to older customs so I think I'll be good but I'll ask.
 
Two reviews of the triples has been out so I'll be pretty excited whenever I get around to ordering them and getting an appointment at an audiologist.

 
Just FYI I have a few clear customs that I've had for several years and they have not turned yellow that I can discern. Maybe compared back to back with their original condition I would notice a very minor change but just looking at them the tips don't look any different than the rest of the shell. The old UE10pro that I had did have some pretty bad yellowing though. But it was very old and probably used different materials/processes than the newer ones.
 
Also I use a custom earpiece for work every day (looks like an empty custom IEM shell) and it seems identical to when I got it despite being worn 40-60+ hours per week for over 5 years. So I'd say unless you have major wax issues you should be fine.

 

 

[u238]

I wonder how the Quad compares to  the Monter Turbine Miles Davis Tribute or even the regular Turbine in bass quantity?  I know the Turbines are a world apart from custom BA IEMs, but it's what I have to go by right now.  I'm seriously considering the Quads after my Alienears C3s stopped functioning correctly.  Concern that the bass will be overwhelming is holding me back a bit.  I like a good quantity of bass, but something like the Miles Davis Tribute has far too much for me. 

 

[ericp10]

Okay, I'm running into some technical problems with photos, some other assignments and some additional information I want to include, but I'm still shooting for getting the quad review posted this week (or early next week at the latest).
 
To add a new wrinkle to the 1964-Q (I hope those members who know me are sitting down for this), I have so madly fallen in love with the quads that I have done something I thought I would never do>>> I put the JVC FX700 up for sale. I know I know. The 1964-Q has just managed to hit the all-time sound signature I desire in voicing, instrument separation, detail and soundstage that I rarely want to listen to anything else. I mainly keep the SM2 and the Panny HJE900 in my ears while commuting. As soon as I get home, however, everything else comes quickly out and the quads are escorted into my ear canals. Again, I will never say there's nothing out there that sounds better than the 1964-Q (I'm sure there is), but I haven't heard it yet. I'm quite satisfied.

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

I wonder how the Quad compares to  the Monter Turbine Miles Davis Tribute or even the regular Turbine in bass quantity?  I know the Turbines are a world apart from custom BA IEMs, but it's what I have to go by right now.  I'm seriously considering the Quads after my Alienears C3s stopped functioning correctly.  Concern that the bass will be overwhelming is holding me back a bit.  I like a good quantity of bass, but something like the Miles Davis Tribute has far too much for me. 

I don't think you have much to worry about. The quad is about quality of bass over quantity. Now, if you're listening to a recording that naturally has an abundance of bass, the quad will reproduce it effortly, but the the IEM is more about reproducing the bass extension and hearing each note clearly with detail. It's not about overly saturating your ears with bass. I owned the MD and Copper and liked them both quite a bit. The quad is on a different level.

 

[u238]

I dropped them an email about some questions I had and got a response in less than an hour.  That's pretty impressive.

 

[SoulSyde]

@aleki, now that we've all heard of them would it be fair to 1964 to rename the title of this thread
 

"1964 Ears (The Appreciation Thread)"?

 

[9homme]

+1 can't agree with @SoulSyde more. hahaha

 

[soozieq]

 
Quote:

To add a new wrinkle to the 1964-Q (I hope those members who know me are sitting down for this), I have so madly fallen in love with the quads that I have done something I thought I would never do>>> I put the JVC FX700 up for sale. I know I know.

Oh my goodness, what a shock. I fell right off my throne when I read that!!! You put your JVC's up for sale? I can't believe it... although, I sold mine a few months ago and still miss them now and then. But I don't have as much listening time as I did before, and when I do, I tend to listen to my home system more than earphones.
 
Nice to hear how much you're enjoying the Quads

 
What do the Doobs sound like with them? And I mean the Doobs without Michael McDonald!
 

 

[rawrster]

Quote:

Okay, I'm running into some technical problems with photos, some other assignments and some additional information I want to include, but I'm still shooting for getting the quad review posted this week (or early next week at the latest).
 
To add a new wrinkle to the 1964-Q (I hope those members who know me are sitting down for this), I have so madly fallen in love with the quads that I have done something I thought I would never do>>> I put the JVC FX700 up for sale.

That's great Eric to know that you are enjoying the quads that much I know you really enjoyed the FX700 and I thought you would just keep it even if you weren't planning on using them much. However does this mean that the trips maybe be added in the future? I guess if someone was in the market for the FX700 now is a good time to buy it off you.
 

 

 

 

[CEE TEE]

@ericp10:  That's a nice vote for the quads.  And for customs.
 
Hmmm, I did get some impressions made during the holiday break...
 
(To think- I ALMOST had FX700's brought over for me...and BOTH of you sold yours?  Yep, next step = customs.) 

 

[aleki]

Quote:

@aleki, now that we've all heard of them would it be fair to 1964 to rename the title of this thread
 

"1964 Ears (The Appreciation Thread)"?

 
Quote:

+1 can't agree with @SoulSyde more. hahaha

really sorry guys. I've been a bit busy lately and havent had much time to sit down, read the 15 odd pages of new content, and make alterations to the OP. I'll gladly change the title, however, the OP alterations may not come 'till next week. I plan to make this the "root of the tree" thread, where I will be trying my best to keep up with links from independent reviews, and perhaps a little picture preview before the links(that is, if the contributing members dont mind)
 
 
Quote:

Okay, I'm running into some technical problems with photos, some other assignments and some additional information I want to include, but I'm still shooting for getting the quad review posted this week (or early next week at the latest).
 
To add a new wrinkle to the 1964-Q (I hope those members who know me are sitting down for this), I have so madly fallen in love with the quads that I have done something I thought I would never do>>> I put the JVC FX700 up for sale. I know I know. The 1964-Q has just managed to hit the all-time sound signature I desire in voicing, instrument separation, detail and soundstage that I rarely want to listen to anything else. I mainly keep the SM2 and the Panny HJE900 in my ears while commuting. As soon as I get home, however, everything else comes quickly out and the quads are escorted into my ear canals. Again, I will never say there's nothing out there that sounds better than the 1964-Q (I'm sure there is), but I haven't heard it yet. I'm quite satisfied.

 
Eric, I am very enthused to hear how much you like them. You have me 100% convinced on the quads. I'll be looking to join you guys sometime this february; right after I sell my brand new replacement MD's

 

[vinnievidi]

Hi everyone.  I've been following this thread for a while now and I've finally decided to bite the bullet and buy a pair of 1964s--I have my audiologist appointment on Monday.
 
I was hoping that someone could offer some advice before I place my order.  
 
I'd prefer a model that is as clear as possible but not too sterile.  I also would like some bass presence and deep bass extension, but not to the point of overshadowing the mids or highs.  I seem to like when headphones simulate the visceral "thwack" of a drum set in rock tracks and can replicate the stringing of an upright bass with some sort of reality.  I am not too particular to rolled-off highs—it kind of makes the music boring to me—but I can't take too much sibilance (I could only tolerate the W3 with those extra long Comply foams).  
 
Even with their sibilance and sunken mids, my favorite universal IEMs in overall sound quality are the Westone 3 and Triple.Fi.  Also, I liked the clarity of the W3, SE535, and UM3X.  I guess that I would like something like the W3, but with more mid presence and less sibilance.  
 
I hope that I am not asking too much and that I was not too cryptic.  I am currently leaning towards the Quads.  Yet I am not married to the idea of buying them, and if the Triples are the right ones then it saves me some cash, but I just want to be sure.  
 
 
Thanks in advance 
 
VV
 
 
Oh, I mainly listen to classical (symphonic and operatic), early 90's rock, and talk podcasts.  
 
 
   

 

[SoulSyde]

Quote:

really sorry guys.

No apologies necessary.  Between my correspondence with Vitaliy, the YouTube videos and the feedback on this thread 1964 really appears to be a great start-up company.  It's nice for the community to embrace them the way they have.

 

[rawrster]

@vinnievidi: you should read the reviews by joker and project86 on the triples. That's a pretty good starting point to figure out if you want the trips or quads.
 
Also for some odd reason choosing a color combination is more difficult than choosing the actual product of what to get since I was originally looking into the quads. I wanted to get a green/blue but I already have that so will have to see. Good thing their current price will be there for a while so no rush in deciding.

 

[vinnievidi]

@rawrster: thanks for the tip.  I read their reviews and found them most helpful.  I also received an email from someone at 1964 Ears who, based on my aforementioned criteria, highly suggested the Triples over the Quads.  Gotta love a company that talks you out of their priciest product in order to put you into an appropriate fit.  
 
I still have until Monday to make a decision, but as of now it looks like I'll be going with the Triples.