Latest Thread Images

1964 Ears
Apr 18, 2011 at 2:18 PM Post #2,162 of 7,417
Some more pictures of my Quads. In particular have a look at the black logo on the red faceplate. It looks like air bubbles in between layers. I think it looks nasty but am I being too picky? The red one is the one I have the big fit issue with.
 
And yes, I do bite my nails...
frown.gif

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
If anyone has any requests for close up photos, let me know.
 
Apr 18, 2011 at 2:32 PM Post #2,163 of 7,417
Didn't someone earlier write that those bubbles are actually were the drivers are glued into place? I think it's probably more than a few pages back, but I remember a flurry of back and forth about it towards the end of March.  I think the consensus was that it's not a defect.

 
 
Apr 18, 2011 at 3:09 PM Post #2,164 of 7,417
Those are not bubbles if you are referring to what you see by the drivers. I have had those on every single one of my customs including a UM custom, 1964 Ears and a remold.
 
Apr 18, 2011 at 4:18 PM Post #2,166 of 7,417
Hey Shoosh- Sorry for the delay, been a bit busy of late. I've taken a few pics close up with my Nexus 1 below there and there are some more artistic shots a mate of mine took at this url- http://www.flickr.com/photos/scifigeek/5631774276/in/set-72157626525123722/
 
For me the build is excellent- I'm not spotting any annoying bubbles, rough edges, etc... After 4 days with them I still think the fit is good. I'm never in pain with them. My left ear can, from time to time, squelch (like there is some damp wax) when I walk, however it's very minimal and with some wiggling I can usually get rid of it. I won't be walking around too much with these anyhow and there doesn't seem to be any seal issues so I don't want to get too picky over something which I think is just how my body works. When I smile my left ear canal moves lots but the seal doesn't break and even when I turn from side to side with nothing in my ears I can, from time to time, get a similar tiny squelch sound so all in all I'm happy at the moment.  Still listening and don't want to put forth a review just yet, but when I do I think rather than trying to be technical in audiophile language, as I'm an amateur, I think i'll select a series of tracks and give my particular impression of them through the Trips.
 
Anyhow! check out the below- I hope ya'll like them. BTW, I just have to say it again but- I escaped import tax!!!!! :)
 
 

 
 
Apr 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM Post #2,168 of 7,417
No, I'm fine with the 'bubbles' inside the shell. It's the white air bubbles on the faceplate that bother me. They make the engraving look like a cheap transfer which is a shame because the detail on the artwork is superb.
 

 
I think the 'bubbles' inside the the shell are necessary to fit the drivers inside. I guess it's down to the size of your ears. I do wish I'd gone solid now instead though because they don't look particularly good in my opinion.
 
Apr 18, 2011 at 6:39 PM Post #2,169 of 7,417


 
Quote:Originally Posted by chocky900 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

 
Some more pictures of my Quads. In particular have a
 
 
 
 
If anyone has any requests for close up photos, let me know.
Click to expand...

Don't stress. You bought them to play music, not to be toys or fashion statements, right?
 
RIGHT???
wink_face.gif

 
The fit is more of a concern, let Vitaliy know and he'll take care of it with you.
 
Apr 19, 2011 at 8:21 AM Post #2,170 of 7,417
Quick question, if I can't lie down on either side without my IEMs poking painfully into my ears would you say the fit is bad? When I lie down the surface pushes against the IEM as well, causing it to come loose in my ears if the IEM is not in parallel with the surface i am lying on. I am not too sure how to go about describing the problem to 1964, depending on what position I am in I find that the problems seem to be different.
 
Apr 19, 2011 at 9:47 AM Post #2,171 of 7,417


Quote:
nightslayer said:
Quick question, if I can't lie down on either side without my IEMs poking painfully into my ears would you say the fit is bad? When I lie down the surface pushes against the IEM as well, causing it to come loose in my ears if the IEM is not in parallel with the surface i am lying on. I am not too sure how to go about describing the problem to 1964, depending on what position I am in I find that the problems seem to be different.
Click to expand...


 
I don't know that being able to lie down comfortably with custom IEMs is necessarily the mark of a good fit. Frankly I don't think they were designed for that sort of thing, although I too have done it. As much as our ears are unique, we should each have different reactions when putting pressure on different sections of the ear or the IEM shell. I've got a pair of customs that don't insert as deep and have more of a loose and flush fit, and those work well for sleeping in. I've got other sets with a deeper insertion or a more "full" outer area and they kind of hurt when I try to lie down. 
 
Remember that you are dealing with a solid acrylic shell that was made from an impression of your ear in its normal state (IE not resting on a pillow, not leaning back too far, etc). The very fact that it fits comfortably while you are in a normal state would preclude it from fitting comfortably when you are in a different position, or at least for my ears it would. I think silicone might have more of a chance to fit better in all positions.
 
Apr 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM Post #2,172 of 7,417
Having spent an extended amount of time listening to these quads, I think it's time to offer extended impressions.
 
When I first got them back, after having listened to the U curve signature of the M50 for so long, I was initially taken aback by the quads' relative lack of treble sparkle. I felt as if the music was not 'crisp' enough and the highs were getting rolled off, though they were extremely comfortable to listen to for long periods of time. The highs never got in the way of the entire song. After I did some EQ with a peak at 7k, I was able to achieve my preferred sound signature. Now the quads offer crisp highs along with very substantial and extended lows. 
 
The bass of these guys may be off-putting to some, but I think they have enough bass to satisfy almost any basshead. The sub-bass is present, and makes itself known where the song requires it. The mid-bass is very obviously present and offers excellent PRaT. I did not feel the bass as a whole to significantly detract from the mids and highs, because they are 'separate' from the rendering of the latter. 
 
Soundstage is slightly better than a typical IEM (W4 is slightly more narrow), and if imaged, is about one palm's distance from my head, forming a hemisphere on the front of the head.
 
I think the quads should be EQ-ed in order to let their full potential shine. That was what I felt when I opened up the highs using the eq. Suddenly everything was clearer and I was hearing cymbals again.
 
Apr 19, 2011 at 1:03 PM Post #2,173 of 7,417


Quote:
spekkio said:
Having spent an extended amount of time listening to these quads, I think it's time to offer extended impressions.
 
When I first got them back, after having listened to the U curve signature of the M50 for so long, I was initially taken aback by the quads' relative lack of treble sparkle. I felt as if the music was not 'crisp' enough and the highs were getting rolled off, though they were extremely comfortable to listen to for long periods of time. The highs never got in the way of the entire song. After I did some EQ with a peak at 7k, I was able to achieve my preferred sound signature. Now the quads offer crisp highs along with very substantial and extended lows. 
 
The bass of these guys may be off-putting to some, but I think they have enough bass to satisfy almost any basshead. The sub-bass is present, and makes itself known where the song requires it. The mid-bass is very obviously present and offers excellent PRaT. I did not feel the bass as a whole to significantly detract from the mids and highs, because they are 'separate' from the rendering of the latter. 
 
Soundstage is slightly better than a typical IEM (W4 is slightly more narrow), and if imaged, is about one palm's distance from my head, forming a hemisphere on the front of the head.
 
I think the quads should be EQ-ed in order to let their full potential shine. That was what I felt when I opened up the highs using the eq. Suddenly everything was clearer and I was hearing cymbals again.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your impressions.  Could you compare the quads to the W4 in greater detail? 
 
 
Apr 19, 2011 at 1:19 PM Post #2,174 of 7,417
Unfortunately, I don't own the W4s, and I only got to audition them for a while at a shop. From what I remember, the W4's midrange is very liquid, and the bass is not a dominant part of the sound signature. The Quads are bass-leaning in that they emphasize the mid and sub-bass more than the mids and highs. Where the W4's midrange is very full and thick, the Quads' midrange is not as thick and spread slightly thinner, though not at all 'recessed'. The highs on the W4 are about the same as the Quads (polite and non-sparkly).

 
 
Apr 19, 2011 at 1:56 PM Post #2,175 of 7,417
When you say,the quads' treble is not sparkly,how can you compare them to the RE0's.
I am using the RE0's at the moment,and getting the triples.I really like the detail and treble the RE0 are giving.(I found them better in the highs than my former Shure E5s.)
Would the treble of the triples be less?
Anyone have them both and did some A/B?
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top