[justinxbailey]

I'm waiting for my quads.. another couple weeks..

 

[Foamybrian]

The fit is perfect. I was contemplating a DIY kit instead of an audiologist for the impressions but I'm glad I went with the latter. They sit flush in my ears and stay put even when I'm running (excellent cord as well, no microphonics). The only time I can break the seal is if I do it on purpose with a huge contorted smile but even then, once I relax, they slip right back into position and reseal. There is some initial pressure but its not painful, rather its more of a signal to let me know that I am wearing the customs. After a few minutes, my senses adjust and the pressure goes away and everything feels natural; definitely a step up from universals. I'm not too fond of doing early impressions since I always undergo a biased honeymoon period but so far, its an improvement over the MTPC and X10's.
 
I've told myself that if I buy these, I will not make another purchase for quite some time. After hearing the Quads though, I'm quite curious as to how the JH16's sound since the general consensus seems to label them as the holy grail of customs.
 
Quote:

Nice looking headphones.
 
How do you find the fit to be?

 

 

[buffalowings]

a little turn of events, I just received by email, a bill of $50.00 for the soft canal tips, oddly enough, I sent $50 (cash) along with the phones in a westone semi hard case by USPS priority. when i asked a week ago if they had received the phones, the rep confirmed that the phones arrived and work had begun. It's hard to believe that a usps employee would bother to open the package, unzip the case and take the $50.00 but leave the unique looking and possibly expensive headphones intact and then reseal the package and send them merrily along their way...
also, my second set of cables which I purchased (at a slightly discounted price due to a defect in the first cable) started debraiding within a month and when I informed them of this, I was told that cables aren't covered under warranty and that debraiding would be impossible unless the cables were caught or yanked (I can testify that the cables weren't ever yanked or caught onto something)

 

[Nightslayer]

Quote:

a little turn of events, I just received by email, a bill of $50.00 for the soft canal tips, oddly enough, I sent $50 (cash) along with the phones in a westone semi hard case by USPS priority. when i asked a week ago if they had received the phones, the rep confirmed that the phones arrived and work had begun. It's hard to believe that a usps employee would bother to open the package, unzip the case and take the $50.00 but leave the unique looking and possibly expensive headphones intact and then reseal the package and send them merrily along their way...
also, my second set of cables which I purchased (at a slightly discounted price due to a defect in the first cable) started debraiding within a month and when I informed them of this, I was told that cables aren't covered under warranty and that debraiding would be impossible unless the cables were caught or yanked (I can testify that the cables weren't ever yanked or caught onto something)

Just a FYI, the cables are not braided in any way. They are simply unwinding. Mine are showing slight signs of it at one point in the cables, due to my coiling the earphones the same way everytime if I'm not wrong.
 
 

 

[spekkio]

Currently experiencing some post-honeymoon syndrome with these quads. I found that my tastes have evolved and changed these past few months, so much so that the Quads' default signature isn't cutting it for me (not enough highs). Being used to a Beyer DT990 setup at home doesn't help that. I recently found the Etymotic ER4S and now am wondering why I spent so much on customs. So, just a word of caution - There's no turning back after you get customs. It's a gamble you live with.

 

[aamefford]

Quote:

Currently experiencing some post-honeymoon syndrome with these quads. I found that my tastes have evolved and changed these past few months, so much so that the Quads' default signature isn't cutting it for me (not enough highs). Being used to a Beyer DT990 setup at home doesn't help that. I recently found the Etymotic ER4S and now am wondering why I spent so much on customs. So, just a word of caution - There's no turning back after you get customs. It's a gamble you live with.

Good point on the be sure what you are looking for when you buy customs, they are a one way item for sure.  To offer just a bit of counterpoint - My experience is the reverse.  I tried out the Ety's last year, after wanting to try them for ages.  No doubt, they are excellent, but very detail oriented, and very bright to me.  I sold them after a couple of months.  I really like the highs on the quads.  They are not so much rolled off, well, maybe exactly that.  They seem very slightly attenuated, but with no real perceptible loss of frequency extension, and yes, I can still hear 20 kHz, even at my advanced age...

 
I just offer my experience as a counter-point.  One can't really try customs, but one can seek advice, (here - caveat emptor)  and from the maker.  I've traded emails with JH Audio and found them helpful, I've traded bunch of emails and a couple of phone calls with the fine folks at 1964 Ears to get advice.
 
spekkio - I really hope after a long time not listening to the quads, you pop them in and wonder why you let them sit so long, and think they sound awesome!  It has happened to me with iems and headphones before.

 

[TT600R]

My T's will arrive in a couple of days,and actually,I am a bit nervous how they will sound.
I am spoiled by the sparkly and detailed highs of my good old RE0's.
I understand the treble of the RE0 is hard to beat,even by the triples.
Gues I just have to "undergo" the sound of 1964 and let it sink in.
Soon I will know.

 

[stew1234]

I in no way mean this as a criticism but if you're finding the sound of the er4s to best the quads I'd try them with a few more sources. Having used the er4p for many years I love the way they sound and can see how they would sound more resolving and detailed out of a weaker source. However having used the quads on a range of sources sometimes I wasn't impressed but out of others that can really drive the lower end I found it really improved the entire spectrum. 
 
My own opinion is sometimes when you hear a slight hiss with the quads you might be expecting that they're getting plenty of juice when in reality only the high frequency drivers are and the lows may need a bit more to sound great. WIth the er4ps - being a single driver - when you heard a bit of hiss you could be sure they were getting plenty of power and the low end could be expected to sound good.
 
In short I think the quads are very transparent. Some tracks sound just about the same as they would with much lower end songs but higher quality tracks from a source that pairs well are leaps and bounds above any sound I could ever get from the er4ps.
 
 

 

[Pisn4e]

Nice insight Stew, what source have found pairs nicely with your quads?

 

[tkalee]

Whoa, now I'm worried. I ordered my Quads just last week, specifically for the better bass presence. But my main portable source is the J3, which has a recessed bass at the low end compared to my trusty Clip+.
 
Perhaps some other Quads owners with J3s can weigh in...
 
Quote:

I in no way mean this as a criticism but if you're finding the sound of the er4s to best the quads I'd try them with a few more sources. Having used the er4p for many years I love the way they sound and can see how they would sound more resolving and detailed out of a weaker source. However having used the quads on a range of sources sometimes I wasn't impressed but out of others that can really drive the lower end I found it really improved the entire spectrum. 
 
My own opinion is sometimes when you hear a slight hiss with the quads you might be expecting that they're getting plenty of juice when in reality only the high frequency drivers are and the lows may need a bit more to sound great. WIth the er4ps - being a single driver - when you heard a bit of hiss you could be sure they were getting plenty of power and the low end could be expected to sound good.
 
In short I think the quads are very transparent. Some tracks sound just about the same as they would with much lower end songs but higher quality tracks from a source that pairs well are leaps and bounds above any sound I could ever get from the er4ps.
 
 

 

 

[buffalowings]

 
Quote:

I in no way mean this as a criticism but if you're finding the sound of the er4s to best the quads I'd try them with a few more sources. Having used the er4p for many years I love the way they sound and can see how they would sound more resolving and detailed out of a weaker source. However having used the quads on a range of sources sometimes I wasn't impressed but out of others that can really drive the lower end I found it really improved the entire spectrum. 
 
My own opinion is sometimes when you hear a slight hiss with the quads you might be expecting that they're getting plenty of juice when in reality only the high frequency drivers are and the lows may need a bit more to sound great. WIth the er4ps - being a single driver - when you heard a bit of hiss you could be sure they were getting plenty of power and the low end could be expected to sound good.
 
In short I think the quads are very transparent. Some tracks sound just about the same as they would with much lower end songs but higher quality tracks from a source that pairs well are leaps and bounds above any sound I could ever get from the er4ps.
 
 

When I compared the quads and etymotic HF5 (very similar to the er4p) the HF5 seemed much more detailed in the mids and highs (the treble was REALLY "detailed") I attribute this to that fact that the HF5's are extremely bass anemic and the quads are the exact opposite in terms of sound signature with a emphasis on bass (with any emphasis on bass, treble and mids will become washed out, no matter how small the increase. Also, the soundstage and positioning was different as well. Though the distance/soundstage was about the same, the quads made sounds taller, wider and fuller this makes for a more realistic portrayal of music but at the cost of clarity because at times, the sounds can seem to be fighting each other for space. Also, in terms of the bass, switching between the HF5 and quads, for music where bass is meant to be heard above others (rap, hiphop) the HF5s really lose out due to the bass rolloff. Subbass that is easily heard/felt (not "eye ball shaking" as many headfiers seem to describe any non neutral headphone) is virtually nonexistant coming from the HF5s and I found myself frequently filling in the bass details with my imagination. overall, the HF5's/er4p's are more detailed but only in the treble and mid range due to the bass deficiency. Because of that, I have found few IEMs that can beat it in terms of detail (maybe except for the hifiman re2 which is very similar in terms of sound signature.
 
also, because of the slightly recessed/recessed treble (very good extension but not very forward) the quads are a warm/relaxed sounding IEM, this is once again, detrimental to the detail

 

[ericp10]

Wow! It's just amazing how different people hear things, because having owned the HF5 and, of course, the quads, there is no way I would ever compare the etymotic to the micro-details of the 1964-Q. I actually liked the HF5 (sans the lack of bass), and found its analytical sound very interesting, but the sound signatures between the two are nowhere near each other to my ears. It's like comparing apples and oranges. In addition, for my ears the 1964-Q reveals micro details that I have never heard in the HF-5, and never got close to hearing. And the mids on the 1964-Q aren't that recessed (a tad, but not as recessed as say the mids are in the FX700). Again, different people hear differently, but what has been described here hasn't been my experience with the quad vs. HF5. The quad is far more superior in sound, details and clarity.
 
Quote:

 


When I compared the quads and etymotic HF5 (very similar to the er4p) the HF5 seemed much more detailed in the mids and highs (the treble was REALLY "detailed") I attribute this to that fact that the HF5's are extremely bass anemic and the quads are the exact opposite in terms of sound signature with a emphasis on bass (with any emphasis on bass, treble and mids will become washed out, no matter how small the increase. Also, the soundstage and positioning was different as well. Though the distance/soundstage was about the same, the quads made sounds taller, wider and fuller this makes for a more realistic portrayal of music but at the cost of clarity because at times, the sounds can seem to be fighting each other for space. Also, in terms of the bass, switching between the HF5 and quads, for music where bass is meant to be heard above others (rap, hiphop) the HF5s really lose out due to the bass rolloff. Subbass that is easily heard/felt (not "eye ball shaking" as many headfiers seem to describe any non neutral headphone) is virtually nonexistant coming from the HF5s and I found myself frequently filling in the bass details with my imagination. overall, the HF5's/er4p's are more detailed but only in the treble and mid range due to the bass deficiency. Because of that, I have found few IEMs that can beat it in terms of detail (maybe except for the hifiman re2 which is very similar in terms of sound signature.
 
also, because of the slightly recessed/recessed treble (very good extension but not very forward) the quads are a warm/relaxed sounding IEM, this is once again, detrimental to the detail

 

 

[project86]

I think buffalowings hit the nail on the head when he said a bass emphasis will affect our interpretation of the highs. I don't remember how the quads are configured, but the 1964-T uses the Knowles ED-29689 driver for highs. That's the same driver used in the Ety ER4 models. Ety obviously runs it full range, while the 1964-T has two separate drivers to handle lows. So if anything the triples should theoretically be more detailed because the ED driver can focus on the highs only. But when our brains hear the ER4 models we tend to focus on the details because there isn't any sub bass to speak of. 
 
I think the 1964-T has just as much detail as the Ety. It just has a different focus. I imagine it is the same for the quads too. 

 

[VictorHalgaard]

Right, so i just got my 1964 quads...Its my first custom iem EVER - My ears feel violated...raped....But the sound! Its freakin' amazing!! My ears will probably adjust to this over time...
 

 

[natashaful]

Quote:

Right, so i just got my 1964 quads...Its my first custom iem EVER - My ears feel violated...raped....But the sound! Its freakin' amazing!! My ears will probably adjust to this over time...
 

I want to get my impressions done and Order some, But i'm scared of customs getting them on the way in and whacking me with a massive duty bill.
 
Natty