[AUserName501]

  Read about the many fitment issues with the universal Roxanne, it's massive. 

Fit issues have been because the tips are not suited to different ear sizes. Once people find out what aftermarket tips work this problem goes away. From what people have said larger tips and deeper insertion will keep them in place.

 

[Hawaiiancerveza]

I'd have to disagree with the CIEM vs IEM.  I've tried many different buds and they always fall out when in my ear while I'm working out or running.  CIEM's have never given me that problem.  But I am only speaking for myself.  Plus they seal better.  That would be dependent on how the audiologist also does the molds and also a persons ear canal. Perhaps there should be an option for the universal, but I'd have to say that CIEM are what I prefer.  

 

[FullCircle]

  Will Noble Audio start offering a universal version of the Kaiser 10 now that the Roxanne has proven there is a large market for universal versions of flagship CIEMs?
 
CIEMs have significant disadvantages such as requiring a mould of your ear, long wait times, significantly lower resale value and most importantly if you have seal issues you have to go through the whole process again. Universal versions don't have these problems and if a proper seal is achieved via ear tips the sound quality will be the same. Expanding into universal versions will expand the flagship IEM market, bring in new customers and bring back old customers who have been disappointed by fit issues and the low resale value.
 
It will also make getting objective measurements easier rather than relying on the spurious testimonies from audiophiles whom I have no confidence in their hearing or comparison abilities. At the moment the problem is that there are a lot of CIEM makers and no one knows what they all sound like nor is there any objective measurements to compare. Simple information such as a frequency response curve is not available which makes spending thousands of dollars on a CIEM very risky.
 
I have heard plenty of good things about the Kaiser 10 but I'm not going to buy anything other than a universal version. I'm not interested in fancy acrylic colors or custom decals and as I can get the Roxanne Universal for $1300, which is a $300 discount other the custom version, I don't see reasons to buy the Kaiser 10. I'd buy a $1300 Kaiser 10 universal but I'm not going to buy a custom version.

 
WoW so many facets here to address.
 
1) I don't need to follow the "success" of the Roxanee to goad me into building universal products. If you know the history of the "Wizard" you would know that I have been involved in, if not spear heading the buidling of universal products for a long time now.  It didn't require 20 years for me to "discover," that building universal IEMs was a good idea. In fact it wasn't the Roxanne that "proved" anything, according to Jerry Harvey (See Google Interview) it was the success of the Fit Ear Universal line that pesuaded him to get involved in hand building Universal IEMs.
 
2) That being said, hand building universals is not a good  idea.  The concept behind universals is to build with speed. The problem with that is....  if your Universal has a shell color, (any color) and you build the shells in large batches (save time) the pigments/dyes settle to the bottom of the container of UV liquid (material used to make the shells).   (Imagine a large soup made, at the end of the day, it becomes more pungent, as the spices settle to the bottom)
 
Any how, the problem with the dyes settling, is the ratio of UV material pigment isn't optimal, and then you run into brittle, fragile shells.   You also have problems with matching shell colors, thus to do a proper repair, and maintain color matching both sides (right and left IEM) have to be re-made, which increases the repair time, which increases repair costs.
 
3) I decided I was not going to participate in such a circle of progress coupled with failure.  Thus, Noble uses a plastic injected mold for the universal shell, resulting in much stronger shells, consistent in strength, color and size.
 
It also afords Noble the oppertunity to offer "classic" Universal IEMs that utilize the standard injected parts
 

 
 
 
and we also offer hand finished, (Wizard Design) Universal IEMs, that are as unique as our Noble CIEMs.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
but here is the thing, even the Wizard Design IEMs shells are made from injected plastic, so we know that they are consistent in strength, size and quality.
 
4) The down side is, designing and building the molds required for injected parts is a very expensive process, and requires a lot of time as well.
 
5) Size, internal parts for the K10 exceed the size of the universal IEM shell that we have.
 
6) Due to that, we would either have to hand make the K10 Universal, or have a new housing designed, just for the K10.
 
   A) As it is, the lab is at full capacity.  We would like to keep our build times below 5-6 months and as mentioned before, hand building IEMs comes with a set of problems.
   B) Investing large sums of money, into a plastic injected housing specifically for the K10 (that would probably fit a small population) is not feasible.

 

[AUserName501]

Spoiler: Quote: Fullcircle

   
WoW so many facets here to address.
 
1) I don't need to follow the "success" of the Roxanee to goad me into building universal products. If you know the history of the "Wizard" you would know that I have been involved in, if not spear heading the buidling of universal products for a long time now.  It didn't require 20 years for me to "discover," that building universal IEMs was a good idea. In fact it wasn't the Roxanne that "proved" anything, according to Jerry Harvey (See Google Interview) it was the success of the Fit Ear Universal line that pesuaded him to get involved in hand building Universal IEMs.
 
2) That being said, hand building universals is not a good  idea.  The concept behind universals is to build with speed. The problem with that is....  if your Universal has a shell color, (any color) and you build the shells in large batches (save time) the pigments/dyes settle to the bottom of the container of UV liquid (material used to make the shells).   (Imagine a large soup made, at the end of the day, it becomes more pungent, as the spices settle to the bottom)
 
Any how, the problem with the dyes settling, is the ratio of UV material pigment isn't optimal, and then you run into brittle, fragile shells.   You also have problems with matching shell colors, thus to do a proper repair, and maintain color matching both sides (right and left IEM) have to be re-made, which increases the repair time, which increases repair costs.
 
3) I decided I was not going to participate in such a circle of progress coupled with failure.  Thus, Noble uses a plastic injected mold for the universal shell, resulting in much stronger shells, consistent in strength, color and size.
 
It also afords Noble the oppertunity to offer "classic" Universal IEMs that utilize the standard injected parts
 

 
 
 
and we also offer hand finished, (Wizard Design) Universal IEMs, that are as unique as our Noble CIEMs.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
but here is the thing, even the Wizard Design IEMs shells are made from injected plastic, so we know that they are consistent in strength, size and quality.
 
4) The down side is, designing and building the molds required for injected parts is a very expensive process, and requires a lot of time as well.
 
5) Size, internal parts for the K10 exceed the size of the universal IEM shell that we have.
 
6) Due to that, we would either have to hand make the K10 Universal, or have a new housing designed, just for the K10.
 
   A) As it is, the lab is at full capacity.  We would like to keep our build times below 5-6 months and as mentioned before, hand building IEMs comes with a set of problems.
   B) Investing large sums of money, into a plastic injected housing specifically for the K10 (that would probably fit a small population) is not feasible.

 

I'll just buy the universal Roxanne then as it seems you're not interested in making universal versions of your flagship. There are too many disadvantages to CIEMs for me. At least with a universal version my only concern is finding a tip that gives a tight seal.

 

[FullCircle]

 
Wish you all the best

 

[angelo898]

I'll just buy the universal Roxanne then as it seems you're not interested in making universal versions of your flagship. There are too many disadvantages to CIEMs for me. At least with a universal version my only concern is finding a tip that gives a tight seal.

This is a pretty childish reply

 

[uelover]

This is a pretty childish reply

Not childish at all. I do prefer universal to CIEM.

 

[AUserName501]

This is a pretty childish reply

I didn't mean for it to come across as childish. I'm actually very grateful that I got a response stating they have no interest in making a universal version because a lot of companies would say nothing/ignore the question.
 
They aren't offering universal versions now or planning to in the future. So my two options are the universal Roxanne or universal UM Mentor.

 

[tupac0306]

 
I didn't mean for it to come across as childish. I'm actually very grateful that I got a response stating they have no interest in making a universal version because a lot of companies would say nothing/ignore the question.
 
They aren't offering universal versions now or planning to in the future. So my two options are the universal Roxanne or universal UM Mentor.

Get the Mentor. Trust me~

 

[elnero]

 
So my two options are the universal Roxanne or universal UM Mentor.

 
There's also Tralucent 1Plus2 or Ref 1's.

 

[FullCircle]

 
I didn't mean for it to come across as childish. I'm actually very grateful that I got a response stating they have no interest in making a universal version because a lot of companies would say nothing/ignore the question.
 
They aren't offering universal versions now or planning to in the future. So my two options are the universal Roxanne or universal UM Mentor.

 
Those two statements were never made.
 
We have internally discussed hand built universal style K10s, we collectively decided against it as we have worked with hand made unversals before, our experience wasn't something we wanted to repeat. Beyond that, as mentioned before, the lab is at full capacity,we do not wish to offer more products that we don't have the time to build.
 
The future is an un-known

 

[FullCircle]

Not childish at all. I do prefer universal to CIEM.

 
 I do as well. It is a lifestyle choice for me. I prefer something that is durable. I am clumsy, and my daughter loves to try to chew on my IEMs as well.  I also want something I can pull out ASAP.
 

 

[AUserName501]

Spoiler: Quote: FullCircle

   
Those two statements were never made.
 
We have internally discussed hand built universal style K10s, we collectively decided against it as we have worked with hand made unversals before, our experience wasn't something we wanted to repeat. Beyond that, as mentioned before, the lab is at full capacity,we do not wish to offer more products that we don't have the time to build.
 
The future is an un-known

 

 
So you're not technically against the idea of a 10+ driver UIEM but don't want to do it for the Kaiser 10?
 
I've also got some general questions about BA drivers.
 

1. Is the number of BA drivers going to plateau in CIEMs?
2. Is there diminishing returns with each BA added?
3. Is BA technology moving forward by much?
4. Is there much potential for BA/Dynamic hybrids in CIEMs?
5. I know that dynamic drivers have trouble with higher frequencies but do better with bass. Are multiple BA drivers able deliver better bass than dynamic drivers now?
6. Are variable resistors to shape the frequency response of BA drivers worth using instead of EQ? Should a combination of both be used?

 
 
Response from Noble Audio here.

 

[FullCircle]

   
So you're not technically against the idea of a 10+ driver UIEM but don't want to do it for the Kaiser 10?
 
I've also got some general questions about BA drivers.
 

1. Is the number of BA drivers going to plateau in CIEMs?
2. Is there diminishing returns with each BA added?
3. Is BA technology moving forward by much?
4. Is there much potential for BA/Dynamic hybrids in CIEMs?
5. I know that dynamic drivers have trouble with higher frequencies but do better with bass. Are multiple BA drivers able deliver better bass than dynamic drivers now?
6. Are variable resistors to shape the frequency response of BA drivers worth using instead of EQ? Should a combination of both be used?

 
 
Nope not technically against a K10 univ, and we were interested in it enough to discuss it.   If the lab had the time, it may be offered in the future.
 
On to the questions
 
1) Plateau : I don't know the future. The most ever done so far that has been well recorded and "functioned" was a 20 driver (per side) built by me.  You can consult with my face book page (John Thomas Moulton) for photos etc
 
   In my opinon, under the current technology and build procedures, 4 drivers per sound bore can be used.  If it is the case that 3 bores can be reliably placed in most ear canals then it would stand to reason that 12 drivers is the max drivers that will be used.  
 
But again, I did build a 20 driver, but I did not use conventional build techniques, sound bores were not used, but rather a "sound channel" was used. 
 
2) Yes BA tech is moving forward, we are seeing more drivers built to address the IEM/CIEM market rather than depending on drivers developed around the hearing aid industry
 
3) Hybrids and potential....   I think we have seen a lot of action in that area
 
4) BA can not deliver bass....   I think that myth has been put to bed a long while back. The Noble 5 hits with the hammer of Thor, and the K10 and the 8C has 2x the bass drivers that the Noble 5 has. Other manufactures can pull bass out of BAs as well.
 
Initially, it was true, the market had a lot of examples of BA IEM that couldn't produce bass.....   but not trying to be rude....  
 
but mfg. were getting away with that, building single BA IEMs.  They were useing low priced drivers, that were fairly "full range" but were very bass light....  and that was pretty much all there was available on the marke, so folks thought that BA/s were all bass light. But that was only because the market was only exposed to bass light BA IEMs.
 
 Then came along multi driver systems....  and I think we now have BA products on the market today that can satisfy just about any bass lover.
 
Variable resistors v/s EQ
 
Ehhhh, hard to say, as it really depends on the Variable resistor and the EQ arangement.  For example, and EQ with changeable x over points, or 16 - 24 bands vs a single potentiometer bass adjustment....   there is no comparison.

 

[Mython]

   
Variable resistors v/s EQ
 
Ehhhh, hard to say, as it really depends on the Variable resistor and the EQ arangement.  For example, and EQ with changeable x over points, or 16 - 24 bands vs a single potentiometer bass adjustment....   there is no comparison.

 
 
I respect the attempt at innovation in the Roxannes, but, on the flip-side, the biggest factor for me, in considering the merits of variable resistor vs just using DAP EQ is that one requires the use of thicker 4-core cables, with troublesome connectors, whilst the other can simply be used with standard 2-pin/core lightweight cables with relatively reliable connectors, so, for me, the latter (older) approach wins.