1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

[Review] 1964 Ears 1964-T

2 3 4
  1. rawrster

    1964 Ears is a relatively new company that offers custom in ear monitors as well as custom tips, reshelling services and noise reduction plugs. They are based in Portland, Oregon and offer a wide range of custom in ear monitors from a single driver all the way up to a quad driver and all at an affordable cost when compared to the prices of the competition.
    1964 Ears as a company emphasizes a couple of points. They want to deliver quality products at affordable prices while having great customer service. I have sent many emails and definitely to the point of excessive and the majority of them were answered in a timely fashion and typically within 24 hours. I find their customer service team to be excellent and rarely do you have the chance to communicate with the owner of a company and I find that to be a good thing. It also lets you know that 1964 Ears is not a huge company. My dealings with 1964 Ears has been nothing short of excellent.
    Of all of their custom in ear monitors their triple driver model or simply the 1964-T was the one that seemed to suit my preferences and being quite affordable for a triple driver custom at $350. The 1964-T incorporates two bass drivers and one driver for the highs in a two way crossover.
    Trip to the Audiologist
    Custom in ear monitors unlike universal fit cannot be picked out and bought in a store expecting to have a listening session later that day. If you are unaware of the process you will have to find an audiologist and make an appointment for ear impressions. Typically the prices range from as low as $20 up to $100 depending on your location and who you go to. Mine came out to $50 for both ears from an experienced audiologist and when located in midtown Manhattan that is a very reasonable price
    The entire process takes around 20 minutes and while it isn't painful it is a bit uncomfortable. I recommend going to someone who is experienced with making impressions for custom in ear monitors. That way you lower the possibility of having a need for a refit and if you were to need another impression your audiologist can either do it again for free or discount the price depending on who you go to.
    The actual process is simple. The audiologist puts a cylindrical shaped cotton dam inside your ears to prevent anything from going too far. Your audiologist will then mix two materials and put that in a syringe. Before that material goes in your ears be sure to have a bite block already on and if unavailable I suggest biting your knuckle but not too hard. The material then goes in your ears and after a couple of minutes everything is removed from your ears and they are inspected to make sure it looks correct. My audiologist then gave me a small box to put the impressions in to mail it to 1964 Ears.
    Review Gear
    Source: Audinst HUD-MX1, Cowon J3
    Phones: 1964 Ears 1964-T (Triple Driver unit)
    Bitrate: A mix of mp3 to FLAC
    Frequency Range: 30-17000 Hz
    Sensitivity: 113 dB
    Impedance: 37 Ω
    Driver: triple balanced armature (dual low, single high in a two way crossover)
    Sound Signature
    Starting off with the bass the extension is good although it does roll off a tiny bit towards the sub bass however it doesn't take much away from the experience that I get from the 1964-T. The quality of bass is good. It has good texture, speed and resolution. Impact is enough for me but those of you who know me should know that means that bass heads need not apply here. I would not call the bass here light or heavy but neutral. Notes are well controlled and never is it out of place, too slow or too fast.
    Moving on to the midrange there really isn't anything added or taken away here. Everything that should be heard is here and whether that is a bad or good thing depends on you. There is no overly forward or recessed midrange which is something I prefer. There also is no wow effect that instantly grabs your attention the moment you press play. Detail, resolution, clarity and speed is good here. There is also a hint of warmth in the midrange but not overly so where the bass bleeds into the midrange or when details are harder to make out.
    Moving to the upper midrange and treble things begin to smooth out here. Usually if the frequency starts to smooth out around here that means that sibilance won't be as much of an issue unlike phones that have a peak here that make sibilance appear out of nowhere. This does not mean that the 1964-T is completely devoid of sibilance as there are tracks where it can't be helped but those that are borderline may be aided by the presentation here. There is still good detail, resolution and clarity here just like the rest of the spectrum. Extension is also good and goes to the limits of my hearing. However the 1964-T is a bit more forgiving in nature than my other pair of customs but still very resolving. This may help if your source including bit rate and recording is not up to par.
    The sound stage of the 1964-T is not the largest but isn't artificially large like some phones I have heard but good enough for me. It doesn't mean that the music is presented as if the band is singing right next to your ear but isn't the largest of stages. It does have good width and depth presence and gives you a good idea of locational cues and where things are placed. Imaging isn't as precise and clear cut however if that is what you want.
    Lastly the 1964-T it does have a slightly laid back signature but is very neutral and more so than any other phones that I have heard prior to owning these. I consider these something that would make a good reference for comparison due to its neutrality.
    Universal vs Custom
    I figure I'll get asked this a lot so I'll include my opinions on this topic from my personal experience of the difference between universal earphones and custom earphones in terms of sound only and in this case the 1964-T but it can apply to my other one as well. I won't include comfort, isolation or anything else unrelated to sound.
    I find that the 1964-T as a whole package is better than any universal I have owned including my favorite universal in the CK10 which I have bought, sold and then bought again and currently in my possession. The 1964-T doesn't “destroy” the CK10 or top universals in every single way leaving them in the dust but as the whole package it does things better. There may be some things universals do better but it is not better by much. When looking at the whole package meaning bass, midrange, treble, sound separation, detail, resolution, speed, etc. I find customs to be better. Universals may be better in one area or even some but definitely not better in most of them.
    I also find the customs can scale up better than universals. Out of an ordinary source such as my J3 the difference between the two is there and you should easily be able to tell the difference but it isn't miles apart. When upgrading sources, amps, files, recordings the gap between the two increases as your audio chain gets better and better. Whether this is worth the investment is up to each individual user and I feel that it was worth it for me.
    The 1964-T offers a great value at $350 not including the cost of impressions and shipping to 1964 Ears. When you have been in head-fi for a while like I have including the years that I have lurked here it was not that long ago when entry level to the custom world was the UE5c at a much higher price than what the 1964-T cost. There was also such companies such as FreQ as well as other companies that tried to fill the market's desire for affordable custom but it didn't work out. I feel that 1964 Ears is a company that has the potential to be one of those companies that offer affordable customs and they are off to a great start.
    The 1964-T is a very neutral earphone with good extension although it does roll off a tiny bit at the lowest of lows. There's no magic lush midrange or forward upper mids. It has a flat response for the most part and makes for a good comparison with other gear and for those who value neutrality. At the price these are going for you can't really go wrong if those characteristics are what you want.
    It is a great time to be in the market for a custom. There are so many models with many different companies so there is something for everyone whether your budget is in the affordable range or the money not an object range.
    Thanks for reading. If there are any errors please let me know. Also if you have any questions I will be glad to answer them to the best of my ability.
  2. rawrster
    Here are a couple of pictures of the 1964-T. You can see the pin connection, tube length, bores and driver placement. It's not the greatest of pictures but I never claimed to be a great photographer.
  3. Region2
    Thanks for the review, rawster.  This helped seal the deal for the Triples.  I've still been sitting on the fence a bit which one with an appointment at the audiologist tomorrow, but the bit about it being neutral helped. I wanted a neutral sound signature as my first venture into customs and these seem to fit the bill.
  4. Kunlun
    Good review as always.
  5. Uncle00Jesse
    thanks for the review, it was a great read. unfortunately, i still can't decide if I want to go the custom route or the high end universal route. reviews like these about the customs make the decision even harder because there are so many pro's that its hard to understand without actually seeing and feeling it in your ear. I think the JVC FX700s look absolutely amazing and they very well could be the phones for me. im not trying to turn this into a comparrison thread, but are the 1964-Ts and the JVCs extremely different? what matters most to me when listening to music is realism. i want to feel like theres someone standing in front of me banging two sticks together when hearing percussion. i'm the kind of listener that wants the bang of drumsticks and the twang of the electric guitar to be the most noticable and engaging aspect of the experience. sibilance is also a very big issue to me (i'm a huge Wilco fan, and Jeff Tweedy sure loves his "ssssss" sounds).ican't stand when sounds blend together with eachother, it makes the signature shrill and unlistenable to me. i'm relatively new, and maybe i need more research time into BA vs Dynamic. but from the little I am able to convey, do you think I would enjoy the customs more? putting aside obvious benefits like perfect fit/isolation... thanks
  6. ericp10
    Nice review rawrster, as is always the case with you....
  7. aLm0sT
    good review, no fuzz and straight to the point.. and very imformative of course!
  8. aamefford
    Nice review, thank you! Still can't decide, though, T's or Q's, and 1964ears already has my impressions...
    Edit - it became Quads for me.
  9. rawrster
    Thanks everyone.
    @Region2: Hopefully you like the 1964-T then. I like them and have been using them quite a bit more than my  other pair but it does have something to do with fit as well :p
    I have never heard the FX700 so will not be able to compare them. I think ljokerl is the only one who has heard both the FX700 and 1964-T
  10. rroseperry
    Nice review.
  11. Confispect
    Congrats. Quads here I come.
  12. rawrster


    I don't think you needed my review to make a decision to go for the quads :p It's pretty obvious which one you would have liked :)
  13. Anaxilus
    I agree on your assessment of universal v. customs.  Though the custom I've heard was universal.  [​IMG]  It's 2%-5%-10% here and there but when taken altogether it seems you can get a 30-35% better sound picture overall.
  14. rawrster
    I would imagine the difference would be a bit more with that level of custom :) However I never gave a number and don't think I can really give a number on how much better it is.
    The only thing about customs is that in a way universals are a better value if you do not know what you like yet since you can resell them at little or no loss depending on the universal but that's another story with customs. Typically it's 50% or lower MSRP and then you have to spend money on a cable, impressions and remold cost. In that sense customs are not the greatest value but if you know what you want then your investment may be well worth it as long as you are willing to spend the money. The price of the 1964-T is probably around the sweet spot imo. For $400 or so including impressions and shipping for me it is near the price point of some very good universals and I find it surpasses the top universals that I have heard so it's a no brainer for me.
    I think for now I'm done buying new gear for portable. I may down the road get an upgraded version of my Livewires through UM as people have reported good things about their upgrading with the W3, UM3X, TF10 and SE530. It's now time for a modest headphone setup which is the plan regardless of what you say :)
  15. shane55
    Good review. Piques my curiosity and I just may get impressions done on Saturday by the audiologist who will be at our meet. Could be dangerous. Thanks... I guess. [​IMG]
2 3 4

Share This Page