UE 4 Pro or 1964 Ears Quad (1964-Q), Please help ... A poor noobie tread :(
Aug 22, 2011 at 12:42 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 12

Wraist

New Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Posts
4
Likes
0
Hi guys, I am currently looking to buy out some custom In-Ear monitors and I was wondering wich of theses two models were the best choice I could make, I know for sure that UE has alredy a great reputation where 1964 Ears is a starting company. I read the review of both theses ears and the UE 4 gets great marks for a "Beginner" set, so are they really worth it ? Or would it be better for me to invest a little more (about 150$) and get the 1964 Ears best set. So what is your opinion ? Are the 1964 Ears best model better than UE's "worst" ?
 
Thank you for your time and opinion, and sorry for my poor english, I'm a french canadian :wink:
 
Tyvm :)
 
Aug 22, 2011 at 1:01 PM Post #2 of 12
imho... i havent heard the UE4 so my opinion might be invalid, but i think it would be a waste of money, might as well purchase a Triplefi10 and reshell it. Looking for customs depends on your your preferences too, personally i have the 1964Q and its a little too bassy for me, so i reshelled a pair of UM3x and now i'm happy.
 
btw french canadian? cool~ reminds me of avril lavigne , she wasnt born on april though, she was born on sept, haha.
 
Aug 22, 2011 at 2:54 PM Post #6 of 12
Ya I read some and they pretty much all says that both these IEM are good ... so considering the 1964-Q are not some entry level C-IEM and cost more (and they do have more channel, wether or not it is important), do they represent a better Price/Value than the UE 4 Pro ?
 
Tyvm :)
 
Aug 22, 2011 at 3:22 PM Post #7 of 12
Indeed maybe I am ... I guess I'll just keep on reading more and more about this, still there is not much on the 1964-Q so that is why I asked so here :) Thank you very much for your time, If one day I happen to finaly make a choce I will let you know :wink:
 
And if there is anything new on those two models plz keep me up, tyvm
 
See ya guys :)
 
Aug 22, 2011 at 11:35 PM Post #8 of 12
It's a hard, hard choice. I've had to make a similar choice myself, very recently.
 
I can tell you this - a musician friend of mine started out using UE4's, then upgraded to UE7's. He says that the extra bass driver makes a big difference, and the UE7 sound a lot 'bigger'.
 
It all comes down to figuring out how much you can afford to spend, and exactly what your requirements are, and take a small risk.
 
I really wanted soft canals, as I don't want them falling out on stage, and I need all the isolation I can get, and so I was looking at Westone, but I couldn't afford $650 for the ES-2.
 
I considered the $400 customs (the UE4, JH5, and Westone AC2), but I play drums live, and so I liked the idea of a big low end to better reproduce kick and bass.
 
And so in the end I went with 1964-T. For my $400 bucks, I got a pair of well respected Triple Driver IEM's. I paid $50 for the soft canal upgrade, and $40 for international shipping. I think that I did well with my $490 US.
 
 
Good luck with your search!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Aug 22, 2011 at 11:52 PM Post #9 of 12
after owning the 1964 ears quads for about two-three months, my overall impression was that they were not worth the $500, too much bass, very little treble, very closed in soundstage with average separation, a bigger gripe was the positioning of instruments, frequently instruments that were meant to be left/right ended up slightly behind me, very very strange situation it was. the westone 3 had much better soundstage and positioning, instruments seemed taller and bigger and the bass didn't overpower the rest of the soundstage. overall, when i compared it with my brothers turbine standard, it didn't seem very much better in comparison, overall it was a very disappointing situation. also, customer service wasn't up to my standards, I was told that the cabling came from the same supplier of JH audio but it started unbraiding in less than a month, when i got a second cable at a discounted price, a week later the cabling unbraided again and i was told that it was my fault because that would only occur if it caught on something (which it did not)
 
Aug 23, 2011 at 5:19 AM Post #10 of 12


Quote:
after owning the 1964 ears quads for about two-three months, my overall impression was that they were not worth the $500, too much bass, very little treble, very closed in soundstage with average separation, a bigger gripe was the positioning of instruments, frequently instruments that were meant to be left/right ended up slightly behind me, very very strange situation it was. the westone 3 had much better soundstage and positioning, instruments seemed taller and bigger and the bass didn't overpower the rest of the soundstage. overall, when i compared it with my brothers turbine standard, it didn't seem very much better in comparison, overall it was a very disappointing situation. also, customer service wasn't up to my standards, I was told that the cabling came from the same supplier of JH audio but it started unbraiding in less than a month, when i got a second cable at a discounted price, a week later the cabling unbraided again and i was told that it was my fault because that would only occur if it caught on something (which it did not)

 
I must say for instrument separation and positioning, I will prefer UM3x over the quads. However, I don't really find its bass to overpower the rest of the spectrum. Simply put, it is not suited to your preference. As for the cable, I had used mine for 9 months and it had turned totally green but there's no unbraiding despite not being kept in case and got caught on stuffs a couple of times. Makes me wonder how you normally handle the cable?
 
 
 
Aug 23, 2011 at 10:10 AM Post #11 of 12

 
Quote:
 
I must say for instrument separation and positioning, I will prefer UM3x over the quads. However, I don't really find its bass to overpower the rest of the spectrum. Simply put, it is not suited to your preference. As for the cable, I had used mine for 9 months and it had turned totally green but there's no unbraiding despite not being kept in case and got caught on stuffs a couple of times. Makes me wonder how you normally handle the cable?
 
 



the same way i treated my westone 3's, also, i think the difference may be in the color of the cables, clear versus black, others in the appreciation thread had similar issues complaining of the cable quickly debraiding
 
Aug 25, 2011 at 10:48 AM Post #12 of 12
I would also agree that the soundstage and freq. that you are hearing is subjective. I really like the my 64-Q's. I listen to mine almost 4 times a week and my cable is still perfect. I have had mine since April. If you look at the freq. reponse of the Q's, I will say it apears as if it would be a little bass heavy, however once you add a little volume to them it is actaully a nice balance between the upper and lower ranges. I find it strange that I can not find a freq. spectrum of the UE's. Scientifically, that is what is being produced. So looking at a freq. chart removes any subjectiveness. Overall I have been very happy with mine.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top