[shane55]

I had a chance to listen to the UE4 Pro Custom at our last Local Meet, and I really liked them, but the environment was less than ideal for critical listening.
 
These are at the price point where I might be interested in snapping up a pair, now that I got the impressions made.
 
Has anyone heard these in comparison to the DBA-02? If so... how do they compare?
 
I'm interested in overall sound signature comparisons as well as specific ergonomic issues and microphonics.
 
Thanks !

 

[shane55]

OK.. I changed the post title and hope it might attract some input.
I'm looking in the $400 range for customs and there are several 'entry level' versions on the market.
 
I'd like some feedback on any of these (especially the UE4) in comparison to the DBA-02, as I'm very fond of it's sonics.
 
Thanks.

 

[buffalowings]

I would suggest reading a bit of the appreciation thread for 1964 ears before deciding on them
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/519457/1964-ears-the-appreciation-thread/1485#post_7300557
the last few pages are particularly interesting

 

[DKaz]

Shane, my 1964-T will be here in a week (maybe two).  Since you've helped me in the past with my DBA2, I would gladly give you a detailed comparison between the two when my customs come in.  I do not have as many high end headphoens as you, but I'm sure aI coudl give you a decent enough A/B between them. 
 
FYI I asked around through soem PMs abouth the DBA2 vs 1964-T before I pulled the trigger and found that the 1964-T has slightly more bass and more laid back highs and is generaly considered a quality upgrade.

 

[Pianist]

I prefer DBA-02 to ES3X if that's of any use to you. The only custom I may consider upgrading to is one of the 6-8 driver ones from a reputable company like JH Audio or UE. Or maybe the ES5, but I found ES3X so mediocre that I don't really feel like dealing with Westone customs again.
 
I am also scared when I think about how many things can go wrong in designing an IEM with so many drivers.

 

[rawrster]

If you send me your DBA-02 I will gladly make a comparison
 
I don't know about the rest but I do have the 1964-T which I'm sure you are well aware of and I did at one time own the DBA-02 so this is from memory and you can take it however you want. IMO the DBA-02 is a very good iem but with one major flaw and that is bass extension especially in the lowest of lows where it does roll off. The 1964-T has a slight rolloff but has much better extension than the DBA-02. I find that the 1964-T is an upgrade over the DBA-02.
 

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

If you send me your DBA-02 I will gladly make a comparison
 
I don't know about the rest but I do have the 1964-T which I'm sure you are well aware of and I did at one time own the DBA-02 so this is from memory and you can take it however you want. IMO the DBA-02 is a very good iem but with one major flaw and that is bass extension especially in the lowest of lows where it does roll off. The 1964-T has a slight rolloff but has much better extension than the DBA-02. I find that the 1964-T is an upgrade over the DBA-02.
 

 
So in what other ways is that vintage custom from 1964 better than DBA-02 besides being able to pump out a more tooth loosening infrasound?
 

 

[rroseperry]

I think it's the quads that have the extended bass, from ericp'10s review.  Sil3nce has a review on the duals, which are a bit cheaper and may be more of what you're looking for shane55.
 
I sent in my impressions this week and should have triples about mid March (I'm driving up to Portland to get them and see some friends). I'll have my own impressions to share then.  I listened to the UE4s, the 11s and the reference iems at the meet.  The 4s were fine, but I was really impressed by the reference model, though not impressed enough to drop 750 bucks (and that's with the discount).

 

[rawrster]

Quote:

 
So in what other ways is that vintage custom from 1964 better than DBA-02 besides being able to pump out a more tooth loosening infrasound?
 

What's with this response?
 
I never once said that the 1964-T is a bass monster. Perhaps you should actually read up on them instead.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

What's with this response?
 
I never once said that the 1964-T is a bass monster. Perhaps you should actually read up on them instead.

Well, I was sort of joking. But the post also expresses my doubts that bass depth is really that important. The DBA-02 hits 30 Hz with no problem from what I've read and what my ears are telling me. But even at 30 Hz, there is very little useful information in most music I think. If you want a bass that you can feel, I think listening to speakers is a much better idea anyway. Also, you can't be serious when you only point out this one difference in bass depth between the two and then claim that the 1964 customs are a nice upgrade. No offense, but I don't even consider a lack of the sub bass below 30 Hz a flaw. It's just too minor to be called such, but of course everyone hears differently so this is strictly my personal opinion

 

[rawrster]

Well my answer wasn't for you. I don't need to give a very detailed answer since shane already should know the majority of my thoughts on both of them from PM. There's many other aspects but since shane55 is the OP so I don't need to explain much.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Well my answer wasn't for you. I don't need to give a very detailed answer since shane already should know the majority of my thoughts on both of them from PM. There's many other aspects but since shane55 is the OP so I don't need to explain much.

 
Ok, fair enough I didn't know that. My bad.

Your post just gives the wrong impression.
 

 

[shane55]

@ rawrster. Yes, from our conversations I have a pretty good understanding of your thoughts on the 1964-T v. DBA. And I thank you greatly for all your insights so far... but if it weren't for you and a couple of my other 'friends' around here (extolling the virtues of their customs, in an 'earvana-loves-company' manner), I wouldn't even be the OP on this thread.

   
 
Thanks all so far for your responses. Having been offered such a sweet deal on the UE-4's from our local meet, I wanted to see what the thoughts were on them specifically... but also on other choices at a similar price.

 

[Anaxilus]

As far as hitting below 30hz, I do hear below that and apparently rather sensitive there according to my hearing tests.  It's something that would be nice in perfecting the DBA's sig but it's not a distraction since the bass balances so well w/ everything else the DBA does sublimely.  I still have my MDs to cover the exquisite character in the lowend w/ it's unique signature.
 
From my readings, one term that keeps rearing up that concerns me w/ 1964 is 'laid-back'.  I'm not sure that meshes w/ my personal sonic preference liking a more emotive sound.  I think the JH5 had a $50 or 20% off sale awhile back?  Heard very good things about them, paticularly prior DBA uses that loved them as well.  If you haven't talked to Jude I would recommend it.  Talked to him about the UE4/UE10/IERM not too long ago.  Mucho experience w/ the UE's.  Btw, did UE put you on the clock?  

 

[music_4321]

Dear Mr Shane55,
 
Being the intelligent person that you are, I'm very surprised you actually started this thread - shame on you! As you well know there are no reviews on the Westones, or the UEs. There's only one member with the 1964 Duals so far, a couple with the Ts and a few more with the Quads. So, right now your best bet in terms of reviews for an entry level custom is probably the JH5s. May I also remind you that apart from pianist, who goes all over HF saying that the ES3Xs are so mediocre, most, if not all ES3X owners rave about them. I've already pointed out to him he should state that he most likely got a bad fit or perhaps even a problem with the custom internals - or at least state that he is THE ONLY ONE not to find the ES3Xs a very good IEM, yet he seems not to take any notice, apart from the very odd post here or there, usually when he's been challenged.
 
By the same token, you'll find that the vast majority of people who own customs, from the cheaper models up to the more expensive ones, will tell you that customs are something unparallelled and that they blow their previous universals out of the water, and so on and so forth. I still maintain this is a highly exaggerated view as so many other things written on HF.
 
You may remember how highly I rated my UM3Xs, being perhaps 85-90% as good, SQ-wise, as my ES3Xs. Only a few days ago I got the new Westone 4, and this has now become not only the best universal IEM I've ever heard, but at the moment I cannot honestly say my $850 ES3X are even a little better, that's how highly I rate the W4s, and I've spent quite a few hours with them. I know you already have ear impressions and are pretty much on the path to customs, but I thought I'd let you know about my latest discovery. I only wish the W4 came with detachable cables at this price range, but the cable on the 4s has been improved over other Westone universals. Also, ergonomically, they are as comfortable as my UM3Xs, though the housing and nozzle are a little different, though not exactly like the W3s I owned a couple of years ago, which were comfy but not as much as the UM3Xs.