1964 Ears Owners Group

[overbybr]

The single driver Sure buds that came with my wireless monitor system worked fine for playing fiddle onstage, but don't even come close to meeting my needs on bass.

You're going to get an automatic improvement in bass response going from universal fit (even with comply foam tips) to custom molds. That alone might be enough for you, but I suspect not.

Are quad drive IEMs sufficient for most bass monitoring needs? Would there be a huge difference in the bass response/clarity/frequency range between 4,6, or 8 drivers? It would definitely make my wife a lot happier if I could say I saved a little and went with a less expensive set, but I'd rather pay a little more now and get the right set, than be wishing I had done so later...

There is a difference between 4, 6, and 8 driver IEM's, but some of those differences can be overcome through proper EQ treatment of the signal arriving to the buds. My experience with 1964 quads comes from using various "high quality" single driver universal buds (shure, etymotic, monster, klipsch, bose) and a set of Westone UM3X triple driver universal buds. The difference between 1 driver and 3 drivers was huge, and the only real difference between the UM3X buds and my quads was in the low frequency part of the signal. HUGE improvement with the addition of the sub armature! It was almost like I was feeling the bass notes. For me, anything beyond 4 is just gimmick for live use, but YMMV.

Second, I'm pretty concerned about the isolation bubble that comes from using IEMs.

You'll likely never overcome the bubble, but you can minimize it with a condenser mic routed into the talk-back line of your board or a dedicated channel or two that only feed the aux mixes. If your band is planning to go wireless, Audio Technica's M2 and M3 line of wireless monitor systems have the capability to add a shoulder-mount lapel mic that is volume independent of the aux mix so you can dial in as much room noise as you want.

Third, would bass response be more accurate from a larger single woofer(Westone ES50) or from 2 or 4 smaller woofers(v6 or v8)?

More drivers devoted to specific frequency are going to be better. Consider a high-fi audio system with multiple drivers and crossovers to handle distribution of the work...they always sound better than what's coming through a single speaker. This is why the quads are, IMO, better for bassits than v1 through v3.

Lastly, just about every review I have read has been very complimentary of 1964ears as a company. That seems to be the agreement here as well. Westone, has been around for 40 years and has a lot of experience, do you guys feel that 1964ears is on par in terms of service and quality? I don't mind paying more for service/quality/longevity, but I hate just paying for a name.

I've never dealt with customer service for either Westone or 1964, because I never had any problems with either product. Others may be able to comment, but Westone is a reputable company who stands by their products. To what length they stand I can't say, but I wouldn't hesitate to buy from them if I was set on their product and customer service was my only hold-back.

I've never been more happy with what goes into my ears than I am with my what my quads provide me, both from a live performance and personal listening experience. You probably won't be disappointed with the V6 or V8's either, but I wouldn't spend the extra cash unless you just want to. To be fair though, it's not like you can quickly (or cheaply) swap out models to compare, so go with your gut.

 

[gzarate85]

#1: I can't speak to any other IEMs in the 1964 lineup other than the quads but what I can tell you is that there is plenty of room for bass. We use avioms at church, and I've not once had an issue with feeling like the quads couldn't handle the bass. Allow me to clarify, what I mean by more bass doesn't necessarily mean they are "bassy" IEM's. In fact, I get more "bassy" sounds from my Bose on-ear or even a pair of Beat solos as an example, but those headphones (IMO) are engineered for folks looking for artificially "bassy" type of music. That said, I've eq'ed my Spotify account to generate more bass when using my quads and I love it. Hopefully this helps in addressing your first concern.

#2: any custom molded in-ears will isolate the sound on-stage. So yes, if you have the option for ambient mic's of some sort I would use them as they do help in having to constantly take out a bud to listen to the director give instruction off mic.

#3: don't know the engineered correct answer to this but I'm more inclined to think that it's always better sonically when you have dedicated drivers to specific frequencies than to have one main woofer to cover a large band of frequencies.

#4: best service, best product, (IMHO), best value. You certainly aren't paying for the "name" as much as your paying for the quality and service. They've just done such a good job at both of those that by nature, in paying for the quality and service, you've bought the name. Lol. Hope that made sense. I'm always skeptical when you get the best "value" as it implies that your getting less than what your paying for sometimes. Definitely not the case here. Do not let "best value" or "best bang for your buck" deceive you from buying such a great product.

 

[gzarate85]

Allow me to clarify, what I mean by more bass doesn't necessarily mean they are "bassy" IEM's. In fact, I get more "bassy" sounds from my Bose on-ear or even a pair of Beat solos as an example, but those headphones (IMO) are engineered for folks looking for artificially "bassy" type of music.

To clarify further and to put into perspective; my bose on-ears and a pair of Beats couldn't handle a high gain load of isolated bass going through my avioms. They would crackle/pop. Thats what I mean about being able to handle the bass and being bass worthy. A high gain kick drum won't be clear and punchy in my bose on-ears. It would sound muddy. Not with the quads, you'll have exceptional low-end.

I felt the need to clarify because I don't want it to sound like the quads aren't bassy, you just have to eq'd your iphone or spotify or whatever to replicate the same kind of bass you get with "artificially engineered" headphones.

 

[s0c9]

#2: any custom molded in-ears will isolate the sound on-stage. So yes, if you have the option for ambient mic's of some sort I would use them as they do help in having to constantly take out a bud to listen to the director give instruction off mic.

The only issue with ambient ports is that they tend to "break the seal" which has a direct impact on the levels of bass in your ears. It took a while to adjust, but I can hear pretty well on stage WITHOUT ambient ports... and it's no big deal to pull out one ear to talk, then pop it back in.

#3: don't know the engineered correct answer to this but I'm more inclined to think that it's always better sonically when you have dedicated drivers to specific frequencies than to have one main woofer to cover a large band of frequencies.

Absolutely better to have dedicated drivers.. if only on the premise that each driver handles a specific frequency range more efficiently than ANY full range drive can. Next comes the crossover setting to maximize the frequency range of the individual drivers.

 

[g4string]

Today's update.....step 5 - shells poured.

 

[gzarate85]

The only issue with ambient ports is that they tend to "break the seal" which has a direct impact on the levels of bass in your ears. It took a while to adjust, but I can hear pretty well on stage WITHOUT ambient ports... and it's no big deal to pull out one ear to talk, then pop it back in.

Agreed, thinking you may have misread my post as supporting ambient "ports" when I actually was speaking about ambient "mics". If the option is there for ambient mics, use them, if not, I would just deal with it and not go with the ports so as to maintain integrity of the seal so to speak. So in other words, I agree 100%. Lol.

 

[s0c9]

Agreed, thinking you may have misread my post as supporting ambient "ports" when I actually was speaking about ambient "mics".

I definitely did... sorry... I learnt to speed read as a young 'un, and old habits die hard.. sometimes the keyword gets skipped.. It totally goofed on the mics bit.. LOL !

 

[Derrick C.]

Awesome! Thank you s0c9 and gzarate85, that really helped a lot!!! I'm thinking the Qi are the right choice for me! And I didn't even think about a lapel mic! I'll have to look at my body pack again but I think it might even have an input to accommodate one. Hopefully our presonus board will allow me to eq my monitor signal without changing FOH setting.

Again, thank y'all for the info...and for taking the time to read such a long original post... Lol. What was I thinking??? You guys are awesome!

 

[gzarate85]

Awesome! Thank you s0c9 and gzarate85, that really helped a lot!!! I'm thinking the Qi are the right choice for me! And I didn't even think about a lapel mic! I'll have to look at my body pack again but I think it might even have an input to accommodate one. Hopefully our presonus board will allow me to eq my monitor signal without changing FOH setting.

Again, thank y'all for the info...and for taking the time to read such a long original post... Lol. What was I thinking??? You guys are awesome!

No problem, Overbybr also had good contribution.

 

[s0c9]

Awesome!Hopefully our presonus board will allow me to eq my monitor signal without changing FOH setting.

It will.. we have one venue we use my Presonus 16.4.2 at, and bring the wireless units from the main rack.
We connect each IEM mix to an AUX out (there's 6 outs, we have 5 mixes) and have full "fat channel" control over each AUX mix and can also add effect levels (to taste) in each mix. You can adjust each IEM mix levels with all 16 channels and add effect levels. You can also assign a 31-band EQ to each out if the fat channel EQ on the AUX bus isn't enough (we don't do this). You can also set compression/limiter levels on each channel. Again, we don't because our wireless units have built in limiters.
Two button presses to get to each AUX mix.

NO IMPACT to, and completely independent from your FOH mix.

 

[overbybr]

I LOVE our 16.4.2! Such a great and intuitive mixer! My drummer and I both have custom molds, so I send him a stereo mix and I solo his channel through the headphone out on the board. It's a sneaky way to get an additional monitor mix, but it's stereo bliss!

 

[Derrick C.]

Dang, sorry overbybr, I meant to thank you as well! That's a great idea using the headphone out as an extra mix! Have y'all experimented with adding a router and computer and using the iphone or iPad app? With the iphone app, each member with an iphone can adjust there individual mix from where they are. The iPad allows pretty much full control of the board. I was using the iPad for a bit, but our board started locking up randomly so I haven't played with that much since we got it back from Presonus. I don't think it was related to the freezes, but who knows...lol. The only drawback is the faders aren't motorized do you have to remember to hit fader locate and match them manually after you make a change.

 

[overbybr]

Dang, sorry overbybr, I meant to thank you as well! That's a great idea using the headphone out as an extra mix! Have y'all experimented with adding a router and computer and using the iphone or iPad app?

Ha, no worries. We have a wireless router and a laptop that we use and I have used my iPad to do some FOH tweaking during a sound check. Honestly, I haven't used the iPad to tweak sound for the last few shows simply because we've been short-changed on setup time, so a good sound check wasn't possible. My main gripe with the Qmix and SL Remote apps is that in order for them to be useful tools on the fly, your iOS device has to remain on...and that can be a bit of a battery drain. Still, if you have time to set everything up and you get connected, they're useful tools.

We try to record all of our shows, but I'm currently having DAW issues that have prevented me from recording the last few shows. Still, if you follow my profile link to our Reverbnation site, the first 4 songs were recorded with the 16.4.2 into Reaper, so it's definitely doable and with good result (the prior songs were recorded using a stereo interface pulled out of the main mix from our old board).

 

[TedH]

Moved to assembled today. That is all; back to our regular programming.

 

[Wadge]

Just sent my designs for the A12 - got in on them in the kick starter campaign. I already own Quads which are great but I'm taking a gamble on the new ADEL technology which is meant to protect hearing. That has become important to me over the years.

 

[overbybr]

^ Baller status!!!!

 

[TedH]

Just sent my designs for the A12 - got in on them in the kick starter campaign. I already own Quads which are great but I'm taking a gamble on the new ADEL technology which is meant to protect hearing. That has become important to me over the years.

Very curious to hear the comparison report once you get them. Enjoy!

 

[azwhofan]

Just sent my designs for the A12 - got in on them in the kick starter campaign. I already own Quads which are great but I'm taking a gamble on the new ADEL technology which is meant to protect hearing. That has become important to me over the years.

At the risk of repeating myself, I spent a good 2 or 3 hours at NAMM trying out all their models. I ended up preferring the A10's over the A12's simply because I found the 12's to be a tad too heavy in the low bass for my needs. I also double (triple?) as the FOH and ME for the band, so I was looking for a more balanced output.
Nothing wrong with the 12's at all, I think they'd be perfect for a bassist that wants more "me" in the mix bass-wise without having to resort to EQ in the feed.

And I found the V6's to have the sweetest low-mid midrange of all their models. It came at the expense of the bass tho. But man oh man the gliss and slapping of the bass in Steely Dan's Peg was a thing of beauty to listen to

 

[azwhofan]

I apologize for not having read the whole thread yet, hope fully this question hasn't been covered already!

At NAMM, all their models had sibilance to one degree or another in the higher registers - especially on vocals and cymbals. Not so much on synths or violins or mandolins. On some of their models it was damn near intolerable.

Are any of you 1964 owners experiencing this once you get the finished product with the molds? Was it because we were using the disposable foam ear pieces?

 

[overbybr]

I've not noticed any sibilance when using my quads. They've always sounded clear to me! To be fair, though, I never listened to any of their products with foam tips.