1MORE Quad Driver Review (IEM)

[amirm]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the 1MORE Quad Driver "THX Certified" IEM. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $150.

I must say this is one excellent work of packaging! The little carrying box has magnetic flap which is nice. Headphone cord seems to be made out of silicon and is a bit longer than what others supply which I appreciated. The organization of the tips with labels is also great. Question: who the heck still uses those airplane 2-plugs as to need this adapter???

1MORE Quad Driver IEM Measurements
As usual, let's start with our frequency response measurement using GRAS 45C fixture:

Both channels were similar with plenty of bass which gave me confidence of a good seal. Alas, there is too much upper bass, and not enough treble. I expect the sound to be boomy and closed. So EQ will be mandatory using relative response graph:

Distortion was exceptionally low:

This should give us freedom to do what we want with frequency response. Better yet, once we get rid of the boominess, absolute distortion will shrink further.

Impedance is flat and low at 30 ohm:

As IEMs go, this one is a bit more power hungry:

Group as with other IEMs, doesn't seem to have much diagnostic value:

1MORE Quad Driver Listening Tests
I was listening with my everyday and super neutral Dan Clark Stealth headphone. Switch to 1More immediately caused the boominess to stand out so EQ tools came right out:

Most of this should be explanatory except the filter at 8200 Hz. I had to dial this way down as otherwise sound was bright. I am starting to think the target is not quite correction for this region.

At first, I liked the sound but thought maybe someone else would like the stock sound. I listened for 15 minutes and then turned off EQ. Wow, did the sound collapse and became closed, boomy and uninteresting. Don't know where THX got this target response.

The lack of distortion is very obvious as you crank up the volume. There is no hint of distortion as the volume gets dangerously loud! Be careful then with that volume knob as you won't have distortion to cause you to pull back.

Conclusions
There are definitely good things going on here with ultra low distortion allowing us to fix its response. Out of the box, it is bass heavy and trebly shy which means it is not offensive. So can be used without EQ. With EQ, it really comes to life and sounds extremely good. As with most IEMs and headphones though, EQ is mandatory for best sound. Without it, I would not bother with this IEM.

Overall, I can only recommend the 1MORE Quad Driver IEM with EQ.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

 

[Lunafag]

Most of this should be explanatory except the filter at 8200 Hz. I had to dial this way down as otherwise sound was bright.

Most likely ear canal resonance. It's different for every person/IEM/insertion depth. GRAS rig dampens it for graph readability but it's always there.

 

[MZKM]

I own the cheaper triple driver IEM, same excellent packaging & tips (Crinacle measured both, the triple has more treble and deeper bass <50Hz, and the midbass hump is lower in frequency, so it actually seems like the better IEM; currently <$70). Had them since 2016, I would say I can hear the midbass hump but it doesn’t sound overly boomy to me. This standard style of IEM is the only kind that is comfortable to me, any monitor style I have tried starts to hurt after 10min.

Amir, did you use the silicone tips for measurements or foam? Could you run just the frequency response measurement using the other to see how they compare?

 

[Lero]

I tried this IEM for a short time. My impression is that they are very boomy and the details are missing...I personally can't feel the deep bass extention that i see in the measurement. Distortion whise i cant say alot beacause the boominess covered everything, at least to my specific ears shape.
Edit: typo.

 

[Lbstyling]

I have owned 8 triple pairs and the quad.

EQed, they sound the same, with the exeption that the quad distorts with very high (max on my phone) spl sub tones. Out of the box the triple has better sound. Neither distort without EQ.

The triple breaks much easier hence having owned so many.

I use these all day every day for work for 13 weeks a year.

The metal mesh that covers the driver gets blocked with dust or wax within a few months in the triple, and the cable breaks at the connection to the inline vol control.

The quad has a better cable, and a better driver 'mesh' with less holes, much like the Samsung galaxy bud+.

Neither are as good as the AKG k371 over ear, but they really arent far off.

 

[raif71]

 

[staticV3]

Some Graphs:

Spoiler: Sources

• oratory1990 (GRAS 43AG)
• AudioScienceReview (GRAS 45CA)
• Crinacle (generic 711 coupler)
• HypetheSonic (GRAS RA0045)
• 0dB (GRAS 43AC)
• SoundStageNetwork (GRAS RA0045)

 

[Robbo99999]

@amirm regarding your EQ observations and not being able to fill out the treble to the Harman Curve without it sounding too bright. I'm wondering if it's anything to do with you choosing a sharp and large dB peak filter at 8200Hz, which might have negative effects (including ringing?). You can get round this problem by boosting the whole area from 2kHz-8kHz with a wide (low Q) filter and then you'd use negative dB peak filters to bring it all down to the shape of the Harman Curve - this way you're rounding off the peaks in the total EQ curve and avoiding ringing (in theory). High Q (narrow) & large peak filter boosts are supposed to be detrimental but you can get round that by boosting a wide area and then using negative dB filters to bring it down to the target curve - this way the total EQ curve will not have sharp peaks, they will be more rounded. You'll need to use a program like REW to enable you to see the effect of all the filters on the measurement though. So I'm thinking it may not be the IEM Harman Curve at fault but rather your implementation of large sharp boost EQ.

EDIT: the drawback of using the approach I mentioned it that it is not intuitive when people look at your individual filters, in terms of them understanding your EQ......but if you were to display a picture of the total EQ curve after doing the process I suggest then this would be intuitive for people to see the results and understand how it relates to your measurement.

 

[staticV3]

@Robbo99999 If you take a look at the graphs I posted above, then you can see that Amir's measurements for the Quad are about 11.5dB below what others have measured at 8.2KHz.
If we assume that this was a measurement error (looks like insufficient insertion depth), then it makes sense why Amir could not stand the correction he made based on his measurements, and why he had to reduce 8.2KHz a lot.
At least, that's my theory: He measured a trough at 8KHz that isn't actually there (as evidenced by measurements from other sources).
Correcting that "fake" trough led to massive overshoot in that region.

 

[Robbo99999]

@Robbo99999 If you take a look at the graphs I posted above, then you can see that Amir's measurements for the Quad are about 11.5dB below what others have measured at 8.2KHz.
If we assume that this was a measurement error, then it makes sense why Amir could not stand the correction he made based on his measurements, and why he had to reduce 8.2KHz a lot.
At least, that's my theory: He measured a trough at 8KHz that isn't actually there (as evidenced by measurements from other sources).
Correcting that "fake" trough led to massive overshoot in that region.

Yes, that could indeed be the case, (I didn't read any comments before posting my reply to the review). Or it could be down to what I mentioned re the EQ process.......I think the EQ process I mentioned is "best EQ practice", best way of implementing EQ.

 

[JJB70]

There seems to be offers on these, if people find them comfortable they seem a very good option for a modest price.

 

[PeteL]

Don't know where THX got this target response.

I don't think THX impose a certain curve, they do mention it must have "A well balanced frequency response with minimal channel imbalance", among other things but that's quite vague. Sure the specs must be clearer when you apply for it but my guess is that there would be some room to wiggle with as long as it can reproduce the full spectrum. It does have good channel compliance and low distortion. In the end they want to make money and get manufacturers to purchase that badge.

THX Certified Headphones - Take THX Certification everywhere you go

We created the THX Certified Headphones program to further define premium sound quality in the personal entertainment space.

www.thx.com

 

[PeteL]

@amirm regarding your EQ observations and not being able to fill out the treble to the Harman Curve without it sounding too bright. I'm wondering if it's anything to do with you choosing a sharp and large dB peak filter at 8200Hz, which might have negative effects (including ringing?). You can get round this problem by boosting the whole area from 2kHz-8kHz with a wide (low Q) filter and then you'd use negative dB peak filters to bring it all down to the shape of the Harman Curve - this way you're rounding off the peaks in the total EQ curve and avoiding ringing (in theory). High Q (narrow) & large peak filter boosts are supposed to be detrimental but you can get round that by boosting a wide area and then using negative dB filters to bring it down to the target curve - this way the total EQ curve will not have sharp peaks, they will be more rounded. You'll need to use a program like REW to enable you to see the effect of all the filters on the measurement though. So I'm thinking it may not be the IEM Harman Curve at fault but rather your implementation of large sharp boost EQ.

EDIT: the drawback of using the approach I mentioned it that it is not intuitive when people look at your individual filters, in terms of them understanding your EQ......but if you were to display a picture of the total EQ curve after doing the process I suggest then this would be intuitive for people to see the results and understand how it relates to your measurement.

The curve in white is the "total EQ".

 

[Keened]

I also owned this and a few Triples before it. Since they were always intended to be used with a phone I rarely used them un-EQ'd and quite enjoyed them. Funny enough, I actually found that airplane adaptor floating around the house a few weeks ago.

My two main complaints were the pointyness at the end of the shell (made it difficult to rest anything against you ear) and the unreplaceable cables (which weren't bad but there are better designs on the market) which meant when the cable inevitably got damaged the entire thing had to go. Lasted a long time though, would easily say I got my money's worth.

Yes the bass can be exaggerated but at least it exists compared to so many other IEMs and it has low distortion. When these broke it took a while to find a replacement candidate (JVC HA-FDX1 in the end) because so many others on the market at the time either had reasonable prices but no bass (and/or high distortion) or insane prices and questionable design choices (*cough* Campfire). Glad to see it get its day in the sun, I remember so many people nay-saying the 1More Triple and Quad as not Hi-Fi because they were coming out of Asia with reasonable prices.

I'm even tempted to get their new TWS and send it for review but that market isn't quite there yet I feel in terms of features I would like. Very very soon though (thanks to the EU forcing better consumer laws).

 

[Robbo99999]

The curve in white is the "total EQ".

That's good, but it doesn't change my other points in my post.

 

[juliangst]

Those were really good like 5 years ago when chi-fi iems weren't a thing yet. I didn't expect that any reviewer would bother reviewing them in 2022

 

[lewdish]

1More went downhill over the years in kinda the same way that Bose lost its reputation among audiophiles over time. Tho ironically Bose products actually measure fairly decent from what I've seen, in comparison 1More measures pretty poorly.

 

[PeteL]

1More went downhill over the years in kinda the same way that Bose lost its reputation among audiophiles over time. Tho ironically Bose products actually measure fairly decent from what I've seen, in comparison 1More measures pretty poorly.

I don't think these measure poorly at all. Sonic signature is a matter of taste but I think these are the lowest distortion multi drivers we have seen in these pages so far, with excellent channel balance. Price is very acceptable too. I'm sure I would find that a bit boomy for me but many appreciate that extra bass, there is definitely a market for that.

 

[lewdish]

I don't think these measure poorly at all. Sonic signature is a matter of taste but I think these are the lowest distortion multi drivers we have seen in these pages so far, with excellent channel balance. Price is very acceptable too. I'm sure I would find that a bit boomy for me but many appreciate that extra bass, there is definitely a market for that.

For $150 theres so much out there in the IEM game now that its a pretty diluted product, esp since this doesn't even have the typical modular components of even $30 IEMs. Theres plenty of tonalities out there for everyone in the IEM game~

 

[PeteL]

For $150 theres so much out there in the IEM game now that its a pretty diluted product, esp since this doesn't even have the typical modular components of even $30 IEMs. Theres plenty of tonalities out there for everyone in the IEM game~

What is modular components?