Comments on: Review: iBlink Earbuds http://www.geardiary.com/2009/09/04/review-iblink-earbuds/ Everyone can understand technology; sometimes it just takes a little translating. Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:19:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: 13 Unusual But Awesome Sets of Earbudshttp://www.geardiary.com/2009/09/04/review-iblink-earbuds/#comment-118758 13 Unusual But Awesome Sets of Earbuds Wed, 08 Jun 2011 14:43:05 +0000 http://www.geardiary.com/?p=46027#comment-118758 [...] Source [...] [...] Source [...]

]]> By: jkj1962http://www.geardiary.com/2009/09/04/review-iblink-earbuds/#comment-48786 jkj1962 Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:25:04 +0000 http://www.geardiary.com/?p=46027#comment-48786 "Ear-canal audio products are the most recent..." Actually, technically, ear-canal devices have been around since....forever. Many, many portable transistor radios from the 50's and 60's (and on into the 70's and 80's) included a mono "ear-canal" earphone. While not cusioned, and only mono, they were sound-isolating, relying on the wearer's inner ear skin for the seal. The "speaker" had a metal cone, with either a magnetic or crystal driver. They were tinny, with no bass, but so were the radios they were attached to. True, today's are MUCH better, but they're older than you'd think. “Ear-canal audio products are the most recent…”

Actually, technically, ear-canal devices have been around since….forever. Many, many portable transistor radios from the 50′s and 60′s (and on into the 70′s and 80′s) included a mono “ear-canal” earphone. While not cusioned, and only mono, they were sound-isolating, relying on the wearer’s inner ear skin for the seal. The “speaker” had a metal cone, with either a magnetic or crystal driver. They were tinny, with no bass, but so were the radios they were attached to.

True, today’s are MUCH better, but they’re older than you’d think.

]]>