or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH 940 impression and support thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure SRH 940 impression and support thread - Page 92

post #1366 of 3844

Heard both the HD598 and HD650 last time I was in NY.  Liked both - but didn't get long enough with them.

 

Always wanted to try the HD600 - it's often described as being more balanced.  I also asked for advice on which would be a similar can to the DT880 - but with better mids, and was told the HD600 would be the one to try.  Just waiting for mine to arrive now.

post #1367 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post




I know what you're suggesting - but not sure (for me anyway) of the point.  I don't own and haven't listened to an HD800 - would love to one day - but sadly no regular "meets" in NZ.  Will try and co-incide a US trip with a regional meet at some stage in the future though.

 

If you state that definitively "to you" the SRH940 and the HD800 sound the same (or at least very close), even if others find they sound nothing alike, all we've really established is:

 * they are in fact very close and people are wasting their money buying the HD800 (someone tell Sennheiser!!)     OR

 * you have a different source / amp set-up etc that is either making the most of the 940 OR not getting the most out of the HD800   OR

 * that your impression of what sounds the same is completely different to some other people's     OR

 * your individual music tastes / preferences are different to others

 

All of the above is cool - so go ahead and do the exercise for interest sake - I'll be interested in the result - but it won't influence me either way.  I'll remain skeptical until I can actually demo the HD800.

 

The SRH940 is not for me (decided with my own sources, meagre as they may be, and my own ears).  And one day I do want to hear the HD800 so I can decide for myself how good it sounds, and if it's suitable for my own personal preferences (how ever strange they may be to anyone else) wink.gif

That's not the way comparisons work, by listening to a song and saying "Yah - they sound alike." No - the way a comparison works is this: Skeptic says "Download track x by artist y from website z (i.e. Amazon or Apple), then listen to the bass lines at 1:05 to 1:10 and also at 2:23 to 2:33 and tell me which has the strongest/weakest bass, and also what the quality differences in those bass lines (i.e. impact, detail etc.)"

That's how a serious comparison works. But on this site it's pretty obvious by now that nobody has done any serious comparisons, preferring to offer unfounded opinions.

First of all don't make assumptions. secondly read my reviews on gear to learn my methodology. Then you can retract some of your comments. By the way, I have done my own comparisons between the 940 and HD800.


Peace.
post #1368 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post



First of all don't make assumptions. secondly read my reviews on gear to learn my methodology. Then you can retract some of your comments. By the way, I have done my own comparisons between the 940 and HD800.


Peace.


Baka - who were you replying to (me or oldshoe99 specifically)?  Just curious - I'm always willing to learn to review better.

 

Also - what was your opinion on the 940 vs HD800?

 

post #1369 of 3844

Wow this thread has turned into a SRH940 vs HD 600 vs HD 800 thread hasn't it? XD

 

Back to the topic of female vocals with the 940's (I think it was mentioned by oldshoe99 about 7 pages ago), I think I understand your thinking. Why would I want a mid/high focused headphones for sounds that are around the mid-high region instead of lower frequency sounds to sound more balanced? A similar question can be posed for the lows. Why would I want a bassy headphone for bassier music rather than for music focused on the highs to make it sound more balanced? My answer to your questions are along the lines as to why bassheads buy bassier headphones. Why would one buy the Ultrasone HFI 580's for bassy music? Why would one buy a Grado headphone for rock music? My thoughts are that that particular headphone presents their music in a way that works for that genre. I found the 940's to present the upper-mids very well without it being too extreme for female vocals. They also seem to present the vocals (males and females alike) up front, making them feel more realistic to my ears. I would rather listen to vocals through the 940's than through bassier headphones such as the HFI 780's, which did not present vocals nearly as well to my ears.

 

Going back to the topic of the bass on the 940's. I don't know if it's the lack of burn-in, but I do find these headphones to be a bit lacking in bass; they seem to be fairly quiet compared to most headphones I've heard.

 

I still don't think it's very fair to compare $300 portable-ish closed-headphones to $300+ open-backed non-portable-ish headphones (HD 600 and HD 800). I particularly find it odd that $300 closed headphones sound nearly identical to $1200+ open-back headphones. Then again, what am I to know? I don't have the proper equipment to compare the two, so I leave those comparisons to you guys who do have the right audio gear. :D

post #1370 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by miceblue View Post

Going back to the topic of the bass on the 940's. I don't know if it's the lack of burn-in, but I do find these headphones to be a bit lacking in bass; they seem to be fairly quiet compared to most headphones I've heard.

 


I  think it's a bit more complicated than that. Maybe it's the more the "mid bass", than the deep bass that is  lacking just like brooko has suggested.

Listen to this track, and tell me if you think the bass lacking :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

post #1371 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post




Baka - who were you replying to (me or oldshoe99 specifically)?  Just curious - I'm always willing to learn to review better.

 

Also - what was your opinion on the 940 vs HD800?

 


Hi Brooko. I was referring to oldshoe99. I don't begrudge someone who puts forth an honest effort at a review. Whether I agree with it or not. As for the 940 vs HD800? I'm not ready to post a full fledged review but suffice it to say the HD800 is the better headphone. In every way. As well it should be. I think the 940 is a good value for a closed can. The HD800 is just better extended, more neutral and more refined. It deserves it's place as a flagship headphone. The 940 does well as a closed can within it's price point. The bass doesn't have the texture or impact of the HD800. The Senn isn't known as being bass heavy either. The HD800 beats the 940 in transparency and clarity. I like the stock 940. It offers many strengths that other cans in it's class lacks. Plus it's easy to mod. I may do a thorough breakdown at a later date. For now I'll just say the HD800 is the better headphone. At a premium.

I was actually thinking of comparing the 940 with the Grado SR-225 given the similar price. But I'm not sure yet. I like the 940 better.
Edited by baka1969 - 9/13/11 at 11:14pm
post #1372 of 3844

Something that doesn't seemed to be as mentioned in this thread (if at all, I forget!)...

 

Regardless of all of the opinions/controversy/reviews/love/hate/etc does anyone else find these headphone's transistions throughout the entire spectrum to be silky smooth?

 

This being outside of how thin, bright, bass light, cold, warm, or dry you find the sound.  I am asking this outside of whether or not you PREFER this sound, I am asking if owners can subjectively say, that when compared to other headphones (or external playback equipment for that manner) these have smooth transitions in the treble tones.  From note to note, any transitions that may occur in timbre or tone.... I find them exceptionally smooth in the 940.

 

I may or may not be alone, but to me if these Shures have any strength it is precisely that... from my subjective standpoint.  "Silky" just seems to describe this headphone so well for me, because not only does this suggest how smooth I feel it is, the word "silk" has always had a colder contentation for me (Maybe this is weird and just applies to me? Haha)

 

I do find them a notch on the colder side, even in comparison to the CharterOak, which is far from warm in my opinion.

 

Thoughts?

post #1373 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

Something that doesn't seemed to be as mentioned in this thread (if at all, I forget!)...

 

Regardless of all of the opinions/controversy/reviews/love/hate/etc does anyone else find these headphone's transistions throughout the entire spectrum to be silky smooth?


Do you mean transients ?

I  found that the cymbals are so sharp that sometimes it hurts. 

I  suggest you listen to summertime by miles davis.

 

 

 

 

post #1374 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

*words*



I TOTALLY AGREE

 

 

SILKY

 

 

 

post #1375 of 3844

Heya,

 

One of my favorite artists for female vocals & piano, is Tori Amos. My SRH940's get a lot of time with Ani Difranco and Tori Amos. Basically I have them for those two artists nearly exclusively.

 

 

I wish everything was mandatory 720p minimum quality. Grr.

 

Very best,

post #1376 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

 Hi Brooko. I was referring to oldshoe99. I don't begrudge someone who puts forth an honest effort at a review. Whether I agree with it or not. As for the 940 vs HD800? I'm not ready to post a full fledged review but suffice it to say the HD800 is the better headphone. In every way. As well it should be. I think the 940 is a good value for a closed can. The HD800 is just better extended, more neutral and more refined. It deserves it's place as a flagship headphone. The 940 does well as a closed can within it's price point. The bass doesn't have the texture or impact of the HD800. The Senn isn't known as being bass heavy either. The HD800 beats the 940 in transparency and clarity. I like the stock 940. It offers many strengths that other cans in it's class lacks. Plus it's easy to mod. I may do a thorough breakdown at a later date. For now I'll just say the HD800 is the better headphone. At a premium.

I was actually thinking of comparing the 940 with the Grado SR-225 given the similar price. But I'm not sure yet. I like the 940 better.


Ross - thanks for that.  I have to admit that I've never heard the HD800 but I just found it hard to believe a $1500 flagship could be on the same or similar level to a $300 can.  Nothing to do with elitism or anything else - just pure and simple pragmatism I guess.  I appreciate your viewpoint anyway - I've enjoyed your reviews of some of the higher ended stuff anyway (esp the last one on the Woo amps - unfortunately out of my price bracket for the time being).

 

Will be interested in your thought vs the SR-225.  I can only compare with the MS1i at the moment (minor mods including venting and damping the chamber + aluminium cups) - and to me, my MS1i (although it has a narrow and close-up sound-stage) equals the mids of the 940, but bests it in more natural bass impact/presentation (this is with the PortaTube which will have some effect on presentation).

post #1377 of 3844

Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

Regardless of all of the opinions/controversy/reviews/love/hate/etc does anyone else find these headphone's transistions throughout the entire spectrum to be silky smooth?

 

Thoughts?


Agree on the mids and highs.  The mids (as I stated previously) are simply gorgeous - very warm - silky smooth.  And the highs are definitely not harsh to my ears.  Just the overall signature is off - and it's undoubtedly the bass for me.  If they were my only can, I'd get used to the in no time.  But after listening to both the Alessandro and the Beyer - something is not right (to me).  Every time I listen it is more noticeable unfortunately.

post #1378 of 3844

SRH940 has really fast transients for a dynamic. The detail and clarity are also exceptional. Timbre is really good. I was listening a live recording through them and I remember getting a very vivid feeling of being on stage and saying to myself "Man, these vocals and guitars sound so darn real." But, I never found SRH940 exciting to listen to. And I always found the bass lacking somewhat. It's definitely not the low bass - it's the mid and/or the upper bass. The low mids are kinda thin as well. With proper amplification, I can see how these can sound wonderful though. Once I can afford a good source and amp, I will definitely give these SRH940s another chance. But for now, I will stick with the SRH840 which just sounds more fun and immersive to me out of the unamped sources.

 

It's not that simple though. SRH840 doesn't exactly sing when unamped either - it's just a lot more tolerable to me that way than the SRH940. Amped, SRH840 also sounds much better than unamped. I was comparing the two at a local audio store out of a decent source and amp and the SRH840 was truly wonderful with that setup, while the SRH940 seemed a tad too dry and analytical, but I didn't find the bass as lacking as I did out of my unamped sources. It is quite possible that the SRH840 tops out earlier than the SRH940, while the latter can scale further with better sources, but I think that if neither headphone is fully powered, the SRH840 is the more natural sounding of the two, although it certainly depends on many other factors like the recording quality and bitrate, source and amp used, personal preferences, etc.

post #1379 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post


Agree on the mids and highs.  The mids (as I stated previously) are simply gorgeous - very warm - silky smooth.  And the highs are definitely not harsh to my ears. 

I  find the hd595 significantly smoother. Coming  from the hd595 I  was tempted to say that the high of srh940  are harsh.... I  resisted  after seeing how much the high of srh940 are praised.

But in an other hand there's a  high roll off on the hd595 that prevents any high to be aggressive, sometimes it destroys the feeling of some musics (especially industrial...).
 

 

post #1380 of 3844

 

One thing is for sure, the HD800's are MUCH more open-air than the SRH-940.

 

 

When I put the HD800's on, I could hear just as clearly as I could with my old Stax SR-404's.

 

p.s. there was a non-audio person at the meet that thought all the headphones sounded the same but she liked the hd800's because they looked like Tie fighters (from star wars...)

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH 940 impression and support thread