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 95

post #1411 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post




Well, we could talk of a small mid-bass "hole" for the srh940. At least Brooko complained that the midbass was lacking, it seems he sold his headphone partly because of that. Probably the headphone would be more musical,  if the 60hz - 200 hz region of the graph  was a "straight line" (not necessarily horizontal).

 


Again the putty/Blu-Tack mod helps compensate for the 940's bass "hole" and, to me, gives a bit more neutral presentation. I still don't believe the 940 as having hotter treble.
post #1412 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

280



I know charts aren't the cure all, but it does seem to confirm what I hear. A mid bass hump.


This is what I meant

 

350x280px-LL-f9212210_graphCompare.png

 

 

Now the 840 is bassy but no more bass hump. 

post #1413 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

So obviously the 940 isn't just "an 840 with boosted treble" as someone in this thread suggested.

 

 

 



Definitely. The 940 is much more airy than the 840s. Its not just a treble boost.

 

And people, don't rely on the graphs too much because some cans with flat response in the bass dont sound like they measure. Heck take the k701 and the hd650., Ive seen a k701 graph on headroom before that had more midbass than the hd650. We all know thats baloney. Also, with the 840s like I also said in one of the posts above, I feel that these particular cans sound a little anemic when they have a flat response in the bass like the 940 which is why I said that if the 840s hump were matched with a response in the lower bass like the graph I edited above, then they would sound more natural. If these were hd600s/650s that measured like that though, I'm sure it would be bassy as $%%%^# hehehe

post #1414 of 3844

Its not all about frequency response. If you have a graph like this for example Untitled.png

with a square wave at 80hz like this

 

Untitled2.png

 

you know you wont have any real bass in there at all. The cans might just look and measure bassy due to a cup resonance causing a hum in the low frequencies LOL. It won't be bass that is part of the music.

post #1415 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post
 The cans might just look and measure bassy due to a cup resonance causing a hum in the low frequencies LOL. It won't be bass that is part of the music.

 

I  don't think that the srh940 have much cup resonances, or I'm just unable to hear any.

post #1416 of 3844

 

I couldn't hear any resonance (dissonance?) in the 940 either... but I only listened to it for 10 minutes... I have to buy one!!

 

Kinda weighing up my options between the SRH-940 and the Tesla T5p right now.

post #1417 of 3844

My probably futile attempt, to flatten the midbass region like this:

 

coorected.jpg

 

With this eq :

 

flatter.jpg

 

. The result is nice, but it's less than a 3 db difference anyway.

 

 

post #1418 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post



 

I  don't think that the srh940 have much cup resonances, or I'm just unable to hear any.



Thats not what I was implying. I was just saying that an identical frequency response curve fom two different headphones won't mean that they sound the same because there are other factors involved like transient response(measured by the square wave). 

 

Since Baka pointed out the bass hump of the 840, I said that the 840s bass is not really a problem if there were some low bass to match with that midbass. It would basically come out like a 940 with boosted bass if it measured that way (which is probably ideal for naturalness since the 940 lacks volume in the bass department).

post #1419 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post

My probably futile attempt, to flatten the midbass region like this:

 

coorected.jpg

 

With this eq :

 

flatter.jpg

 

. The result is nice, but it's less than a 3 db difference anyway.

 

 


Yah, I don't think this subtle dip is what is causing the 940s lack of bass. Its the other factors like the square wave.

 

post #1420 of 3844
280


Ok, here it is, the 50Hz square wave.
post #1421 of 3844

Ouch, I am actually pretty disappointed with my SRH840 right now. In direct comparison with my DT880/600 and RE0, the treble on the Shure is quite grainy. SRH940 would certainly do better than this. Saxophones in the jazz recordings I tried don't sound as natural as on the other two aforementioned phones either. And the bass is not as tight. And overall the SRH840 out of the box simply cannot keep up with the other two. I hope burn in will help.

post #1422 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

280


Ok, here it is, the 50Hz square wave.


That squarewave there already shows that the 940 will have a faster attack than the 840 with the steeper risetime and that the bass of the 940 will be more punchy, tight and more in volume vs the 840 if they measured the same in the frequency response. I can see this because the 940 decay is less steep. Now If you had something like the shure  se530 square wave measurement which is almost perfect then a flat frequency response may even come out bassier than a slightly boosted bass response on a headphone with a squarewave like the above.

 


Edited by donunus - 9/14/11 at 6:43pm
post #1423 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post




Yah, I don't think this subtle dip is what is causing the 940s lack of bass. Its the other factors like the square wave.

 

I  think the srh940, is quite capable of interesting bass .  In comparison my hd595 are "castrated". I was trying to improve the frequency balance, and the  little hole in the graph match what  brookoo said i.e a lack of "mid bass" .

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

280


Ok, here it is, the 50Hz square wave.

From the graph, I'd say the srh940 is better. The blue graph is crossing the zero ligne, inside "each square" which is bad.
 

 

post #1424 of 3844

The 940 does have a slightly better square wave. and yes the shures are capable of better bass than the 595s. They are not capable of better bass than their own se530 IEM though.

 

Here are some measurements

 

graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=843&graphID[]=573&graphID[]=3101

The FR here shows that the hd600 and the srh940s should have almost identical volume in the bass. The measurements deceive us if we don't understand square waves :)

 

graphCompare.php?graphType=3&graphID[]=843&graphID[]=573&graphID[]=3101

 

heck, the highs deceive us too because according to this, the 940 and the hd600 almost has the same square wave response. This explains the similarity in attack/decay smoothness I observed with the shures and the senns. My first impressions were that the shure sounded like an eq;d hd600 which is confirmed by the measurements.

 

The se530 is a superior beast in the square wave and deep bass extension.


Edited by donunus - 9/14/11 at 7:12pm
post #1425 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

The se530 is a superior beast in the square wave and deep bass extension.


The se530 is what I  call an exception, not much headphones (expect the ones that costs 1k+ ) are able to produce such good square responses.

 

Quote:
the 940 and the hd600 almost has the same square wave response.

But still, the srh940 win on the comparison with the hd600  wink.gif

 

 

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