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 98

post #1456 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post




I suggested that yes, from looking at Tyll's measurements as posted on Innerfidelity, which clearly show that the only signicant difference between the two headphones (of the things he measured) is frequency response.  If the 940 was a actually more detailed, faster, more resolving, etc I think it's measurements would at least have more differences from the 840.  A driver can't be moving faster and have an identical impulse response.

Which just illustrates what we already know - that those measurements don't capture what the ear can hear. Some, but not anywhere near all.
post #1457 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

Right from the good folks at Headroom:

 

"Headphones also need to be rolled-off in the highs to compensate for the drivers being so close to the ear; a gently sloping flat line from 1kHz to about 8-10dB down at 20kHz is about right. You'll notice all headphone measurements have a lot of jagged ups & downs (peaks & valleys) in the high frequencies; this is normal and mostly due to reflection cancellations in the folds and ridges in the outer part of the ear. Ideally however, the ups and downs of the frequency response should be fairly small and average out to a flat line. "

 

smile.gif

One of the 940 reviews mentions inserting cloth strips into the earcups to trim excess highs. Anyone have an opinion on how that would compare to using EQ? Better? Worse?
post #1458 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post

Here's an "ideal curve" , that I  tried to guess, by trying to find something regular close to hd800 curve, and not too far from the srh940 curve.

 

ideal.jpg

 

Ideal vs Hd800

 

hd800-regular.jpg

 

Ideal vs Srh940

 

srh940-compare.jpg

 

And the three graph compared:

 

three.jpg

 

 

Off course my "ideal curve" was obtained through very very scientific means wink.gif.

Never mind, I think it could help of getting an idea of what would be more "desirable".

 

 

These curves look really good, and show a smoother response in the mids to upper mids for the 940, until you get to that peak at 9khz. But what's interesting is, while my hearing is flat more or less to beyond 10 khz, the 940 has slightly less sibilant problems than the 800, which I would think would be made worse by that peak.
post #1459 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

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.

That's interesting. It's not often someone here will weight a $300 headphone equally against a $1300 headphone.
post #1460 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post


I have both headphones, and they are about equal. People here can rant day and night and fill this thread with 10 thousand denials (for whatever reason), but the facts are clear - when you list a specific track with a specific attribute to compare the two, I will check them with that track and report the obvious conclusion back to you. But you never do that because you know what the outcome will be. It's too bad for Sennheiser that Shure is eating their lunch with a 5 times cheaper headphone. Deal with it.

I'm waiting for ksc75 vs hd800 comparison.
 

 

post #1461 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post

I have both headphones, and they are about equal. People here can rant day and night and fill this thread with 10 thousand denials (for whatever reason), but the facts are clear - when you list a specific track with a specific attribute to compare the two, I will check them with that track and report the obvious conclusion back to you. But you never do that because you know what the outcome will be. It's too bad for Sennheiser that Shure is eating their lunch with a 5 times cheaper headphone. Deal with it.

I disagree with you on every point. I did read the review and the review deserves several large grains of salt. The Shure 940 is not as good as the HD800.
post #1462 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post



I disagree with you on every point. I did read the review and the review deserves several large grains of salt. The Shure 940 is not as good as the HD800.


Not anywhere close IMO. Heck, I don't even like the SRH940s.

post #1463 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelocks View Post




Well, I don't have the HD800s so... I could offer a few time stamps I like but... wouldn't it be great if you listened to one

of the suggested songs, and made the comparison yourself and maybe make note of which part you thought was great on the 800

or the 940?

 

Here's the problem (among many): Certain people here are determined to prove that the 940 has a bass "hole" or is bass "light". So what we need (me at least, to prove the point) are tracks, plus what exactly to compare in those tracks. If Mr. hole-in-the-bass has a suggestion what to listen to for the bass hole using actual tracks that I can buy, then I'm in.
post #1464 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

Sorry, but if the measurements don't show the differences between the 840 and 940, the measurements are lacking / flawed.

 

 

There's a reason why people compare the 940 to very high-end headphones, which has never been the case with the 840, the differences between the 840 and 940 are clear during a listening session, so all similarity on paper tells me is the paperwork needs to be improved.


Sir, I believe you have used up all of your bash the SRH840 coupons.wink.gif  Seriously speaking, the 840 is certainly not the plain jane, boring headphone you make it out to be.  With it's lush beautiful midrange, an impresive(though far from bass heavy) bass responce, and smooth highs I'd say it's FAR from boring.  If it weren't for a bit of a peak in the lower treble region it would have been the last word on closed style headphones for me.


Edited by Digital-Pride - 9/16/11 at 10:54am
post #1465 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post

I have both headphones, and they are about equal. People here can rant day and night and fill this thread with 10 thousand denials (for whatever reason), but the facts are clear - when you list a specific track with a specific attribute to compare the two, I will check them with that track and report the obvious conclusion back to you. But you never do that because you know what the outcome will be. It's too bad for Sennheiser that Shure is eating their lunch with a 5 times cheaper headphone. Deal with it.

I disagree with you on every point. I did read the review and the review deserves several large grains of salt. The Shure 940 is not as good as the HD800.

Your disagreement does not inform anyone here of anything. The reviewer dealt with actual facts, and listed tracks for differences. Until you provide something factual, your opinion does not have any value. List tracks and what to listen for, and I will do your work for you so people here can benefit from it.
post #1466 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post

Here's the problem (among many): Certain people here are determined to prove that the 940 has a bass "hole" or is bass "light". So what we need (me at least, to prove the point) are tracks, plus what exactly to compare in those tracks. If Mr. hole-in-the-bass has a suggestion what to listen to for the bass hole using actual tracks that I can buy, then I'm in.

What's your rig from from to back?
post #1467 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post


I have both headphones, and they are about equal. People here can rant day and night and fill this thread with 10 thousand denials (for whatever reason), but the facts are clear - when you list a specific track with a specific attribute to compare the two, I will check them with that track and report the obvious conclusion back to you. But you never do that because you know what the outcome will be. It's too bad for Sennheiser that Shure is eating their lunch with a 5 times cheaper headphone. Deal with it.


Can you tab notes? Maybe make things interesting and concrete. I think the HD800 was fantastic at playing notes to the pitch. Make a comparison in this manner? Pick out some insanely modal jazz with rich bass-playing, maybe by Paul Jackson (oooh, groovy) or something, and try to see which one distinguishes it better. Don't pay any attention to coloration, differences in tone or FR, just music. 

 

Hard to make any claims, since I don't own either, but the HD800 was fantastic when I listened to them a bit longer...

post #1468 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post




Not anywhere close IMO. Heck, I don't even like the SRH940s.

Nobody cares whether anyone likes the 940 or not, they just want to know how it sounds. And it sounds like a Senn 800. But so far after hundreds of posts, not one person has an example of a track to compare and what to listen for. I think my case is winning.
post #1469 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post


Nobody cares whether anyone likes the 940 or not, they just want to know how it sounds. And it sounds like a Senn 800. But so far after hundreds of posts, not one person has an example of a track to compare and what to listen for. I think my case is winning.


Hah, but Baka has both and states that they are completely different. I don't think either of your cases are winning. 

post #1470 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post




Can you tab notes? Maybe make things interesting and concrete. I think the HD800 was fantastic at playing notes to the pitch. Make a comparison in this manner? Pick out some insanely modal jazz with rich bass-playing, maybe by Paul Jackson (oooh, groovy) or something, and try to see which one distinguishes it better. Don't pay any attention to coloration, differences in tone or FR, just music. 

 

Hard to make any claims, since I don't own either, but the HD800 was fantastic when I listened to them a bit longer...

I did some of that, which is an excellent suggestion. The two were roughly the same, given the differences created by the sound effects of the 800 from that big echo chamber and angled drivers. I love the 800's sound and soundstage, but I also loved the Bose 901 and the way it created a spectacular speaker soundstage, by bouncing the sound backward and around. So it sounds better to me that way, and better to others, but it isn't something in the sound itself, it's in the smearing (ouch!) created by the 800's acoustics.

One of the best tests is with sibilants. The 940 seems to have less on several tracks I tried, but in the end they still don't sound worse on the 800, probably because of that wonderful soundstage effect.

So in a sense no headphone will "compare" directly to the 800 unless it has big earcups and angled drivers and the same acoustics. But given that limitation, I try to do what the reviewer said and listen past that. I think it's going to be more telling if we can get suggestions about what tracks and segments to compare the bass with, if some of the naysayers will cooperate.
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