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 151

post #2251 of 3844

 

I just found the 940's at a good price and I am very close to buying them but I don't need them I think I should buy something else.................

 

Shopping lust...

 

post #2252 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post



What's really peculiar is how you keep "monitoring" this topic day in and day out forever, as though you have prove your point, which you have made no effort towards.  I did two tests as suggested by members here, and stand willing to do more, as further suggestions happen.  That effort is real - the rest of this is just talk.

And BTW, nobody could determine the minute differences in upper harmonics by monitoring this topic.  You sure didn't.  It's subtle and you need to listen to the actual headphones, carefully.



You're full of bollocks.
post #2253 of 3844

 

Well I'm on oldshoe's side but I am curious about the mansion he visited with a rats nest of cables and $10,000+ worth of audio equipment (I think he said that's where he tested the 940).

 

So baka1969 what's the SR225 like compared to the 940?

 

I've heard the SR335 and Skullcandy Uprock and I need a 'rocking' headphone like one of those in my collection.

 


Edited by kiteki - 11/23/11 at 10:40am
post #2254 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post


And why don't you ask the other guy to give it a rest?  I did a lot of work testing and comparing them, and to my recollection, the other guy did none.

 

 


 

Simply because "the other guy" is right. The SRH940's have "issues" with their measurements and sound not as good as any of $1K+ headphones (well, maybe on par with the AT W5000 and Ed 10s tongue.gif). Basically you're the only one insisting this...and no matter how many times you try, it just doesn't make it so. You've been rather insistent over the past several weeks and it's getting tiresome reading the same post virtually over and over again.

 

I'm on the record (along with Tyll) for not liking the SRH940s. Can I understand how some may like them for $200, sure...but I wouldn't go beyond that position by any means.


Edited by MacedonianHero - 11/23/11 at 10:45am
post #2255 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post


baka1969 what's the SR225 like compared to the 940?

I've heard the SR335 and I wouldn't mind a 'rocking' headphone in my collection like that... preferably a step above the Skullcandy uprock (which sounds similiar to the SR335).





To me (before we discuss the 940) the 225(i) and the 325i(s) are somewhat different to each other. The similarities are that they both share that really close soundstaging. They differ because the 325i(s), to me and others, have piercing highs. Almost blood curdling so. The 225(i), on the other hand, has more of the traditional John Grado sound. Just a more refined version than the 80(i).

Compared to the 940? The 940 is more neutral to my ears. The Grado still aggressive next to the Shure. I'd say the bass of the 940, while not really more impactful, does have better extension. I find the Shure's treble not as raw sounding as the Grado. Also, the Shure does have more clarity and detail.
post #2256 of 3844

 

Thanks for that baka1969, then I will skip the sr225.

Yes the sr325 did have some "sceraming cat sibilance" in it and I was a little hesitant to turn the volume up, the Skullcandy uprock sounds quite close to the 325 with less high-highs, less instrument seperation and less screaming cat.

 

post #2257 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

Thanks for that baka1969, then I will skip the sr225.

Yes the sr325 did have some "sceraming cat sibilance" in it and I was a little hesitant to turn the volume up, the Skullcandy uprock sounds quite close to the 325 with less high-highs, less instrument seperation and less screaming cat.

 

You might want to try getting some used on head-fi for sale listings. I got mine for $200 and you could easily resell for the same price if you don't like them.
post #2258 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

Thanks for that baka1969, then I will skip the sr225.

Yes the sr325 did have some "sceraming cat sibilance" in it and I was a little hesitant to turn the volume up, the Skullcandy uprock sounds quite close to the 325 with less high-highs, less instrument seperation and less screaming cat.

 

You might want to try getting some used on head-fi for sale listings. I got mine for $200 and you could easily resell for the same price if you don't like them.
post #2259 of 3844

Gathering new reviews, as they are relatively infrequent .
Here's an interesting one I  found from Tape op magazine.
Here are some quotes I  found significant:
 

Quote:
One of my colleagues commented that the SRH940 were too sibilant when he first listened to them. On the contrary, I feel that the high-frequency response is actually exceedingly smooth. Yes, there is a small bit of high-frequency lift to my ears, but it's a very smooth rise, and to me, what I hear is the opposite of sibilance.
[...]
I think that listeners who are accustomed to an overabundance of bass volume in their cans will definitely find the SRH940 inappropriate for their needs, but I find the low-frequency clarity refreshing. Plus, transient response throughout is amazing.
[...]
I found that the orientation of the SRH940 on my head had a greater effect on the sound than with other headphones. For example, I can hear the bass levels go up when I rotate the earcups a bit so that the headband is just above my forehead
[...]
The SRH940 are now my favorite headphones - not only for critical listening during recording and mixing, but also for just plain listening to music


Link for full review:
http://www.tapeop.com/reviews/880/

A somehow confusing technical review (at  least for me)  from "Everything Audio Network" ,  but I'd  keep this quote at least:

Quote:

The Shure SRH940 delivers a refreshing shot of bass clarity in the thumpity-thump world of today’s pop music.


http://everythingaudionetwork.blogspot.com/2011/10/personl-audio-review-shure-srh940.html

A little "review" (well, it's in a discussion) from gearlutz forum, user WheresCarter:

Quote:

People will tell you that you shouldn't mix on headphones - and I agree that you should never do your final mixes from just headphones. However, with the right headphones you can make some decent progress on the mix if you've got to keep the volume down at night. I just bought a pair of Shure SRH940 headphones and did some mixes last weekend. I was in the zone and forgot I was wearing phones while mixing. When I realized it, I was disappointed that I had put that effort into it with phones, but when I compared the mix on my monitors, it really wasn't far off. So I am really liking these for "pre-mixing" and leakage is minimal for tracking. And they are super comfortable. While the retail price is like $299, you can get them for $199 if you look around.

 


http://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end-theory/670239-best-headphones-tracking-mixing-180-max.html

Currently I'm back to my hd595, because I'm a bit tired of some recording sounding harsh on the srh940 (and despite all the dsp tricks I  could find to sweeten the sound). I  agree with the Larry review "Shure SRH 940 vs. Sennheiser HD 650" , in the sense that my Senns handle much better harsh or compressed music . I  think what Sennheiser offer is better adapted for "modern"  or mainstream music, but I  can imagine people  preferring the srh940 while listening to vinyls.

I  quote Larry answer in a thread:

Quote:
today you find much music made for the Ipod people, so lot of compression made in the production, which I don´t like. Here the Sennheiser still shines with a good vocal and is very tolerant on music that sound harsh


http://www.whathifi.com/forum/headphones-etc/new-shure-srh-940-vs-sennheiser-hd-650
There's also the head-fi thread, but it's not where the quote comes from:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/579095/new-shure-srh-940-vs-sennheiser-hd-650-the-dogfight
 

post #2260 of 3844

Even after equalization, the SRH940s are distinctly and without any doubt (at least to my ears) more detailed than the HD650. Surely that means something... to those of you trying to say the SRH940s aren't worth more than $200. Keep in mind this doesn't make them necessarily "better" than the HD650s because the SRH940s cannot produce the kind of bass and lower end the HD650 can.

 

When equalized the HD650s are quite detailed and are very versatile across the frequency range. The SRH940s are less versatile and can have "saturation" type effects with bassy songs, especially if you boost bass with EQ. This does not happen ever on the HD650. With that said, the SRH940's treble and mids are notably better (more detailed) than the HD650. Again, that must mean something regarding its value. I don't think it's fair to say this headphone is only worth $200, when it's clearly superior in some areas to headphones like the HD650.

 

For now, lets put away the whole HD800 argument, because it's going nowhere. Has anyone here actually claimed the SRH940 is not superior to HD650 highs and upper mids?


Edited by ac500 - 11/24/11 at 10:27am
post #2261 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

 The SRH940s are less versatile and can have "saturation" type effects with bassy songs, especially if you boost bass with EQ.


What you call  "saturation",  might be a clipping problem. Try to decrease first the volume on the dsp chain before applying EQ,
or you could decrease all sliders of EQ before boosting bass.

post #2262 of 3844

No, if I bass boost my HD650, it sounds fine. Same exact signal to the SRH940, and it gets clipped, at least in the sense that the treble/mids get muffled. The HD650 seems to be able to put out literally any bass I give it (to the point where it's literally vibrating on my head) without any clipping whatsoever, and the treble and mids remain fully intact and detailed.

 

Like I said I'm not saying the SRH940 isn't good because I do think it's notably superior to the HD650 in treble and upper mids, at least subtly. Bass is good and quality, it's just not like the HD650 where you can boost it to absurd levels without any degradation of sound quality at all.

 

Also I'd add that how you judge the value of a headphone depends entirely on what areas you're comparing, and what your frame of reference is. If the HD650 is $350 worth of highs, the SRH940 is worth $500+. If the HD650 is $350 worth of bass and lower mids, the SRH940 is worth ~$200. 


Edited by ac500 - 11/24/11 at 11:22am
post #2263 of 3844

 

Hmm I heard the HD650 at a meet recently (with silver dragon cable btw) and it's an impressive headphone, I didn't draw any connections to the SRH-940.

 

From my brief impressions I think the 650 is a dark and musical headphone with a nice surround effect and smokey velvet sound, whereas the 940 is a shimmering headphone like a crystal blue lake in summer on a scorching hot day with a colourful giant beachball and a pretty girl drinking a corona.

 

I don't like dark headphones very much and I value nakedness on the vocals highly, however I can see why the HD650 is a popular headphone.

 

My favorite headphones at the meet that I didn't want to take off were definitely the AKG K1000 and I quite enjoyed the Grado SR325. Oh and I heard the Tesla T1 and I prefer my T5p they are indeed birds of a different feather, I was surprised.

 

If I divide headphones into two groups of sound "involving" and "admiring" then the only really high-end headphones I put in the involving group are T5p and K1000, whereas with most electrostatic type stuff or the Tesla T1 I find myself only 'looking at' or admiring the sound but not really getting into it, I also call this "reference sound", I think the SRH-940 is a mixture of involving/admiring.

 

HE-60 was definitely admiring, it's like wow that's a nice satellite in outer space but where's the giitar?

 

post #2264 of 3844

 Double post....oops.....


Edited by achristilaw - 11/25/11 at 1:04am
post #2265 of 3844

   Listening to Acoustic instruments in natural settings....and never through an Ipod, I conclude the 940 is surprising (IMO). I don't "EQ" anything and haven't for many, many years in two channel....no need (for me) to attempt in Headphones. I stay away from those pieces of gear that artificially boost or attenuate frequencies important to Natures own. I have selections of Music (acoustic) that concentrate on specific parts of the audible spectrum (highs, middle and lows). Then Piano (for the gamut) in testing gear that might be a keeper. I own and have heard better than the 940....but none of those can be had for such a small price.  

 

  SYNERGY...of mating components is important (some conclude MOST important) in Audio. Find components the compliment the features/attributes of this phone and then let them run! 

 

  What I find important...and is never mentioned...how loud we listen to Music. I try to attend live acoustic events (I'm retired so it's easier) ...and dependent on the setting (small club to outdoor festivals), perceived loudness will vary. Your distance to the performers vs. surroundings etc.. With the 940 Brass has proper bite, Strings have proper sheen and both are plausible and can be had at lower levels. Bass is the Musical foundation and never leads for the most part. The balance of this phone is for Acoustic and not for amplified Music (IMO). Just my two pennies.......

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