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 183

post #2731 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post



You know what Casey - debate is absolutely pointless.  If you ever get the chance to actually listen to said HD600, I really suggest you take it and at least then you'll know.  And trust me - the difference between the HD600and SRH940 is very big.

 

Unsubscribed.



I can guarantee most of that difference comes from the fact the hd600 is open back and not the frequency response. I have tried headphones with similar frequency response where people claimed there was a substantial difference and there wasn't.

 

For example.

 

The shure srh840 vs srh750dj.

Is it true there is more bass? Yes but it's not hugely audible unless the track you are listening is huge on the sub bass. Everything else on the graph is only off by at most 3db and i hear no difference.

 

I took it another step further. I wore both headphones at the same time. I put a shure srh740dj pad on my left ear and a shure srh840 pad on my right. There wasn't enough of a difference to warrant any discomfort in listening.

 

Point i am trying to make is am very skeptical of a lot of this community. People tend to recommend headphones which are popular over what they have tried and they say things which are innaccurate. I am not saying your wrong but i am still very skeptical there is a huge difference between the hd600 and shure srh940. Judging from that graph however i would think the hd600 would be really harsh.

 

post #2732 of 3844

I think arguing whether it's "colored" is a bit silly in the context of music listening. None of the people arguing here are studio professionals I gather, so let's not pretend we can judge it for that, and just accept that sound engineers seems to really really like the SRH940.

 

As for coloration, some of the most loved headphones of all time (Sennheiser HD650) are extremely colored. The SRH940 is not very colored, but it's not flat neutral either. I'll be able to comment soon with a better frame of reference I suppose when my DT880s arrive. However I can say compared to an Audio Technica AD2000 I found the SRH940 and HD650 to be both better all-around.

 

While the AD2000 does not offend in any part of the FR, it neither impresses in any. The HD650 does not offend in any area, but impresses in the lower end (and when EQed the high end as well). The SRH940 offends in treble on some bad recordings but can sometimes sounds brilliant where neither the HD650 or AD2000 does.

 

> I can guarantee most of that difference comes from the fact the hd600 is open back and not the frequency response

 

If you take a look at innerfidelity's FR graphs for the HD600, HD650, and DT880 it's quite interesting. By graphs, the HD600 is the least neutral with rolled off lows and highs. HD650 is much better. The DT880 is yet again much better than both for neutrality according to the FR graphs.


Edited by ac500 - 12/17/11 at 4:57am
post #2733 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcasey25raptor View Post

1. In the reality of headphones dated products which have been proven over time should be considered better.

 

2. Also silver cables? Who cares. Silver, copper, gold, whatever it's all the same. If you can prove to me that cables make a sound difference that is noticeable then i will accept it. But i am very skeptical of it making any difference. Just like with how the opinions of the shure srh940 on this website vary so much 3. i am now greatly skeptical of nearly this entire community.

 

 

1.  Meh, I have the Koss PortaPro and Sony MDR-V6, I've also had the Etymotic ER-4, and I'm interested in the Beyer DT48. I've owned Stax SR-404 Signature, and I want to try Sony CD900ST, and the latest MDR-7520.

 

2. I don't want to associate myself with a headphone where it's almost standard to modify the cables, and I think Sennheisers cheap stuff all sounds weak, and it's overpriced.

 

3. I'm a little bit skeptical of price influencing popularity and review, like the Shure SE535 and J-phonic K2 SP which I didn't like.

 

I think the flagship European and Japanese headphones are expensive, but I accept that, I just "deal with it", R&D in Europe and Japan is expensive and I want it to continue, I don't want the future of audio to be Yuin and Dunu.

 

 


Edited by kiteki - 12/17/11 at 4:57am
post #2734 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

I think arguing whether it's "colored" is a bit silly in the context of music listening. None of the people arguing here are studio professionals I gather, so let's not pretend we can judge it for that, and just accept that sound engineers seems to really really like the SRH940.

 

As for coloration, some of the most loved headphones of all time (Sennheiser HD650) are extremely colored. The SRH940 is not very colored, but it's not flat neutral either. I'll be able to comment soon with a better frame of reference I suppose when my DT880s arrive. However I can say compared to an Audio Technica AD2000 I found the SRH940 and HD650 to be both better all-around.

 

While the AD2000 does not offend in any part of the FR, it neither impresses in any. The HD650 does not offend in any area, but impresses in the lower end (and when EQed the high end as well). The SRH940 offends in treble on some bad recordings but can sometimes sounds brilliant where neither the HD650 or AD2000 does.



Thats what i was afraid of and i had read a lot of in this thread. It doesn't echo my experience at all. Harsh treble recordings are really easy to listen to on these compared to say my audio technica m50s which i find brutal to bad recordings.

post #2735 of 3844

post #2736 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcasey25raptor View Post


Sorry but those graphs nearly look identical to me aside from the treble. A difference of 3 db isn't audible.

 


http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=3

 

Please don't fail on purpose. 

 

 

post #2737 of 3844

 

I have said this before but don't take FR too seriously.

 

 

Just because a Skullcandy smokin' bud is ruler flat doesn't mean it's going to sound great with your blu-ray 24/96 Chaconne in D-minor.

post #2738 of 3844

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcasey25raptor View Post


I can guarantee most of that difference comes from the fact the hd600 is open back and not the frequency response. I have tried headphones with similar frequency response where people claimed there was a substantial difference and there wasn't.

 


ROFL. ok.

 

Here's one.

 

 

graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=513&graphID[]=2941

 

 

Not much difference between the two apart from the 100-200Hz area, and the sub-bass response.

 

"Harsh treble recordings are really easy to listen to on these compared to say my audio technica m50s which i find brutal to bad recordings."

 

http://www.head-fi.org/products/sennheiser-adidas-hd-25-1-ii-orginals-headphones-black-blue/reviews/5946

 

"The highs are very good. Allowing the headphones to shine."

 

"Although They are revealing so if a recording is harsh you will hear it."

 

note: Treble is okay on Shure 940, but not on M50. Treble makes HD25 shine.  Similar treble response on all the 3 headphones.

note 2: Shure 940 is easy to listen to. HD25 is revealing. M50 is revealing. Similar FR on all 3 headphones. +- 3 to 5db. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Blue Boat - 12/17/11 at 5:20am
post #2739 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Boat View Post


http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=3

 

Please don't fail on purpose. 

 

 


I can't say weather i did or not.

 

post #2740 of 3844

Eh, Bcasey isn't an FR graph purist, he just doesn't know it yet.

 

People that hang out at innerfidelity graph.com and then come here tearing down headphoens they've never heard are ******

post #2741 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Boat View Post


ROFL. ok.

 

Here's one.

 

 

graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=513&graphID[]=2941

 

 

Not much difference between the two apart from the 100-200Hz area, and the sub-bass response.

 

"Harsh treble recordings are really easy to listen to on these compared to say my audio technica m50s which i find brutal to bad recordings."

 

http://www.head-fi.org/products/sennheiser-adidas-hd-25-1-ii-orginals-headphones-black-blue/reviews/5946

 

"The highs are very good. Allowing the headphones to shine."

 

 

 

 

 



Fine dive in to my earlier archive of writings. My opinion still stands.

 

 

Also there is a boast in the upper treble on the m50s that you forgot to mention.

 

 

post #2742 of 3844

Brah I'm not purposely attacking you. I'm just proving that you're still in the honeymoon phase. You don't think you are, but you are. Opinions change after a while. That's why there are quite a number of discrepancies in your reviews. So don't be so quick to shoot down other people's review/comments and say that they're invalid (Quote: i am now greatly skeptical of nearly this entire community.).

 

 

post #2743 of 3844

Well FR graphs represent magnitude, not quality. The Sennheiser HD 280 Pro show much more flat down to 0hz than HD650s even, yet HD650s and SRH940 sound vastly better in bass, and I really doubt the HD 280 Pros can produce very strong bass at all. But while HD650s sound vastly better quality than HD 280 Pros, the HD 280 Pros are indeed much flatter -- however the FR curve is not as smooth. I think a smooth FR seems to produce a "refined" sound, or at least that's my theory. But just a different shape FR tells you almost nothing about sound quality, but rather the hardware equalization essentially being performed.

 

I think someone needs to find a way to play a high quality FLAC signal through a headphone, measure the output, and compare it with the source digital audio signal. Of course it would need to be analyzed carefully accounting for phase shifts etc. that might throw off the results, but it shouldn't be impossible to arrive at a good analysis of overall sound quality in any desired area simply by seeing how close the headphone reproduces a given REAL WORLD sound signal. Rather than synthetic square waves and single sine waves.


Edited by ac500 - 12/17/11 at 5:32am
post #2744 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcasey25raptor View Post



Fine dive in to my earlier archive of writings. My opinion still stands.

 

 

Also there is a boast in the upper treble on the m50s that you forgot to mention.

 

 


Quit clutching on straws. 

 

graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=3101&graphID[]=513&graphID[]=2941

 

The Shure 940 also has it. 


Edited by Blue Boat - 12/17/11 at 5:29am
post #2745 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

Well FR graphs represent magnitude, not quality. The Sennheiser HD 280 Pro show much more flat down to 0hz than HD650s even, yet HD650s and SRH940 sound vastly better in bass, and I really doubt the HD 280 Pros can produce very strong bass at all.

 

But while HD650s sound vastly better quality than HD 280 Pros, the HD 280 Pros are indeed much flatter -- however the FR curve is not as smooth.

 

I think a smooth FR seems to produce a "refined" sound, or at least that's my theory. But just a different shape FR tells you almost nothing about sound quality, but rather the hardware equalization essentially being performed.


Thank you.
 

 

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