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 214

post #3196 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by crinacle View Post

 



Basically a person would go for the HD650 for general musicality, and the SRH-940 for sheer detail at the cost of said musicality etc.. So for a regular HiFi audiophile, the HD650 would be the more popular choice, unless you be a detail freak like me.

my srh940  are modded & and also eq- ed, they are VERY  musical. They have occasional sibilance, but most of the time they are great.

  Recently I've been enjoying "Infected mushroom", with quite satisfying bass .
I  tried to eq my hd595, in order to get something as enjoyable : no way; muddy bass& total lack of details at best.

post #3197 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by crinacle View Post

 



Basically a person would go for the HD650 for general musicality, and the SRH-940 for sheer detail at the cost of said musicality etc.. So for a regular HiFi audiophile, the HD650 would be the more popular choice, unless you be a detail freak like me.



I hate this description.  I listen to music on my 940s, and it sounds pertty...musical...to me. 

 

I get what you mean, but I still don't like that description.  I much prefer the cold v. warm analogy :P

post #3198 of 3844

sennheiser = treble roll off,  unless you wish to spend the 1000$ required for the hd700.
Makes listening easier, but you are  missing so much.

Same story for the IEMs, my only only motivation for getting the IE8  over the IE7 , its the better treble,  and again that's still one weak point of the IEM.

Enjoy your BAAAASS.

post #3199 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crinacle View Post

 



Basically a person would go for the HD650 for general musicality, and the SRH-940 for sheer detail at the cost of said musicality etc.. So for a regular HiFi audiophile, the HD650 would be the more popular choice, unless you be a detail freak like me.


That's not exactly how I would characterize it.  Clearly the HD650 is more popular, and part of that is related to factors besides how they sound.  I think they have different musical uses, but one is not necessarily more "musical" than the other.  It tends to smooth out flaws in recordings and compression, which can make for a more pleasurable listening experience, but actually at the cost of some "lost" information.

post #3200 of 3844

Overall, the HD650 reveals much more audio information consistently if you count bass and mids and low treble, and is overall the higher quality sound. The SRH940 doesn't exactly have "fake" detail but it has very very detailed highs which makes the midrange sound really nice and crisp. I liked it for its crispness, which makes it quite nice for some genres like Infected Mushroom.

 

Overall though versus the HD650 there's a fair amount of the music which it fails to reproduce. Coming from my HD800 (obviously not a fair comparison) the SRH940 sounds like the music just got a bunch of holes punched through it, and it's just not all "there", in addition to the overall vastly lower sound quality, resolution, detail, etc. Versus the HD650 the difference isn't so severe BUT the HD650 does still make the SRH940 sound like it has "holes" in the presentation, if that makes sense. The HD650 naturally and accurately reproduces everything without any particular spotty holes in the sound, except for a gradual treble roll-off and blurring in the 15+khz region -- its only weakness IMO. The SRH940 excels at the 10-20khz region, but suffers weird inconsistencies and faults all throughout the FR spectrum. It's hard to explain exactly, but that's about as good as I can do -- the HD650 is incredible at everything but suffers in treble without a really synergistic amp. The SRH940 is incredible with treble but suffers with everything else.

 

I don't recommend the SRH940 as a general purpose headphone. I understand now why some people call it a $150 headphone in the bass to mids range because of all these "holes". I think it's worth $300 possibly just for the detailed treble in some ways, but it's arguable -- it depends on how much you care about specialized treble at the expense of mediocre bass/midrange. I don't listen purely to Infected Mushroom so my HD650s proved better for most of my music. (Incidentally, an HD800 takes the best of both and improves everything yet another league beyond.)

 

Feel free to disregard some of this though because I'm definitely spoiled with my new HD800. Still, the HD650 vs SRH940 comparison is still valid to my ears.


Edited by ac500 - 2/8/12 at 8:20am
post #3201 of 3844

 


I  hope Beagle won't mind, but I'll copy/paste the PM  he sent me:

 

Quote:

I tried your rope mod on the 940. It accomplishes what you say it does. I find the sound has more depth, the top end is more subdued, mids are smoother and the bass has more presence and dynamics.

 

Too bad nobody will believe it, or take it seriously.

 

Now to answer to ac500.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

  The SRH940 is incredible with treble but suffers with everything else.

I find them incredible almost through the whole frequency range, detailed & clean from mid-bass to treble. Did I mention I modded them ?

 

Quote:
I understand now why some people call it a $150 headphone in the bass to mids range because of all these "holes".

I'm sorry but my hd595 (which are sold for more than 150$)  sound like junk in comparison. At least when listening to infected mushrooms wink.gif.

post #3202 of 3844


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

Overall, the HD650 reveals much more audio information consistently if you count bass and mids and low treble, and is overall the higher quality sound. The SRH940 doesn't exactly have "fake" detail but it has very very detailed highs which makes the midrange sound really nice and crisp. I liked it for its crispness, which makes it quite nice for some genres like Infected Mushroom.

 

Overall though versus the HD650 there's a fair amount of the music which it fails to reproduce. Coming from my HD800 (obviously not a fair comparison) the SRH940 sounds like the music just got a bunch of holes punched through it, and it's just not all "there", in addition to the overall vastly lower sound quality, resolution, detail, etc. Versus the HD650 the difference isn't so severe BUT the HD650 does still make the SRH940 sound like it has "holes" in the presentation, if that makes sense. The HD650 naturally and accurately reproduces everything without any particular spotty holes in the sound, except for a gradual treble roll-off and blurring in the 15+khz region -- its only weakness IMO. The SRH940 excels at the 10-20khz region, but suffers weird inconsistencies and faults all throughout the FR spectrum. It's hard to explain exactly, but that's about as good as I can do -- the HD650 is incredible at everything but suffers in treble without a really synergistic amp. The SRH940 is incredible with treble but suffers with everything else.

 

I don't recommend the SRH940 as a general purpose headphone. I understand now why some people call it a $150 headphone in the bass to mids range because of all these "holes". I think it's worth $300 possibly just for the detailed treble in some ways, but it's arguable -- it depends on how much you care about specialized treble at the expense of mediocre bass/midrange. I don't listen purely to Infected Mushroom so my HD650s proved better for most of my music. (Incidentally, an HD800 takes the best of both and improves everything yet another league beyond.)

 

Feel free to disregard some of this though because I'm definitely spoiled with my new HD800. Still, the HD650 vs SRH940 comparison is still valid to my ears.



 

I still stand by my opinion that the 940 is probably the most detailed can under one grand :) but I do agree with you though, it isn't as balanced as I thought it would be, especially in the mid bass and some parts of the lower mids. Treble (and to a certain extent, upper mids and middle mids) are its strong points though, so yeah it is more 'specialised' than 'generalised' which is what the 650 is.


Edited by crinacle - 2/8/12 at 2:59pm
post #3203 of 3844
I haven't read the last few posts, but from my perspective, the 940's are definitely worth the price as a closed headphone. I was originally going to purchase a K701 as my first major headphone purchase until I read that they required a decent amp and are open-back.

For a closed-back headphone, the 940's are definitely an excellent headphone from my experience. They are portable, fairly rugged, extremely comfortable (for me), able to fold-up and lie flat, have removable cables and earpads (with an extra set of both in the package), comes with a 6.35mm adapter, and backed with a 2 year warranty. Those in itself are great features for a user like me who stays at school for most of the day.

As for the sound, I like it. I don't mind the quiet bass on my iPod Video, though when amped, the 940's really do sound much better. The mids and the highs really shine through and I find them very fun to listen to, whether it's finger-tapping to Ottmar Liebert's guitar, casually listening to Fourplay's smooth jazz, or studying with Gabriela Montero's piano. I don't know why, but I seem to like headphones with lean bass. Maybe it lets me appreciate the other sounds in my music? Maybe it's because I've been around with too much mid-bass that I've grown to dislike it? I certainly learned to appreciate the the thunder-like 'rumble' of my music tracks over the clubbing 'thump.'

For the more serious listener, or someone who wants a more balanced-sounding headphone, there may be better options out there, but in my case, I really do enjoy the 940's for what they are. I did get to try an HD650 at a local meet, and they had a tad bit too much mid-bass for my liking.....go figure.


Now my only complaint is the swiveling earcups...they are really squeaky, and yes I know they're covered via the warranty...but I feel that I will miss them far too much in a week's worth of time. atsmile.gif

Just throwing in my $0.02 there.
post #3204 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by miceblue View Post

I did get to try an HD650 at a local meet, and they had a tad bit too much mid-bass for my liking.....go figure.

HD600  have  less pronounced bass, you might like them

post #3205 of 3844

I use OPA2132PA and OPA2134PA in my headphone amp and both sound great with my SRH940.  Changing the cable and connectors make the sound smoother, i try to avoid the SRH940 with gold plated stuff, they made the sound harsh silver is better in my book.

post #3206 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by eugenefeng View Post

  Changing the cable and connectors make the sound smoother,

Probably the treble is decreased by using a bigger impedance. I  tried with a "big resistance" , which is a volume adjustor (koss vc-20)

and I  didn't like the result, you loose lot of clarity. Nothing is better than the mod of cups I've suggested.

EDIT: you get more interesting results by increasing clarity in full frequency range, than by making the treble muddy (in case the treble  emphasis annoys you), and that's what exactly the mod do.

 

Listening now to Agatsuma Hiromitsu. I  discovered accidentally this artist, and this is a "kind of" acoustic, which particularly suit  the srh940.

I  really like ,  and the artist deserve more listening when I  see stats at last.fm

The most "easy listening" track , might be this one (Yuudachi).
 

 


Edited by extrabigmehdi - 2/11/12 at 7:26am
post #3207 of 3844

According to a recent french review ,
the performance of srh940 can be compared without exaggeration with headphone that costs two, three, or even four times their price.

Their bass is very clean and tight, and their high very sharp (with a bad source, their high can become aggressive).

Their cons: bulky, heavy, unforgiving highs.

 

http://v6.erenumerique.fr/shure_srh940_des_performances_exceptionnelles-article-2334-1.html

 

Oh, and also this flagorsa impression is quite intriguing , to say the least:

Quote:

I just got my SRH-940 today, after 8 hours of burn-in it very much sounds like my previously owned HD800, also like my ER4S in some ways.   I like it, bass is nimble and clear. Bass impact is very much present coming out of my Concerto, and HM-801.   I think the mid bass hole some are taking about is overstated.   I don't want my headphones sounding all the same so I might keep it unmodded for a while.  I can happily switch between this and my HE500.


http://www.head-fi.org/t/597256/srh940-simple-mod-that-fixes-the-bass-and-treble-problems#post_8169442

About the mod, it's  a new mod mod suggested by beagle.

post #3208 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post

According to a recent french review...
 

Their bass is very clean and tight, and their high very sharp (with a bad source, their high can become aggressive).

Their cons: bulky, heavy, unforgiving highs.

 

 


I pretty much agree with this.  Their bulkiness isn't a huge issue for me...they fold up pretty compactly which makes toting them around pretty simple.

 

post #3209 of 3844

Just bought some hd25 II-1. It doesn't have the amazing clarity of the srh940, but so much more fun... I  was really missing something. Something easy on ears, with great bass, no fuss...

Listening to 2pac, michael jackson biggrin.gif.

 

EDIT: I  understand why bcasey bashed the vocals of the srh940 , after listening to the hd25 II 1...

Because the vocals on the hd25 II 1 are so great, it is so much easier to figure out what a singer is exactly singing with them, nice clarity and forward presentation of vocals ....


Edited by extrabigmehdi - 2/26/12 at 8:31pm
post #3210 of 3844

 

Hi everyone ^^

 

So hey the SRH-1440 is $399 at amazon.com, I wonder how it compares to our beloved SRH-940.

 

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