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 34

post #496 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max View Post

 

 



How dare you take that out of context like that! My eyes are burning! ... And worse is people seek me as target for their molotovs! ... Well played.

post #497 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverickronin View Post


Unfortunately the vast majority of dynamics need to add quite a large midbass hump in order to get any deep bass out of the drivers at all.

 

Some people hate those sorts of midbass humps but what I can't stand at all is a lack of bass extension.  Nothing sounds like it has any weight to it all unless the bass goes deep enough.  If I have to chose, I'll take the hump in order to get the extension that comes with it but other people are happy to disregard those last few octaves if they happen to impinge on anything else.

 

I enjoy dissecting these sorts of things in order to tease out a little bit of data...


Heh, get the K272's and miss nothing :) 

 

But again, you're speaking of preferred sound ("Nothing sounds like it has any weight to it") ... I dunno, the 272s go pretty low without sounding overly weighty. Maybe it's the midbass hump itself that gives you this sonic characteristic you enjoy? Have you tried a phone that goes low without the mid-bass hump? 

I'm basically asking what your experience is, factually, to have come to such a conclusion that extension itself is the factor that determines the "weight" you desire.

 

Also, "few octaves" is a bit of an overstatement. I could her no further musical information down there with the LCD-2 compared to my K272's, for instance. Sure, I got a headache from all the extra "rumble", but that was irrelevant to the musical integrity of the... music. :)

I'm deducing your conclusion is based on having experience with "overall poor", and maybe cheap, headphones. There aren't many out there, at all, that cut low frequencies that high. Correct me if I'm wrong, in both cases. Heh.

post #498 of 3844

I'm very interested in these.

 

I've been into "hi-fi" for about 5 years, but I'm pretty disciplined as to buying gear. I have "only" bought 4 headphones in that whole time for instance (first the Senn 595, then Grado 225i, AKG 702, and Beyer 770 600). I do prefer speakers (I listen to them 80% of the time) but I also enjoy headphones (obviously lol) and can't always listen to speakers.

 

So as I only buy about one mid priced headphone a year on average, I try to be careful in choosing. I have bought all my headphones unheard as well, since I think it not only takes a lot of time with a lot of different music/genres to properly evaluate headphones (or speakers), but also that the pairing of equipment is important. So I base my purchases on online reviews entirely. So far I have yet to be disappointed, except for with the 595's which I largely bought, it must be mentioned, for the Senn name when I was new to the audio world. They are ok, but I was never very impressed and never listen to them now (or really after getting the 225i which blew them away imo).

 

Anyway, out of all the headphones I have and have heard (which also includes some cheap ones and the Senn 600's), I like the AKG 702's the best. I find them very analytical, clear, resolving, detailed, and with a nice wide sound stage. Their bass, while some find anemic, I find perfect. The lows have impact when needed and don't when not. That is, they lack the pseudo bass lower mid range hump other cans have (including my 225i's and 770's), but have surprising bass when it is present in the music. Love articulation in my bass over omnipresent and overdone "impact".  

 

So I'm basically wondering if anyone has compared these new Shure's to the AKG 701/02's. Although I'm really completely satisfied with the 702's, I do sometimes need a closed can. This is why I bought the Beyer 770's (as well as to just hear yet another brand's house sound). I find them, however, after the 595's, to be my least liked headphone. They are too V-shaped for me: the mids are too recessed, the highs too sharp/metallicy, and lows are too bloated/sloppy. They are good cans, and I am impressed with their openness for closed cans, but I still find them lacking enough that I am dissatisfied with them enough to want better closed cans. Thus my interest in the 940's as well as the great reviews. I have no problem listening to closed cans instead of open if they sound great as well, as long as they are not closed in.

 

IOW: (short version lol) If anyone can say whether the 940's have an 701/02 overall approach to the sound I'd be thankful. I know I could just buy the AKG 271's, but I do like to take "risks" and buy from different brands as well (hence the Beyer 770's). I never know what I could be missing and wouldn't at all be upset if I found my personal favorites the 702's to be dethroned by another can, for that just means I've found an even better sound I can enjoy!

 

I am using the Matrix M-Stage amp btw which I find works well with all my cans. It takes away the somewhat "plasticy" mids the 702's can have straight out of built in amps for instance and really makes them sing. So although the 940's might not need extra amping to sound great (like my 225i's), I have it anyway and I bet they would benefit from it in any case.

 

Thanks for reading and any comments!


Edited by Pratt - 6/25/11 at 8:24am
post #499 of 3844

If we could have different reviews, a bout how these shr940 compare to well known headphones ,

this would be more interesting than the zelda / manga related discussions.

post #500 of 3844

     Quote:

Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post

If we could have different reviews, a bout how these shr940 compare to well known headphones ,

this would be more interesting than the zelda / manga related discussions.



Do you mean to imply that Zelda related conversations are somehow not interesting?wink_face.gif  I agree that comparisons like SRH940 vs. the HD600 for example, would be greatly appreciated.

post #501 of 3844

I would be highly interested in how they compare to DT1350.

Several references of both relating DT880, both closed, both in the same price range, both with non-emphasized bass, both very detailed and resolutive, both quite sensitive, both low impedance... but, which one wins?

Any lucky owner of both?

post #502 of 3844

You can check http://www.headfonia.com/shure-srh-940-detail-monster/ for another POV and Mike

did compare it with a couple of headphones... (check the comments too!)

post #503 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pratt View Post

I'm very interested in these.

 

I've been into "hi-fi" for about 5 years, but I'm pretty disciplined as to buying gear. I have "only" bought 4 headphones in that whole time for instance (first the Senn 595, then Grado 225i, AKG 702, and Beyer 770 600). I do prefer speakers (I listen to them 80% of the time) but I also enjoy headphones (obviously lol) and can't always listen to speakers.

 

So as I only buy about one mid priced headphone a year on average, I try to be careful in choosing. I have bought all my headphones unheard as well, since I think it not only takes a lot of time with a lot of different music/genres to properly evaluate headphones (or speakers), but also that the pairing of equipment is important. So I base my purchases on online reviews entirely. So far I have yet to be disappointed, except for with the 595's which I largely bought, it must be mentioned, for the Senn name when I was new to the audio world. They are ok, but I was never very impressed and never listen to them now (or really after getting the 225i which blew them away imo).

 

Anyway, out of all the headphones I have and have heard (which also includes some cheap ones and the Senn 600's), I like the AKG 702's the best. I find them very analytical, clear, resolving, detailed, and with a nice wide sound stage. Their bass, while some find anemic, I find perfect. The lows have impact when needed and don't when not. That is, they lack the pseudo bass lower mid range hump other cans have (including my 225i's and 770's), but have surprising bass when it is present in the music. Love articulation in my bass over omnipresent and overdone "impact".  

 

So I'm basically wondering if anyone has compared these new Shure's to the AKG 701/02's. Although I'm really completely satisfied with the 702's, I do sometimes need a closed can. This is why I bought the Beyer 770's (as well as to just hear yet another brand's house sound). I find them, however, after the 595's, to be my least liked headphone. They are too V-shaped for me: the mids are too recessed, the highs too sharp/metallicy, and lows are too bloated/sloppy. They are good cans, and I am impressed with their openness for closed cans, but I still find them lacking enough that I am dissatisfied with them enough to want better closed cans. Thus my interest in the 940's as well as the great reviews. I have no problem listening to closed cans instead of open if they sound great as well, as long as they are not closed in.

 

IOW: (short version lol) If anyone can say whether the 940's have an 701/02 overall approach to the sound I'd be thankful. I know I could just buy the AKG 271's, but I do like to take "risks" and buy from different brands as well (hence the Beyer 770's). I never know what I could be missing and wouldn't at all be upset if I found my personal favorites the 702's to be dethroned by another can, for that just means I've found an even better sound I can enjoy!

 

I am using the Matrix M-Stage amp btw which I find works well with all my cans. It takes away the somewhat "plasticy" mids the 702's can have straight out of built in amps for instance and really makes them sing. So although the 940's might not need extra amping to sound great (like my 225i's), I have it anyway and I bet they would benefit from it in any case.

 

Thanks for reading and any comments!


SRH940 dethroning K70x?  Hard to imagine.  =p

By the way, you should have gone with ATH-A2000X instead of DT770.  You will probably find SRH940 to be the replacement for your DT770, but for half the price of A2kX, lol!

post #504 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post

Heh, get the K272's and miss nothing :) 

 

But again, you're speaking of preferred sound ("Nothing sounds like it has any weight to it") ... I dunno, the 272s go pretty low without sounding overly weighty. Maybe it's the midbass hump itself that gives you this sonic characteristic you enjoy? Have you tried a phone that goes low without the mid-bass hump? 

I'm basically asking what your experience is, factually, to have come to such a conclusion that extension itself is the factor that determines the "weight" you desire.

 

Also, "few octaves" is a bit of an overstatement. I could her no further musical information down there with the LCD-2 compared to my K272's, for instance. Sure, I got a headache from all the extra "rumble", but that was irrelevant to the musical integrity of the... music. :)

I'm deducing your conclusion is based on having experience with "overall poor", and maybe cheap, headphones. There aren't many out there, at all, that cut low frequencies that high. Correct me if I'm wrong, in both cases. Heh.


 

The numbers on the 272 don't look so hot to me.  FR is good and the bass is flat and extended for a full size closed dynamic but the distortion numbers and 30hz square waves look pretty bad.

 

It not the midbass hump that I enjoy.  I own and have heard 'phones that are flat or nearly flat down into the subsonics and that's what I prefer out of sound signatures that actually exist.  I'm talking about 'phones like my SE530s and DT1350s, and other ones I've heard at meets like the LCD-2s and HiFiMan orthos.  I prefer that to the midbass humps found on some 'phones like the M50s or SRH840s, but like I said earlier if I had to make a choice I'd take the hump and extension that it grants over rolled off bass response.

 

I have plenty of music with content in the low bass and I like to be able to hear it.

post #505 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pratt View Post

I'm very interested in these.

 

I've been into "hi-fi" for about 5 years, but I'm pretty disciplined as to buying gear. I have "only" bought 4 headphones in that whole time for instance (first the Senn 595, then Grado 225i, AKG 702, and Beyer 770 600). I do prefer speakers (I listen to them 80% of the time) but I also enjoy headphones (obviously lol) and can't always listen to speakers.

 

So as I only buy about one mid priced headphone a year on average, I try to be careful in choosing. I have bought all my headphones unheard as well, since I think it not only takes a lot of time with a lot of different music/genres to properly evaluate headphones (or speakers), but also that the pairing of equipment is important. So I base my purchases on online reviews entirely. So far I have yet to be disappointed, except for with the 595's which I largely bought, it must be mentioned, for the Senn name when I was new to the audio world. They are ok, but I was never very impressed and never listen to them now (or really after getting the 225i which blew them away imo).

 

Anyway, out of all the headphones I have and have heard (which also includes some cheap ones and the Senn 600's), I like the AKG 702's the best. I find them very analytical, clear, resolving, detailed, and with a nice wide sound stage. Their bass, while some find anemic, I find perfect. The lows have impact when needed and don't when not. That is, they lack the pseudo bass lower mid range hump other cans have (including my 225i's and 770's), but have surprising bass when it is present in the music. Love articulation in my bass over omnipresent and overdone "impact".  

 

So I'm basically wondering if anyone has compared these new Shure's to the AKG 701/02's. Although I'm really completely satisfied with the 702's, I do sometimes need a closed can. This is why I bought the Beyer 770's (as well as to just hear yet another brand's house sound). I find them, however, after the 595's, to be my least liked headphone. They are too V-shaped for me: the mids are too recessed, the highs too sharp/metallicy, and lows are too bloated/sloppy. They are good cans, and I am impressed with their openness for closed cans, but I still find them lacking enough that I am dissatisfied with them enough to want better closed cans. Thus my interest in the 940's as well as the great reviews. I have no problem listening to closed cans instead of open if they sound great as well, as long as they are not closed in.

 

IOW: (short version lol) If anyone can say whether the 940's have an 701/02 overall approach to the sound I'd be thankful. I know I could just buy the AKG 271's, but I do like to take "risks" and buy from different brands as well (hence the Beyer 770's). I never know what I could be missing and wouldn't at all be upset if I found my personal favorites the 702's to be dethroned by another can, for that just means I've found an even better sound I can enjoy!

 

I am using the Matrix M-Stage amp btw which I find works well with all my cans. It takes away the somewhat "plasticy" mids the 702's can have straight out of built in amps for instance and really makes them sing. So although the 940's might not need extra amping to sound great (like my 225i's), I have it anyway and I bet they would benefit from it in any case.

 

Thanks for reading and any comments!



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max View Post

 


SRH940 dethroning K70x?  Hard to imagine.  =p

By the way, you should have gone with ATH-A2000X instead of DT770.  You will probably find SRH940 to be the replacement for your DT770, but for half the price of A2kX, lol!


 

Well, they are both very different headphones, not easy to compare, but this is what I can say about it.... I once owned the K701's and I must say that in terms of clarity, detail, resolution, treble, musicality and bass the 940's win (considering both headphones have been well amplified). The K701 win on soundstage, this is where they excelled, perhaps exaggerated... but for a closed headphone the 940's are surprisingly open. So yes, If you want an closed can that is somehow near to the detailed nature of the K701, the 940's are the ones, but if I had to choose, I would got with the 940's, I would prefer to sacrifice the enormous soundstage and looks for a more musical and detailed can.

 

Again, the 940's NEED TO BE AMPLIFIED!

 

post #506 of 3844

@GuyDebord

 

Quote:
Well, they are both very different headphones, not easy to compare, but this is what I can say about it.... I once owned the K701's and I must say that in terms of clarity, detail, resolution, treble, musicality and bass the 940's win (considering both headphones have been well amplified). The K701 win on soundstage, this is where they excelled, perhaps exaggerated... but for a closed headphone the 940's are surprisingly open. So yes, If you want an closed can that is somehow near to the detailed nature of the K701, the 940's are the ones, but if I had to choose, I would got with the 940's, I would prefer to sacrifice the enormous soundstage and looks for a more musical and detailed can.

 

But this is great news then ! Lot of people are complaining of the exagerated soundstage of k701 anyway . How do you compare the soundstage compare for instance to hd595 (or any well known sennheiser headphone).

 

Quote:
Again, the 940's NEED TO BE AMPLIFIED!

 

Are they at least "okay" without amping.  Would the amping of a xonar stx be enough ?

 

Also about the bass, can you hear some thump from this song ?  Or does it sound like a muddy bass salad. My hd595 sucks with it (compared to my senn Ie7).

post #507 of 3844

What is your definition of "musical"?

I really wish everyone would explain his or her own interpretation of the term.

I take it as "pleasantly distorted," which is something I am indifferent about.


Edited by Mad Max - 6/25/11 at 4:46pm
post #508 of 3844

@Mad Max.

Quote:

What is your definition of "musical"?

I really wish everyone would explain his or her own interpretation of the term.

I take it as "pleasantly distorted," which is something I am indifferent about.

 

Are you asking this to me ?  I  provided a song example , because this one is almost unlistenable without bass thump.  And having experienced this with my sennn IE7, I  don't consider this to be a distorsion  at all.  Nor do I  consider my IE7 for "bass heads".  And if it takes a slight distorsion in the bass frequencies to enjoy a big library of music, then why not.

post #509 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post

@Mad Max.

 

Are you asking this to me ?  I  provided a song example , because this one is almost unlistenable without bass thump.  And having experienced this with my sennn IE7, I  don't consider this to be a distorsion  at all.  Nor do I  consider my IE7 for "bass heads".  And if it takes a slight distorsion in the bass frequencies to enjoy a big library of music, then why not.


I meant GuyDebord, lol.

 

Also, I agree with you.  I tend to like energy, I don't know if that is distortion or not.  I also don't mind a lack of it because not too many headphones sport this trait, it seems to me.  I like aggressiveness, though I do like to have at least one headphone without it and A2000X is the most non-aggressive headphone I've ever heard, yet one of the most energetic.  w00t!


Edited by Mad Max - 6/25/11 at 5:32pm
post #510 of 3844

@Mad Max

 

The closest to a natural reproduction of the harmonics, air reverberations and liquidity of musical notes in an acoustic string instrument, female voice and orchestral percussion. The opposite to musical would be analytical, dry, sterile and technical, which for some reason a few here like. A good example of an analytical, technical headphone is the Beyer DT-48.

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