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 48

post #706 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

Must be you. There's plenty of bass. I think what throws people off is that they display clarity and transparency in the bass range which is at odds with 90% of headphones. They are bright...when the recording is bright. I listened to some tracks that sounded bright and others that sounded warm and rolled off. So don't blame the messenger. Check your source.
Quote:



I agree with this 100%.  I suspect that a LOT of folks who don't like the tonality of these cans in the bass to mid-bass range don't like them because they're accustomed to thudding mushy bass that (as you point out) is found in a lot of headphones.

 

post #707 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrod-tom View Post





I agree with this 100%.  I suspect that a LOT of folks who don't like the tonality of these cans in the bass to mid-bass range don't like them because they're accustomed to thudding mushy bass that (as you point out) is found in a lot of headphones.

 

I'll second this.

 

Moving between headphones and external setups frequently it is easier to detect... since external setups usually have the luxury of crossed over drivers for specific frequency ranges they tend to split the job up better.

 

I hinted at this earlier, but I feel like this "mushy" or "muddy" low mid/bass region is one of the biggest differences between cheapo audio devices and those which are of higher quality.

 

The Shures are quite articulate, and I feel like even someone who doesn't necessarily prefer their sound signature will have a hard time disagreeing.. assuming they are feeding it with something better than an iDevice
 

 

post #708 of 3844


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by elrod-tom View Post




I agree with this 100%.  I suspect that a LOT of folks who don't like the tonality of these cans in the bass to mid-bass range don't like them because they're accustomed to thudding mushy bass that (as you point out) is found in a lot of headphones.

 

 

I third this!

 

These cans have got to be the best High-end value I have heard, they are a STEAL! to bad a lot of people are going to miss on these due to their low price, they are in my opinion, among the best closed cans in the market today and could easily compete in the 1k class, perhaps not win it, but seriously compete.

 

On another note, I recently used them in a trans-Atlantic flight and I had no comfort issues, another plus! My only criticism so far is the design, I still find them ugly...
 

 

post #709 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyDebord View Post

My only criticism so far is the design, I still find them ugly...
 

 


Yeah, and I'm not a fan of the unwieldy plastic construction. Like I stated earlier, too much like the Goldrings, this creaky plastic clamping effect. I realize they are designed to withstand studio abuse, but perhaps Shure could come up with a "home" version with a more sophisticated and user-friendly headband/bails design.

 

But the sound! These tell you pretty much the whole story about what your musical sources and gear are all about (remember, Shure is the same company that designed the V15-IV/V phono cartridges which were reputed to be the most neutral and accurate of their time). And on days when I can't handle the truth, I'll use something else.
 

 

post #710 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyDebord View Post


 

 

I third this!

 

These cans have got to be the best High-end value I have heard, they are a STEAL! to bad a lot of people are going to miss on these due to their low price, they are in my opinion, among the best closed cans in the market today and could easily compete in the 1k class, perhaps not win it, but seriously compete.

 

On another note, I recently used them in a trans-Atlantic flight and I had no comfort issues, another plus! My only criticism so far is the design, I still find them ugly...
 

 


I believe they are the top of Shure HPs line but I am not sure they are categorized as Hi-End cans. Again, it's just my opinion and everybody has one you know what....  

 

post #711 of 3844

Yup, I said it before and I'll say it again. The sound on these is quite fantastic. In fact, my 3rd favorite sounding headphone ever.

 

If they had a different build and improved comfort, these would easily be one of the best headphones ever anywhere near it's price range.

post #712 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View PostWill the srh940 even reach the statut of FOTM ?


No. It's reserved for $1000+ cans.

post #713 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyDebord View Post


 

 

I third this!

 

These cans have got to be the best High-end value I have heard, they are a STEAL! to bad a lot of people are going to miss on these due to their low price, they are in my opinion, among the best closed cans in the market today and could easily compete in the 1k class, perhaps not win it, but seriously compete.

 

On another note, I recently used them in a trans-Atlantic flight and I had no comfort issues, another plus! My only criticism so far is the design, I still find them ugly...
 

 


For sub $300, these are the best headphones I have heard. If I had never heard any higher end cans, I would have saved some money.

 

The SRH940 do everything well. They are now my go to travel headphone, and get most of my listening time at my PC.

 

I have already had two friends buy these, after A/B tests with my HD800 and LCD-2's. One actually picked the SRH940 in a listening test, having no idea about pricing.

 

 

 


Edited by floydfan33 - 7/10/11 at 3:22pm
post #714 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

 

But the sound! These tell you pretty much the whole story about what your musical sources and gear are all about (remember, Shure is the same company that designed the V15-IV/V phono cartridges which were reputed to be the most neutral and accurate of their time). And on days when I can't handle the truth, I'll use something else.
 

 


 

What else do you use?

I'm still debating what other headphones/sound signature I'm gonna get to go along with these and my 440s...

 

post #715 of 3844

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katun View Post

Yup, I said it before and I'll say it again. The sound on these is quite fantastic. In fact, my 3rd favorite sounding headphone ever.

 

If they had a different build and improved comfort, these would easily be one of the best headphones ever anywhere near it's price range.


Strong words, I feel lucky to have a pair on the way!

 

Have you ever posted the EQ for your JVCs? I'd like to pick up a pair and pit them against the 940's for the hell of it.

post #716 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by 200poundsofamp View Post

Strong words, I feel lucky to have a pair on the way!

 

Have you ever posted the EQ for your JVCs? I'd like to pick up a pair and pit them against the 940's for the hell of it.


Yeah, I hope you enjoy them. They are technically my 2nd favorite "full sized" as my real 2nd favorite is an IEM.

 

Which of the two JVC? I'm still tweaking and reviewing multiple EQ's on my FXC51, but I think I've found the one. It as absolutely mind boggling what an EQ can do to some headphones. It turned these into "an IEM I'd easily pass up" to "2nd best headphone I've heard, ever."

 

post #717 of 3844

Thanks, but I'm sure I'll find something to like, I've never even listened to a headphone so expensive (Beats don't count).

 

And yeah, the FXC51, I'd love to hear what almost perfect sound is to someone who's been through so many great headphones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katun View Post


Yeah, I hope you enjoy them. They are technically my 2nd favorite "full sized" as my real 2nd favorite is an IEM.

 

Which of the two JVC? I'm still tweaking and reviewing multiple EQ's on my FXC51, but I think I've found the one. It as absolutely mind boggling what an EQ can do to some headphones. It turned these into "an IEM I'd easily pass up" to "2nd best headphone I've heard, ever."

 



 


Edited by 200poundsofamp - 7/12/11 at 1:03pm
post #718 of 3844

Got mine the other day.

 

I was a bit put off at first because the upper frequencies were a bit harsh but after letting them run in for a bit and now with probably 20-30 hours on them they have settled down in that area to be accurate. The lower frequencies have gained some detail now also.

 

Very good reference sound. They'd be excellent for music production.

 

They could be a bit more comfortable for all day wearing. The Senn HD 380 would likely have been more comfortable being a bit lighter and with better weight distribution with a wider foam on the headband. I seriously doubt they would sound as good though.

 

I don't have much headphone experience but I do have hi-fi tastes. If I can listen to them all day long then they should be very good by any standards.

These are only meant to solve a noise issue in the office. I won't be trading headphones for my main system for dedicated listening.

post #719 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlach View Post
Pratt, i agree with your description of accuracy/transparency/resolution vs coloration, however i think there is more to it than that. Resolving gear can also be smooth. For instance, you can have an accurate/transparent/resolving/clear/detailed headphone that isn't smooth, and thus producing a certain amount of treble harshness. Other analogies can be used as examples; going from a Lexus to a Mercedes (while the former can be considered of very good quality, the latter simply turns the asphalt into silk!), the same thing happens with wine, scotch, etc. you get the point. You "usually" have to spend more for the qualities of richness and smoothness. Having said that (and now getting back to headphones), pursuing reference qualities AND expecting smoothness (and avoiding sibilance) probably places you in flagship territory...

 

Well, yes, resolving gear (especially speakers) can be smooth, but I'd just say that it is thus less transparent and more colored; not as resolving as other comparable more neutral gear.

 

As for the "you get what you pay for" platitude, I've never bought that and never will, especially in the audio world. After a certain low price point any increments in SQ are negligible if not entirely illusionary and due to psychological factors (expectation/placebo...It has to sound better, I paid so much for it and I'm not a sucker!). And yes I've heard and compared all sorts of very expensive audio gear (besides headphones) to much less expensive gear, even blind tested in our group, and it all sounded virtually the same after a certain low/entry price point (which depends on the what type of gear it is). 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

Must be you. There's plenty of bass. I think what throws people off is that they display clarity and transparency in the bass range which is at odds with 90% of headphones. They are bright...when the recording is bright. I listened to some tracks that sounded bright and others that sounded warm and rolled off. So don't blame the messenger. Check your source.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elrod-tom View Post
I agree with this 100%.  I suspect that a LOT of folks who don't like the tonality of these cans in the bass to mid-bass range don't like them because they're accustomed to thudding mushy bass that (as you point out) is found in a lot of headphones.


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

I'll second this.

 

Moving between headphones and external setups frequently it is easier to detect... since external setups usually have the luxury of crossed over drivers for specific frequency ranges they tend to split the job up better.

 

I hinted at this earlier, but I feel like this "mushy" or "muddy" low mid/bass region is one of the biggest differences between cheapo audio devices and those which are of higher quality.

 

The Shures are quite articulate, and I feel like even someone who doesn't necessarily prefer their sound signature will have a hard time disagreeing.. assuming they are feeding it with something better than an iDevice
 


I agree with all of this. For me the bass is near perfect in quality, depth, "power" and extension. It is very tight and taut which I love.

 

Still really liking these cans with about 35 hours on them now. No changes in sound (didn't expect any) and that's a good thing as out of the box they sounded very good. Slight flaws are still there and so are all the strengths. They sound great with all (well recorded) material I throw at them in various genres. Good all rounders.

 

I'm happy to report that they have "burned in" in terms of comfort: the pads must have adjusted to my ears somewhat as I can now wear them for hours with no real comfort issues, no clamping as I felt somewhat before. That's good as that was the only thing I didn't like about these out of the box.

 


Edited by Pratt - 7/12/11 at 2:26pm
post #720 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pratt View Post



 

As for the "you get what you pay for" platitude, I've never bought that and never will, especially in the audio world. After a certain low price point any increments in SQ are negligible if not entirely illusionary and due to psychological factors (expectation/placebo...It has to sound better, I paid so much for it and I'm not a sucker!). And yes I've heard and compared all sorts of very expensive audio gear (besides headphones) to much less expensive gear, even blind tested in our group, and it all sounded virtually the same after a certain low/entry price point (which depends on the what type of gear it is). 
 


 

 


 

Interesting comment, and I have to agree, although more carefully than you stated it :)

 

I'm taking it you've had your fair share of experience with external setups yourself?  I agree with the statement that sometimes audio quality and price of product above a certain price floor have a lowly (positive) correlated relationship, but I am going to disagree strongly with the fact that it all sounds virtually the same.  Maybe you don't actually feel this way and you just weren't being careful with your words (NOT meant to bash you here, just curious).  With external loudspeakers, just like headphones, you're going to find different flavors.  Switching between specific Martin Logan, Klipsch, Canton, DefTech, Mirage, etc (this list could go on forever) I still find changes in presentation, and pretty significant ones at times.  If you have the opportunity to get yourself in a sound room with a lot of high end loudspeakers and can quickly switch between them with a central unit (you can find these at some "hi'fi" stores sometimes), I feel like you'll swallow your words a bit, or at least modify them.  I agree that you can't make the blanket statement "I paid more so it much be better", but I think it is okay to say that paying different amounts of money can lead to different types of sonic presentation, and if that preferred presentation is more or less money AND you're willing to shell out whatever it costs to get that right sound, I can't be one to say someone spent too much money on it even if I may not agree that it is the "best" sonic presentation available.

 

Again, no disrespect.

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