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 51

post #751 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcasey25raptor View Post





if they are not revealing then they suck. those are the only 2 options. but i find dome songs sound impressive while others sound atrocious. so yes they must be revealing at least from what i have experienced.

 

I think this is extremely erroneous. "Revealing" is not black and white as you have made it here, but a gradient scale of relativity.  Hard to just say "this isn't revealing therefore it sucks".
 

 

post #752 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyDebord View Post

Most pop/hip-pop recordings are now very dynamically compressed and equalized to increase their loudness, sacrificing the sound quality so that they can be played on tiny computer speakers or crappy boom boxes/car stereos/headphones to their clipping point, for whatever reason, people like to show off their BASS and recording studios give them what they want! In short, the 940's will dramatically reveal the trade-backs of dynamic compression, like distortion (rough treble, hissing, boomy bass, etc.) and clipping, remember, they were designed as studio/monitoring headphones. Adding to this, It has been said many times in this thread that the 940's are very Neutral, they wont add or mask the bass that its not there and will reveal the distorted one of the recording.  Summarizing, I believe these are not the best headphones for pop/hip-hop music.


For sure, nothing like ear destroying loudness wars cymbals, but I think it's a little more than that. I have a cheap but okay stereo setup (Bic DV64s) in my house that I've tried to EQ as neutral as possible, but even so in what I think are typical (crap) room acoustics there's noticeably more reverb and decay to the bass, which seems to add a lot of bass body compared to the 940, despite being at a very similar balance to my ear. I can't help but think that the 940 is what neutral sounds like in an anechoic chamber.

 

Not knocking it by the way, I just think it's a little on the clinical, monitoring side in that regard, neutrality aside.

 

edit: yeah sorry I'm being insanely picky here


Edited by 200poundsofamp - 7/15/11 at 8:47pm
post #753 of 3844

For musical enjoyment (is there anything else?) these are one of the best headphones I've ever heard. My favourite tunes sound as good as I've ever heard them. Good recordings sound good and bad ones sound bad without the exercise being a science project. Fun and musical, while giving me what's on the recording. What else are they supposed to be doing? Right, nothing.

post #754 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

For musical enjoyment (is there anything else?) these are one of the best headphones I've ever heard. My favourite tunes sound as good as I've ever heard them. Good recordings sound good and bad ones sound bad without the exercise being a science project. Fun and musical, while giving me what's on the recording. What else are they supposed to be doing? Right, nothing.

 

Absolutely, that they took the sweet midrange of the 840, made it better and more detailed, then extended the bass and treble seamlessly without an ugly midbass hump or with anything seeming harsh or undercooked makes it a huge winner in my book. My other headphones seem downright ugly and slow in comparison.


Edited by 200poundsofamp - 7/15/11 at 7:30pm
post #755 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

For musical enjoyment (is there anything else?) these are one of the best headphones I've ever heard. My favourite tunes sound as good as I've ever heard them. Good recordings sound good and bad ones sound bad without the exercise being a science project. Fun and musical, while giving me what's on the recording. What else are they supposed to be doing? Right, nothing.


Exactly my conclusions. Well, besides that I would qualify that my favorite music sounds as good as I've ever heard it through headphones. 

 


Edited by Pratt - 7/15/11 at 9:22pm
post #756 of 3844

ekhm ekhm...so how do they sound comparing to dt1350?...

post #757 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcasey25raptor View Post





if they are not revealing then they suck. those are the only 2 options. but i find dome songs sound impressive while others sound atrocious. so yes they must be revealing at least from what i have experienced.


Revealing and forgiving might go perfectly hand in hand. For instance, Grados generally are very unforgiving due to being characteristically peaky. The 840s have a peak as well, but are much more mellow but also in some ways much more revealing. 

 

post #758 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by zibra View Post

ekhm ekhm...so how do they sound comparing to dt1350?...


The wonderful thing about head-fi is that there are great search options and videos posted by Jude. There are plenty of reviews and impressions already written about both headphones for you to make an educated comparison between the two rather than clutter this thread with the same question over and over.
post #759 of 3844

I hope the mid-range reproduction is a vast improvement over the 840s. Might be that I didn't like it (wasn't just a matter of liking or disliking; I simply couldn't discern parts of the music as effortlessly as with the K272s, for instance) due to masking by the bass-hump, which on paper and according to everyone's statements seems corrected in the 940s.

 

****, I shall remain interested. :)

 

Oh, and I agree with R-audiohead regarding the relativity on "revealing". I kind of dislike the term "transparent" as well. You always ask: "a window to what exactly?". People listen to so many different things with different material it's impossible to make an objective term out of it. For me the K272s are very transparent since they let me hear the musically relevant information (every note representing their correct pitch, every drum hit and harmonics) with minimal amount of effort. No pinching. That's important to me :)

 

With the LCD-2's, I had trouble hearing certain woodwinds and their harmonics since they're so rolled off up there... Given I never had the chance to give a properly matched amp a go.

post #760 of 3844


If everyone based only on reviews there would be no need of forum. Im just curious if anyone heard both of these cans and can make a little comparision. There is always such big hype on new products which are the best on the world at that time. I currently own dt1350 which are generally at the same price point and are also described as great. whats wrong with that question?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Germancub View Post



The wonderful thing about head-fi is that there are great search options and videos posted by Jude. There are plenty of reviews and impressions already written about both headphones for you to make an educated comparison between the two rather than clutter this thread with the same question over and over.


 

post #761 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by 200poundsofamp View Post


For sure, nothing like ear destroying loudness wars cymbals, but I think it's a little more than that. I have a cheap but okay stereo setup (Bic DV64s) in my house that I've tried to EQ as neutral as possible, but even so in what I think are typical (crap) room acoustics there's noticeably more reverb and decay to the bass, which seems to add a lot of bass body compared to the 940, despite being at a very similar balance to my ear. I can't help but think that the 940 is what neutral sounds like in an anechoic chamber.

 

Not knocking it by the way, I just think it's a little on the clinical, monitoring side in that regard, neutrality aside.

 

edit: yeah sorry I'm being insanely picky here


Well, I have heard/owned some clinical headphones: HD800, DT48, ER4p/s, K701, and I would not put the 940's in this category. The detail of the shure's is somehow more liquid, it has a musical soul, with the mentioned headphones I would get tired of listening, so far this hasnt happened with the 940's, huge complement!

 

Comparing reproduction in room acoustics with headphones is difficult, to many differences in the equation. I have a very high-end stereo setup and if I compared any headphone, even my Staxen to it, it would be a massacre, the stereo system is so much better in every sense, I use headphones when I cannot use my stereo, which sadly is 70% of the time!

 


Edited by GuyDebord - 7/16/11 at 3:08am
post #762 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by zibra View Post


If everyone based only on reviews there would be no need of forum. Im just curious if anyone heard both of these cans and can make a little comparision. There is always such big hype on new products which are the best on the world at that time. I currently own dt1350 which are generally at the same price point and are also described as great. whats wrong with that question?


Very good point! So, lean back, take more time to follow (not only) this thread to make your opinion. In the end you have to order a 940 to check it with your ears. And if they don't fit you can turn it back to the dealer. This is what I would (will) do.


Regards 

post #763 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by zibra View Post


If everyone based only on reviews there would be no need of forum. Im just curious if anyone heard both of these cans and can make a little comparision. There is always such big hype on new products which are the best on the world at that time. I currently own dt1350 which are generally at the same price point and are also described as great. whats wrong with that question?



 


I suppose you have a point... However, asking once is fine but I saw about four posts on this thread so far asking the exact same question within a period of a day or two and it's getting redundant.
post #764 of 3844

I don't know if this question has already been answered, but does somebody know if the SRH940 has the same drivers as the SRH840?

Can someone, who has both, try to verify this?

And if they are indeed using the same driver unit, are there any difference in damping materials used inside the enclosures?

 

From the Shure website, I see that both use a 40mm driver and looking at some measurements and graphs, I get the feeling that both are actualy using the same driver, but I'm not sure...

I just wanna try to know what is it that mostly contributes for the different FRs and driver performance/speed between both Hps, if they are using the same drivers.

Is it enclosure dmensions or shape? Is it the damping materials used?

Please try to disregard the earpads!

 

Thanks!

post #765 of 3844
They sounds pretty different to me. But even if they are, the build quality wise, comfort and the great bundle already made it worthwhile. SRH840 is quite a bit more bass and have noticeable less detail than the SRH840.

Also, no idea what you are reading, the graph clearly shows that the 840 have a clear mid bass hump and 940 have a clearly more midrange and extends better in the low bass, and square wave response are different too,.
Edited by Ra97oR - 7/16/11 at 7:32am
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