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 59

post #871 of 3844

Thanks, guys!

 

Something else I should have mentioned, amping the 940s adds more weight to the bass, so that might be enough if you find the bass a touch too light. The treble and mids still maintain their weights relative to each other, though.

 

Regarding "neutral sound," I don't believe that it exists. In headphones, bass always rolls off somewhere, there's always some curving of frequencies that progresses from bass to treble, and the treble frequencies always jump around a bit. I have no idea what the technical reasons are, but you can see it in every frequency response graph for headphones. So the best you can get is something that sounds neutral to you.

 

And that's after someone's recorded the music with non-neutral equipment, EQ'd and processed it, and your transport/DAC/amp has done things to the signal before getting to your headphone, then to your non-neutral ear and taste. :)

post #872 of 3844
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan S View Post

 

Regarding "neutral sound," I don't believe that it exists. In headphones, bass always rolls off somewhere, there's always some curving of frequencies that progresses from bass to treble, and the treble frequencies always jump around a bit. I have no idea what the technical reasons are, but you can see it in every frequency response graph for headphones. So the best you can get is something that sounds neutral to you.


The technical reasons are that 'neutral' in headphones is not flatline like in speakers because of the influence of the pinna (the fleshy outer part of your ear). The closest frequency response wise in headphones to neutral is the beyerdynamic Telsa T1. There must be compensation done to factor in the influence of the pinna e.g. the ~+4-5 dB in the bass regions, the spike at around 8-10kHz... 

 

Also, 'neutral' sound for headphones exists. It's an IEC standard.

 

IEC TR 60959:1990 <--- the standard.

 

It will / should be altered though, resulting in better headphone design :)

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101012101251.htm

 

EDIT: My grammar was shocking lols.


Edited by chinesekiwi - 8/2/11 at 4:56am
post #873 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesekiwi View Post




The technical reasons are that 'neutral' in headphones is not flatline like in speakers because of the influence of the pinna (the fleshy outer ear of your ear). The closest frequency response wise in headphones in frequency response is the beyerdynamic Telsa T1. There must be compensation done to factor in that factor e.g. the ~+4-5 dB in the bass regions, the spike at around 8-10kHz... 

 

It exists. It's an ISO standard.


Are you saying the 8-10K frequency bump in the T1 would make it neutral? I beg to differ. It was one of the least neutral sounding headphones I've heard, but maybe I'm just a strange one.

 

post #874 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by wind016 View Post

Fixed.

 


Lol, nah...biggrin.gif

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan S View Post

Thanks, guys!

 

Something else I should have mentioned, amping the 940s adds more weight to the bass, so that might be enough if you find the bass a touch too light. The treble and mids still maintain their weights relative to each other, though.

 

Regarding "neutral sound," I don't believe that it exists. In headphones, bass always rolls off somewhere, there's always some curving of frequencies that progresses from bass to treble, and the treble frequencies always jump around a bit. I have no idea what the technical reasons are, but you can see it in every frequency response graph for headphones. So the best you can get is something that sounds neutral to you.

 

And that's after someone's recorded the music with non-neutral equipment, EQ'd and processed it, and your transport/DAC/amp has done things to the signal before getting to your headphone, then to your non-neutral ear and taste. :)


I find the bass just fine myself, although I think the 702's are more extended, but not as tight or taut.

 

Right about neutral sound: it doesn't exist given the highly fallible human mental/perceptual apparatus and the philosophic problem of "private minds", just as neutral/true/perfect eyesight, smelling, taste, etc. do not. All such individual mind oriented measures of these categories are ultimately, irreducibly, subjective in principle. They can never be empirically proven to be otherwise even if some "true neutral" standard existed for such things, which it can't even in principle given the inherent limitations stated above. The best we can hope for is approximation or what we ourselves find more or less neutral/correct. 


Edited by Pratt - 8/1/11 at 11:50pm
post #875 of 3844

Quote:

Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post

pfff, putting some putty inside expensive headphones to decrease the highs ... You definitely have too much money to burn. I'd rather learn to enjoy the default sound, or use an eq.


But you get a free T1 out of it! wink.gif

 

 

Might be a stupid question, but can't you use sinegen to see if 5-10k is fairly flat? To me it sounds like the 940s take a small dip at 7k and an equally small peak at 9k, but it isn't the icycle stabbing you in the brain that it looks like on paper.


Edited by 200poundsofamp - 8/2/11 at 1:25am
post #876 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by wind016 View Post

Are you saying the 8-10K frequency bump in the T1 would make it neutral? I beg to differ. It was one of the least neutral sounding headphones I've heard, but maybe I'm just a strange one.

 


Yes, the frequency response graph of the T1 is very close to what is scientifically 'neutral' for headphones. Many headphones have this bump. Whether you subjectively like it is another thing all together.

post #877 of 3844

Exactly! That's why you're better off trying before buying. Your ears and taste are unique. :)

 

I wish that was easier to do nowadays. You can get a great deal on the Internet if you're willing to buy before trying. While you can get a money-back trial period sometimes, even that doesn't allow you to compare with other possibilities.

 

I was happy to try the 940s out at Headphone Bar in Vancouver before buying. I probably could have found them slightly cheaper on the web, but I felt that the slight markup was a good deal for being able to try them and compare them to other models, as well as talk to the nice guy trying to make a living catering to this hobby.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pratt View Post

Right about neutral sound: it doesn't exist given the highly fallible human mental/perceptual apparatus and the philosophic problem of "private minds", just as neutral/true/perfect eyesight, smelling, taste, etc. do not. All such individual mind oriented measures of these categories are ultimately, irreducibly, subjective in principle. They can never be empirically proven to be otherwise even if some "true neutral" standard existed for such things, which it can't even in principle given the inherent limitations stated above. The best we can hope for is approximation or what we ourselves find more or less neutral/correct. 


 

post #878 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesekiwi View Post




Yes, the frequency response graph of the T1 is very close to what is scientifically 'neutral' for headphones. Many headphones have this bump. Whether you subjectively like it is another thing all together.


Well, all I heard was mostly treble and pain to my ears. Mids and bass were recessed. Raising the volume to the point where mids and bass was audible was horrendously painful. So I guess I just don't like such an accurate sounding scientific neutral. rolleyes.gif

 


Edited by wind016 - 8/2/11 at 12:04pm
post #879 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by wind016 View Post

 


Well, all I heard was mostly treble and pain to my ears. Mids and bass were recessed. Raising the volume to the point where mids and bass was audible was horrendously painful. So I guess I just don't like such an accurate sounding scientific neutral. rolleyes.gif

 



His point stands however. Your terminology was misplaced when you confused "neutral" with what is subjectively perceived as neutral, which is always debatable. However I'm still thinking that reference curve doesn't apply to all ears, objectively, and different ear shapes and other factors, besides psychological, shape one's experience.

 

I don't like the T1 as well, although for other reasons. But clearly your statement must be a case of not so mild exaggeration, or you're just used to very bass-heavy presentation. :)

post #880 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post



I don't like the T1 as well, although for other reasons. But clearly your statement must be a case of not so mild exaggeration, or you're just used to very bass-heavy presentation. :)


I'm not exaggerating. I wanted to like the T1s because of all revere over it and I didn't want to go through the hassle of selling headphones over and over.  The sound of the T1 is one of the most confusing moments I had in Head-fi and no amount of EQ could make it sound tolerable to me without a dramatic loss of detail.

 

Well, I feel the FR of the Stax O2 mk1 is almost perfect sounding, so if that is supposedly bass heavy, then I guess =P  But no, it's not really bass heavy to me.

 

I guess we hear extremely different, though I did for quite a long time think Head-fiers had major hearing loss.

post #881 of 3844

I actually thought you might be having hearing loss after this statement: 

"Mids and bass were recessed. Raising the volume to the point where mids and bass was audible was horrendously painful"

 

That's basically saying that they're inaudible, which was/is not the case. I had trouble distinguishing notes, but otherwise everything was audible no matter the level of volume at which I listened to them. 

 

How bout the HD800? I think they are quite natural. If something is treble happy on a recording I'll gladly take it. You go to a live jazz performance and the crash cymbals are pretty much on top most often and the bass is in most cases almost inaudible, balance wise. So yes, I think the O2's are not very neutral or natural in that sense. 

 

You can say "horrendously painful" at a small venue, unamplified live performance. If a headphone conveys that, I wouldn't blame it :) Though of course it's unrealistic of me to say this, due to all, even minimal, mastering processes live-recordings go through.


Edited by electropop - 8/2/11 at 1:06pm
post #882 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post

I actually thought you might be having hearing loss after this statement: 

"Mids and bass were recessed. Raising the volume to the point where mids and bass was audible was horrendously painful"

 

That's basically saying that they're inaudible, which was/is not the case. I had trouble distinguishing notes, but otherwise everything was audible no matter the level of volume at which I listened to them. 

 

How bout the HD800? I think they are quite natural. If something is treble happy on a recording I'll gladly take it. You go to a live jazz performance and the crash cymbals are pretty much on top most often and the bass is in most cases almost inaudible, balance wise. So yes, I think the O2's are not very neutral or natural in that sense. 

 

You can say "horrendously painful" at a small venue, unamplified live performance. If a headphone conveys that, I wouldn't blame it :) Though of course it's unrealistic of me to say this, due to all, even minimal, mastering processes live-recordings go through.


Well, I don't really care if you find the T1 neutral, but your argument is not very convincing. What lives are you talking about that has no bass? Death metal and violin concertos? Jazz is thick with bass so I don't know what you're talking about there. You also realize we're talking about recordings, not lives?

 

I never owned the HD800. If the O2 isn't natural sounding to you, then that really sucks


Edited by wind016 - 8/2/11 at 5:29pm
post #883 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by wind016 View Post

 


Well, I don't really care if you find the T1 neutral, but your argument is not very convincing. What lives are you talking about that has no bass? Death metal and violin concertos? Jazz is thick with bass so I don't know what you're talking about there. You also realize we're talking about recordings, not lives?

 

I never owned the HD800. If the O2 isn't natural sounding to you, then that really sucks


No no, I don't assume you care, just making conversation :) I have to make a few clarifications.

 

Whether or not I or anyone else finds the T1 neutral is not relevant. I simply said that the rest of the audio spectrum apart from the treble is in no way inaudible as you said. It is very audible, which is why I thought you were the one who might be having hearing loss, nothing else, heh.

 

About the balance issue, I thought I drew a clear context... Let me rephrase and clarify. If you listen to a a minimal, 3-5 person jazz/funk band live UNAMPLIFIED, you foremost hear the cymbals and every other instrument as well tends to block out the bass (I'm talking about acoustic double bass here). So my point was, that the O2 in this sense isn't "neutral" at all, if you want to hear music as you hear it live. I also said this comment was somewhat moot due to the fact that every live-recording goes through a mixing board/computer. So I was actually talking about live music and recordings both, which you didn't seem to realize :) Most live jazz recordings are never rich with bass, which might have something to do with what I stated earlier. I'm open to discussion though...

 

I disagree that jazz is thick with bass in actually both cases, when hearing it on a recording or live, as long as it's acoustic bass we're talking about. Talking about electric bass is somewhat pointless I'm sure we both agree. Most recorded jazz I listen to is mixed in a very sophisticated manner; nothing overwhelms anything else and you can hear notes, which is how I like it. I get quite uneasy when discussing balance/neutrality/naturalness issues since there are so many factors which make it irrelevant. I only care that I can hear the content of the song, the notes according to their pitches, nothing added, nothing taken away. Life is much simpler when you prioritize music over sound :)

 

According to the general consensus here, I might actually like the 940s quite much. Anyone else pitted them against the K271/272? The SRH840 doesn't hold a candle to my 272's when it comes to distinguishing as much musical information as possible, whether high, mid or down low. 


Edited by electropop - 8/3/11 at 11:10pm
post #884 of 3844

I won't quote it because it's so long but the above missive by electropop is one of the most astute articles I've ever read on these forums. Well said.

post #885 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by electropop View Post




No no, I don't assume you care, just making conversation :) I have to make a few clarifications.

 

Whether or not I or anyone else finds the T1 neutral is not relevant. I simply said that the rest of the audio spectrum apart from the treble is in no way inaudible as you said. It is very audible, which is why I thought you were the one who might be having hearing loss, nothing else, heh.

 

About the balance issue, I thought I drew a clear context... Let me rephrase and clarify. If you listen to a a minimal, 3-5 person jazz/funk band live UNAMPLIFIED, you foremost hear the cymbals and every other instrument as well tends to block out the bass (I'm talking about acoustic double bass here). So my point was, that the O2 in this sense isn't "neutral" at all, if you want to hear music as you hear it live. I also said this comment was somewhat moot due to the fact that every live-recording goes through a mixing board/computer. So I was actually talking about live music and recordings both, which you didn't seem to realize :) Most live jazz recordings are never rich with bass, which might have something to do with what I stated earlier. I'm open to discussion though...

 

I disagree that jazz is thick with bass in actually both cases, when hearing it on a recording or live, as long as it's acoustic bass we're talking about. Talking about electric bass is somewhat pointless I'm sure we both agree. Most jazz I listen to is mixed in a very sophisticated manner; nothing overwhelms anything else and you can hear notes, which is how I like it. I get quite uneasy when discussing balance/neutrality/naturalness issues since there are so many factors which make it irrelevant. I only care that I can hear the content of the song, the notes according to their pitches, nothing added, nothing taken away. Life is much simpler when you prioritize music over sound :)

 

According to the general consensus here, I might actually like the 940s quite much. Anyone else pitted them against the K271/272? The SRH840 doesn't hold a candle to my 272's when it comes to distinguishing as much musical information as possible, whether high, mid or down low. 


We're just going in circles. You say the bass in jazz is in most cases almost inaudible, then you say it's not overwhelmed and very well balanced. Then you say cymbals are always overwhelming the bass. Well, I've never heard a jazz piece where the drummer just went psycho on the cymbals, but I assume you're talking about the few moments when the cymbals are hit so you're just supporting my comment that bass is clearly audible in jazz. Nowhere did I say anything to the effect that jazz has overwhelming bass. It's jazz, not Lady Gaga. I had the K271 and as clear as it was, it was lacking a neutrality to bass reproduction which also helped it sound clear I suppose. But if you find that neutral, then you do.

 

I don't know where you get the assumption where I prioritize sound over music confused_face_2.gif I just don't like exaggerated treble making music listening incredibly fatiguing. Those that prefer exaggerated treble generally are prioritizing details over music.


Edited by wind016 - 8/3/11 at 12:14pm
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