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 60

post #886 of 3844
Quote:

 

 I just don't like exaggerated treble making music listening incredibly fatiguing. Those that prefer exaggerated treble generally are prioritizing details over music.


Don't those who want detail want it so they can capture all the music? "Over-detailed" is not conceivable to me, unless sounds are literally being ADDED (not altered or colored) to the recording.  I think it is difficult to say one can prioritize details over music, as obtaining as many details as possible gets you the closest to the "real music" IMO.

 

Fellow detail lover, and to get back on topic, the 940 does it very well for the price-- considering you don't need a monster amp to reach its potential.

 

post #887 of 3844

Quote:

Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post




Don't those who want detail want it so they can capture all the music? "Over-detailed" is not conceivable to me, unless sounds are literally being ADDED (not altered or colored) to the recording.  I think it is difficult to say one can prioritize details over music, as obtaining as many details as possible gets you the closest to the "real music" IMO.

 

Fellow detail lover, and to get back on topic, the 940 does it very well for the price-- considering you don't need a monster amp to reach its potential.

 


In regards to treble, low level detail is what it is, low level detail. If you're exaggerating treble, you're not getting closer to the "real music." Is it good for monitoring? Most likely. Now, all I'm talking about is treble being exaggerated. There are headphones that have fantastic layer separating capability with or without exaggerated treble.

 

I'm done with the topic of neutrality also as it's been discussed tirelessly and we're being extremely nit picky. I hate nit picking and it's contagious on Head-fi. You'll catch the nits yourself.


Edited by wind016 - 8/3/11 at 3:13pm
post #888 of 3844

Quote:Originally Posted by wind016 



"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 I just don't like exaggerated treble making music listening incredibly fatiguing. Those that prefer exaggerated treble generally are prioritizing details over music."


@ the both of you. Jazz as a genre is so varied, so diverse and has so many sub-genres to make any definitive statements tough to pin down. Hell, if you were to only listen to Miles Davis you'd be hard pressed to nail it. Let alone to encompass all of jazz and make any real prototypical declarations.

The real question is, is the 940 neutral, balanced and comprehensive enough to make all of what jazz has to offer sound great? I think so. Especially with the putty mod that gives the bass a bit more impact and takes the edge of the treble a hair. Particularly for the price and for being a closed back can.

post #889 of 3844

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by baka1969 View Post

Quote:Originally Posted by wind016 


@ the both of you. Jazz as a genre is so varied, so diverse and has so many sub-genres to make any definitive statements tough to pin down. Hell, if you were to only listen to Miles Davis you'd be hard pressed to nail it. Let alone to encompass all of jazz and make any real prototypical declarations.

The real question is, is the 940 neutral, balanced and comprehensive enough to make all of what jazz has to offer sound great? I think so. Especially with the putty mod that gives the bass a bit more impact and takes the edge of the treble a hair. Particularly for the price and for being a closed back can.


We use the word Jazz loosely just because it's such a large genre and more often than not, jazz bass is involved. He said sometimes the bass is inaudible in live or recordings, but that's just not right seeing as how it is absolutely essential for improvisation. Bass is not supposed to be overwhelming, but it should be clear as day no matter how you're listening. I would imagine, it would be extremely difficult for a soloist to follow if his own instrument blocked out the bass. However, I've only been involved in amplified improv sessions so if the bass is inaudible in a live scene, the bassist's amplifier is just too quiet. Anyways, Electropop's idea of neutral seems to be bass-light.


Edited by wind016 - 8/3/11 at 8:09pm
post #890 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

Don't those who want detail want it so they can capture all the music? "Over-detailed" is not conceivable to me, unless sounds are literally being ADDED (not altered or colored) to the recording.  I think it is difficult to say one can prioritize details over music, as obtaining as many details as possible gets you the closest to the "real music" IMO.
 

 

Yes, I'm only a "detail head" in that I want to hear the nuances and subtleties (whether they be background or layered) that are inherent in the music, not that I want them over emphasized to the point of distraction, to hear the trees more than the forest. But when I hear cans or speakers that aren't as detailed as others, I feel I'm missing something, because, well, I am.
 

 


Edited by Pratt - 8/3/11 at 8:22pm
post #891 of 3844

Quote:Originally Posted by wind016 


"We use the word Jazz loosely just because it's such a large genre and more often than not, jazz bass is involved. He said sometimes the bass is inaudible in live or recordings, but that's just not right seeing as how it is absolutely essential for improvisation. Bass is not supposed to be overwhelming, but it should be clear as day no matter how you're listening. I would imagine, it would be extremely difficult for a soloist to follow if his own instrument blocked out the bass. However, I've only been involved in amplified improv sessions so if the bass is inaudible in a live scene, the bassist's amplifier is just too quiet. Anyways, Electropop's idea of neutral seems to be bass-light."


I do agree that the bass should be audible. I also agree that, in stock form, the 940 can come across as a bit bass shy. That's why the mods do just enough to bring out the bass and tame the highs.

post #892 of 3844

Keep getting tempted to get a pair of these. Are they much more comfortable than the SRH-840? Or just barely?

The SRH-840 was my #1 favorite for awhile until I upgraded to the DJ100. Before that I switched from the 840 to the M50 and gave up some mids for comfort.

 

So I take female vocals are far better on the 940 compared to the 840? See, that's what I like in a headphone. It has to be perfect for that. Everything else comes next.

 

I hope someone can eventually do a review of them compared to the KRK headphones, but the chance of that happening is probably ZERO.

 

I'm just not convinced it will be better than the KRKs, but I sure hope so! I guess I could be the one to get this done.

 

Is it's sound signature as warm as the 840? I never thought the 840 was until I compared it to my DJ100 and the 8400! I hope not.

 

Is the 940 clearer sounding than the 840? I imagine it has much more detail? I'm hoping the 940 is some sort of detail monster.

 

It still sounds severely overpriced. I still don't even know if can compete with my recabled HD-598 (way better than stock!). Probably.

post #893 of 3844

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdockweiler View Post

Keep getting tempted to get a pair of these. Are they much more comfortable than the SRH-840? Or just barely?

The SRH-840 was my #1 favorite for awhile until I upgraded to the DJ100. Before that I switched from the 840 to the M50 and gave up some mids for comfort.

 

So I take female vocals are far better on the 940 compared to the 840? See, that's what I like in a headphone. It has to be perfect for that. Everything else comes next.

 

I hope someone can eventually do a review of them compared to the KRK headphones, but the chance of that happening is probably ZERO.

 

I'm just not convinced it will be better than the KRKs, but I sure hope so! I guess I could be the one to get this done.

 

Is it's sound signature as warm as the 840? I never thought the 840 was until I compared it to my DJ100 and the 8400! I hope not.

 

Is the 940 clearer sounding than the 840? I imagine it has much more detail? I'm hoping the 940 is some sort of detail monster.

 

It still sounds severely overpriced. I still don't even know if can compete with my recabled HD-598 (way better than stock!). Probably.


These are actually pretty comfy except for the headband. If you're listening for a while you have to move it around occasionally, but that's it, these don't press down on your ears as much or feel as top heavy as the 840s, and the velour stays very cool.

Vocal presentation is very different, on the 840 they were warm and rich and blended into the rest of the midrange a bit; on the 940 they're very vivid and clear. I like vocals better on the 940, but the main thing for me is it's much better with strings and acoustics, which the 840 didn't do that well at.

But overall they're just very different, the only thing that sounds similar at all is the midrange, only cleaner and with more forward vocals. The 840 to me was like floating in a thick sea of midbass and midrange; the 940s have an extremely clear and articulate sound that can be haunting with good recordings and really annoying with bad ones. Detail is much better, although some of that is probably because of the brighter presentation. The treble is way better and more extended, same with the bass but there's much less of it this time around. Bass level is nearly equal to my four hole modded SR80i, so it's there just not the center of attention.

Hope that helped.


Edited by 200poundsofamp - 8/3/11 at 11:33pm
post #894 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by wind016 View Post

 


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.



I thought you said "Jazz is thick with bass", so that's where I got that from. Sorry if I was mislead. So my point was that it's usually not, but that it's well balanced (almost always on recordings) or almost inaudible (live or truthful live-recording mixes). Not just the cymbals, but other instruments as well tend to overwhelm it, especially if the music is a bit more energetic. If the jazz drummer is skillful, it will let others have breathing room of course. I get to listen to bands play live a lot, mostly jazz and a bit funkier stuff. When it's unamplified, I think what I said is in most cases correct, given those few factors. Room acoustics is an important factor as well, which goes without saying. 

Also, I didn't get any assumptions about you or anyone prioritizing sound over music. I just said that I didn't. And I'm quite poor in evaluating minute differences in coloration. In most cases it doesn't matter, if just everything is audible to me in a musical sense (yes, the notes regular_smile%20.gif). Given that premise, I in no way said that the K271/272 are neutral, it simply is "musical" to me. There's nothing that derails me from enjoying a well written piece; no bass humps, harsh highs etc. 

I concur that they're bass-light, but like you said them being clear thanks to that, I've noticed that in most cases a steady drop, instead of a bump and a leveled bottom low, is much more accurate when it comes to distinguishing bass-notes to their pitch. Very few notes exceed below 50Hz or so, so it's important that where 95% of the music happens (the midrange), there is no veiling, which the SRH840s are good at doing. Even the LCD2's disappointed me in this area a bit, even though they measure quite sexily... It's fun to hear all that extra rumble on electronic recordings, but that's a bit "meh" for me, heh.

 

This is why I'm so interested in the SRH940s, and a bit in the KRK 6400s, now that I've seen the measurements. Also itching to hear anything about the K550. Something to throne my K272's is always welcome :)

post #895 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by wind016 View Post

 


We use the word Jazz loosely just because it's such a large genre and more often than not, jazz bass is involved. He said sometimes the bass is inaudible in live or recordings, but that's just not right seeing as how it is absolutely essential for improvisation. Bass is not supposed to be overwhelming, but it should be clear as day no matter how you're listening. I would imagine, it would be extremely difficult for a soloist to follow if his own instrument blocked out the bass. However, I've only been involved in amplified improv sessions so if the bass is inaudible in a live scene, the bassist's amplifier is just too quiet. Anyways, Electropop's idea of neutral seems to be bass-light.


Sorry for derailing more, but that's the reason I emphasized "unamplified". Other thing, following my previous post, is my point about not really caring about if it's neutral or not given that my musical preferences are fulfilled. Neutrality is always secondary to distinguishing musical information, because that's what I listen to. I don't seek neutrality, as long as the differences are minute, and as I said I'm poor at making such evaluations, although I had to pitch in regarding the jazz-bass thing :)

 

post #896 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by 200poundsofamp View Post

Quote:


These are actually pretty comfy except for the headband. If you're listening for a while you have to move it around occasionally, but that's it, these don't press down on your ears as much or feel as top heavy as the 840s, and the velour stays very cool.

Vocal presentation is very different, on the 840 they were warm and rich and blended into the rest of the midrange a bit; on the 940 they're very vivid and clear. I like vocals better on the 940, but the main thing for me is it's much better with strings and acoustics, which the 840 didn't do that well at.

But overall they're just very different, the only thing that sounds similar at all is the midrange, only cleaner and with more forward vocals. The 840 to me was like floating in a thick sea of midbass and midrange; the 940s have an extremely clear and articulate sound that can be haunting with good recordings and really annoying with bad ones. Detail is much better, although some of that is probably because of the brighter presentation. The treble is way better and more extended, same with the bass but there's much less of it this time around. Bass level is nearly equal to my four hole modded SR80i, so it's there just not the center of attention.

Hope that helped.

 

Going triples here, hehe.

 

That surely sounds good, although I would use vocals as the last tool for evaluating headphones. For some reason here on head-fi, vocals for some are a synonym for mid-range (not saying that for you, just making an observation). Some TV-enthusiasts talk about skin tone and not absolute color reproduction, which by my logic would consist that sub-category. But I guess it's something of an emotional thing. To me, mid-range is everything. I listen to a lot of Miles Davis and Frank Zappa kind of stuff, and it's all mid-range basically. And the better everything is distinguishable, the better the mid-range. :)

 

So I take it no one has done a comparison between these and the K271/272s... *sob*
 

 


Edited by electropop - 8/3/11 at 11:55pm
post #897 of 3844

Anyone have any idea on reducing the sibilances on the 990s???/

post #898 of 3844

ok so i took the plunge and ordered the 940s. got it for $235 shipped from electronics-expo with a coupon (SUMMER30). had to phone in the order though since the system wasnt taking the coupon online.

 

i know these are good cans. but i may not be impressed since i dont have a headphone amp and i just plan to use them on my ipod and macbook.

 

any good "warm" portable amps i could look at? looking at $100 or under new. just in case.

post #899 of 3844
Quote:
Originally Posted by antikryst View Post

ok so i took the plunge and ordered the 940s. got it for $235 shipped from electronics-expo with a coupon (SUMMER30). had to phone in the order though since the system wasnt taking the coupon online.

 

i know these are good cans. but i may not be impressed since i dont have a headphone amp and i just plan to use them on my ipod and macbook.

 

any good "warm" portable amps i could look at? looking at $100 or under new. just in case.


Warm, portable, under $100

 

Either a Fiio E11 or JDS Cmoy.

 

post #900 of 3844



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pratt View Post



 

Yes, I'm only a "detail head" in that I want to hear the nuances and subtleties (whether they be background or layered) that are inherent in the music, not that I want them over emphasized to the point of distraction, to hear the trees more than the forest. But when I hear cans or speakers that aren't as detailed as others, I feel I'm missing something, because, well, I am.
 

 


This is a good way to spell out my feelings on details vs. overall presentation. Nice, Pratt.
 

 


Edited by SLCanhead - 8/5/11 at 4:33pm
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