Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH-940 Reviews and Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure SRH-940 Reviews and Appreciation Thread - Page 6

post #76 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post

GAAHH I don't know what I want, SRH940's or AKG K702/Q701's.

 

Decisions, decisions.... then comes along DT880/600 and HD600.... -.-



The shures don't have the annoying upper mids of the k701, so I'll takes the 940s anyday. Tonal balance so far as bass to treble balance on the shures and akgs are similar though if you don't count their own anomalies in between.

post #77 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post



This review is copy/pasted in at least six major website, it's hard to miss it. The fact that the hd800 is tested straight out of an ipod is questionable.
 

 

That review discusses the reason for ipod tests and also notes the results when amped.
post #78 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post





Oh I think you are talking about Dalethorn. Hes the guy that reviewed the Shures against the hd800. I am a different guy. I commented on the post comparing against my dt48e and hd600.

The Malveaux review is a good contrast to the Dale review. One discusses more the absolutes of the sound playing various music and the other does mostly comparisons. I learned from both.
post #79 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post

Oh I think you are talking about Dalethorn. Hes the guy that reviewed the Shures against the hd800. I am a different guy. I commented on the post comparing against my dt48e and hd600.


Yes, 200poundsofamp linked to the review, and then he said to look at the comments instead. Sorry if this was confusing.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldshoe99 View Post


That review discusses the reason for ipod tests and also notes the results when amped.

 

Yeah, but  some people  that tried both the srh940 & hd800 are just not convinced by the review. The discussion was like: "the srh940 similar to the hd800 ? no way !". Anyway, I  tested my srh940 out of a cowon s9, and it wasn't as good as from a true sound card, i.e in my case a xonar stx. So I  imagine that testing BOTH the srh940 & hd800 out of an ipod could lead to an unfair review.
 

 

post #80 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by extrabigmehdi View Post




Yes, 200poundsofamp linked to the review, and then he said to look at the comments instead. Sorry if this was confusing.

 

 

Yeah, but  some people  that tried both the srh940 & hd800 are just not convinced by the review. The discussion was like: "the srh940 similar to the hd800 ? no way !". Anyway, I  tested my srh940 out of a cowon s9, and it wasn't as good as from a true sound card, i.e in my case a xonar stx. So I  imagine that testing BOTH the srh940 & hd800 out of an ipod could lead to an unfair review.
 

 

Actually, the point of fairness was a central point in the review. Most of the posts at head-fi ignored that part of the review, but I see the points clearly.
post #81 of 187
The review at Amazon has the fairness text after the Aug 16 edit. Someone said that all those reviews were the same, but apparently not.
post #82 of 187

I'm reading everywhere that these (Shure 940) are probably some of the best sound quality headphones under $1000, with that one review comparing them to HD 800's (is this crazy or is the 940 really this good?). What I'd like to know is, if this is true, why are the 940's so apparently unpopular? For example this thread is just 6 pages compared to other headphone appreciation page's 100, 200, or 300+ pages.

 

Anyhow I ordered SRH-940s, should arrive today :D. I'm looking forward to listening to them.


Edited by ac500 - 9/7/11 at 4:35am
post #83 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

I'm reading everywhere that these (Shure 940) are probably some of the best sound quality headphones under $1000, with that one review comparing them to HD 800's (is this crazy or is the 940 really this good?). What I'd like to know is, if this is true, why are the 940's so apparently unpopular? For example this thread is just 6 pages compared to other headphone appreciation page's 100, 200, or 300+ pages.

 

Anyhow I ordered SRH-940s, should arrive today :D. I'm looking forward to listening to them.


Heya,

 

The SRH940 is not as good over all as the HD800, nor several other flag ships that cost three times as much. However, the SRH940 does match aspects of several of the high-end flags. After comparing them myself (and re-purchasing the SRH940 twice now), the highs and mids are simply gorgeous. I've got a pair of $900 headphones on right now that still don't do acoustic the way the SRH940 does. The SRH940 is not perfect, not at all. But for various genres, it's an amazingly good flagship from Shure. The highs & mids are why you get this headphone. Also, sound stage. This closed headphone actually has an impressive sound stage. It's not cramped, but it's also not overly artificially expanded (such as the way HD800 and K701 does). The SRH940 is not a flagship $1k headphone giant killer. But, if someone is looking for a headphone for genres like female vocals, acoustic, indie, folk, jazz and classical (both symphonic and simply piano/cello ensembles) that sounds like high-end without a high-end price, that's where the SRH940 comes in. This is of course merely my opinion. And I say that as someone with high-end and SRH940's.

 

Very best,

 

post #84 of 187

>  However, the SRH940 does match aspects of several of the high-end flags. After comparing them myself (and re-purchasing the SRH940 twice now), the highs and mids are simply gorgeous. I've got a pair of $900 headphones on right now that still don't do acoustic the way the SRH940 does. 

 

That's what surprises me to hear, I guess. Pretty impressive that $300 headphones would do so well in any area against expensive ones. From what it sounds like, I'm assuming: The compromise is that it's not as "perfect" in frequency response flatness, or has weak points (like bass?), whereas higher end headphones would be excellent across any frequency.

post #85 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalVeauX View Post

Heya,

 

The SRH940 is not as good over all as the HD800, nor several other flag ships that cost three times as much. However, the SRH940 does match aspects of several of the high-end flags. After comparing them myself (and re-purchasing the SRH940 twice now), the highs and mids are simply gorgeous. I've got a pair of $900 headphones on right now that still don't do acoustic the way the SRH940 does. The SRH940 is not perfect, not at all. But for various genres, it's an amazingly good flagship from Shure. The highs & mids are why you get this headphone. Also, sound stage. This closed headphone actually has an impressive sound stage. It's not cramped, but it's also not overly artificially expanded (such as the way HD800 and K701 does). The SRH940 is not a flagship $1k headphone giant killer. But, if someone is looking for a headphone for genres like female vocals, acoustic, indie, folk, jazz and classical (both symphonic and simply piano/cello ensembles) that sounds like high-end without a high-end price, that's where the SRH940 comes in. This is of course merely my opinion. And I say that as someone with high-end and SRH940's.

 

Very best,

 


This ^^

 

Couldn't have said it better Mal - I haven't heard a better headphone for female vocals.  For that alone it is worth trying.  And modern jazz - words can't describe it.  My problem is that I'm still finding my ideal signature / house sound.  The 940 is great for the genres Mal listed above - agree completely.  But they just don't gel for me with some Prog Rock and Classic Rock (which makes up a fair bit of my collection).  So I'll end up selling these with regret (actually have a buyer already lined up locally) - but I may end up buying these again at some stage wink.gif

 

The funny thing is that one of my cheapest cans is a definite keeper (MS1i).  Also love the DT880's (better all-rounder than the SRH940 for me).  Hoping the HD600s I have coming might be the mix between the DT880 & SRH940 I'm looking for.  But yeah - SRH940 for the price they're going for at the moment - incredible bargain, and worth trying.

post #86 of 187

Brooko,

 

have the HD600s myself (like 2 weeks with them now) and quite frankly I still prefer the Shure 940s for

every genre. Now, could it be that my ears are more used to the Shure sound?

Definitely!

I haven't used the HD600s as much because I plan to use them with my home rig.

Unlucky for me, I spend most of the time outside my house.

Have them connected to the Icon HDP DAC/AMP, soundwise they are good.

You can definitely hear music details and a WHOLE LOT low-end (compared to the Shures) but again,

I might need to change a bit and start bringing the Senns at work to see if they dethrone the 940s.

post #87 of 187

There definitely were times when I prefered the shures over the hd600. Long term listening is where my hd600 won in the end for me.

post #88 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

I'm reading everywhere that these (Shure 940) are probably some of the best sound quality headphones under $1000, with that one review comparing them to HD 800's (is this crazy or is the 940 really this good?). What I'd like to know is, if this is true, why are the 940's so apparently unpopular? For example this thread is just 6 pages compared to other headphone appreciation page's 100, 200, or 300+ pages.

 

Anyhow I ordered SRH-940s, should arrive today :D. I'm looking forward to listening to them.

They are not unpopular. If you count the views at some of those review sites they are killing everything else. But the naysayers here apparently are freaking out over the notion that a $300 headphone equals the Sennheiser 800 overall. I would call that justice. Enjoy the $1000 sound for $300.
post #89 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by ac500 View Post

>  However, the SRH940 does match aspects of several of the high-end flags. After comparing them myself (and re-purchasing the SRH940 twice now), the highs and mids are simply gorgeous. I've got a pair of $900 headphones on right now that still don't do acoustic the way the SRH940 does. 

 

That's what surprises me to hear, I guess. Pretty impressive that $300 headphones would do so well in any area against expensive ones. From what it sounds like, I'm assuming: The compromise is that it's not as "perfect" in frequency response flatness, or has weak points (like bass?), whereas higher end headphones would be excellent across any frequency.

The only real difference from the HD800 is the soundstage.
post #90 of 187
That review and these posts got me to thinking, what's the differences in headphones anyway? You have things like the $1700 Grados and the $1300 Beyerdynamics that sound a lot different from the $1500 Sennheisers. Then you have the small (hopefully) sample to sample variations in each product that comes off the assembly line. So my take on the Shure vs Senn comparison is the differences there other than soundstage are not much more than the sample to sample differences for a given product like the HD800, and certainly a lot less than the differences between the Senns, Beyerdynamics and Grados. It's almost like Shure cloned the sound of the 800's or maybe the 600's like Don said and then made changes to sound more like the 800. But if you want to hear bigger differences then check out the Beyerdynamics and Grados on the top end, then you would more appreciate the Shure.
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 Reviews and Appreciation Thread