Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH1840 and SRH1440 Unveiled!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure SRH1840 and SRH1440 Unveiled! - Page 111

post #1651 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post

 

I heard that was dependent on how they were positioned around your ears.

 

You mean like on or off?  

post #1652 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

You mean like on or off?  

 

LOL biggrin.gif

post #1653 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katun View Post

 

Wait, I thought the K550 had that in the bag? tongue.gif

 

LOL. It's kind of the inverse of "its the best until you hear something better."

 

For reference:

 

SRH1840 (extremely high 3rd and 5th order from bass to midrange). This distortion is why the 1840 sound like advanced full-sized ibuds to me. It's not a bad sound, just not worth $699, which IMO is highway robbery on the part of Shure. Proper price point: $212.63 or lower

 

K550 (very high second order in lower treble rough spot. high in sub/low bass) The lower treble peak can also been seen on CSDs (not pictured). Overall mediocre/decent at its best. Slightly or extremely painful at its worst. Proper price point: $67.99 or less. Supposedly, there are improved versions floating around. I have only heard/measured two units and neither of them were improved, although one was clearly better than the other.

 

HD650 (high second order in sub/low bass. high-ish third order from upper bass down = muddy/slow bass)


Edited by purrin - 8/26/12 at 11:30pm
post #1654 of 2016

These have a build in tube amp, that's why they sound good even out of portables. :D Distortion (harmonics) doesnt have to be a bad thing. If you listen to a mix from CLA you will hear a "larger than life" sound, "wall of guitars" and whatever... all that thanks to harmonic distortion, from pushing faders on his SSL console and dozens of outboard gear including lot's of transformer or tube coupled compressors and EQs. The Shure accentuates that even further, just like any other headphone you either like it or not. I personally think the 1840 is piece of very neat engineering and fit's its pricetag easily. Talking about headphones that missed their pricepoint: Fostex TH900 by a big margin.

post #1655 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

 

Trying to discredit Anaxilus is ridiculous and only makes you look desperate.  He has some of the best listening ability of anyone on head-fi.  If meet conditions weren't good enough for him to hear them accurately, he would reserve judgement. 

 

Yep, you got me, I'm desperate.

 

BTW, thanks for reminding me why I stopped frequenting this site as often. Head-Fi has become a place where people become experts on products from <1 day meet/store experiences.

 

I also love how everyone interprets graphs to match their own subjective experiences or assumptions. It's funny to see several different interpretations of the same data. If you've been following this thread, it's pretty obvious. Same goes for several other headphones, like the HD800.

post #1656 of 2016

The one hundred million dollar question of the day is "Will he change his mind in a month like with the BHA-1"?

 

My question to you guys is this:

 

Do you listen first and then let the graphs confirm what your heard.  Or do you look at the graphs first and let your ears confirm what you saw?

post #1657 of 2016
I find the measurements and comments very interesting, in that I don't perceive the 1840 to be lacking bass in any way and they certainly don't have the 6kHz treble peak I hear in my HD 800. Note my reference headphones are SR-007A, LCD-2.2, LCD-2.1 and HD 800, pretty much in that order. I am beginning to wonder if there are different versions of this headphone or maybe some major manufacturing deviations that could account for the discrepancies.
post #1658 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

The one hundred million dollar question of the day is "Will he change his mind in a month like with the BHA-1"?

 

My question to you guys is this:

 

Do you listen first and then let the graphs confirm what your heard.  Or do you look at the graphs first and let your ears confirm what you saw?

 

I always listen first. And then listen again after listening to a known good reference. Graphs can be deceptive sometimes, particularly if used alone without other pieces to give us the entire picture. (Note the distortion measurements above are only one kind of measurement.)

 

In the case of the SRH1840, it's light on the bass compared to other headphones, and I think it's tonal balance is not bad overall. As someone pointed out, the SRH1840 does not have the 6kHz peak of the HD800 which can be pretty nasty at its worst. I did not hear the SRH1840 to have any ringing or resonances, which was confirmed by the CSD measurements (not shown here.)

 

The measured distortion is horrid though (and one of the things which I immediately suspected when I first heard it); but again, as someone else pointed out, distortion may actually be pleasurable to certain people, just as some people like high frequency ringing / resonances. BTW, I believe Tyll's site can corroborate the distortion measurements.


Edited by purrin - 8/27/12 at 12:05pm
post #1659 of 2016

Well,  at least their not as bad as the D71000.  I guess - and I hope.  Just going on impression I read about them.

post #1660 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

Do you listen first and then let the graphs confirm what your heard.  Or do you look at the graphs first and let your ears confirm what you saw?

 

If you followed Purrin's CSD plot thread, you would already know that he listens first because he spent months posting subjective impressions, followed up with csd measurements.  He was usually spot on, but not always. 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shahrose View Post

 

Yep, you got me, I'm desperate.

 

BTW, thanks for reminding me why I stopped frequenting this site as often. Head-Fi has become a place where people become experts on products from <1 day meet/store experiences.

 

I also love how everyone interprets graphs to match their own subjective experiences or assumptions. It's funny to see several different interpretations of the same data. If you've been following this thread, it's pretty obvious. Same goes for several other headphones, like the HD800.

 

It doesn't take me a week to figure out how headphones sound especially not when they have glaring problems.  Not once have I hated a headphone on day one and then grown to like them later.  The opposite has happened, but never that extreme.  I have slowly discovered more flaws in headphones over periods of years as my hearing abilities got better. 

 

I can hear headphones pretty accurately in 5 minutes, and it only takes about 5 seconds to hear the glaring issues most phones have. 

 

I also don't see anyone "interpreting graphs to match their subjective experiences".

post #1661 of 2016

It's not that distortion might actually be pleasurable to certain people, as i wrote some modern music is full of distortion and yet it sounds good. There's just 2 kinds of distortion, the good, mostly subtle and not recognized as such unless you have experience as a mix engineer, and the ugly. I'm curious which aspect of the shure made you guess there's harmonic distortion at work?

Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post

as someone else pointed out, distortion may actually be pleasurable to certain people, just as some people like high frequency ringing / resonances.

post #1662 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilCox View Post

I find the measurements and comments very interesting, in that I don't perceive the 1840 to be lacking bass in any way and they certainly don't have the 6kHz treble peak I hear in my HD 800. Note my reference headphones are SR-007A, LCD-2.2, LCD-2.1 and HD 800, pretty much in that order. I am beginning to wonder if there are different versions of this headphone or maybe some major manufacturing deviations that could account for the discrepancies.

 

I thought the same thing regarding the bass BUT I believe it was some kind of reverberation (is that the correct word?!?!) or something GIVING THE IMPRESSION of them sounding a bit "fuller"... but directly comparing them head to head with other capable headphones (including the HD600s), you quickly noticed the 1840s lacking. I've said time and time again that these kind of reminded me of the Senns HD600s... maybe a BIT brighter/bumped. In the end, I did stay with the Senns...

 

BTW, purrin, can the distortion you mention be what causes the impression of bass (or "fake bass") on these?

post #1663 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

 

If you followed Purrin's CSD plot thread, you would already know that he listens first because he spent months posting subjective impressions, followed up with csd measurements.  He was usually spot on, but not always. 

 

 

 

Well I didn't follow Master Purrin's CSD plot thread and I don't wish to.  So of course that's why I asked.  Are you Purrin's personal cheerleader or something?

 

If you followed this thread you would already know the he replied.


Edited by preproman - 8/27/12 at 2:18pm
post #1664 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

 

Well I didn't follow Master Purrin's CSD plot thread and I don't wish to.  So of course that's why I asked.  Are you Purrin's personal cheerleader or something?

 

 

Yes.  I'm a fan of all things on this website that aren't complete BS.

post #1665 of 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

 

Yes.  I'm a fan of all things on this website that aren't complete BS.

 

Fair enough.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH1840 and SRH1440 Unveiled!