jkorten said:

  You are a pioneer. Without folks like you, we would never learn about Shure 1840s because they'd never make it to market.
 
For me the trouble is I couldn't find them for $300 used (like the SD650s which I did buy at that price). Now they will compete nicely with the Sennheiser and maybe they'll both come down.
 
Mine were $499 (not $500) and with free shipping and no sales tax by the way.

Click to expand...

 
You can get a medium slurpee or big gulp or a hot dog at 7/11 for a dollar btw.
 
Think about it.

So, I recently returned the SE535 (too mid forward for my liking in an IEM) and chose to exchange it for the SRH1840 to avoid a restocking fee at earphone solutions.

I wonder how it will match up against my K712 PRO as my open reference headphone. I'll be using the new alacantara pads that came with the 1540 in the comparison as well as the stock pads.

Just got a pair of SE846, wondering the difference between 1840&846....

change is good said:

So, I recently returned the SE535 (too mid forward for my liking in an IEM) and chose to exchange it for the SRH1840 to avoid a restocking fee at earphone solutions.

I wonder how it will match up against my K712 PRO as my open reference headphone. I'll be using the new alacantara pads that came with the 1540 in the comparison as well as the stock pads.

Click to expand...

So how do you like the SRH1840? Still Torn between that and the HE500.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

^ Won't be delivered until Tuesday... I hope...

Hi everybody, new to the forum. I was interested some new headphones, specifically the SRH1840, so I stumbled across this thread and despite clearly better uses of my time I read every page. I'm new to this type of community as the last headphones I bought were before the age of the internet, but wow, how things have changed.
 
It seems there are an incredibly large number of people who are ready to dismiss this headphone based simply on a few graphical plots of information. These people seem to be so biased against the headphone that they refuse to have anything to do with it and automatically put it into a category not worth their time and have an ability to write it off before even listening to it. At the same time, many who have actually listened to them love them. Also interesting to note how the HIFIMAN HE-500, a headphone with "audiophile approved graphs" has the exact same review score as the SRH1840 on Amazon (4.8).
 
Even Purrin, probably the most outspoken SRH1840 hater who spoke at length on the crappiness of the headphone based on the shockingly bad graphs, couldn't muster up much if any criticism, finally admitting that they produced "OK" sound, and didn't have the "treble boasting" as much as the graph would indicate, but of course these are still "lowfi" headphones, as is obviously and painfully indicated by the graphs.
 
I wasn't sure what to think. After looking at frequency response graphs, distortion graphs, sine wave plots, THD 3-d plots (oooo pretty pictures) and a whole lot of other mumbo jumbo I've come to the conclusion that I've wasted just about enough of my life on it then I have patience for. It seems that while many "audiophile" approved headphones share very very similar frequency response graphs, and maybe don't show as much distortion in the distortion graphs,  it seems there is "more then one way to skin a cat" as the saying goes, and that things which should be "obvious failures" in this headphone, such as a "boasted treble", are audibly absent from "professional" reviews.
 
It seems to me if every headphone shared the same frequency response graph I suspect every headphone would sound almost the same, maybe that is an "audiophile approved" vision of the future but personally I've always been of the opinion that choice is good.
 
So I've decided to go ahead and order a pair. They can be had for $400 these days, a relative steal considering people were incredibly satisfied with them at $700. If you all don't hear from my again it is because I am thoroughly enjoying the music with a part of me wondering what "audiophiles" will be discussing and debating in the next 10 years.

Well Superlofi, I have the Sennheiser HD650 and I think these SRH1840s are better. Lower bass (better transient response on the bass and goes lower imho) more transparent and less artificially dark. Though I do speak to people who's first impression (my son is one) who say, "Oh I could listen to this all day without fatigue" which may be the reason they darkened them so much.
 
You won't be disappointed in the SRH1840. I think they sound great.
 
But I have the Fiio X3, a Little Dot Mk1+ enhanced to use on the road when I travel and wow what a fantastic stereo system this is! On a plane I use the SRH425s with ATH ANC9 noise cancelling headphones on top of them. :-D
 
Enjoy them!
 
 
 

superlowfi said:

  It seems there are an incredibly large number of people who are ready to dismiss this headphone based simply on a few graphical plots of information. These people seem to be so biased against the headphone that they refuse to have anything to do with it and automatically put it into a category not worth their time and have an ability to write it off before even listening to it. At the same time, many who have actually listened to them love them. Also interesting to note how the HIFIMAN HE-500, a headphone with "audiophile approved graphs" has the exact same review score as the SRH1840 on Amazon (4.8).
 

Click to expand...

 
It's not that simple. People hear the headphones first, then base what they hear on the graphs, not the other way around. While distortion is its biggest technical flaw it's only one of many reasons why some people either dislike or feel ambivalent about the 1840s.

viralcow said:

   
It's not that simple. People hear the headphones first, then base what they hear on the graphs, not the other way around. While distortion is its biggest technical flaw it's only one of many reasons why some people either dislike or feel ambivalent about the 1840s.

Click to expand...

I would urge caution on interpreting graphs. The biggest problem with these tests are the test dummy head which doesn't mimic flesh and bone. Distortion can be caused by reflection in the test setup. Also we don't know the damping factor of the amplifier driving the system. And then there is the relevance factor. I'm not trying to protect the SRH1840, I have many headphones. All sound different (at similar price points) each has a strength, each a weakness.
 
But let's remember the fallacy of the frequency response tests of the 1970's and 80's that "proved" that CD sound was superior to turntables. Or the current situation with $50,000 triode amplifiers which show more distortion than any solid state amplifier but are preferred by many as a superior sound.
 
If possible you should definitely compare the sound of the headphones you are considering. However, I haven't yet heard a $500 pair of headphones I would hate.

This forum is just as good at steering people wrong as it can right. In the past I've seen some claims of ATH-M50 sound better than SRH840. I've owned both those headphones and till own SRH840 and there is no way in hell the M50 sounds better than the SRH840. 

jkorten said:

 
I would urge caution on interpreting graphs. The biggest problem with these tests are the test dummy head which doesn't mimic flesh and bone. Distortion can be caused by reflection in the test setup. Also we don't know the damping factor of the amplifier driving the system. And then there is the relevance factor. I'm not trying to protect the SRH1840, I have many headphones. All sound different (at similar price points) each has a strength, each a weakness.
 
But let's remember the fallacy of the frequency response tests of the 1970's and 80's that "proved" that CD sound was superior to turntables. Or the current situation with $50,000 triode amplifiers which show more distortion than any solid state amplifier but are preferred by many as a superior sound.
 
If possible you should definitely compare the sound of the headphones you are considering. However, I haven't yet heard a $500 pair of headphones I would hate.

Click to expand...

 
And I'm saying the graphs aren't the reason why people are ambivalent about the 1840s (to be fair I don't think anyone would flat-out dislike the 1840).

And while we're talking about graphs - I plotted two headphones I own here
 
http://www.headphone.com/buildAGraph.php?graphID[0]=3561&graphID[1]=853&graphID[2]=&graphID[3]=&scale=30&graphType=1&buttonSelection=Update+Graph
 
And it clearly shows that the Sennheiser is incapable of producing a 500Hz tone and frequency shifts it down to somewhere around 400Hz. What?
 
Then let's consider the meaning - most of the distortion components of a large steady state signal fall 60db below the signal, below your ability to hear it in the presence of the steady state tone. There is a single spike at 1.4kHz (if I can read this graph correctly it looks like 300Hz per division on the X axis). at -40db. And it is not clear to me what meaning this would have for music which does not play a sinusoid (except for some synthesizer music perhaps) and certainly nothing is steady state.
 
So relying on other people's measurements and choices of what to measure is problematic as well. Trust your ears. It's all subjective. If you like it then by definition it is good for you. Or else we'd all be listening to KOSS Pro 4AAs (Ha! That's a test for all you youngins!)

I've been reading up on the negative impressions of the 1840 and quite frankly it baffles me. Then again, most of these are from when they were $700 which I will say was far overpriced. These seem about right at the current price.

Let's just say that after a full day of listening... then going back to the K712... I found myself preferring the 1840 and sold my beloved AKGs.

viralcow said:

   
It's not that simple. People hear the headphones first, then base what they hear on the graphs, not the other way around. While distortion is its biggest technical flaw it's only one of many reasons why some people either dislike or feel ambivalent about the 1840s.

Click to expand...

 
Hi viralcow - I just want to mention, I saw your feedback on these headphones and it was valuable to me. You clearly gave them a fair shot and didn't like them. Fair enough. But according to the content of this thread, your approach was the exception, not the rule. Many responses in this thread have been simply "the graphs aren't good enough for me, this headphone is trash", or "I listened to them and confirmed the graphs LOWFI!" (ie. self-fulfilling prophecy type of opinion).
 
It is interesting to me how some of the most negative (and heated) criticism of these came from the crowds that actually produce the graphs (Tyll + Purrin). I do not claim to have a trained ear for frequency response and distortion, but when in doubt I would tend to "trust the experts". I ordered them and if they aren't up to my pedestrian and plebeian standards I will return them, but I will try not to color my impression of them based on some very "pretty pictures".

1) I find it hilarious that people on this forum can claim a headphone to be terrible based on a frequency response. No human ear is the same, we all hear frequencies differently. 
2) These are probably one of the most neutral headphones out there is which is a more objective way to judge the frequency response graph. You can always EQ to change the neutral frequency response to something warm or whatever you want. If you want more bass, just add it.