Latest Thread Images

New Shure SRH1540 closed-back headphones?
Oct 30, 2013 at 6:04 PM Post #33 of 94
Oct 30, 2013 at 7:46 PM Post #34 of 94
trance_gott said:
Can you please compare them with the Sig Pros?
Click to expand...


At this point, I would have to say that the SRH1540 wins on comfort, but the Sig Pro wins on overall SQ and tonal balance as well it should considering the fact that it is over 2x the price of the Shure. I do think imaging is better with the Sig Pro. Isolation is better with the Sig Pro, but that is likely due to the tighter fit on the ears, thus making them less comfortable. The 1540 earcup is larger and my entire ear is enclosed as opposed to the Sig Pro which is mostly supra-aural.

FWIW, the Shure's are much easier to convert to balanced due to the dual entry removable cables. Both the 1840 and 1540 sound very nice balanced. I just swapped my 1840 cable that I had previously converted to balanced to check the performance of the 1540 when driven by a balanced input as both cables are identical.

These are just my first impressions, as I have not had time to a lot more detailed comparisons using different genre's of music and different amps.
 
Oct 31, 2013 at 12:06 AM Post #36 of 94
Thanks for the impressions HiFlight.
 
Your take on SRH1540 vs Sig Pro is intriguing since the Sig Pro were kind of one of my favorite headphones for a while! :wink:
 
Oct 31, 2013 at 11:39 AM Post #38 of 94
trance_gott said:
  I already have Sig Pros and T5p. So I think in the end I don't need the SRH1540 because in overall SQ it is below Sig Pro and T5p.
Click to expand...


I'm trying to procure a T5p as well... arrrghhh! LOL
 
Nov 1, 2013 at 8:57 PM Post #40 of 94
nicholars said:
Love Shure products... Would be good to see a FR graph for these.
Click to expand...


I feel sure that there will be quite a low-end rise in a FR graph. The 1540 can, by no means, be considered a neutral headphone. There is a very large difference in overall SQ between these and the 1840's and to be honest, I am not yet sure which I prefer. Sometimes the bass of the 1540 is just too attention-getting for me although it seems pretty well-controlled.

I must add that the 1540 does sound really fine at reduced volume levels. Sort of like a loudness contour switch on an amp.
 
Nov 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM Post #41 of 94
hiflight said:
I feel sure that there will be quite a low-end rise in a FR graph. The 1540 can, by no means, be considered a neutral headphone. There is a very large difference in overall SQ between these and the 1840's and to be honest, I am not yet sure which I prefer. Sometimes the bass of the 1540 is just too attention-getting for me although it seems pretty well-controlled.

I must add that the 1540 does sound really fine at reduced volume levels. Sort of like a loudness contour switch on an amp.
Click to expand...

 
"Attention gettting" bass sounds good to me
biggrin.gif
As long is it is good quality bass... Shure midrange is one of the best I have heard, so if these have good bass / treble and the usual Shure mids then I might try them, they will be up against my HE400 so they better be good... Not sure dynamics sound so good anymore after using orthos.
 
Nov 2, 2013 at 10:12 PM Post #43 of 94
I discovered a very interesting change when out of curiosity I swapped the Alcantara pads from my 1540 and the velour pads of my 1840 as they fit interchangeably. Suddenly the 1840 played at the same volume as the 1540 with very large increase in bass response, whereas the 1540 dropped in volume from stock and had significantly reduced bass. It is clear that the difference between the two types of pads make a huge difference in SQ.

I felt the stock 1540 had a bit too much bass emphasis for my taste, whereas the 1840 had just a bit too little. Now, with the pad swap, the 1540 suits my preferences very well. I suspect that I will keep the 1540 and sell my balanced 1840 with one set of each type of pad.

I was amazed that there was so much difference between the sound just by swapping pads.
 
Nov 11, 2013 at 12:46 AM Post #44 of 94
nicholars said:
   
"Attention gettting" bass sounds good to me
biggrin.gif
As long is it is good quality bass... Shure midrange is one of the best I have heard, so if these have good bass / treble and the usual Shure mids then I might try them, they will be up against my HE400 so they better be good... Not sure dynamics sound so good anymore after using orthos.
Click to expand...

 
was able to try a new set of 1540s (new in box and never burned in) at my local store. tried it right after i auditioned the HE400! tried both of a fiio e17.
 
the HE400 is a lot more airy that the 1540s. soundtstage of the 1540s is quite good for a closed can. but it doesnt sound open. bass quality and texture is better on the HE400 as well.
 
im a shure fan. i currently use the 940s and the se425s a lot. also had some of the older closed backs. i feel like the 1540s out of the box is similar to the 840s but improved all around. mids is not forward like the 940s. bass is more prominent on the 1540s vs the 940s by a LOT. but defenition and texture was better on the 940s but the 940s bass rolled off earlier.
 
i also was able to try the 1840s (really looking to get the 1840s or the HE400 this christmas) 2 weeks ago in hong kong and the 1540s doesnt sound like a closed 1840 at all. its different. i really remembered the 840s with it. never tried the 1440s.
 
i know its just an initial impression. but i hope this helps. 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top