Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH1540 Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure SRH1540 Review - Page 52

post #766 of 778

These headphones need more reviews and feedback so more people buy them, these SRH-1540 beat any other headphones I have owned easily, yet only 4 reviews on head-fi and only #128 headphones.

post #767 of 778

Relatively speaking... they are only low key on head fi vs some other headphones on this site. As to the rest of the world they are well received, reviewed and popular. K550 is more popular here but still looked down upon by many. Think both are on par with any $1000 or less headphones out there. Both are flawed in some ways as well but so is my HD800...

post #768 of 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by nw130d View Post
 

Relatively speaking... they are only low key on head fi vs some other headphones on this site. As to the rest of the world they are well received, reviewed and popular. K550 is more popular here but still looked down upon by many. Think both are on par with any $1000 or less headphones out there. Both are flawed in some ways as well but so is my HD800...

 

What is a flaw of the SRH 1540 though, I cannot find any. And at the price of £300-£400 I have not heard anything better personally, for example the 1540 overall sound better than the HE400. Maybe its because people either go for cheaper £200 headphones or jump straight to £600+ high end. I suppose they are quite laid back sounding but I am getting old and have tinnitus (urgh) so I really appreciate the fact that these headphones sound GREAT at mid / low volumes and can be used for hours with no problems.


Edited by nicholars - 12/23/14 at 3:02am
post #769 of 778

I really liked the 1540, bit too bass heavy for my tastes though, and I found the headband strangely uncomfortable. Would prefer a solid piece of foam as they 2 strips just get crushed either side.

post #770 of 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by marts30 View Post
 

I really liked the 1540, bit too bass heavy for my tastes though, and I found the headband strangely uncomfortable. Would prefer a solid piece of foam as they 2 strips just get crushed either side.

 

They have just about enough bass for me as I like lower midrange and bass, as long as it does not sound bloated which the SRH 1540 does well, most headphones if you have that amount of lower midrange around 80-400hz will sound distorted and generally bad but the SRH1540 pull it off nicely. With electronic music these headphones are perfect and with everything else they are very good as well. Only improvement I would make would be to bring 700-4000hz forward a bit compared to the treble. I am surprised only 4 reviews and rated #100+ whereas a lot of significantly worse headphones are rated higher. Looking at the rankings, I have no idea why people love the ATH-M50 so much, the Shure SRH 840 are much better, even the UE6000 I bought for £35 sound pretty much better than the M50's to me. Some strange buying behavior among head-fi members...


Edited by nicholars - 12/23/14 at 5:04am
post #771 of 778

I for instance have NAD Viso, UE6000, V-Moda M-100, had and sold SRH1540, V-Moda is also for sale.

And for me, ATH-M50 still beats them all.

Very exciting, and still easily most tonally balanced out of all.

 

Second will be NAD, (too dark compared to M50, and bass is not that good).

UE6000 has nice bass, but even darker than NAD.

V-Moda is too colored to even start talking about it.

SRH1540's bass was bloated, but the most problematic were the mids - too recessed.

Guess I shouldn't have started all this journey :confused: 


Edited by Rune1221 - 12/23/14 at 5:40am
post #772 of 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rune1221 View Post
 

I for instance have NAD Viso, UE6000, V-Moda M-100, had and sold SRH1540, V-Moda is also for sale.

And for me, ATH-M50 still beats them all.

Very exciting, and still easily most tonally balanced out of all.

 

Second will be NAD, (too dark compared to M50, and bass is not that good).

UE6000 has nice bass, but even darker than NAD.

V-Moda is too colored to even start talking about it.

SRH1540's bass was bloated, but the most problematic were the mids - too recessed.

Guess I shouldn't have started all this journey :confused: 

 

The m50 compared to the 1540 is not even remotely in the same league tbh.

post #773 of 778

Yeah, thought so also, didn't wear m50 for an year at least.

Then tried it yesterday, and now listen only to it.

 

Come on, the tonal balance is very subjective thing, and if you don't like it on some particular - even very expensive headphone - all other aspects aren't relevant.

Soundstage, resolution, speed etc., you name it.

Hence you cant say that let's say grado gs1000 is not in the same league as shure SRH1540, "tbh" it must be clearly better.

Same goes for many Beyerdynamic models - they have very specific tonal balance, kind of hate it or love it.

 

BTW, the M50 has surprisingly good instruments separation and bass/mids separation for a basshead can.

NAD for instance has considerable bass leakage to mids.

The bass in SRH1540 was almost disturbing - kind of thumping in your head, I guess something going on with resonances and such.

 

Believe me - there's a reason to so much crowd love that M50 receive.

Until recently I also would be very skeptical if anyone told me I'd prefer them to many much pricier alternatives.

If anything the bass in them is sometimes too strong, other than that... dunno, almost perfect.

I guess it's only left for me to try Beyers, since apparently I love some treble here and there too.

post #774 of 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rune1221 View Post
 

Yeah, thought so also, didn't wear m50 for an year at least.

Then tried it yesterday, and now listen only to it.

 

Come on, the tonal balance is very subjective thing, and if you don't like it on some particular - even very expensive headphone - all other aspects aren't relevant.

Soundstage, resolution, speed etc., you name it.

Hence you cant say that let's say grado gs1000 is not in the same league as shure SRH1540, "tbh" it must be clearly better.

Same goes for many Beyerdynamic models - they have very specific tonal balance, kind of hate it or love it.

 

BTW, the M50 has surprisingly good instruments separation and bass/mids separation for a basshead can.

NAD for instance has considerable bass leakage to mids.

The bass in SRH1540 was almost disturbing - kind of thumping in your head, I guess something going on with resonances and such.

 

Believe me - there's a reason to so much crowd love that M50 receive.

Until recently I also would be very skeptical if anyone told me I'd prefer them to many much pricier alternatives.

If anything the bass in them is sometimes too strong, other than that... dunno, almost perfect.

I guess it's only left for me to try Beyers, since apparently I love some treble here and there too.

 

The 1540 has no resonance at all, other than they are closed headphones so the bass has more impact and slight resonance, or "thumping in your head" as you describe it, but it is supposed to and is very well done... But no the sound quality is just a lot better, soundstage, resolution, speed, imaging, quality of treble etc. no contest at all. Yes if you do not like the tonal balance then you would not like them,  the M50 are popular because they are cheap, durable and quite good for the price, but the shure 840 are better at that price TBH. Anyway if they sound good to you then great you have just saved yourself £250.


Edited by nicholars - 12/23/14 at 11:44am
post #775 of 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicholars View Post
 

 

The 1540 has no resonance at all, other than they are closed headphones so the bass has more impact and slight resonance, or "thumping in your head" as you describe it, but it is supposed to and is very well done... But no the sound quality is just a lot better, soundstage, resolution, speed, imaging, quality of treble etc. no contest at all. Yes if you do not like the tonal balance then you would not like them,  the M50 are popular because they are cheap, durable and quite good for the price, but the shure 840 are better at that price TBH. Anyway if they sound good to you then great you have just saved yourself £250.

 

Going back to my other post, the 1540 is almost indeed flawless(compared to what is technically capable in closed headphones of today). The highs aren't as clear as some other headphones I have listened to, however they do sound real. Some other headphones do sound cleaner but same time does sound a bit off from the real thing. But for the most part I completely agree the 1540 are near perfect and when considering the price they are no brainier. What is also amazing is Shure achieved what I consider a perfect balance of "fun" and "neutral" to me they sit perfectly on that knife edge, sound signature wise.

 

I can not agree anymore! I dislike and loathe the M50 fad train. Don't get me wrong I don't think they are that terrible and people who enjoy it all the for you... But when people who are new to audio get recommendation straight to the M50. When they sit at home and read on how awesome their purchase is on site such as this one, they get the false image of what good audio is about. Reason being some pushers of this M50 fad train; compare their M50 with likes of headphone of much higher audio quality. To me they are just wasting money and also not getting bang for their buck which is what it really is all about at the lower priced headphones. There is much better headphones to be had for the price such as the HD25, SRH840, KRK KNS8400 among others... I have not tried the M50x but the M50 to me sounds like a muddy mess with a dash of bright vinegar on top. Sound stage wise it is there but sounds like each frequency is playing in a different size room. As if stuff is recorded in frequency bands then mashed together. (again I don't think they are that terrible but if I had to nit-pick)


Edited by nw130d - 12/23/14 at 9:37pm
post #776 of 778
Thread Starter 

Huh. 1540s are getting a bit more hype than I thought they would.

post #777 of 778
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimvictor View Post
 

Huh. 1540s are getting a bit more hype than I thought they would.

It seems their sound is highly controversial! I think it is funny that some say it is a bass cannon and others say it is to thin.  I know tastes are subjective, but i mean come on ha.

post #778 of 778

Indeed.  Mine are for sale (see signature below)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Shure SRH1540 Review