[electropop]

Quote:

Hold your wild horses there fella, k701? Voted the most overrated headphone on head-fi, ever. SRH-940? 'voted' the best new portable headphone, under $1000. 

 

This post: Voted the most moot comment on head-fi, ever.
 
 

 

[gelocks]

So I see that everyone started again going on and on about the same thing (i.e. Senns flagship vs 940s)...
 
I think everyone that enjoys listening to various types of music (not only one specifically) should go ahead and try these guys out. I find them to be the best at MOST of what I throw at them. Just be aware of what you are looking for.
 
For detailed, mid/high-driven music and for clarity on every genre, these are the best
I have listened to (though they haven't been a lot, just throwing that out.). If apart from this you are looking for CLOSED cans, then you can do no wrong (and right now you can even get one of these for $180 open box on electronic expo!)
 
If you want mostly the same but a bit warmer sound with better bass response and a bit bigger soundstage, then you can look at the HD600s. I love how these sounds on most genres too, the only "negative" is that they are OPEN cans and I cannot use them at work.
 
Are the SRH940s the best value for the money at under $300?
DEFINITELY NOT!!!!
This is a purely too subjective hobby... and everyone will have different views on that. Right now I'm enjoying one of the most FUN headphones I have ever used (the HTF600s by Panasonic) which are only $30. Are these the best value under $100? Maybe... maybe not... it will purely depend on taste.
 
Anyway, that's enough for today... unsubscribing! hehehe
 
(I'll keep enjoying my 940s without worrying how much they cost or how they compare to freaking $1000+ cans...)

 

[extrabigmehdi]

hi,
I  moved again, and I'm now using the realtek onboard card (alc889)
Now, I'm 100% sure, the sound is much less smooth than the xonar stx, it is a striking difference.  It's as if each details are more or less  hidden behind a "fog of noise",
making everything dull, and the sound subpar. I noticed that setting the output of onboard card to 192000 hz, and doing resampling inside foobar (pphs ultra), helps a bit. I'm not sure if wasapi  makes a difference.
 


Finally, I  use the vst, "oxford transmod native" inside foobar , to decrease the amount of transients. This helps the sensation of having a "smoother/cleaner" sound, but I  guess this comes at the cost of a loss of details. I didn't need such vst, on the computer with the xonar stx. The end result I  get now with onboard realtek + transmod vst, is still not as good as when using the xonar stx with no vst; but I  polish the turd the way I can.
 
Current settings :



 

 

[electropop]

Amount of transients? 

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Amount of transients? 

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transient

definition : (acoustics) A relatively loud, non-repeating signal in an audio waveform which occurs very quickly, such as the attack of a snare drum.


The vst transmod I use allows to boost or decrease transients. Decreasing transients behaves a bit like (bad?) noise reduction. If the source is bad, the srh940 reveals how badly transients are reproduced, it's a mess! That's why I'm tempted to lower transients when listening with my realtek onboard soundcard.


Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk

 

[electropop]

Thanks, I know what a transient is
There is no amount if there is no reference. You mean to say that the program counts if a drummer is playing fast 32nds it reduces them to 16ths, for instance? I'm sorry, I would never touch something like that. Would probably smear absolutely everything in proper acoustic music. 
Or does it reduce the attack? Is it a value per second? I'm confused. Regardless, sounds like something I wouldn't toy with. 
 
Sounds a bit like poor 80s or 90s cd-masters where they tried to get the noise out of vinyls and when somewhat succeeding in that, ruined the whole albums as well.

 

[extrabigmehdi]

 
@electropop
Quote:

You mean to say that the program counts if a drummer is playing fast 32nds it reduces them to 16ths, for instance?

No it reduces/increase the loudness of transients using a ratio. Nothing is removed.
 
Quote:

There is no amount if there is no reference.

You have many settings , to decide what kind of transient you affect. You have first the threshold, which means you don't affect transient below a certain loudness. You have the deadband, so that you decide by how much the transient must increase to be affected. The overshoot, the length of transient changes allowed  etc....
Quote:

 smear absolutely everything in proper acoustic music.

I  don't think so. Anyway, the bottleneck is my onboard realtek soundcard.
Quote:

 Sounds a bit like poor 80s or 90s cd-masters where they tried to get the noise out of vinyls and when somewhat succeeding in that, ruined the whole albums as well.

Perhaps. It seems that the transmod vst, is usually used to boost transients instead, when producing some music. For instance if you want to "boost" drums, the result would be more subtle, than doing some loudness compression.
Anyways, I'm just experimenting...
 

 

[electropop]

No problem, thanks for further clarifying. I was just not sure what the program specifically does. Still am not 100%, about the technicalities nor the effects it would have on complex acoustic music. Just speculating that I wouldn't like it

 

[metalgear]

i bought the 940 out of curiousity (thanks to this thread!) and while it bears the same "type of sound" or sound signature, the HD800 outdoes it in every aspect as a top flight phone should. not to say that the 940 is bad - in fact it is very good value for what comes in the packagaging, as well as a  very modern sound signature (very "hifi-ish - detailed and very clear across a very broad sound spectrum), the HD800 is just more airy in the treble, has more timbre in the mids and bass, and has more and faster punch in the lower bass, and a much much wider soundstage and more comfortable overall.
 
its correct to say they are similar - fast,detailed and to me it is metallic or has that glare across the upper range that adds to its clarity and sharpness - its clear that difference is between a mid-range and a high-end experience. so if you like this sound signature and looking for an upgrade to the 940, the HD800 is definitely in the right direction. whether its worth it or not, its up to whether you can or want to afford it, as the law of diminishing returns sets in quickly when you get to any high end purchase.
 
To me based on the cans I own, very roughly, I'd say that in terms of value and sound signature, the 940 is to the HD800 as what the HD650 is to the LCD2.

 

[Lorspeaker]

Wow metal gear, this is a very good post u made...
I agree up to the very last word...LCD,
Which I haven't own, but I have heard briefly.
I will agree with u very $$$shortly I hope!

 

[baka1969]

i bought the 940 out of curiousity (thanks to this thread!) and while it bears the same "type of sound" or sound signature, the HD800 outdoes it in every aspect as a top flight phone should. not to say that the 940 is bad - in fact it is very good value for what comes in the packagaging, as well as a  very modern sound signature (very "hifi-ish - detailed and very clear across a very broad sound spectrum), the HD800 is just more airy in the treble, has more timbre in the mids and bass, and has more and faster punch in the lower bass, and a much much wider soundstage and more comfortable overall.
 
its correct to say they are similar - fast,detailed and to me it is metallic or has that glare across the upper range that adds to its clarity and sharpness - its clear that difference is between a mid-range and a high-end experience. so if you like this sound signature and looking for an upgrade to the 940, the HD800 is definitely in the right direction. whether its worth it or not, its up to whether you can or want to afford it, as the law of diminishing returns sets in quickly when you get to any high end purchase.
 
To me based on the cans I own, very roughly, I'd say that in terms of value and sound signature, the 940 is to the HD800 as what the HD650 is to the LCD2.

Good post. While I agree with parts of what you stated, there are some that I can't see. Partly because of the mid bass hole, to me, the 940 is a brighter headphone than the HD800. The HD800 is, as it should be, a more refined headphone. Even though the 940 does well for being a closed can, it's still sounds like a closed can to me. Again, although the Shure is detailed I still believe the Senn is more revealing. Also, the HD800 is more transparent.

With the differences in bass, soundstage, refinement, tonality and transparency I just don't think the HD800 and 940 share a similar sound signature. As I have said over and over, I think the Shure 940 is a good value and is a very nice closed headphone for the money. I listened to it again yesterday. I just don't believe it compares to the Sennheiser HD800 in almost any way.

 

[extrabigmehdi]

 

Or more seriously the similarities are too subjective. Not everyone seem to agree that the srh940 are good value too (Tyll disliked them) . Just listen to what you enjoy.
 

 

[Lorspeaker]

i am doing some ripping of cds on my mcAir...
and just plugged the 940 direct into the laptop without dac,
listening to SKY FM Bosa Nova Breakfast internet radio....pure bliss..

 
 

 

[kiteki]

Quote:

 closed can

If not the Shure, which closed can do you believe is similiar to the HD800, then? Or is it a prerequisite, to be open-air?
 
 
 

 

[baka1969]

If not the Shure, which closed can do you believe is similiar to the HD800, then? Or is it a prerequisite, to be open-air?

I honestly don't have as much experience with closed headphones as I do with open cans. So I won't speculate. Of the closed 'phones I've heard, however, they all sound like closed cans. Including cans like the Denon D7000 which has a more "V" shaped curve. The Sony R10 isn't a true closed design with the port it has.