[bcwang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gridlinked /img/forum/go_quote.gif All of those headphones cost at least double what the SRH840's cost, so that's not a fair comparison.

I know

just trying my best to convince the OP not to buy the SRH840 since that's what he wants us to do.

 

[Gridlinked]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcwang /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know just trying my best to convince the OP not to buy the SRH840 since that's what he wants us to do.

 

[david1978jp]

I am also interested in 840. Once a while I read someone said "lifeless"; (I can certainly understand when people call Grado's treble harsh); what's the possible causes for calling 840 "lifeless"?

 

[feverfive]

A baby seal dies every time someone buys a pair of these.....so don't

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by david1978jp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am also interested in 840. Once a while I read someone said "lifeless"; (I can certainly understand when people call Grado's treble harsh); what's the possible causes for calling 840 "lifeless"?

One possibility is their relatively shallow soundstage. They do sound a bit compressed and two dimensional, which can be partially remedied with certain tubes. That being said, they sound better overall than all my other closed headphones (4 total, the rest all cost more), with the exception of D5000 which does have good soundstage and sounds very spacious and open in comparison. However that comes with a price of terrible sound leakage.

I'd also be interested in hearing people's interpretations of their lifeless sound.

 

[akwizeguy]

so im looking to get a total airhead, can anyone comment on whether it would be a good pairing with the srh840s? Or what about a cmoy bass boost or mini3? Thanks for your responses guys

 

[akwizeguy]

got the srh840s in, been listening to it lightly...while they've been burning in nearly 40 hours now. Definitely not what Im looking for.

For Electronica music (deadmau5, dnb, dubstep electrohouse), listening to headphones without a dynamic range of low freq is pointless. Like listening to a symphony minus the violins or cellos....no melodies.

So now im going to return them and try to find some beyer dt770 or m50s, thought Id let other people know of my experiences thats all

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by akwizeguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif got the srh840s in, been listening to it lightly...while they've been burning in nearly 40 hours now. Definitely not what Im looking for. For Electronica music (deadmau5, dnb, dubstep electrohouse), listening to headphones without a dynamic range of low freq is pointless. Like listening to a symphony minus the violins or cellos....no melodies. So now im going to return them and try to find some beyer dt770 or m50s, thought Id let other people know of my experiences thats all

I am sorry that the Shures disappoint you. Before you return them though, I would recommend that you give them at least another 100 hours of burn in. The bass should eventually become tighter and more present. Also, Shures need to be amped to get the best out of them. BTW, the same applies to M50 as well - out of the box they have awful bass, even worse than the Shures and need a lot of burn in as well as dedicated amplification for the low end to tighten up. In overall sound quality, a well burned in amped SRH840 sounds much better than a well burned in amped M50. For unamped use, M50 may work better, but that depends on how good your source is. Out of a good quality DAP, like a Sony Walkman, SRH840 still sounds better than M50. Out of something weaker like Sansa Clip, M50 takes the lead.

 

[tdockweiler]

It's too bad you don't like the SRH-840. I felt like they had the perfect amount of bass for me. I felt the soundstage was good but not as good as the ATH-AD700 that I tried. Of course, don't even think about getting those.

I can't think of anything else to suggest, but maybe you'd like the Sennheiser sound. I don't. You probably don't want to spend this much, but I think maybe you'd love the Denon D2000. Often you can find them for $200. They have a LOT of bass. Too much for me and sometimes I feel like i'm the only ones who thought the bass on them was excessive. DT-770 you mentioned would probably be your best bet. The bass on those things scare me.

 

[tdockweiler]

I thought i'd never hear someone say the SRH-840s have poor bass. Of course nobody really said that. To me, the bass is a step up from the Triple fi 10's bass and has slightly less then my Sennheiser HD-555.

Even a few days ago I heard that the SRH-840 had "recessed mids" and i'm thinking "Huh?!". To me they are nowhere near having recessed mids.

The next day I read something that said the SRH-840s have "massive bass" which just confused me. Not even close to me.

I think I even read a few weeks ago that the Sennheiser HD-555's have NO BASS AT ALL. I'm just baffled by comments like that.

I'll have heard everything if one day I see a post from someone saying the Denon D2000 have weak bass!

It's just amazing how much an opinion varies between people. So far I don't think i've heard of a headphone that nearly everyone agreed on was good. The HD-600 almost sounds that way.

 

[Mr_Tasty]

I'm pretty close to pulling the trigger on these myself... Still doing some research on how they compare to similarly priced IEM's though.

Can anyone tell me how the srh840's stack up against IEM's such as the TF10's, RE0's, Panasonic RP-HJE900's and so on.

 

[bcwang]

Since I've got the Monster Turbine Pro Coppers, I haven't been using my srh840. Something about the 840 just doesn't work with me. Not sure if it's the lack of soundstage, the not that great isolating compared to IEM aspect, or the fact that for a full size I'm used to open headphones. But the coppers are more enjoyable to me than the srh840.

 

[tdockweiler]

To me the sound of the Shure SRH-840 is pretty close to the UE Triple Fi 10. I had been using the TF10 for over three years and wanted to find something as close to them as possible as an over the ear headphone. This is as close as i've been able to get so far. They're close enough for me to know that both of them offer the type of sound I want. No excessive anything!

The Shure SRH-840 does have much more bass though, but it doesn't take away from anything else. I think the midrange might be slightly better on the SRH-840. By far the worst thing about the SRH-840 is the sound from cymbals, but it's not that bad. Maybe it's just my source file. Singing is as crystal clear on the SRH-840 as it is on the TF10 to me. I'm never struggling to hear what's being said like with my old Sony MDR-V6 or Sennheiser 555.

With the 840 you don't quite feel like you're right there on stage like the TF10, but close. I think it has to do more with having the speaker jammed into your ear hole.

Right now I enjoy listening to the SRH-840 more then my TF10, but I think the TF10 sound is a bit more natural, but definitely not like the AKG 701. Sometimes the extra bass on the 840 is nice. They're just a bit more fun to listen to.

 

[MayaTlab]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_Tasty /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm pretty close to pulling the trigger on these myself... Still doing some research on how they compare to similarly priced IEM's though. Can anyone tell me how the srh840's stack up against IEM's such as the TF10's, RE0's, Panasonic RP-HJE900's and so on.

I found the SRH840 to be superior in most ways to the IE8 and W3 (slightly more details, much better balance overall). So that's a $165 vs $300 case.

However, I did not find them very much superior, just slightly, which is already quite good.

Also, I don't think the SRH840 are by default very musical : they're quite undramatic and might appear as being boring. However, they'll gain in musicality with burn-in, and a better source.

Like tdockweiler, I did fing that their worst point is the trebles, but even there they do a decent job.

Frankly I think they're very good value for money regarding sound quality.

 

[morphon]

I got a really crazy deal on a set of new SRH840's and took the plunge. My source is either my laptop (don't ask), a Sansa Fuze, and an iPod.

I have a Behringer USB DAC feeding a Bravo V2 Dual-Triode class A tube amp. Very barebones Chinese 12AU7 delivering the tubeyness. Right now I have it hooked up to my turntable downstairs for some pure analog listening. Yummmmmmm.

Comparing against the UE TF10 and my recently acquired AudioTechnica ATH-AD700....

SRH840 is the closest in sound to the TF10. But here's the strange thing - the TF10 sounds like crap out of the iPod video and laptop but absolutely gorgeous out of the Fuze. AD700 and SRH840 are thin out of the Fuze and iPod, very decent out of the laptop, but amazing out of the Bravo.

Go figure....

Anyway, the SRH840 has a kinda flat soundstage on the Fuze and iPod, but it opens up a little on the laptop. Not much, mainly because the Shure, for lack of better terms, sounds very monitor-ish. It is detailed and non-fatiguing, but not _exciting_. Off the Bravo the soundstage really starts to pop out - I don't know if it is a result of the class A topology or the triodes or something else. The AD700, which already has a great soundstage (open, angled drivers, all that jazz) becomes almost 3D through the valves. Bass has better bloom as well, giving it more body.

Anyway, I am only a little surprised that some folks find the SRH840 bass lacking out of the Fuze. That combo just isn't impressive. I'd be tempted to think it is the tubes except that the laptop delivers the goods as well even though the Bravo makes the Shure sound even better. In my estimation, the Shure definitely has more bass oomph than the TF10, and the little IEM's already have more bass than neutrality.

Everyone already knows this... but the AD700 is far more comfortable than the SRH840. Lighter, more breathable, everything.