Roland RH-300 impressions
Nov 11, 2009 at 12:01 AM Post #18 of 57
Nov 11, 2009 at 9:54 PM Post #20 of 57

Originally Posted by mr.khali /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Hey Vlad! How does it compare to the Shure in soundstage? Is it more forward and does the bass have more impact than the Shure? At $185 CDN it sounds like it is worth a try!

Hey man. If you want, we can meet up and I'll gladly let you try try these out. They have an excellent soundstage and imaging for closed headphones in their price range, but so do the Shures. Have you tried the Shures BTW? I would say that Roland has an edge in imaging, while Shures just sound a bit bigger and slightly less cupped in than the Roland. But then my Rolands only have 30 hours on them right now, while the Shures probably have three times as much, so it's not really such a fair comparison just yet.
Nov 11, 2009 at 10:17 PM Post #21 of 57
Thanks for the offer. I do have the Shures currently but would like just a touch more bass and bit more forward presence. I am nitpicking as they are great headphones but what the hell is this forum for, right?
I will pay attention to your comments when you have burnt them in more and send you a PM if I would like to check them out.
Dec 8, 2009 at 6:10 PM Post #27 of 57
nice looking headphone there, i really like this simplistic look after all the sophisticated looking headphones that i have been seeing lately.
Dec 9, 2009 at 3:58 AM Post #28 of 57
(sighs) Ok, so here are my final thoughts on Roland RH-300:

After about 30 hours of burn in, the sound began to shift toward the low end of the spectrum - it became noticeably fuller and warmer, but unfortunately also lost that initial sparkle and magic and in the upper mids/low treble. That's too bad - I expected that these would keep the same sound signature but would clear up and sound more controlled with more burn in, but that did not happen. Up until 30 hours, the sound did clear up and the bass tightened, but after that the sound signature seemed to have started changing quite significantly and became not quite suitable for my tastes.

In conclusion, I would say that if you like a warm sound with emphasized upper bass/low mids and a non-fatiguing, mellow, somewhat recessed treble, then these may just be your headphones. Unfortunately, they lose to similarly priced and even cheaper headphones like Hifiman RE0 and Shure SRH840 in overall detial resolution and clarity, but do have a more realistic tonality that the Shures (but not as realistic as my Hifiman RE0). I think that they are worth the price, if you like that kind of pleasant, warm, lush sound and don't mind or even prefer sacrificing a bit of analytical detail and clarity for a more musical and natural presentation (and also very dynamic BTW). These may also benefit from a good amp.
Dec 9, 2009 at 4:18 PM Post #30 of 57

Originally Posted by InFn-0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
nice looking headphone there, i really like this simplistic look after all the sophisticated looking headphones that i have been seeing lately.

I agree,very nice looking headphones.

Are they more comfortable compared to the srh 840?I like my shures but sometimes i feel a bit uncomfortable after some hour...That's because the earpads don't sit like the way i like(i want a similar feeling like the hd 600 if possible,i mean i want the pads to cover my ears and have some space to breathe inside)

What about the Rolland,do they have a more comfortable fit?

Users who are viewing this thread