[Rock702]

quick question about the 940s, do they suffer from the same tendency as the 840s where if you start rocking too hard they fall off your head?
 
is SpectrumAudio.com a legit site?
i can't seem to find anything about them.
but that price is nice

That was one of my quarrels with my 840s. The 940s are much more snug fit, have the tendency to not fall off and are more comfortable.

 

[Pratt]

Quote:

I work at the most reputable audio store in montreal, and I can demo a lot of headphones. Trust me, burn in is no joke. A brand new pair of srh940 barely sound better than the srh440's mainly due to no burn-in whatsoever. You definitely need to put in a modest 50 hours at least to be able to judge.
 

You have a right to your opinion and I respect that, but anecdotal, unquantified personal testimony can not discredit scientific fact which overwhelmingly proves that burn in does not exist (at least past a VERY minimal break in point which is a couple of hours at the absolute most and more like a few seconds). I will not argue this for it is like arguing whether or not gravity or evolution are fact. I only mentioned my position on burn in so no one would ask me if I was burning these in or not, not to start anything.
 
Quote:

Sometimes one has to take into consideration that the earpads (on demo'd 'phones) soften with use, thus making a different seal as well as bringing the drivers closer to the ear.
 

This is the only possible way older headphones will sound different to new. Even then it is fairly insignificant. (Yes I've heard both new and old cans of the same models with pads broken in or not, switched on them and blind).
 
Quote:

 
It's hard for me to believe that. The 701/702 are the clearest headphones I know!
(Note: I am using a Violectric/Lake People HPA V200 headphone amp: http://www.violectric.de/Pages/en/products/hpav200.php)
 
 
Did you really compare the 940 and 702 on the same(!) volume level!? If so, how you manage to adapt the volume? Did you have a headphone amp with two headphone outputs so you can change the phones very quickly "without" time lag?  As you know the louder one always will "win".
 
K 702: 62 ohm, 105 dB, 10-40 kHz
940:    42 Ohm (!), 100 dB, 5-30 kHz
 
"more" bass .. if there is bass in the music than it's OK. But than the 702 will also deliver bass! Not the more spectacular bass but the right one because the 702 are very neutral!
The sound of the 702 is very speaker-like. And I am aware of what that means because I can compare the sound to my very neutral monitor-like speakers:
* http://www.nubert.de/index.php?action=product&id=341&category=72 (with NAD C326BEE)
* http://www.nubert.de/index.php?action=product&id=26&category=3 (with Marantz SR 9600)
* http://www.nubert.de/index.php?action=product&id=1&category=1 (with Rotel RA02)
 
Btw...the bass on my Grado SR 325i is much punchier and seems deeper (but it isn't), also the trebles are "sharper" (sometimes too much!) and more present which gives someone the impression that it is "clearer" (but it isn't). Sometimes I like this ("in-head", "live") sound very much. But if I change to the 702 I get the most relaxed soundstage with fantastic clarity and neutrality over the whole freq. range (imho even better than the HD 800!).
 
The 702 are still "off" and will be. You can be sure
 
So...in a few month I think I will also order a Shure 940 to make my own comparition.
 
Regards
Tiad
 
PS: My cans are: AKG K500, K702, K271 Studio Monitor, Grado SR 325i, iGrado, Alessandro MS1i, Sennheiser HD 650, IE8 (in-ear), Beyerdynamic DT 880 Hifi 2005 Edition, T50p, Audio Technica ATH-M50, Goldring DR-150, Superlux HD 681B Monitor and some other low-end headphones like KOSS Porta pro, Sennheiser PX 100/200, ....
 
 

 
Trust me, I thought the AKG 702's were clear too until I heard these!
 
I did listen at the same volume level, both through my AV 123 X Head amp which has two headphone outs and my Matrix M Stage and Cowon D2 set at the same volume. With the latter gear it takes a bit of time to switch cans, but not more than 20 seconds at the most. The 702's were much quieter at the same volumes.
 
I agree the 702's have enough bass as well. The 940's have more though imo and it is also tighter and more articulate. This is nice, although I was satisfied with the 702's bass. The 940's are more speaker like to me than the 702's as well because, although the sound stage isn't as wide, they are simply the more refined and sophisticated can imo. I also have very neutral "hi-fi" monitors (and have heard dozens more) and the 940's sound more like them than any other can I've heard. Again, they have more of a refined and sophisticated sound like "hi-fi" monitors than the 702's.
 
Quote:

But if you're a treblehead, you'll love them!
 

 
I'd say detail head! 

 
 
So I've been listening to these, about 20 hours now I guess, and still really enjoying them. No major flaw has appeared in that time, but nor have they been sounding better to me since when I first listened to them. In fact, a few minor flaws have become more noticeable the more I get used to these cans. These would be that there is a slight resonance that can cause these cans to sound slightly chesty. Probably due to the closed design. Also the treble, while not harsh, can be a bit sheeny or sharp. Finally these are slightly dry or crisp. But these are minor flaws and not fatal. These also are dependent on the source material: these are revealing cans, even more than my 702's, so well recorded material will sound great while lesser produced material will sound worse than with more forgiving phones. This is the blessing and curse of all "hi-fi" nuetral/resolving/transparent gear of course.
 
The overall sound is one of clarity and detail yet balance and composure with good PRaT. I can't say I've heard more micro detail than ever before through these cans, but that's probably because I have and have heard very resolving speakers. They certainly are the most detailed headphones I've ever heard and thus accentuate those nuances and subtleties and background sounds more than others. I can hear almost all of these details in the 702's for instance, but they are harder to hear, they don't come out as much as with the 940's. But again, this detail is still not overly distracting from the main flow of the music, no it just adds to it and makes you appreciate the little flourishes artists put into their material, flourishes that are missed or at least not as brought out with less resolving gear. I am a lover of drums for instance (Rush is my favorite band) and the cymbal work these cans detail is phenomenal, but again not distracting. Bass is also very articulate and textured which is also great as I am a lover of bass guitar (again, Rush lol). Clarity, balance, and neutrality reigns on all levels and with all material I've thrown at these, from classical to metal, synth pop to singer/songwriter.
 
In more comparison to the 702's I found the AKG's to be darker, hollower, more distant, duller...yes really! The 940's are better balanced, more forward, have more detail, are more refined, with better, deeper, even richer bass. In my mind the 940's are clearly superior, though the 702's are still a good can.

I'm not afraid to add that while listening to the 940's I lost count of how many "wows" and "omg's" I uttered, as well chills I experienced in the midst of summer. Impressive!
 
Very happy with these cans!

 
Btw, they sound fine straight out of my D2 or with my FiiO E5 amp.

 

[ACDOAN]

Could be just another FOTM as the M50s hype?
 
We have M50s, HD598 and now the SRH 940 ....What's next?

 

[Pratt]

I don't think so. I'm critical with my gear and these are still impressing me. It could be that with time I will either find more flaws or grow tired of them (kind of like what I did with my 702's in a way: still good cans, but I wanted to try something different/better, just didn't want to spend $500 or more to do so), but only time will tell.
 
I never heard the M50's btw, and if the 598's are the same as my 595's then I would say they are very poor cans (the 595's are literally horrid to me).

 

[bcasey25raptor]

Quote:

Could be just another FOTM as the M50s hype?
 
We have M50s, HD598 and now the SRH 940 ....What's next?

i am pretty sure the shure srh840 is still flavor of the month. i see a ton of threads and recommendations about them and they are easy to find locally. i found them at my local futureshop so no need to buy online for me.

 

[Ra97oR]

I don't see the appeal on the HD598 but the SRH940 really grabbed me. They are cheaper than ES10 and Z1000 yet sounds better than both, IMO. They even topped Ed8 as my favourite "portable" headphones, and fixed upon all the weakness the 840 and improved on its strong points.

Headband no longer flat, its not heavy, it don't clamp like mad, have a straight cable to choose from, more balanced sound.

 

[wind016]

 
Quote:

I don't see the appeal on the HD598 but the SRH940 really grabbed me. They are cheaper than ES10 and Z1000 yet sounds better than both, IMO. They even topped Ed8 as my favourite "portable" headphones, and fixed upon all the weakness the 840 and improved on its strong points.

Headband no longer flat, its not heavy, it don't clamp like mad, have a straight cable to choose from, more balanced sound.

Wow, I got to give these SRH940s a try.
 

 

[marts30]

Quote:

i am pretty sure the shure srh840 is still flavor of the month. i see a ton of threads and recommendations about them and they are easy to find locally. i found them at my local futureshop so no need to buy online for me.

Nice avatar, my favourite album
 
Still enjoying my 940's.

 

[blackzarg]

I don't really understand why the M50's are labeled as a FOTM. They've been recommended since 2008, and highly recommended since 2009. I guess time really is relative.
 
Quote:

Could be just another FOTM as the M50s hype?
 
We have M50s, HD598 and now the SRH 940 ....What's next?

 

 

[200poundsofamp]

Well, Pianist didn't seem to like them at least, and from the review at headphonia it seemed like he preferred it more for monitoring than actually listening to music.
Quote:

Could be just another FOTM as the M50s hype?
 
We have M50s, HD598 and now the SRH 940 ....What's next?

 

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

Well, Pianist didn't seem to like them at least, and from the review at headphonia it seemed like he preferred it more for monitoring than actually listening to music.

He gave me more the impression of nitpicking that really not liking them. And in the comments it's as if he is discouraging people to get them, because of his idea of what an "average user" should be looking for.
Also he rank the k701 as the worst when comparing hd650, k701 & dt880 (see the all school trio review).
 

 

[TheMiddleSky]

Quote:

I don't see the appeal on the HD598 but the SRH940 really grabbed me. They are cheaper than ES10 and Z1000 yet sounds better than both, IMO. They even topped Ed8 as my favourite "portable" headphones, and fixed upon all the weakness the 840 and improved on its strong points.

Headband no longer flat, its not heavy, it don't clamp like mad, have a straight cable to choose from, more balanced sound.

 
wow, short impresion between srh940 and z1000 please?

 

[Katun]

I'll be comparing the SRH940 to my Z1000 once it arrives. I may even do a Z1000 vs SRH940 | Comparison & Review.

 

[Rainbow Randy]

Quote:

You have a right to your opinion and I respect that, but anecdotal, unquantified personal testimony can not discredit scientific fact which overwhelmingly proves that burn in does not exist (at least past a VERY minimal break in point which is a couple of hours at the absolute most and more like a few seconds). I will not argue this for it is like arguing whether or not gravity or evolution are fact. I only mentioned my position on burn in so no one would ask me if I was burning these in or not, not to start anything.

 
Many a fool has stated, 'I wish not to argue', after having curtly argued their case. They allude to privileged knowledge but do not share it, for they have not the time for that either. Those who generously contribute to the education of strangers are, indeed, often short of time; their moral quest commands them onward.

 

[meboy]

Burn-in is real. Much more so for speakers, plasma TV's and high quality cables than headphones but it still exists (it will be different for each model and how the drivers are made).
Nothing more to discuss on that topic.
 
I'd be shocked if the Denon's are better dollar for dollar. They are also not really closed headphones in that the isolation is only slightly better than many open phones so they won't suit most people looking at the Shure's.