[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

And you have a good point. Better for others doesn't mean better for me

Well, there's always absolute ranking you seem to see here , like hd800 > srh940.
As a guy who didn't test much headphone , and cannot test them on store, I  usually rely on consensus / ratings.
But I  realized that a headphone excellent for a majority, doesn't necessarily mean excellent for me: there's some hyping, fotm, etc...
Also a perfectly "neutral" headphone is not necessarily what I  enjoy the most.
I  like some "euphony", perhaps what  other call "good timbre" .

 

[Alexium]

R-Audiohead, so you consider GMP 450 Pro to be more natural-sounding and evenly balanced, and not less detailed, than the other headphones in question? I might want to search for those, then. I kind of like my GMP 8.35D, but they are not as reference as the manufactirer claims.
 
How's the soundstage of 450 Pro compared to SRH940?

 

[Alexium]

Quote:

 
Also a perfectly "neutral" headphone is not necessarily what I  enjoy the most.

I hear you, but personally (again, based on my VERY limited experience - I'm just starting to dive into high-quality music reproduction) I found the headphones with the most evenly balanced (the most flat, if you like) frequency response to excite me the most. Of course, there's more to it than frequency response. I have yet to hear 'phones with wide soundstage. All the 'phones I've heard had very narrow stage. I hope that's not the best headphones have to offer...
 
 

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

 I have yet to hear 'phones with wide soundstage. All the 'phones I've heard had very narrow stage. I hope that's not the best headphones have to offer...
 
 

For wide soundstage you might try the vst TB isone (as a vst inside foobar for instance) , I've seen some praise  here at head-fi.
I've also experimented with other vst: sheppi (free) , and the reverberate vst with M7 impulse set (true stereo).
I didn't like dolby headphone.
I rank for now,  TB isone> Reverberate > Sheppi > Dolby headphone
One think I don't like with TB isone, is that I can't expand soundstage of regular speakers (too fake).
 
And for "natural"  soundstage , open headphone are recommended.
I manage to get a good soundstage of the srh940, but after playing with the postion of the cups on the  head (see my review for more details).
 

 

[ac500]

I thought also that most headphones' soundstage (LCD2 HD650 DT880 SRH940 AD2000 etc.) sounds more or less similar. There are small differences of course but nothing too major honestly.
 
Then I heard the HD800. The difference is massive... Soundstage so good in fact, the HD800 is a definite upgrade goal of mine now (unless SRH1840 beats it).

 

[R-Audiohead]

Quote:

R-Audiohead, so you consider GMP 450 Pro to be more natural-sounding and evenly balanced, and not less detailed, than the other headphones in question? I might want to search for those, then. I kind of like my GMP 8.35D, but they are not as reference as the manufactirer claims.
 
How's the soundstage of 450 Pro compared to SRH940?

My SP-1 is a modified QP450 PRO, which should give me a really close idea of what the GMP450 PRO should sound like, although there is evidence to suggest QP 450 PRO =/= SP-1 =/= GMP 450 PRO.  The differences should be subtle though.
 
Honestly, the SP-1 isn't very easy to drive, but just shines behind a good amp/dac.  It seems to be really picky.  It is also very revealing so I caution its use with poor recordings.  In comparison, the 940 is very forgiving (and some have noted that the 940 isn't all that forgiving to begin with although I may disagree).  If you're looking for a monitor/reference type sound AND you have the equipment to drive the GMP450 PRO, I think it is one of the better options available.
 
As far as soundstaging goes, I think it is a step up from the 940, but not necessarily drastic.  The imaging is certainly improved.  The SP-1 claims to be closed, but it is most certainly semi open to me, and isolates at about a semi-open level as well (leaks a lot).  I have heard the QP400 as well (an open version) and if you're looking for a little bit richer top end and just a bigger (however slightly less lean/revealing) sound overall that can is a great monitor option as well (and pretty cheap last I checked, with very limited stock for the MB Quart version).  Just so the thread doesn't derail, if you're interested in these models go ahead and PM me.  Sometimes the custom SP-1 can be had for less than the GMP450 PRO and sometimes not.  They're available in very limited stock.  I'm curious how many were made (my serial is 0042).  I have been in contact with the producer/engineer at CharterOak and may be able to help you negotiate a price if you're serious about the SP-1.  We can chat further if you'd like.
 
Lastly, I have the QP805 (which is a GMP 8.300D equivalent) and while it has a "fun" signature with some bassy emphasis, I agree it is far from a monitor sound.  The bass is a bit big and the mids are surprisingly non-MB Quart characteristic, a tad murkey to me....

 

[John In Cali]

Quote:

I also asked for other monitor headphones, so it's OK.
 
And you have a good point. Better for others doesn't mean better for me, and superiror to 840 (better headphones I've heard so far) also doesn't mean I'll like them more. Which leads to a conclusion - one shouldn't buy phones (or any acoustic system, for that matter) without prior listening. But in my city there's no 940's, as far as I can tell. Tough decision...
 

Guitar Center or Sam Ash would have them if you have one around.
 

 

[Alexium]

Quote:

Guitar Center or Sam Ash would have them if you have one around.
 

 
I live on the edge of the civilized world. Behind the edge, actually. There would be no problem if I lived in USA...

 

[John In Cali]

If anyone is interested i am going to be changing the stock connector to a Mini-XLR are my pair.  I have a 11 foot cord from my AKG's and will be cutting the stock Shure cable down a foot for a portable cable.  
Here is the Male Mini-XLR end i will be using(in headphones) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00404HBC2/ref=ox_sc_act_title_6?ie=UTF8&m=A7KODY9T0BTOM
And the female for the cord.  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003ZZBDNA/ref=ox_sc_act_title_7?ie=UTF8&m=A7KODY9T0BTOM
I'm stuck using amazon because i have a gift card there.  The male connector is 5 pin so i will be pulling two pins off.

 

[eugenefeng]

I have got a set and listened for a while.  After about 100 hours of burning, the sound is coming out.  I always replace the Shure cable whenever I can.  The original OFC cable and gold plated plug is not bad, but the sound is always too "pushy".  I replaced with a Sennheisser  silver cable with Oyaide 3.5mm silver/rodium 3.5mm plug.  Cannot find a better 2.5mm plug.  The mid-high and highs are smooth out although still bright but much better than gold plated plugs.  Definitely with an amp.  I can say if the phone is truly Hifi, then the phone should reveal the charasteristics of the amp too.  Which I can tell from the 940.  The sound is full and alive, cannot complain about anything for the money spent.  Very detailed and enjoyable earphone indeed.

 

[dL.]

Finally pulled the trigger and picked one of these up. I was hesitant all these times because I already have the 840 and the 440. The 440 is there simply because I got a phenomenal price on it and it's my gaming and casual headphone. The 840 was my serious headphone, however there were 3 things I personally did not like:
 
- Too laid back. Vocals are not as forward as my 440.
- Too dark. While it's very relaxing, I sometimes wish for more treble lushness.
- Extremely uncomfortable. Basically, after 30 minutes I gotta take them off and my headband is already really loose because I dropped it a few times already.
 
Now comes the SRH 940. My first experience of these dated back a few months ago at Headphone Bar. I actually compared it to the HD800. I am no expert like the rest of you guys here but all I have to say is:
 
- HD800 is definitely better than the SRH940. More detailed. More spacious. It actually feels like a performance.
- Despite the HD800 being 5 times the cost, it's definitely not 5 times better than the SRH940. More like 1.5 to 2 times better, which says a lot about this headphone.
 
I was very positive about it already, but every time I listened to my 840 again I would be convinced that the 940 would not be that much better, until today.
 
Now that I have the 940, 840 and 440, between these 3 I will conclude that:
 
- 940 is a "detail monster", just like Headfonia claims. So much detail. Sounds balanced yet it's fun to listen to. Tight and controlled bass. Excellent mids and treble. Sounds a tad bit too bright at the moment, probably because I got used to the 840 and it's not burnt-in yet.
- 840 has more bass presence, although the 940 has tighter and more controlled bass.
- 840 is laid-back and dark. 940 is forward and bright. 840 is more relaxing to listen to, as I always fall asleep on the chair with them. The 940 just begs for you to listen to every cymbal, breath, pedal sound that the song offers. 
- 840 has a wide soundstage feel that imo is a bit better than the 940, although they are similar.
- 940 is way more comfortable. At least I haven't taken it off for the past 3 hours that I have owned them. Although it does feel much tighter than the demo one I tried, which is alright because I know it will loosen up over time.
- 440 and 940 actually sound quite similar imo. Forward, bright and fun yet balanced with nice bass presence, except it's not as detailed as the 940 in the entire range spectrum, and the 440 soundstage is much narrower than the 940. Everything is right in your ear and head.
 
In summary, the Shure SRH440, SRH840 and SRH940 are overall very balanced and natural with Shure's signature mid range. The 440 is balanced, forward, bright and fun with a narrow soundstage and lacks the fine details where everything is just thrown right to your head. The 840 improves upon the soundstage and detail, but is laid back and dark. Very relaxing sounding set but unfortunately the ergonomic of the clamping force is uncomfortable. The 940 combines the soundstage of the 840 with the forward, bright and fun of the 440 and adds a whole new level of detail, comfort and balance to the legendary mid range signature brand of Shure.
 
Overall, Shure's sound signature is perfection to my ears, as evident with the gears that I have (including my SE535). My preference of great quality sound is exactly what the 940 offers, with the exception of the HD 800 which adds details and spatiality into the formula that I cannot personally afford or justify to get.
 
Compared to the Q701, Hifiman HE-300 and the Audio Technica ATH-50 that I briefly tested today, I find the overall detail of the 940, especially in the treble to be better than the other three, however I must say that the HE-300 has a really warm mid that sounds comfortable but it sounds artificial, and the Q701 is really smooth across the low and mid, and the ATH-50 gives you that extra enjoyment and umph when listening to Rock or songs with a lot of bass, but the high was a bit tough for myself to listen to.
 
Hope you enjoyed reading my unprofessional comparison and opinion
 
dL

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

 
KRK KNS-8400 definitely has more detail than the SRH-940 IMO (even the 6400 does). I think people exaggerate the detail of the SRH-940. Basically the KRK gets almost everything except the bass better than the SRH-940. It's just not as full bodied as the SRH-940's sound, but that's not a negative for me. Depends on what one likes.
 
BTW the KNS-8400 has more sub-bass than the SRH-940, but overall the headphone sounds lighter in the bass than the SRH-940. The $150 KRK is far more clearer sounding too.
 
If someone can hear something on the SRH-940 that's not there on the KNS-8400, I'll personally mail them a check for $50

If there's anything that's nearly impossible to hear in a song on most headphones, but is there on say the HD-800 or SRH-940, please let me know. People generally say something is more detailed, but without actually comparing them and giving references tracks. I don't believe specific details usually go missing.
 
Also...a good DAC really pushes the last bit of detail out the the KRKs. I was surprised how much the HRT Music Streamer II helped the level of detail on the KNS-8400.
 
BTW what's considered the most detailed headphone ever made under $500? Most detailed headphones i've heard were the DT-880, Koss A/250 and the KRKs. Q701 is pretty detailed, but I don't think it's any sort of detail monster, but close.

 

Quote:

See, but what perplexes me is that people claiming the DT880 has more detail than the SRH940. That makes absolutely no sense to what I'm hearing. Do you people even hear 15+khz and how important it is to the fine detail I'm referring to?
 
The DT880 actually had some of the most sibilant and grainy upper treble I've heard (15+khz), not even close to the quality of the SRH940 or even HD650.
 

I agree the term "detail" is quite vague, and there is a lack of, say, track reference.
 
To be fair, you haven't referenced a track, tdockweiler...
 
If I 'cut off' 15kHz+ in Foobar it seems there is more information there than you'd suspect yeA...
 
Anyway there are many kinds of detail, for example speed and seperation is an important one, however if a headphone is really fast and has zero soundstage and really weak layering, then the details will be all mixed together, a very detailed milkshake, right?
 
If I remember correctly..... I thought the SRH-940 had really good layering?  That would give the perception of lots of detail...... a very evenly layered milkshake, so you can hear the sounds more clearly.
 
I'm guessing that's what your DAC did trottweiler... increased the space of the layering and imaging, a.k.a. instrument seperation, a.k.a. prettier milkshake.
 
I havent' experienced more "raw detail" from a DAC I don't think...
 
Hmm... I find it difficult to describe the sound of DAC's, and I think the term detail a bit vague...
 
I mostly focus on concepts like speed, decay, seperation, imaging, layering, energy, realism, tonality, extension, quality, airiness, bass reverb, wet/dry, soft vs sharp etc...

 

[Beagle]

 
 

Originally Posted by tdockweiler
 
If someone can hear something on the SRH-940 that's not there on the KNS-8400, I'll personally mail them a check for $50

 
I hope you're wealthy.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Then I heard the HD800. The difference is massive... Soundstage so good in fact, the HD800 is a definite upgrade goal of mine now (unless SRH1840 beats it).

The "soundstage" is fake, exaggerated. Pulling the drivers a distance from your ears is akin to placing loudspeakers 30 feet apart. Some cool effects but all wrong. If you don't hear the recording's soundstage on a pair of earbuds, then there is none.
 

 

[mutabor]

Quote:

 
I live on the edge of the civilized world. Behind the edge, actually. 
Location: Ukraine

 
 
+1 

 

[kiteki]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle /img/forum/go_quote.gif

The "soundstage" is fake, exaggerated. Pulling the drivers a distance from your ears is akin to placing loudspeakers 30 feet apart. Some cool effects but all wrong. If you don't hear the recording's soundstage on a pair of earbuds, then there is none.

That's true, a binaural recording sounds extremely good on earbuds... so are you saying full-size headphones ellicit an artificial soundstage?
 
I know this isn't the right thread, but I find it interesting.