[nicholars]

removed

 

[LNuneek]

I have the ath-m50. Is the 1540 a significant step up? Is it worth upgrading to at triple the price of the m50?

 

[nicholars]

I have the ath-m50. Is the 1540 a significant step up? Is it worth upgrading to at triple the price of the m50?

 
Yes

 

[Jackson9696]

+1

The m50 isn't even close to being in the same realm.

 

[nicholars]

For example the "no EQ mentality"...
 
SRH 1540 are all round very good... The treble peak can be annoying sometimes and mid can sound too far back compared to the treble peak.... "no EQ mentality" would be "right ok I am selling the headphones and spending 2-3x the amount to fix that".... OR You could just have one flat EQ and one with a small reduction at 10-12khz.... This will give you zero / almost zero reduction in sound quality... Simply reducing the volume of that frequency slightly... The sound is then fine with no treble peak on tracks where it is annoying (already bright / sibilant recordings) and you can use flat EQ for others... BUT... "I must not EQ because it is against my principles, so I will buy a new amp and new headphones" Don't understand it.

 

[Hachiko270296]

LCD2 and HE500 I am sure are probably better but also need serious amping, cost a lot more and are not as light / comfortable... So yes a porsche 918  is obviously better than a porsche 911... but it also costs a lot more... LCD2 + an amp is about TRIPLE the price of 1540... At £300 I paid for the Shures I do not think there is anything better as an all rounder. Denon Dxxxx, Momentums, HE400 and HD650 are all very good in particular ways but do not have as good all round sound that works well with every genre.

For example the mids are slightly too recessed / thin at times on 1540, but then on the HE400 and D2000 they are extremely recessed... The problems on the 1540 are minor compared to others. HD650 has better mids but no sub bass at all, Momentums sound good but have miniscule soundstage, HE400 and D2000 have horrible sibilant treble unless heavily EQ to the point they have basically no treble left (HE400).

You can't say a headphones has weak mids(1540) then call it an all-rounder lol an all-rounder should be a headphone that does everything well. The 1540 does not do well with vocal tracks. It does not have the body and natural flow with vocals.

The NAD VISO is what I would call an all round headphone. It does everything very good. Better than the Shure in most areas.

Anyway. Just suck it up, I don't rate your headphones so just deal with it really. No amount of arguing is going to make them any better.

 

[Hachiko270296]

For example the "no EQ mentality"...

SRH 1540 are all round very good... The treble peak can be annoying sometimes and mid can sound too far back compared to the treble peak.... "no EQ mentality" would be "right ok I am selling the headphones and spending 2-3x the amount to fix that".... OR You could just have one flat EQ and one with a small reduction at 10-12khz.... This will give you zero / almost zero reduction in sound quality... Simply reducing the volume of that frequency slightly... The sound is then fine with no treble peak on tracks where it is annoying (already bright / sibilant recordings) and you can use flat EQ for others... BUT... "I must not EQ because it is against my principles, so I will buy a new amp and new headphones" Don't understand it.

Again, take a deep breath..relax! I don't like EQ..be a man and accept it. Loads of people don't either.

 

[chailee80]

I have the ath-m50. Is the 1540 a significant step up? Is it worth upgrading to at triple the price of the m50?

Well, whether something is worth it or not is very subjective. Yes the 1540s are a step up in quality but i wouldnt say they sound 3 times as good. I thought the 1540s sounded very good but i also thought there were some cheaper models that were comparable in sound so for their normal retail price i think they are a little overpriced personally. But then again i'm about to buy a pair of noble k10s which are crazy expensive but worth it to get what i want.

 

[iCupboard]

 
Well, whether something is worth it or not is very subjective. Yes the 1540s are a step up in quality but i wouldnt say they sound 3 times as good. I thought the 1540s sounded very good but i also thought there were some cheaper models that were comparable in sound so for their normal retail price i think they are a little overpriced personally. But then again i'm about to buy a pair of noble k10s which are crazy expensive but worth it to get what i want.

What headphone would be comparabale in sound but less expensive as an example? 

 

[chailee80]

  What headphone would be comparabale in sound but less expensive as an example? 

I think the yamaha mt220, nad hp50 and focal spirit pro are comparable for around half the price.

 

[nicholars]

You can't say a headphones has weak mids(1540) then call it an all-rounder lol an all-rounder should be a headphone that does everything well. The 1540 does not do well with vocal tracks. It does not have the body and natural flow with vocals.

The NAD VISO is what I would call an all round headphone. It does everything very good. Better than the Shure in most areas.

Anyway. Just suck it up, I don't rate your headphones so just deal with it really. No amount of arguing is going to make them any better.

 
It is a good all rounder, the mids are not that bad and vocals sound pretty good to me tbh (heard better but they are not bad at all), as I said with some recordings you can EQ the treble to make the mids more forward... Anyway lets not discuss it any more!

 

[nicholars]

Again, take a deep breath..relax! I don't like EQ..be a man and accept it. Loads of people don't either.

 
I am relaxed... Just saying a small amount of EQ can sometimes make headphones sound much better, but it is a bit stupid IMO when people refuse to EQ out of principle when it does not actually reduce the sound quality other than lowering the volume of certain frequencies. Try playing music with a flat EQ enabled and disabled, enabling EQ makes ZERO difference to sound quality... And changing frequencies makes little / no reduction in sound quality.

 

[Change is Good]

I don't get it why people complain about mids when this headphone was intentionally tuned with a u-shaped curve. Want forward mids? Look elsewhere...

 

[nicholars]

If the 1540 had more forward midrange I doubt they would be able to have a good soundstage like they do, I have never heard closed headphones with forward mid and a good soundstage at the same time.

 

[Delance26]

I agree with both prior statements, I mean would a more forward midrange be nice? yeah, but at what cost?  Plus the midrange is not that recessed.  If  you wanna hear an extreme U-shape listen to the Beyerdynamic DT990.  Those have a huge U-shape.  
 
I have mentioned this before, but to me what add so much value to these headphones is the comfort.  It seems that many HiFi headphones are absurdly large and awkward (LCD anyone?).  I wear glasses and I can easily wear these for hours with no issue.  This is very rare in a full size headphone.  I will sacrifice a bit of "HiFi sound quality" to allow for comfort listening.  I will also mention that over the past months that I have owned these (since mid November) I have gained an appreciation to there forgiveness for poor source material and flexibility to what the source play through is. (laptop, dedicated Amp, mobile player, etc...).  To me these are qualities that add immense value to these headphones and why I would call them one of the best all rounders on the market.  
 
Anyway those are my thoughts Moral of the story, who cares what everyone thinks about the headphone the important question is do you think it sounds good? then cool it sounds good, end of story!
 
Have an awesome day everyone!