[TAMAL]

I strongly concur with recessed mids and distant sound. That's one of the reasons why I sold my pair (along with boosted, boomy bass and dark trebble).
Having read quite a lot about these headphones in people opinions and reviews, and having seen some FR graphs from different sites, I also think there's quite a big differences from pair to pair, or from batch to batch/revisions?
I don't know, but apparently you absolutely should NOT buy these before auditioning them.
IMHO.

I know that hearing them myself is the best way but unfortunately it's not possible.

Also what are your preferences(genre etc) ?

 

[Rune1221]

That was my case also (couldn't hear them before purchase), and fortunately I didn't loose much money on resale.
Hence, if you must, buy them from classifieds.
I mostly hear light rock, pop and EDM - pretty much all mainstream hits.
 
Currently I have:
Sony MDR-1A (too much base in 80hz. Really too much)
AKG k267 (now I know what they mean - unrefined, although seems most neutral on mid-bass setting)
Both Focals - Pro and Classic (Pro - a little shy in bass, Classic is too much in bass)
NAD Viso HP50 (mid is shouty - when I get all frequencies to dance levels, I can't bear the shouting voices, also the treble is a little shy)
V-Moda M-100 (No no, just too colored in all frequencies = unbalanced)
Logitech UE6000 (dark treble)
...and I returned Soundmagic HP150 due to very sibilant high mids, plain painful on some songs.
 
For now I use Focal Classic for portable (bass is tamed when connected to phone)
And Focal Pro for desktop setup - almost perfect, and these breathing voices... aaaah

 

[TAMAL]

I listen to mainstream too.
According to Tyll of innerfidelaty, the Focals should sound like the shures... seems that in your case it is completely different.
The Focals are on-ear but I need a full size...

I'm confused again....
-______-

 

[nicholars]

  That was my case also (couldn't hear them before purchase), and fortunately I didn't loose much money on resale.
Hence, if you must, buy them from classifieds.
I mostly hear light rock, pop and EDM - pretty much all mainstream hits.
 
Currently I have:
Sony MDR-1A (too much base in 80hz. Really too much)
AKG k267 (now I know what they mean - unrefined, although seems most neutral on mid-bass setting)
Both Focals - Pro and Classic (Pro - a little shy in bass, Classic is too much in bass)
NAD Viso HP50 (mid is shouty - when I get all frequencies to dance levels, I can't bear the shouting voices, also the treble is a little shy)
V-Moda M-100 (No no, just too colored in all frequencies = unbalanced)
Logitech UE6000 (dark treble)
...and I returned Soundmagic HP150 due to very sibilant high mids, plain painful on some songs.
 
For now I use Focal Classic for portable (bass is tamed when connected to phone)
And Focal Pro for desktop setup - almost perfect, and these breathing voices... aaaah

 
Sell all / most of those and get 1 pair of high end headphones like LCD2, HE560 etc.

 

[doctorjazz]

Good advice, though it does sometimes occur that you go up in the "food chain", and find there is still something "not perfect" about the higher end model, leading to wanting ever higher end gear (the well known "audiophilia nervosa" syndrome). Proceed with caution!!!

 

[Pianist]

I don't think SRH1540 has recessed mids. Not really. I would say that they are just a bit in the background relative to the bass. I think the mid/treble balance is great on the Shures. In fact, sometimes I feel that they could use even a touch more presence or perhaps more attack in the highs, as the treble is quite soft/smooth sounding on the Shures and can sometimes get slightly lost behind the bass and low mids, which have more presence on this headphone than the treble.
 
I think the sub bass (<100Hz) is the only part of the frequency range where the Shures deviate significantly from neutral response and have a noticeable (and excessive IMO) emphasis. The sub bass can sometimes intrude into the mids to my ears, especially with bass oriented music - EDM, electronic, trance, etc. If the music has a lot of low bass content, I can't listen to the Shures at high volumes at all because the air pressure from the low bass simply becomes too strong for my ears to bear. At moderate volumes, the low bass doesn't cause discomfort, but excessive emphasis on the lowest notes can still be heard.
 
I think Shure engineers have messed up the tuning of the SRH1540 somewhat with that strong low bass boost, which may appeal to bassheads, but not to people like myself who are looking for a well balanced sound, with satisfying, but not overpowering bass. If the Shures had a few dB less of the emphasis, the headphones would have been almost perfect sonically IMO.  In pretty much every other aspect of sound, the SRH1540 is fantastic to my ears - wonderful balance from mid bass through to upper highs with no odd dips or peaks anywhere in the response, great sense of space and separation that rivals good mid level open back headphones, excellent dynamics, superb detail retrieval in the mids, great refinement and clarity across the entire range...
 
I think the mids are actually where the SRH1540 shines the most. Even though it can get a little lost behind the low bass boost at times, the quality of the mids is simply amazing - the timbre of human voices, especially male ones, is spot on and that coupled with excellent detail retrieval, including micro detail, really allows me to feel like I am there with the singers quite often and more often that with any of my other headphones actually, even HD800. That's right. I am not saying SRH1540 has better mids than HD800. In fact, I think HD800 mids are even more detailed and refined. However, the tonal balance of the HD800 is less natural due to emphasis on the treble around the 6 kHz range and a dip in the presence region (2-4 kHz) that makes vocals and many other instruments sound overly distant and unnaturally thin at times. SRH1540 doesn't have this issue with tonality and this allows it to often sound more natural than the HD800.
 
Overall, SRH1540 is the best sounding closed back headphone I've heard. Its only downfall is that excessive low bass emphasis IMO. In most other aspects of sound, it is clearly ahead of other closed backs I tried, such as Focal Classic, NAD HP50 and ATH-MSR7, and sounds closer to an open back headphone in regards to air and overall sense of space than any of the others. It's still a bit behind open backs such as HD600 or K612 Pro in regards to openness and sense of space, but not by a lot.

 

[Change is Good]

I find it funny how people who are probably used to mid-centric and bright headphones think a bassy headphone like the 1540 will suit their taste. I understand curiosity and such, but one should do so with an open mind (not ready to bash because it's not the sound signature they like).

 

[7S Cameron]

It really must depend on your source. I don't feel that the Shure is nearly as bassy as some do. It is definitely emphasized, but it is not even close to basshead levels. I find the sound to be very neutral with the bass just slightly above neutral.

 

[TAMAL]

Change is Good Are you saying that they are vastly different than... say Apple ibuds ? I don't like their biting treble & try to increase bass with foam. Mids are not so bad. What bothers me is that they lack body, music sounds separated.

The sad part is... my experience is low & I can't try them. They will be my first pair & I'll use them for quite a while.

 

[kimvictor]

You prefered MDR 1A above the Shures, why is that ?

That "recessed mids" is what's freekin me out.

Also the laid back thing... I'm not sure if it'll suit me

most of what I listen to are rock,pop & some metal.

Well, 1As are portables. 1540s were more or less compared to the HD800, as it was mainly for home use. And it is on the distant side. Some like that, but for me, if it's going to be distant, it must image and stage as well as the HD800.
 
Mids are definitely more laid back. Some like that, I just happen to not.

 

[kimvictor]

That being said though, if you've read this thread(the review) you will know that I do rate the 1540 highly. If not, I wouldn't have started this thread with a review like that.

 

[Pianist]

  Well, 1As are portables. 1540s were more or less compared to the HD800, as it was mainly for home use. And it is on the distant side. Some like that, but for me, if it's going to be distant, it must image and stage as well as the HD800.
 
Mids are definitely more laid back. Some like that, I just happen to not.

 
That's a completely unfair comparison. HD800 is a $1500 open back with angled drivers, and is known to be one of the best, if not the best headphone in the world in regards to imaging and staging, while SRH1540 is under half that price and is closed back with regular, non-angled drivers. There really shouldn't be any contest between the two when it comes to staging and imaging. I think SRH1540 images and stages just fine compared to other headphones in its price range and considering that it's a closed back headphone. Also, remember that you can hear great soundstage and imaging with almost any half decent headphone when listening to binaural recordings.
 
Also, I think that the SRH1540 works just fine for portable use. Personally, I don't mind the size because the fit is comfy, the headphone looks great and the isolation is quite good. It can definitely be used and enjoyed just fine out and about and makes a very good portable. The same certainly cannot be said about HD800. In fact, I would say that HD800 is strictly for home/quiet environments use only, where noise levels are minimal.

 

[kimvictor]

   
That's a completely unfair comparison. HD800 is a $1500 open back with angled drivers, and is known to be one of the best, if not the best headphone in the world in regards to imaging and staging, while SRH1540 is under half that price and is closed back with regular, non-angled drivers. There really shouldn't be any contest between the two when it comes to staging and imaging. I think SRH1540 images and stages just fine compared to other headphones in its price range and considering that it's a closed back headphone. Also, remember that you can hear great soundstage and imaging with almost any half decent headphone when listening to binaural recordings.
 
Also, I think that the SRH1540 works just fine for portable use. Personally, I don't mind the size because the fit is comfy, the headphone looks great and the isolation is quite good. It can definitely be used and enjoyed just fine out and about and makes a very good portable. The same certainly cannot be said about HD800. In fact, I would say that HD800 is strictly for home/quiet environments use only, where noise levels are miniaml.

Well, yes. That's why I didn't bash the 1540. Have you read my review? I do rate it highly for its imaging and staging. It's just that I prefer forward sig for portable rigs, which 1540 didn't provide.

 

[TAMAL]

Well, yes. That's why I didn't bash the 1540. Have you read my review? I do rate it highly for its imaging and staging. It's just that I prefer forward sig for portable rigs, which 1540 didn't provide.

What about home use ? Do they have that "Room Feel" that a lot say about ? Do they sound like speakers ?

I know I'm asking a lot of questions... just trying to minimize the risk.

 

[Pianist]

  Well, yes. That's why I didn't bash the 1540. Have you read my review? I do rate it highly for its imaging and staging. It's just that I prefer forward sig for portable rigs, which 1540 didn't provide.

 
Sorry if I offended you in any way with that post. Didn't mean to sound harsh. I did read your review and I think that it was spot on - great job and I agreed with you on almost if not everything you wrote there. However, that last post of yours did bother me, because you wrote that the Sony cans are portables, while SRH1540 was for home use, seemingly implying that the SRH1540 is not well suited for portable use. You also said that it must image as well as HD800 if it sounds distant and that also bothered me because firstly, I don't think SRH1540 sounds distant, just a little laid back and secondly, I disagree that a laid back or even distant sounding headphone must sound like HD800 to be great sounding and enjoyable. Don't forget that HD800 is likely the best production headphone currently in regards to imaging and soundstage with stereo recordings. You are really setting your expectations to unrealistically high levels when you say that a headphone "must image and stage like HD800". There are plenty of headphones out there that have significantly inferior soundstage and imaging to HD800 with stereo recordings and yet can be more natural and enjoyable sounding for many people. Also, I mentioned binaural recordings, because even a KCS75 playing a quality binaural recording can probably beat HD800 playing a stereo recording in soundstage and imaging.
 

What about home use ? Do they have that "Room Feel" that a lot say about ? Do they sound like speakers ?

I know I'm asking a lot of questions... just trying to minimize the risk.

 
Well, the SRH1540 is not marketed as having "Room Feel" - that's NAD marketing for their Viso HP50. However, the Shures do have a sound signature that is somewhat like the HP50 and both of them do provide a more "speaker-like" headphone experience that more neutral headphone do with that boost in the low end that allows the listener to "feel" the bass more. Do they sound like speakers? No, they still sound like headphones, but with satisfying bass presence.