[nicholars]

Yeh even at full extension the bottoms of the earcups press on my earlobes. My plan is to try to gradually bend the top piece of the headband into more of a v shape which should give the earcups a little more reach. I haven't played with eq yet I'm hoping a proper fit will solve the bass issue.

 
They don't have much sub bass below about 50hz at stock settings even with a good seal (although much better than with a poor seal anyway) If you look at the FR graphs you can see they have a bump in the bass which extends up to about 60hz and then lowers in volume below that, if you effectively make this flat by increasing below ~60hz then the 1540's will have a decent amount of sub bass. Increasing anything above about 70-80hz will make them sound boomy and not good but increasing below about 50-60hz will give you more sub bass and no / hardly any reduction in quality.

 

[nicholars]

Here is an example using the standard 31 band graphic EQ in foobar, something like this is good for bass heavy music eg. electronic etc.
 

 

[doctorjazz]

I assume you are aware you can slide the headphones to change the fit? Also if you add some bass below about 60hz with EQ then they have decent amount of bass.

Yeh even at full extension the bottoms of the earcups press on my earlobes. My plan is to try to gradually bend the top piece of the headband into more of a v shape which should give the earcups a little more reach. I haven't played with eq yet I'm hoping a proper fit will solve the bass issue.

I'm convinced different size and shaped heads have as much to do with the different impressions people have with headphones as most build differences. I have exactly the opposite issue with the 1540 (and most over the ear headphones)...I have to set them at the SMALLEST setting of the band/cups, and even then most will be slightly big. If the cups are big enough, they still encircle my ears, but bass is especially affected by fit/seal. (I must have a tiny head, have this with all the over and on ear phones).

 

[RyanDJ1]

I keep hearing people says theses have a unique sound...where? They are just typical V shaped headphones that are dry and grainy. Really disappointed. I think the Mad Dogs are superior.

 

[nicholars]

I keep hearing people says theses have a unique sound...where? They are just typical V shaped headphones that are dry and grainy. Really disappointed. I think the Mad Dogs are superior.

 
Yes extremely dry and grainy headphones.... (sarcastic)
 
The grain is probably from Mp3 or bad recordings... Try some FLAC / CD good recordings no grain at all.

 

[doctorjazz]

Again, everyone hears things differently. I heard these had great bass, when I bought them I was wondering where the bass went. Changed pads, got a better fit, there it was.

 

[nw130d]

I keep hearing people says theses have a unique sound...where? They are just typical V shaped headphones that are dry and grainy. Really disappointed. I think the Mad Dogs are superior.

 
I would say they are unique but in the since of hi fi headphones. Most hi fi headphones does not have similar sound signature. In some ways the 1540 sound signature it self is similar to average consumer headphones but with higher fidelity.
 
Bass and mids have same emphasis, same playing filed. High has lower presence but not rolled off or anything like that...
 
So guess in some ways some people might not be impressed by them

 

[nicholars]

What I like about them is that they are a "jack of all trades", they are not 100% neutral but not so far away that they sound bad or missing frequencies, they are a bit "V" shaped, but not so V shaped that all you can hear is *BOOM TISH* with no midrange, they don't have the most bass impact or quantity compared to some closed headphones, but the bass sounds nice and is enough to make the headphones sound warm and quite bassy (especially with EQ the bass quantity is good), they are not dry sounding or whatever the opposite of dry sounding is, They are somewhere between, the mids are not forward or recessed, the treble has a bit of brightness so it is not boring, but without being harsh or sibilant. The soundstage and imaging for closed headphones is very good, comfort is excellent. They are not outstanding in any particular area, but very good at everything... So the overall sound for closed headphones is outstanding (to me anyway). Maybe this is why they do not get many reviews on head-fi because people often look for something "Flavor of the month" or want something that seems amazing at first but will soon become tedious after a few months and get sold.... Overall as a pair of all rounder headphones at the price I don't think there are any better options, except maybe some used Denon D5000 + HD650 which would end up costing quite a lot more.

 

[nw130d]

  What I like about them is that they are a "jack of all trades", they are not 100% neutral but not so far away that they sound bad or missing frequencies, they are a bit "V" shaped, but not so V shaped that all you can hear is *BOOM TISH* with no midrange, they don't have the most bass impact or quantity compared to some closed headphones, but the bass sounds nice and is enough to make the headphones sound warm and quite bassy (especially with EQ the bass quantity is good), they are not dry sounding or whatever the opposite of dry sounding is, They are somewhere between, the mids are not forward or recessed, the treble has a bit of brightness so it is not boring, but without being harsh or sibilant. The soundstage and imaging for closed headphones is very good, comfort is excellent. They are not outstanding in any particular area, but very good at everything... So the overall sound for closed headphones is outstanding (to me anyway). Maybe this is why they do not get many reviews on head-fi because people often look for something "Flavor of the month" or want something that seems amazing at first but will soon become tedious after a few months and get sold.... Overall as a pair of all rounder headphones at the price I don't think there are any better options, except maybe some used Denon D5000 + HD650 which would end up costing quite a lot more.

 
Agreed, they are just good at everything. 1540 doesn't wave it's hands around and yell "look at me and what I can do!".
They are not do all end all headphones but for sure can cover a lot of grounds in the sound and comfort department

 

[RyanDJ1]

Yes extremely dry and grainy headphones.... (sarcastic)

The grain is probably from Mp3 or bad recordings... Try some FLAC / CD good recordings no grain at all.

Yes extremely dry and grainy headphones.... (sarcastic)

The grain is probably from Mp3 or bad recordings... Try some FLAC / CD good recordings no grain at all.

They are grainy and thin in the mids. Vocals sound a bit shouty and this is coming from someone who has a setups based around smoothness. They remind me of a refined Beyer. While the mids are not what I call recessed they are thin like beyers. I can appreciate that they are solid headphones but there's nothing about them that make them special. There's too many bright, V shaped headphones on the market. Surely some lush mids would be better eh? Shure being a mic company certainly left the vocals out.

 

[bassboysam]

I don't hear thin mids, especially low mids. my dt880 is much thinner as are my d2000 and d5000.

 

[nicholars]

They are grainy and thin in the mids. Vocals sound a bit shouty and this is coming from someone who has a setups based around smoothness. They remind me of a refined Beyer. While the mids are not what I call recessed they are thin like beyers. I can appreciate that they are solid headphones but there's nothing about them that make them special. There's too many bright, V shaped headphones on the market. Surely some lush mids would be better eh? Shure being a mic company certainly left the vocals out.

 
The lower midrange on these headphones is quite emphasized and they don't sound overly thin to me (and I hate thin sounding headphones), but if you used them with no EQ the treble at 9-12khz sounds too exaggerated compared to everything else which makes them sound a bit thin, on the EQ I posted earlier this balances that out and makes them sound good.  How much have you used them or did you just test in a shop? They really aren't thin sounding compared to most headphones. I don't hear any grain on them that is not from the recording, they are quite detailed so maybe you are hearing the grain in recording. They are also not bright headphones at all compared to some, I don't understand about the vocals either, vocals sound really good on these, especially coming from the HE400 and D2000...

 

[nw130d]

They are grainy and thin in the mids. Vocals sound a bit shouty and this is coming from someone who has a setups based around smoothness. They remind me of a refined Beyer. While the mids are not what I call recessed they are thin like beyers. I can appreciate that they are solid headphones but there's nothing about them that make them special. There's too many bright, V shaped headphones on the market. Surely some lush mids would be better eh? Shure being a mic company certainly left the vocals out.

 
 
Shure has enough mid centric headphones, no need for another. Mid are there but bass is just as powerful, kinda makes it sound like someone is drumming a bit too enthusiastic behind the signer lol
 
No 1540 are not special but what headphone is?... Everything has been made and remade. There is no all new and exiting sound signature that is never done before. In this cause 1540 is slightly better than all the others before it with that sound signature, eg HD25. If you aren't into the sound signature you can't blame the headphone being bad, simple as that.

 

[JRoMan]

 


Shure has enough mid centric headphones, no need for another. Mid are there but bass is just as powerful, kinda makes it sound like someone is drumming a bit too enthusiastic behind the signer lol

No 1540 are not special but what headphone is?... Everything has been made and remade. There is no all new and exiting sound signature that is never done before. In this cause 1540 is slightly better than all the others before it with that sound signature, eg HD25. If you aren't into the sound signature you can't blame the headphone being bad, simple as that.

Interesting comments. Looking to move up from HD25. I previously had SRH840 and loved the midrange but sold them for a couple different reasons.

I started looking at Mad Dog/Pros and am intently following the Audeze EL-8 thread. Mike Mercer also compared the EL-8 to Mad Dog Pro and HD25. At some point I think he also mentioned the 1540. $699 is probably more than I can spend but $500 seems like a better option (I am also thinking of getting a DAC, probably Modi...already have the Magni).

The 1540 look way more comfortable than the 840 was. I wasn't crazy about the 840 headband. I'm also slightly hesitant about the Mad Dogs being modified headphones even though the quality is reported to be good and they have a warranty.

Anybody else heard both the Mad Dogs and the 1840?

 

[nw130d]

Interesting comments. Looking to move up from HD25. I previously had SRH840 and loved the midrange but sold them for a couple different reasons.

I started looking at Mad Dog/Pros and am intently following the Audeze EL-8 thread. Mike Mercer also compared the EL-8 to Mad Dog Pro and HD25. At some point I think he also mentioned the 1540. $699 is probably more than I can spend but $500 seems like a better option (I am also thinking of getting a DAC, probably Modi...already have the Magni).

The 1540 look way more comfortable than the 840 was. I wasn't crazy about the 840 headband. I'm also slightly hesitant about the Mad Dogs being modified headphones even though the quality is reported to be good and they have a warranty.

Anybody else heard both the Mad Dogs and the 1840?

 
Wouldn't the Alpha Dog be in more direct comparison with the 1540? Especially if one consider the price. I haven't owned/ demoed the Mad Dog but Alpha Dog sound signature is different than the HD25.
 
The 1540 at louder playing levels, slightly higher decibels than say at normal conversation volume. The 1540 sounds 99% the same as HD25, sound signature wise. Small difference is bass boom of the 25 is slightly narrower freq range than the bass emphasis of the 1540, which is slightly wider and into the lower freq. Sound stage is bigger in the 1540 as expected. I personally been looking to get the HD25 sound signature but improvements in comfort for a long... long time. 1540 is the end game for me in closed headphones (k550 for some genres are better).
 
Comfort of the Alpha Dog is better in the headband area. 1540 for me still more comfortable as ears gets sweaty less of the time vs Alpha Dog. 1540 is also more portable in the sense it doesn't require as powerful of an amp.