[Digital-Pride]

Quote:

 
I found the SRH1840 non-fatiguing, somewhat balanced, and with decent soundstage. However, I did not find the SRH1840 good at detail retrieval. Personally, I found my $100 used HD558 a little more detailed. While not a terrible headphone, for the price, the SRH1840 is IMO a poor performer.
 
Consider that ~$700 will get you an entry level STAX package (SRS-2170), an HD600/650 (+ decent portable DAC/Amp), HE-500,...

 
Really?  You found the HD558 more detailed than the 1840?  Interesting.  What gear did your pair yours with?

 

[Shahrose]

Not that I'm dismissing your comments ultrabike (since I haven't heard the HD558), but it's a little hard to believe when the 1840 is more detailed than the HD650.

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

 
Really?  You found the HD558 more detailed than the 1840?  Interesting.  What gear did your pair yours with?

 
Loaned Leckerton UHA-6S. I felt percussion instruments and vocals were definitively more distinctive and detailed by no small margin. You seem surprised, why so?

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

Not that I'm dismissing your comments ultrabike (since I haven't heard the HD558), but it's a little hard to believe when the 1840 is more detailed than the HD650.

 
I felt the 1840 had more emphasis in the tremble and upper mids than the classic HD650 (though I've heard some HD650's that are more neutral in the upper frequencies - and measure so.)  That may come across as more detailed.
 
IMO, the HD558 has probably more in common with the 1840 than the HD650 (in terms of tone.) However, I found percussion instruments and vocals (specially male) more detailed with the Senn HD600/650 and the HD558.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
I felt the 1840 had more emphasis in the tremble and upper mids than the classic HD650 (though I've heard some HD650's that are more neutral in the upper frequencies - and measure so.)  That may come across as more detailed.
 
IMO, the HD558 has probably more in common with the 1840 than the HD650 (in terms of tone.) However, I found percussion instruments and vocals (specially male) more detailed with the Senn HD600/650 and the HD558.

 
I can only comment on the 650s and the 1840s  and for me the 1840s detail retrieval is better and they're way ore accurate than the 650s.  They also image better.

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

 
I can only comment on the 650s and the 1840s  and for me the 1840s detail retrieval is better and they're way ore accurate than the 650s.  They also image better.

 
To me vocals, bass, and percussion (drums) where somewhat muddy (i.e. no detail) with the 1840 compared to the 650 and 558. However, 1840 are brighter than the 650, and with certain music the 1840 may come across as more detailed.
 
If you favor the 1840 tone, the 558 may be worth checking out.

 

[preproman]

Muddy vocals compared to the 650s???  uumm.  Vocals is where the 1840 shine - compared to the 650s "IMHO"

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

Muddy vocals compared to the 650s???  uumm.  Vocals is where the 1840 shine - compared to the 650s "IMHO"

 
Well, I've heard two HD650 that sounded different. At T.H.E. Show I heard one HD650 that was a bit dark IMO, but at the LA meet, the HD650 I heard was great with vocals (far superior to the 1840 I heard in the same meet.) Have you tried the HD600s?

 

[preproman]

Nope.
 
What amps / DACs are you using.  It might be the difference.  I'm only going by what I live with and the few different amps I have.  In all accounts the 1840s are a much faster and accurate headphone with quality Vocals compared to the 650s.  Now yes Bass and mids are a different story.  The 650s are just a little slow.

 

[ultrabike]

At the meet the 1840 were powered by Headroom's Ultra stuff. I also had my HD558s with me and that sounded OK with the HR Ultra stuff (better than the 1840). The HD650 at the meet was powered by a Marantz receiver (that HD650 was not slow at all - really good!)... At T.H.E. Show, the HD650 I heard was powered also by Headroom's Ultra stuff and that one seemed a bit "slow".
 
That said, I used to think it was the amps. However, I saw two HD650 frequency responses that seemed to point out differences in the headphone itself! Those differences may account for the differences in "speed"... and the different impressions...

 

[preproman]

With all that said.
 
The 650s is still a very fun headphone to listen to.  More fun than the 1840s  I just think the 1840s beat it out in certain areas and vise versa as well.

 

[Shahrose]

Once again, meet/store impressions. Take them for what they're worth prep.

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

Once again, meet/store impressions. Take them for what they're worth prep.

I'm not sure what to say. I feel impressions (meet/store included) are valuable as long as they are honest.
 
...and FWIW I 100% agree with preproman's comments. Some HD650 builds may be dark or slow to some. Some HD650 may not. Like preproman, I thought it was the amps. But then I saw these:
 
HD650 (perhaps a bit dark)
 

 
HD650 (perhaps a bit faster)
 

 
Regardless of the plots. I heard two different HD650 and the one I heard at the LA meet (which may not correspond to the above graphs) was far superior IMHO to my HD558 and 1840 (also at the meet) as far as vocals.
 
As far as bass and mids, my impressions mirror preproman's. I felt all HD650 I heard and my HD558 performed well above the 1840 I heard in the mids/bass departments.

 

[Shahrose]

Sorry, I don't mean any disrespect. I just have strong opinions on impressions from ownership vs meet/stores. I personally put much more value in the former, based on experience.

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

Sorry, I don't mean any disrespect. I just have strong opinions on impressions from ownership vs meet/stores. I personally put much more value in the former, based on experience.

 
I understand. I did give the HD650 as much attention as I could. But yes, long term impressions tend to be more accurate.