[Digital-Pride]

Quote:

I don't think so. Because if I EQ the HD650 to boost the treble, the HD650 is still blurred while the SRH940 is not. The NFB12, if dark at all, definitely doesn't sound blurry on the SRH940 so it's definitely not hiding detail.
 
If it was purely due to the HD650 being laid back, then the HD650 would clear up when I add a big treble boost. I've tried both removing the foam on the HD650 and boosting treble with a high quality equalizer, and while these both effectively make the HD650 sound neutral/bright, and make it seem more detailed and crisp -- the added detail is all fake. Don't get me wrong, the HD650 is very detailed. But the SRH940 is just astonishingly more so, above 15+khz, to my ears. 
 
It's hard to describe a "blurred" sound in the context of treble, but that's the best I can describe the HD650. Honestly I don't like it - it's a sign of lower quality treble by nature. Not to say the HD650 has low quality treble, because like I said it's very good, the SRH940 just beats it by a lot in the really high frequency range.
 
But if you had a headphone with HD650 quality bass and lower mids, combined with SRH940 quality upper mids and treble, then you'd have basically the perfect headphone, and that doesn't exist.

 
Ah, I see.  Maybe that headphone will be the 1840?

 

[funkmeister]

Quote:

But if you had a headphone with HD650 quality bass and lower mids, combined with SRH940 quality upper mids and treble, then you'd have basically the perfect headphone, and that doesn't exist.

Easy... the AKG K550. Oh wait, that's not as detailed either. Maybe the perfect headphone is the SRH1840. Or Maybe it's the SRH940 with DSP for fixing its issues.

 

[achristilaw]

 
Quote:

Differing opinions then.  I used to play the guitar, I've also been involved with piano from a young age (both my mother and her mother used to play - my grandmother actually taught as well).  I've also been to many live concerts - especially classical - although not recently.  And IMO the SRH940 was coloured.  The HD600 is more realistic.
 
Guess we have different ears

  Disagree (respectfully). Different gear is more apt! I have enjoyed the 600 since the mid nineties. Have two (one balanced) and power them properly (most people do not!). It is a pleasurable phone...but a bit more hi-fi than actual (IMO). The Sennheiser will gloss over the failings far...far easier from the rest of the chain. I used to play before rheumatoid arthritis caught me and forced retirement from everything....
 
  I have said before, that the main failing of the 940 is it's price...because it will be gobbled up by people with entry-level gear. Then (horrors!) they will hear what the rest of the chain sounds like. Also, many folks listen at above natural levels, even for acoustic music. If you try a similar level setting (on your amp) with the 940 as you would other phones....nose-bleed! It will run from most any amp....not every amp should run the 940. Add and inadequate source at a stymied bit rate? Ugh...as in ugly.
 
  Everything offers some degree and level of coloration. To my ears, with my gear, the 940 is a wondrous bargain.

 

[ac500]

 

Ah, I see.  Maybe that headphone will be the 1840?

I hope so. I guess we'll find out soon... ish. Time always runs slower when you're waiting for something, of course.

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Do the Walter Huston dance (from "Treasure of the Sierra Madre") while exclaiming, "need dem' phones!" "need dem' phones!"....."need dem'.........!" 
 

 
I think I'll wait a couple of months, take therapy and end up repulsed by the thought of headphones.
 
Quote:

   
  You guys have to take time out and learn whet an un-amplified instrument sounds like in real space...I'm betting it will shock most of you. I feel that it's "band" being dropped from many High School curriculum's isn't helping matters. BRASS reproduction via this phone is dazzling!!
 
 That BRASS !!!
 

Correct, brass should have rasp and sound fast and super tight stop/start. Most headphones make a mess of it.


Quote:

Originally Posted by achristilaw /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
  I have said before, that the main failing of the 940 is it's price...because it will be gobbled up by people with entry-level gear. Then (horrors!) they will hear what the rest of the chain sounds like. Also, many folks listen at above natural levels, even for acoustic music. If you try a similar level setting (on your amp) with the 940 as you would other phones....nose-bleed! It will run from most any amp....not every amp should run the 940.
 
  Everything offers some degree and level of coloration. To my ears, with my gear, the 940 is a wondrous bargain.

Agree again, I find the nice thing about the 940 is that it gives you everything at lower volume, so you don't have to pump up the levels to find it. People come across like "No bass, must turn it up...OHHHH IT'S TOO BRIGHT!!".
 
Like you stated, listen to the natural sounds of live music and unamped instruments/voices. You will be shocked at how bright and strident they will sound if you compare that sound to the sound of so many headphones.
 

 

[roma101]

Quote:

 


  Disagree (respectfully). Different gear is more apt! I have enjoyed the 600 since the mid nineties. Have two (one balanced) and power them properly (most people do not!). It is a pleasurable phone...but a bit more hi-fi than actual (IMO). The Sennheiser will gloss over the failings far...far easier from the rest of the chain. I used to play before rheumatoid arthritis caught me and forced retirement from everything....
 
  I have said before, that the main failing of the 940 is it's price...because it will be gobbled up by people with entry-level gear. Then (horrors!) they will hear what the rest of the chain sounds like. Also, many folks listen at above natural levels, even for acoustic music. If you try a similar level setting (on your amp) with the 940 as you would other phones....nose-bleed! It will run from most any amp....not every amp should run the 940. Add and inadequate source at a stymied bit rate? Ugh...as in ugly.
 
  Everything offers some degree and level of coloration. To my ears, with my gear, the 940 is a wondrous bargain.

Just a few questions, as I'm always interested in headphones that sound the most natural and have good timbre accuracy: do you think the 940 would pair well with a TTVJ Slim (warm and analog-sounding amp)? How much do you think the 940 should cost? And where would you rank it amongst the HD600/650 and hell even other higher-tier cans? Thanks for the input, in advance. Love these discussions on the way instruments should really sound. That's the most important thing to me. 
 

 

[achristilaw]

 
Quote:

 
I think I'll wait a couple of months, take therapy and end up repulsed by the thought of headphones.
 

Correct, brass should have rasp and sound fast and super tight stop/start. Most headphones make a mess of it.

Agree again, I find the nice thing about the 940 is that it gives you everything at lower volume, so you don't have to pump up the levels to find it. People come across like "No bass, must turn it up...OHHHH IT'S TOO BRIGHT!!".
 
Like you stated, listen to the natural sounds of live music and unamped instruments/voices. You will be shocked at how bright and strident they will sound if you compare that sound to the sound of so many headphones.
 

 
  I had a "new" audiophile I befriended and the shock and awe of a live performance stupefied the young Man. It's amazing how a flute can pressurize an auditorium. The sass of Brass OMG! Fifteen feet from a Violinist playing Paganini Caprices? Make your cheeks clench...the bottom ones. 
 
 

 
 

 

[achristilaw]

Quote:

Just a few questions, as I'm always interested in headphones that sound the most natural and have good timbre accuracy: do you think the 940 would pair well with a TTVJ Slim (warm and analog-sounding amp)? How much do you think the 940 should cost? And where would you rank it amongst the HD600/650 and hell even other higher-tier cans? Thanks for the input, in advance. Love these discussions on the way instruments should really sound. That's the most important thing to me. 
 

I have a Slim...I'll get back to you!

 

[roma101]

Quote:

I have a Slim...I'll get back to you!

Awesome!

 

[purrin]

Quote:

The graphs in the presentation are uncompensated and averaged - so if you're looking for a comparison look at the lower cluster of lines on the Innerfidelity charts rather than the higher line.
 
From broswing a few graphs there and comparing the uncompensated lines to the presented 1840 FR - I think it looks kind of close to similar in frequency response to one of the Lambda models of Stax headphones - a frequency response I personally really like.
 
EDIT -
 
Just had a little go on my lunch hour at putting the 1840 and SR-404LE lines next to each other, and to make the "stretching" match each other a bit more closely... OK I kind of proved myself wrong in the process as there are some significant differences between the two, but the point that you shouldn't consider the 1840 to be crazy bright from that graph remains the same.
 

Can't really compare - even uncompensated ones. The B&K coupler Shure used could be quite a bit different (that is require different compensation) than Tyll's AP rig. 
 

 

[John In Cali]

Quote:

 


  Disagree (respectfully). Different gear is more apt! I have enjoyed the 600 since the mid nineties. 

That might explain things.  Your mind tends to basically "get used to" cans a lot.  And that comes past the times when you are wearing the cans.  Your mind might put the EQ into the concert you go to and so the cans sound natural to you. 
Of course this discounts nothing you said and i agree with you although i listened to the HD600 for only a minute with tons of background noise.  Again im not arguing anything, it was just the first thing i thought of when i read that sentence. 

 

[achristilaw]

 
Quote:

That might explain things.  Your mind tends to basically "get used to" cans a lot.  And that comes past the times when you are wearing the cans.  Your mind might put the EQ into the concert you go to and so the cans sound natural to you. 
Of course this discounts nothing you said and i agree with you although i listened to the HD600 for only a minute with tons of background noise.  Again im not arguing anything, it was just the first thing i thought of when i read that sentence. 

 
  Yup, we have to find a coloration that makes sense to us and forge ahead. Never formulate a value judgment of equipment at a meet or similar for the distractions.
 
  If your at a Music venue and experiencing the presentation, I have never used the typical audiophile criteria to validate (or attempt to substantiate) what I'm hearing. That flies right out the doors of the Hall and defies convention. The live, visceral experience can't be precisely captured then re-lived. Some Loudspeakers will dig up the past and you can again glimpse what the event covered, still never quite the same (IMO). You have to push the "believe it button" and use imagination to fill the voids. Yet when it works, the smile creeps across the fascia

. 
 
  Tastes in gear will very with time and experience, while being linked to our personal evolution. If Music remains important in ones life, it will undergo an expansion of sorts. It will expand beyond a single favorite artist or a favorite genre and include many of the Musical facets available. We alter how we listen, why we listen and the importance placed on those interpretations.
 
  And healthy (respectful) arguing is always constructive!  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.
 
 
 

 

[EddieE]

Quote:

Can't really compare - even uncompensated ones. The B&K coupler Shure used could be quite a bit different (that is require different compensation) than Tyll's AP rig. 
 

True, just a bit of fun though. It was more of a general point about comparing uncompensated graphs to compensated graphs. If you're used to see compensated graphs any uncompensated one is going to look like a crazy treble-fest at first glance.
 
 

 

[achristilaw]

 
Quote:

Awesome!

  Well....it's not a good match. The qualities the phone can offer are smothered via the Slim. The space, focus and dynamics's are squelched using the small amp. I used the "high" (and others) setting and the amp was under duress all the while. Sorry Man! It makes noise of course...and you do recognize it's attempting to play Music...just very underwhelming. I tried two of the Xin's and an early Portaphile also...no... (IMO).
 
  Maybe.....your reading this and you own the slim and 940....and it's the best you ever heard! No hollering please!?! 
 
  If I heard the 940 under those circumstances, and wasn't aware of better (read: more compatible) amps existed....I would hate the 940!
 
  

 

[funkmeister]

 


  Well....it's not a good match. The qualities the phone can offer are smothered via the Slim. The space, focus and dynamics's are squelched using the small amp. I used the "high" (and others) setting and the amp was under duress all the while. Sorry Man! It makes noise of course...and you do recognize it's attempting to play Music...just very underwhelming. I tried two of the Xin's and an early Portaphile also...no... (IMO).

  Maybe.....your reading this and you own the slim and 940....and it's the best you ever heard! No hollering please!?! 

  If I heard the 940 under those circumstances, and wasn't aware of better (read: more compatible) amps existed....I would hate the 940!

  

We're in a new era. The old myth of needing an amp is a carryover from the past. I know you have all had positive experiences with amps as I have, but the modern phones benefit most by a current buffer and not a voltage amp. These Shure SRH940's are low enough impedance that you need something that can deliver over 50mA of current and also have an undistorting opamp implementation with super low impedance on the output. Would you like some suggestions?