[Brooko]

Thanks Jude - appreciate the feedback.
 
Interesting also to see yet another voice preferring the SRH840 over the SRH940.  Your preference in this matter very much matches mine and quite a few others.

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Well, what a debacle for Shure. Perhaps they 'll manage to sell the new open headphones under the "the sound is good for professionals" argument. How many reviews I've read for the srh940 explaining that a small bass could be an advantage for professionals .... But at 700$ for the srh1840, I think shure exaggerated and have absolutely no clue of what the market is expecting. They 'll realize soon or later, that people need more than marketing mumbo-jumbo to sell their stuff.
Perhaps the srh1840 are the srh940 done right , but 700$ is too much.
 

 

[MuppetFace]

I'm honestly a bit perplexed.
 
The SRH1840 is clearly aimed at the audiophile sector given their marketing emphasis on the design and materials used. Not to mention the price tag. Given that Shure seems to be moving away from their pro-audio association with the SRH1840, it's odd they'd go with a signature akin to the SRH940 but even more relentless. Having read HeadRoom's description, I was honestly expecting these to be more laid back and euphonious, at least enough to differentiate them in the Shure lineup.

 

[Brooko]

Agree Muppet - I think the thing that confused me was the numbering.  I was expecting something pretty good ....
 
SRH840 > SRH 1840
 
They should have just numbered these new ones as SRH1940 ... seems they're voiced similar.
 
No longer on my radar anyway.  HD700 though ......

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

SRH840 > SRH 1840

 I'd rather say k701> sr1840 , for people  looking for  an open headphone with lot of clarity , and not too concerned by a subdued  bass.

 

[Ypoknons]

hmmm... measurements aren't promising but seems to still have some strengths; worth a listen at the audio store. The EX-1000 was supposed to sound peaky but isn't actually jarring; I'm not that good with reading charts unfortunately to see the headphone's performance holistically make a judgment at this point.

 

[Digital-Pride]

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

If they slashed the price by half, I'd get the 1840 for analytical gaming... like a super powered AD700, though thats what the AKGs are for...

 

[Brooko]

Quote:

 I'd rather say k701> sr1840 , for people  looking for  an open headphone with lot of clarity , and not too concerned by a subdued  bass.

Sorry - should have made the reference clearer.  When they released the numbering SRH 1840 - I was expecting a flagship open headphone voiced along the lines of the SRH840 - but with better extension etc.  What they appear to have given us instead is an SRH1940
 
I liked the SRH840, didn't like the SRH940.  Naming the new one SRH1940 would have at least been less confusing (expectations).
 

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

I liked the SRH840, didn't like the SRH940.  Naming the new one SRH1940 would have at least been less confusing (expectations).

That's because they plan a srh1940 with even more treble, and less bass. The price, I just can't imagine what it would be.
 
 

 

[roBernd]

Quote:

That's because they plan a srh1940 with even more treble, and less bass. The price, I just can't imagine what it would be.
 
 

oh you
 
Also, I found the "perfect solution" for this dilemma -> just replace the drivers with some HD600 drivers and you got yourself quite a slick looking headphone.

 

[jimejam]

""The Shure SRH1840 is a headphone I like a lot, but I want to be clear on what it is (to my ears)"'
 
Jude did say he liked them though and he doesnt evnen like  940s?

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Quote:

""The Shure SRH1840 is a headphone I like a lot, but I want to be clear on what it is (to my ears)"'
 
Jude did say he liked them though and he doesnt evnen like  940s?

From the review you understand that unlike the srh940 , the srh1840 are not "edgy". I guess it would mean no abrupt treble  peak.
Also although you understand that Jude only liked the srh1840 for casual listening, and that he is not sure they are worth their price.
700$ that's some serious cash, you'd expect no serious flaw.
 

 

[nikp]

Quote:

Sorry for taking so long to get back with you guys about the new Shures. CES--and what felt like the many strains of flu I caught while there--got in the way.
Okay, here's what I think of the new Shure SRH1840 and SRH1440, in bullet points:

1. First of all, I am not a fan of the Shure SRH940. I've had it since it was pre-production, but it never grew on me. Why? I find the SRH940 to be too tipped-up in the treble, too light in the bass. I can take a little above-neutral treble, but, at that point, for me, it better be presented without any edge to it whatsoever. To my ears, this wasn't done with the SRH940--the treble, tipped up as it is, is also edgy to me. I much prefer the Shure SRH840, which I am a big fan of, and frequently recommend. In short, I was not looking or hoping for an open-back SRH940 with either of the new headphones.
2. The Shure SRH1840 is a headphone I like a lot, but I want to be clear on what it is (to my ears), so that you can decide (as much as is reasonably possible from someone else's words) if it's even something you should have on your list of candidate headphones in this price range.
   1. I am not a pro audio guy, but I can see how the SRH1840 might find its place in a studio environment. In some ways, from the mids through the treble, it reminds me of my Ultimate Ears In-Ear Reference Monitor, which is supremely neutral sounding to me. No, the SRH1840 isn't neutral like the Ultimate Ears IERM--its treble is pushed too far north for that--but it does convey (like the IERM) a lot of midrange and treble detail. As I said earlier, a little above-neutral treble is a flavor I can find favor with (when the mood's right), but it has to be edge-free; and, unlike its closed counterpart (SRH940), the SRH1840 does a good job of this. This is a headphone with brightish tendencies, but it's a headphone I've had for several months, and it has a certain zest I like to turn to from time to time.
   2. The SRH1840 images very well. It's one of my favorite things about this headphone.
   3. The SRH1840's bass is maybe its most significant weakness to me, especially accompanied by its forward treble tilt. It could use more thickness, more impact through the lows. I wouldn't characterize the bass as anemic, but it's south of neutral; and neutral through the bass is, for my tastes, the absolute minimum amount I need to work toward ideal.
   4. The SRH1840's headband suffers from the Shure Teletubby headband syndrome--that is, it's huge on the head, and makes me look like some sort of Teletubby character. As with other Shure over-ears, the headband extensions (the yokes) pull out more to the side than just straight down, and results in the headphone's weight sitting more on top of my head than I think it should (as opposed to better distributing the weight by hugging the radius of my head). The bigger your head, the more you're likely to feel the weight on top of it. With more of the support happening right at the top of my head, I'd have preferred one larger, flatter headband pad than the two narrow ones that come on the SRH1840's split headband.
   5. The velour earpads are very comfortable on my ears.
3. Whereas I reach for the SRH1840 purely for listening pleasure from time to time, I do not reach for the SRH1440 that way. Why? For many of the same reasons I don't reach for the SRH940. No, the SRH1440 doesn't sound exactly like a closed SRH940, but it has enough in common with it--particularly in terms of treble stridency and not enough weight in the bass--to exclude it from my pleasure listening arsenal.

Again, I very much enjoy the Shure SRH1840, but the SRH1440 leaves me cold. As much as I enjoy the SRH1840, though, it may end up being a tough sell at $700 for a lot of people.

 

 

[John In Cali]

Ehh this seems like all the negative comments that came out of people when the LCD-3 came out, a lot more people are buying them then commenters were expecting. And it seems like jude said that was more bass than the 940, but it is still below neutral. You guys got a lot of negatives out of a positive review, he even said he listens to them from time to time, doesn't he have just about every flagship that exists?
But what i want to hear is direct comparisons to a different can, like the Stax 507, Shure 940, HD800, ED8 and such.