[voyager123]

I'm currently listening to my SRH1840s with a borrowed ADL Esprit DAC and my Apex Butte, altough the sound is not hyper-engaging or astonishing but man, do these have and open, expansive soundstage and spot-on imaging!
The sound is wonderfully natural as well.
Every instrument sound like you were listening to live music.
I don't want to start a flame war, but you should appreciate the good qualities of this headphone not only chide the bad.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

I'm currently listening to my SRH1840s with a borrowed ADL Esprit DAC and my Apex Butte, altough the sound is not hyper-engaging or astonishing but man, do these have and open, expansive soundstage and spot-on imaging!
The sound is wonderfully natural as well.
Every instrument sound like you were listening to live music.
I don't want to start a flame war, but you should appreciate the good qualities of this headphone not only chide the bad.

Yeah I don't know why some people here are so degrading/condescending towards others in this thread.
"Oh gawd you think it sounds good? You should get your ears checked because these are probably the worst $700 I have ever hear. That distortion! Look at the graphs....the graaaaaaaaphs! How can you bear listening to it?" <- something along the lines of this

 

[twizzleraddict]

Quote:

"Oh gawd you think it sounds good? You should get your ears checked because these are probably the worst $700 I have ever hear. That distortion! Look at the graphs....the graaaaaaaaphs! How can you bear listening to it?" <- something along the lines of this

 
This made me laugh and spit out my water. 

 

[obobskivich]

This made me laugh and spit out my water. 

Did you damage anything? (Hopefully not).

Question for owners of these - I've seen them compared to the Sennheiser open cans favorably mroe than few times, but how about with 'stats? Or Sony open cans?

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

Did you damage anything? (Hopefully not).

Question for owners of these - I've seen them compared to the Sennheiser open cans favorably mroe than few times, but how about with 'stats? Or Sony open cans?

 
The only Sony cans I can compare to are the SA5000 (stock + recabled). The only areas where they are better than the 1840 is speed and mid/upper bass impact. In all other regards, the 1840s are clearly a step ahead.

 

[obobskivich]

The only Sony cans I can compare to are the SA5000 (stock + recabled). The only areas where they are better than the 1840 is speed and mid/upper bass impact. In all other regards, the 1840s are clearly a step ahead.

Thanks!

If you don't mind:
Which is warmer? How are the mids on the 1840? etc

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

Thanks!
If you don't mind:
Which is warmer? How are the mids on the 1840? etc

 
Neither one is particularly warm, but the 1840 are easier on the ears because of their smoother treble. Their mids are very good in general.

 

[dleblanc343]

I've had the shure on loan in spring, and although not really worth their pricetag imo, I have to say it's a better phone than the hd650. I mean it's not as musical as the senns, and i'm sure most people would prefer the musicality of the senns over the shure. Keep in mine guys, the shures try to be the lest colored as possible; being that Shure focus' on pro audio.

 

[voyager123]

dleblanc343:
You mean that they were that much worse than the HE 500s?

 

[dleblanc343]

dleblanc343:
You mean that they were that much worse than the HE 500s?

Whoa wait a minute, how did you guess i compared the 1840's to the hifiman
I think the he500's are the best high end headphone for their performance/price ratio. I had in mind to swap them for 1840's upon their release, but once I heard the shures I realized the he500's are better for musical enjoyment. The hifiman is not quite as detailed as the shures, and maybe the instrument seperation is slightly better on the shures; but besides that, i think the he500's are significantly better. (Oh, comfort is better on shures too )

It also depends on what you will be doing with the phones and what you listen to.

 

[voyager123]

I saw in one of your post that you compared the two, and said that the Shure cannot compete with the HE500s.
I just wanted to know more about it. (In detail)

 

[kstuart]

Quote:

Quote:

dleblanc343:
You mean that they were that much worse than the HE 500s?

Whoa wait a minute, how did you guess i compared the 1840's to the hifiman

I think the he500's are the best high end headphone for their performance/price ratio. I had in mind to swap them for 1840's upon their release, but once I heard the shures I realized the he500's are better for musical enjoyment. The hifiman is not quite as detailed as the shures, and maybe the instrument seperation is slightly better on the shures; but besides that, i think the he500's are significantly better. (Oh, comfort is better on shures too

)

It also depends on what you will be doing with the phones and what you listen to.

dleblanc343 - Have you heard the he400 ?   If so, how would you compare them to the he500 and 1840's ?  And where they the he400 Revision 2 ?  The Revision 2 is the one with the smaller plug with an adapter for the large plug (while the first release had the larger plug with an adapter to use the smaller iPod-ish plug). Lastly, did you try the HE400 Rev 2 with velour pads, rather than the stock pleather pads?

 

[purrin]

I have the rev2 HE400s. Compared to the HE500 and SRH1840s, they are laid-back in the upper mids (less of a bite with snares, female vocals etc.) In the mid/upper treble, the HE400 are brighter than the HE500 and slightly brighter than the SRH1840. All headphones are well behaved. I don't hear any nasties in the treble. The HE500 has the smoothest treble presentation, followed by the SRH1840. The HE400 treble can be a bit unrefined, but it's probably the most airy (that upper octave air that we almost sense more than we hear). Despite the uplifted mid/upper treble of the HE400, it always has laid-back feel because of the upper-mid/lower treble depression. The lack of attack of the HE400 (in comparison to the HE500 and SRH1840) does sometimes bother me. The SRH1840 is probably the most "aggressive", if you can even put it that way, in this regard.
 
The SRH1840 is the most "bass-lite" of the bunch. Do not expect bass power or slam. The SRH1840 does not reproduce the lowest bass registers. Although there is a certain warmth to the SRH1840's bass despite FR graphs. While it's treble is articulate and sweet, the SRH1840 bass and mids are the most muddy, ill-defined, and soft among the three. The HE500 has the smoothest mids out of all of them. The HE400 can sound nasal at times. The SRH1840 can be shouty. The HE400 wins in the bass in terms of control and articulation. The HE500 bass is slighty muddy in comparison to the HE400 bass, but still much better than the SRH1840's bass. Both HE400 and HE500 have similar levels of very good low bass extension. The SRH1840 stages the best, not unexpected since staging is not a ortho strong point.
 
YMMV.

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

I have the rev2 HE400s. Compared to the HE500 and SRH1840s, they are laid-back in the upper mids (less of a bite with snares, female vocals etc.) In the mid/upper treble, the HE400 are brighter than the HE500 and slightly brighter than the SRH1840. All headphones are well behaved. I don't hear any nasties in the treble. The HE500 has the smoothest treble presentation, followed by the SRH1840. The HE400 treble can be a bit unrefined, but it's probably the most airy (that upper octave air that we almost sense more than we hear). Despite the uplifted mid/upper treble of the HE400, it always has laid-back feel because of the upper-mid/lower treble depression. The lack of attack of the HE400 (in comparison to the HE500 and SRH1840) does sometimes bother me. The SRH1840 is probably the most "aggressive", if you can even put it that way, in this regard.
 
The SRH1840 is the most "bass-lite" of the bunch. Do not expect bass power or slam. The SRH1840 does not reproduce the lowest bass registers. Although there is a certain warmth to the SRH1840's bass despite FR graphs. While it's treble is articulate and sweet, the SRH1840 bass and mids are the most muddy, ill-defined, and soft among the three. The HE500 has the smoothest mids out of all of them. The HE400 can sound nasal at times. The SRH1840 can be shouty. The HE400 wins in the bass in terms of control and articulation. The HE500 bass is slighty muddy in comparison to the HE400 bass, but still much better than the SRH1840's bass. Both HE400 and HE500 have similar levels of very good low bass extension. The SRH1840 stages the best, not unexpected since staging is not a ortho strong point.
 
YMMV.

 
I have to say, I agree with pretty much all of this WRT the HE500 and SRH1840. I haven't heard the HE400.
 
The only claim I'll contend with here is the 1840's lack of bass extension. It's relatively slow, soft and lacking slam, but it does go down pretty deep. More than the HD650, which I thoroughly compared it to (650 has more midbass). Not as cleanly or forcefully as the HD800 or HE6, but it's all there. Actually, most of the bass problems I listed are *almost* nullified on the Dynahi as it adds speed and impact.

 

[kstuart]

The SRH-1840 bass is highly dependent on the fit of the earpieces.  Putting some material between the pads and the earpieces can help, depending on one's head shape.  Break-in of at least 24 hours can significantly help the bass response as well.
 
purrin - are your comments about the HE-400 Rev 2 made with velour pads, or with the stock pleather pads ?