[xeizo]

You have a lot of excuses but noise cancelling actually salvage the bass exactly as you describe you need without silly levels of bass. Of course those cans sounds somewhat crap at home, but they're impossible to beat in the subway.

You don't try to tighten screws with a hammer ....

 

[TheGiantHogweed]

You have a lot of excuses but noise cancelling actually salvage the bass exactly as you describe you need without silly levels of bass. Of course those cans sounds somewhat crap at home, but they're impossible to beat in the subway.

You don't try to tighten screws with a hammer ....

Well, maybe impossible to beat in terms of bass, but regarding the detail, as I said, there is nothing wrong with my K550s, and I will seriously miss it if noise cancelling headphones sound "somewhat crap at home" My K550s sound great either at home or on public transport, but just really miss the impact with the latter.

There will (or should) be headphones about that have detail like the K550s but with more bass. My dad's HD280 pros have a lot more bass than the k550s and are better in that sense for public transport, but really lack the spacious soundstage that the K550s have.

I'm basically wanting to know what sort of frequency responce the srh480s have, then I can compare it to the K550s.

 

[xeizo]

Well, maybe impossible to beat in terms of bass, but regarding the detail, as I said, there is nothing wrong with my K550s, and I will seriously miss it if noise cancelling headphones sound "somewhat crap at home" My K550s sound great either at home or on ublic transport, but just really miss the impact with the latter.

There will (or should) be headphones about that have detail like the K550s but with more bass. My dad's HD280 pros have a lot more bass than the k550s and are better in that sense for public transport, but really lack the spacious soundstage that the K550s have.

I'm basically wanting to know what sort of frequency responce the srh480s have, then I can compare it to the K550s.

Well, most AKG are bass light so nothing new there, basically anything(except maybe GRADO) with a well known name on it will have more bass. the SRH840a is slightly U-shaped and has ok levels of bass but it's a monitor can and not a bass monster. It will need some eq to sound optimal, unlike the older SRH840 which had excellent FR(but crappy hw quality). The sound is clean and detailed, not sacrificing much there. A can like the M50x has more bass punch, if that is a priority, but less detailed midrange. I like the Sony MDR-1AM2 too, it is very detailed and has punchy bass, it is also compact and light which is nice on the go.

 

[TheGiantHogweed]

I have been thinking about the M50x. There have been a lot of comparisons in the past with the M50 and K550. The M50s are more fun sounding and have much more impact to the bass, but less detail and a narrower soundstage, which probably would be a compromise for me. I was very tempted by the M70x which are more like a studio sound and quite similar to my K550s but just with more bass, however, there have been loads of issues reported with major problems with build quality.

I think a U / V shaped sound ( i assume both mean the same thing) will probably be what I'm after. I'm very keen on sharp and clear treble. All the headphones I have / have had are all pretty treble heavy.

Here is a list:

Audio technica ATH-AD700s
AKG K550
AKG K702
Beyerdynamic DT880s


All sound pretty similar in the treble region and soundstage. None have a lot of bass, but some less than others. It maybe will be pretty hard to keep the details of these headphones while at the same time having a fair bit more bass if I get new ones.

I'll keep hunting around and see if i can find a frequency responce comparison of the srh840 and the K550.

 

[xeizo]

I would look at the Beyer DT700 Pro X too, I have the DT900 Pro X which is the open version and I think it punches above it's price, it's a fun dynamic sound. The 700 Pro X would be similar but closed.

 

[holden4th]

I just broke the headband of my 840s at the left ear cup - not repairable I'd say so I need to make a decision. What sold me on the 840s when I got them in 2009 was both their tonality and to a certain extent their timbral reproduction. What I was looking for was a reasonably neutral set of cans that could accurately reproduce the sounds of a piano, violins and cellos and the human voice. The 840s achieved this over a number of more expensive headphones I auditioned including models from Sennheiser, Beyer, Audio Technica and one or two others so I sprung for them and have not regretted it. At this stage the likes of Focal, Meze, etc, had not appeared on the market.

So the question I have is this: Can the 840As reproduce this accuracy in tonality that the 840 had - especially for piano - without some part of the instrument sounding that very slightly off? If so I'll spring for a new pair as I need them for work. My local audio supplier (ATA) has both the original and the 840A with only a $30 price difference.

 

[holden4th]

OK, so after a lot of looking around, including more expensive cans, reading a lot of reviews I came to a decision. I was tempted to fork out for the Drop DCA Aeon Closed X which were considerably more expensive and also Addicted To Audio had the Focal Elegia selling for an incredible $AUS499 (down from $AUS1399). I then thought about the fact that these would be my 'work' cans and decided that if the venerable SRH840s had kept me happy for 14 years then maybe I should accept that fact. I wouldn't be doing high end listening at work as the Shure's would be running from my Fiio Q1 out of my work laptop. What I wanted was a tonally accurate, basically neutral set of headphones which the 840s are and hopefully the As would be a bit of a step up but fulfil everything that I want for headphones at work.

Decision made, the 840As are paid for and on their way via express post.

I'll report back after they arrive.

One point to note. The Elegia's look like an absolute bargain but more than one review mentioned issues with tonality andthat the bass could appear to be somewhat thin. As both tonality and instrumental timbre are very important to me I decided not to take the risk that I wouldn't like aspects of these headphones.

 

[Mike F]

OK, so after a lot of looking around, including more expensive cans, reading a lot of reviews I came to a decision. I was tempted to fork out for the Drop DCA Aeon Closed X which were considerably more expensive and also Addicted To Audio had the Focal Elegia selling for an incredible $AUS499 (down from $AUS1399). I then thought about the fact that these would be my 'work' cans and decided that if the venerable SRH840s had kept me happy for 14 years then maybe I should accept that fact. I wouldn't be doing high end listening at work as the Shure's would be running from my Fiio Q1 out of my work laptop. What I wanted was a tonally accurate, basically neutral set of headphones which the 840s are and hopefully the As would be a bit of a step up but fulfil everything that I want for headphones at work.

Decision made, the 840As are paid for and on their way via express post.

I'll report back after they arrive.

One point to note. The Elegia's look like an absolute bargain but more than one review mentioned issues with tonality andthat the bass could appear to be somewhat thin. As both tonality and instrumental timbre are very important to me I decided not to take the risk that I wouldn't like aspects of these headphones.

I would be interested in your impressions of the new 840A vs the original. I share your views with regard to the original 840 - tonally neutral and really quite flat except for a slight lift in the bass and treble, but again, tonally excellent.

 

[ADUHF]

What I wanted was a tonally accurate, basically neutral set of headphones

Not sure that's exactly what you'll get with the A's from looking at the graphs. But I also look forward to hearing some more impressions on these. And it's hard to know what else to suggest in a closed headphone in this price range. The AKG K371 has pros and cons, as does the AT M50X.

The New Beyer DT-700's look more tonally neutral than the original DT-770. But they haven't received stellar reviews for their technical performance. The new Rode NTH-100 also seems to be a mixed bag. And its main strength seems to be the matched drivers... which is important. But its not the only thing you need in a studio headphone imo!

If you really want something that's an upgrade in terms of tonality and fidelity, then how bout an open model?

 

[holden4th]

I'm listening to these at home via my Modi3+/Asgard3 so when they go to work tomorrow and go through my modest Fiio Q1 they may sound different. I also realise that they will take a little while to burn in. I like what I hear so far and yes these do appear to be a bit of a step up from the 840s though it's not huge. Accurate tonal reproduction of piano meets my very exacting standards at this point in time and I also enjoyed the chamber music I auditioned with no strange string tone artefacts.

I'm also beginning to understand why these are highly valued as monitoring cans. I'll not go into this at the moment but reserve my judgement until I've done a full audition. However, what really struck me was how Shure have tuned these to give both width and depth to the soundstage. It seems that they use dynamic range to give a staging effect. If it's further away or wider the dynamics are reduced but it doesn't sound unnatural. I've not heard a pair of cans do this so well before and when I hear how these headphones control both diminuendo and crescendo it's quite a magical effect.

I am happy with my purchase, yes, very!

 

[ADUHF]

I'm listening to these at home via my Modi3+/Asgard3 so when they go to work tomorrow and go through my modest Fiio Q1 they may sound different. I also realise that they will take a little while to burn in. I like what I hear so far and yes these do appear to be a bit of a step up from the 840s though it's not huge. Accurate tonal reproduction of piano meets my very exacting standards at this point in time and I also enjoyed the chamber music I auditioned with no strange string tone artefacts.

I'm also beginning to understand why these are highly valued as monitoring cans. I'll not go into this at the moment but reserve my judgement until I've done a full audition. However, what really struck me was how Shure have tuned these to give both width and depth to the soundstage. It seems that they use dynamic range to give a staging effect. If it's further away or wider the dynamics are reduced but it doesn't sound unnatural. I've not heard a pair of cans do this so well before and when I hear how these headphones control both diminuendo and crescendo it's quite a magical effect.

I am happy with my purchase, yes, very!

Thanks for sharing some of your thoughts on the SRH840A, holden4th.

 

[Alchemistt]

Maybe someone can answer?
1_) 440a ear pads smaller than 840a ear pads?
2_) Do the ear pads change the same way as before?
3_) Has the size of the seat for the ear pads changed?
4_) Interested in the dimensions of the ear pads: inner width, height, depth for 440a and 840a.
5_) What are the differences in sound? 440a and 840a?
6_) I correctly read on the official website that the 840a speakers are matched to each other, but the 440a speakers are not matched?

 

[ADUHF]

Can't offer anything definitive on the above. I tried on a pair of the original 840's (the non-A version) a couple years ago, and found them to be pretty comfortable. The pads were maybe a bit on the shallow side though. They fit my ears much better than the AT M50X, Sony 7506, and also the AKG K371. They weren't as generous in size as my current DT-770's though. And the K371 may have a little better pad depth (emphasis on may).

Replacement pads were included in the 840 package at that time. I don't know if that's still true for the A's though.

Regrettably, I didn't actually have the opportunity to listen to the headphones, because they weren't plugged into anything. And I was just curious about the fit and feel of the Shures. Based on the graphs though, the newer 840A's have a different response than the previous 840, with better emphasis/extension in the lower frequencies. And a bit less brightness up top, it appears. The A is also more laid back in the mids...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/66dznl84dn2r4jx/Shure SRH840.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4kfrvxw92hlz7t/Shure SRH840A.pdf?dl=0

Between the 840A and 440A, I think I'm prepared to trust DMS that the 840A is probably the better sounding of the two headphones. The FR graphs of the two models are fairly similar though...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4kfrvxw92hlz7t/Shure SRH840A.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1vt4eoyo4bdo7y0/Shure SRH440A.pdf?dl=0

 

[adelaidestevens]

Can't offer anything definitive on the above. I tried on a pair of the original 840's (the non-A version) a couple years ago, and found them to be pretty comfortable. The pads were maybe a bit on the shallow side though. They fit my ears much better than the AT M50X, Sony 7506, and also the AKG K371. They weren't as generous in size as my current DT-770's though. And the K371 may have a little better pad depth (emphasis on may).

Replacement pads were included in the 840 package at that time. I don't know if that's still true for the A's though.

Regrettably, I didn't actually have the opportunity to listen to the headphones, because they weren't plugged into anything. And I was just curious about the fit and feel of the Shures. Based on the graphs though, the newer 840A's have a different response than the previous 840, with better emphasis/extension in the lower frequencies. And a bit less brightness up top, it appears. The A is also more laid back in the mids...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/66dznl84dn2r4jx/Shure SRH840.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4kfrvxw92hlz7t/Shure SRH840A.pdf?dl=0

Between the 840A and 440A, I think I'm prepared to trust DMS that the 840A is probably the better sounding of the two headphones. The FR graphs of the two models are fairly similar though...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z4kfrvxw92hlz7t/Shure SRH840A.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1vt4eoyo4bdo7y0/Shure SRH440A.pdf?dl=0

Do you think the 840a sounds better than the K371? I've also tried the 770, it's a good headphone, especially in the bass department but I find the treble to be undefined (too many peaks & dips). Also, it's hard to find closed-back headphones that are comfortable, I feel like Sennheiser are the only one that actually care

 

[Alchemistt]

Maybe someone will help, bandaged with a fabric collar, now they do not irritate))

I put a cable in the ear pads, now there is enough space for the ears.
It is strange that the manufacturer regretted 5 mm of depth.

With part of the cord Weight 315-320 grams.

The sound got brighter.
In general, this is Shure. But now I don’t have old 840s, I compare from memory.

4 holes appeared in the cans, probably to strengthen the bass and unload the can from mumbling.

Headphones are good, fit well, sound good. The sound is slightly harsh, requires an equalizer, but assertive, the whole range, it's definitely shur.

The question remains open, how does the sound of 840a differ from 440a?

And where can I get such a 2.5mm jack to make my own cable?
Native very oak, but high quality.

I wonder if the ear pads from 940/1540 fit here in terms of sound?
(Older 840s fit.)