[cactus_farmer]

That's pretty damming...What are the major percieved 'weaknesses' of this headphone? Is it considered more bass-anaemic than the model it superceeded - the SRH840? Funny how that headphone got 4.5 stars...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[nikp]

The SRH840 is neutral. Probably the SRH940 kinda miss the point of being reference studio headphones (not neutral enough?).

 

[TMRaven]

Maybe headroom values bass more than head-fi.

 

[electropop]

How is the 840 neutral?

 

[Hughkk]

i think 840 is quite neutral, is it not??

 

[electropop]

Aside from the bass-boost, sure. I find them to mask a lot of crucial information, which is why I prefer many cans over them.

 

[stv014]

Quote:

That's pretty damming...What are the major percieved 'weaknesses' of this headphone? Is it considered more bass-anaemic than the model it superceeded - the SRH840? Funny how that headphone got 4.5 stars...

It is a "value rating", so they probably did not find it very good relative to the $299 price, while the SRH-840 is only $199, and is almost as good.
 

 

[TobaccoRoad]

Headroom should get rid of those value ratings on their site. If it was strictly for reviewing headphones I understand but they're actually selling the product they're reviewing. It doesn't do any good trying to sell something that you rate it poorly to keep away the customers from buying it.

 

[Hughkk]

Quote:

Headroom should get rid of those value ratings on their site. If it was strictly for reviewing headphones I understand but they're actually selling the product they're reviewing. It doesn't do any good trying to sell something that you rate it poorly to keep away the customers from buying it.

 
but i am sure that headphones newbie will appreciate the rating very much, since it helps them decide

 

[bixby]

Value ratings are great, they establish a benchmark for sound quality at a price.  One can easily justify purchasing a higher priced lower value rated can if the characteristics suit their tastes.  For new folks and seasoned veterans the value ratings are good solid guideposts and nothing more.
 
Now on to the comments about the 940 getting 3.5 stars.  Obviously they feel some headphones around that price point to be better, look at the Beyer 880 -600 for example.  Does it mean it is worse headphone than the 840?  Perhaps yes, perhaps no depends on what you like.  
 
I own the 840 and it is not neutral but it sounds great to me aside from some kicked up midbass and slightly rich mids, oh and highs are a bit less resolving than I would like.  I have not heard the 940s but those who have feel it is lean in the bass and a bit bright up top.
 
As for the 840 being anemic in the bass, that is nonsense, read a few reviews.....better yet listen to a pair if you can.

 

[tdockweiler]

Probably because it's overpriced? Should be more like $200 considering it's only slightly better than the SRH-840. I'm completely baffled by how this headphone is $250-$300.
Yes, I did like it a lot, but it's not worth $250 IMO. Didn't sound much better than my DJ100 and $99 KNS-6400.
 
I keep saying I'd buy one if they dropped to under $175, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
 

 

[zazex]

Unlike many here on HF, I did not like the 940 - from the moment I started listening to them.
 
They're OK phones that are nicely made but overpriced, with better choices available
for less money.
 
I think Shure could have done much better with their upgrade to the 840.

 

[MalVeauX]

Heya,
 
They're excellent headphones for a specific genre of listening, or specific purpose (monitoring). But they're not excellent as an all around headphone because they do not do certain genres well, due to their lack of bottom end presence in the spectrum. I absolutely love them for female vocals and piano. However, I have to use a different headphone when listening to prog rock, electronic or pop. So to me, that hurts their value a lot, and it makes sense, since they're not a complete headphone in that sense. I bought them twice because they sound so good for what they sound good for, but they are not good for the things they're weak with. Makes it hard to keep them. I had to do it twice to be sure, lol.
 
Very best,

 

[extrabigmehdi]

Weakness:
- unbalanced frequency response, especially 9 k peak. On regular music this put too much emphasis on percussions.
- a slight bass coloration, wouldn't hurt musically ... I  guess this would be the srh840. I  wish I  could try these srh840.
-  reveal too much the "harsh" materials . If input is smooth , output is  smooth, but if  input is not smooth, the srh940 is not forgiving. This is a double edged aspect. If your source is not enough good, the srh940 will remind it to you.
 
I'm sure these headphones can be very interesting; on a good source (like a xonar stx)  , and some music (industrial, classic...) they can really blow your mind.
However, they can be sometimes frustrating. In order to really enjoy them, I  need some eq (at least reducing the 9k peak) and a very good source.
 
What at least 80% people would like more:
- more bass
- more forgiving
- bigger soundtage
- more balanced
 
 
 

 

[nikp]

Quote:

 
What at least 80% people would like more:
- more bass
- more forgiving
- bigger soundtage
- more balanced
 
 
 

I would love a bigger soundstage and a more balanced sound but I want a merciless headphone. I don't really mind more bass as long as it doesn't kill the mids and highs.