dalethorn

There is a lot of strangeness in that article, but that's also typical for headfi, which he says had a big influence in the 700 voicing. Someone should explain how the 700 can be "clearer" than the 800 and also free of the 800's "grain", and yet the 800 have better micro-detail. You know what I think? I think nobody will ever explain that, and you look at all of the bizarre headfi reporting on the Shure 940 for example - when different users tried to pin the headfi guys down for specific examples, the headfi guys just got angry and banned the people who interfered with their fun. The same will happen with the 700 - lots of hyperbole to market the 700, but no attempt to really explain anything.

They may indeed. But when they trash the 1840 I'll have the last laugh. Go with me on this, you'll see.

So, what do you think? Is a "grain free" headphone that's "clearer than the HD800" worth $1000? I would guess HD-800 owners are going to run out and buy the 700, knowing they are going to get all of that plus "tremendous" improvement in bass impact. They bought the 800, so they can afford it. The 1840 OTOH is not going to compete on bass, and I don't know about that grain either. And so far I haven't seen any reviews of the 1840 like that HD-700 review, even though the 1840 shipped much earlier. So nobody has to worry about a HD-700 review by me, since there are certain things I just don't believe in: Santa Claus, Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, and "bass slam".

Reading the Headfonia review (I'll get the link in a bit): The comments in the review about the 700 being "grain free" are very interesting. Here are more comments from the review. http://www.headfonia.com/the-sennheiser-hd700-journal/ "The HD700 is in no way going to replace the HD800 as the flagship model. Early in this article I’ve talked about how the HD800 is currently the king of the headphone technology. The HD800 driver just oozes with resolution, micro detail...." "The HD700's dark sound simply exudes with clarity, to the extent that the sound coming out of it is clearer than the HD800...." "The HD700 tremendously improves on the bass impact of the HD800...." Anyway, in the article, I see that not only does the 700 improve on the 800's bass impact "tremendously"(?), but the sound is clearer than the 800 and free of the 800's grain, yet the 800's resolution and micro detail can't be matched by the 700. Do people read this stuff because it sounds exciting to them? It looks like a lot of doubletalk. Good observation on 'grey' - that's a pretty accurate description of what the Shure 1840 sounds like. On that 8 db difference - with some headphones at some freq's, I don't hear much difference with a 8 db boost or cut on the EQ sliders. Then with other headphones, a small variance is a big deal. Hard to predict. Of course in the midrange it's very obvious.

One guy at Gearslutz says the 700 may prove better than the 800 for most people since it's darker. Even though it doesn't have the absolute detail it's so good people will like it, even for $1000 USD. Now that's a lot for a headphone that's junior to the 800, but if they pull off that dark thing as well as Shure did with the 1840 then it could be a hit. (BTW, I think they're all jacking us on those prices - come on - $700 for a Shure and $1000 for the Senn, and they're just tweaked 40mm drivers. I think if you're close it means nothing is really peaky or sucked out.

There is a lot of confusion about high fidelity or accuracy/neutrality. I believe in the principle of it, but as far as the application to any particular headphone, it's not perfect (whatever that is), so the reality is arguable of course. But I would suggest that deliberate colorations are probably always bad for general music listening, since those colorations then write over ALL of the music, and that can't be good. There's a theory of course that you could have all or almost all of the tracks you're going to listen to today be especially in tune with a particular headphone, but I for one have found that when I go somewhere, usually carrying just one headphone, I rarely stick to just those tracks. I almost always like to change moods and genres according to inspiration of the moment, and that requires a headphone that's not very colored in any one direction. Funny thing is, I can use the DT-1350 in that sense and it works pretty well, even though the 1350 is nowhere near neutral. I just "tame" it a little bit and that works OK. I think most LCD2 users also adapt well that way, because otherwise they wouldn't pay so much money for them.

The point of high fidelity is not to offer different sound preferences, but rather to reproduce what's in the recording accurately. So even though our ears are different, what we hear on a good hifi is the same as each of us would hear at the recording session or the live music date. Equipment that does not at least subscribe to this principle is not high fidelity.

If someone doesn't like me for any reason they have, no problem. But I do have a problem with false statements about what I say. I did a factual test of the HD-800 with iPod and I reported my results, including my recommendation that the HD-800 needs more power for many tracks that won't be loud enough. So as long as you report what I actually said, no problem, but please report factually. On the LCD2, I have several headphones myself which sound very different from each other, so you can be sure some of those are very "colored", since they cannot all be "right". But that's no problem either. When I listed the six items, I wasn't making anything up, just repeating what the OP said in a condensed form, for comment. The LCD2 is a very expensive headphone, and when 6 items are listed like that in one small review, it certainly deserves more attention. We are here to discuss headphones I thought, not to hide behind product names and legends. So please, let's discuss and dispense with the silly stuff.

I hate to have to repeat myself, but it is not a criticism. Why is it not a criticism? Very simple - because like I said, I haven't heard it. When I noticed so many negatives in one post I thought it would be a good idea to collect those in one place so someone could explain better how in spite of all those, it was still very good. There is no need to be defensive - I read the same things you do, I just wanted to put that together for an explanation. The term 'rubbish' doesn't make sense when I said I haven't heard it. So let's stop with the "reeks" stuff and just offer an explanation if you want to - I'm not demanding any explanations - it's just a friendly request, that's all. I would like to also suggest that when we say headphone 'x' works best with one type of music and headphone 'y' works best with other genres, that is not what high fidelity says. Personally, I find it very inconvenient to restrict myself to one or two or three genres when I'm using a particular headphone. I find in most cases how enjoyable the tracks are with my current headphone I'm using is not by the genre, but by the quality of the recording.

Putting all those negatives together in one place, it doesn't sound quite so good: Has a mid-bass bump. Doesn't go as low as the 800. Loses some midrange detail compared to the 800. Treble not as extended as the 800. Not as good soundstage as the 800. Not as good speed as the 800. Not a criticism since I haven't heard the LCD2, but those are six things that seem like they add up to a lot. The other thing that bugs me about the LCD2 is reading about so much variance in their sound from sample to sample, as well as a high incidence of defects.

Beyerdynamic DT-48A Video Review My latest DT-48A video, replacing the old video.

http://youtu.be/0LjSyHiaVQ0

So how does the DT-1350 sound? Excellent. Is it worth the price? Yes. But that determination is purely subjective of course, and takes into account things other than the sound. I'll get to the details of that sound after first describing the headphone's physical characteristics. The DT-1350 has a single-entry fixed (non-detachable) cable that's about five feet long and straight (not coiled), terminated by a standard straight (not angled) miniplug. A 1/4 inch (6.35mm) adapter is supplied and screws onto the miniplug. I can't be certain whether the miniplug would fit into any of the recessed sockets on music players that have such things, but the threaded portion of the plug ahead of the business end is 7mm in diameter including the threads. The cord is a slender single strand that's just 2mm thick, and joins the left earcup which then routes the sound to the right earcup through the headband. Many people feel that single-entry headphone cables are a better choice because they're more convenient, i.e. they don't get tangled as much as double-entry cables. This headphone comes with a small semi-stiff carrycase that affords good protection when transporting the headphone, and at less than two inches thick is a very convenient size for including in airline carry-on bags without taking up much room. Since the DT-1350's cable has a standard miniplug with optional 6.5mm adapter, one might assume that Beyer intended that it could be used with portable music players. Since laptop and desktop computers also have miniplug jacks, I'm going to assume that the intent for the miniplug is to be used primarily with computers, although small music players like the iPod Touch will drive the headphone to satisfactory volume levels as long as the music tracks themselves are set to a reasonable volume. The earpads are the on-ear type and made of 'pleather' apparently, and are round with a diameter of 2-1/2 inches. The insides of the cups have a thin cloth covering over the drivers, and the drivers and their covers are recessed enough that there is no chance of the ears contacting anything that would cause discomfort. The earcups appear to be some type of high-grade plastic or metal, with a headband of metal alloy that provides good flexibility, light clamping force, and (since the DT-1350 is so light), good stability with no tendency to shift when I move my head around. The headband has small spongy pads underneath which feel very comfortable on my head, but if there is any tendency for discomfort in spite of the very light weight of the headphone, I recommend pulling the earcups down just slightly more than the minimum, to let more of the weight be borne by the earcups and not the headband. Note that the earcups of the DT-1350 swivel 180 degrees, so they should fit any ears and also fold flat for convenience when walking around or packing them into the standard slim carrycase supplied with the headphone. The DT-1350 is a nice-looking small headphone if you've seen photos of it - mostly black with some silver-color trim, so it has a modest bling factor that you don't have to pay a premium for. I would rate its appearance as 8.5 out of 10 and I would rate its comfort factor equally high. The reason the appearance doesn't get a 9 or better is because the DT-1350 isn't a fashion headphone, so my subjective rating of 8.5 is probably as good as you can get for a serious hi-fi product like this. The reason I didn't rate the comfort 9 or higher is because the DT-1350 is an on-ear design with moderate clamping pressure to keep it stable on your head. The DT-1350 sound is emphasized somewhat in the lower midrange around 400-500 hz, and some users have reported the bass to be "light", presumably because the midrange might overshadow other aspects of the sound. Since the DT-1350's overall sound is so smooth and detailed, and since people in most cases are going to be using it with high-quality audio equipment, I recommend they avail themselves of the features in that equipment that adjust sound parameters like midrange levels and bass strength etc. The DT-1350 has the quality and dynamic range to accomodate nearly any audio gear and settings that users are likely to apply to it. I have heard of people bending the headband to increase or decrease the clamping pressure in an attempt to modify the sound signature, but I don't recommend such modifications since they can damage the headphone. Being a closed-back design, the DT-1350 offers decent isolation against the higher-frequency sounds that make up most background noise in an office or home. The soundstage is average for a closed headphone, which is fine for myself and most other headphone fans. Listening to the DT-1350 I never get a sense of constriction, compression or any other such quality - the sound is always airy and effortless. Sibilants also seem less bothersome with the DT-1350 than some other premium headphones I've used. For this review I mostly used a Dell desktop with premium soundcard playing FLAC format tracks in Foobar2000. Some of those tracks, notably certain recordings by David Chesky, sound so amazingly good with the DT-1350 that I'm often startled by their realism and clarity. Some tracks that I use I don't have FLAC copies of, and those MP3's (320k CBR) sound nearly as good on the iPod Touch connected via the line out dock to an Objective2 "assembled" headphone amp as they do on the desktop computer. A more ideal configuration would be a good DAC running from the desktop or laptop USB, feeding into a decent headphone amp like the Objective2 or better, but given the terrific sound I'm getting already I have no doubts about the ultimate quality of the DT-1350 headphone. Now that I've covered the basics of the sound, it's time to describe how the DT-1350 sounds with a variety of music that's available on CD's or as high-quality downloads from Internet music stores. I've used the following examples in other reviews, so these will serve as good test tracks for this review and the results can also be compared to the results noted in the other reviews. 10000 Maniacs - Peace Train (late 80's); pleasant sound, great details and good soundstage depth. Andrea True Connection - More More More (late 70's): Classic disco, very smooth, big soundstage. Bauhaus - Bela Lugosi's Dead (~1980): Strong midrange sound effects - this is a good worst-case test for resonant-type sounds in the most sensitive midrange area. Handled very well by the DT-1350. Beatles - And I Love Her, Things We Said Today, I'll Be Back, I'll Follow The Sun (~1964, in stereo): Amazing sound quality and decent soundstage, with excellent voice and instrument detail. These four tracks are a perfect example of how good high fidelity recordings could be as far back as the 1960's. Beethoven Symphony 9, Solti/CSO (1972): Excellent overall sound and particularly striking how the DT-1350 reproduces the triangles, bells and other background instruments that are often obscured with other headphones that have limited high frequency response. Of special note for this headphone are the bass impacts beginning around 10:30 of the fourth movement. Although the Solti is my long-time favorite, I recently got the Abbado/Berlin Philharmonic version in FLAC format from HDTracks, and the dynamics in that version are so wide that it took some time to get used to. The DT-1350 makes listening to that version a very rewarding experience. Bill Evans Trio - Nardis (early 60's): Fairly close-up recording, and despite soft highs, excellent instrumental detail, particularly the upright bass and piano. Billy Eckstine - Imagination (date??): Sounds like a recent high-quality stereo recording. Excellent from top to bottom, wide soundstage and overall a great vocal demo. Blood Sweat & Tears - And When I Die, God Bless The Child, Spinning Wheel (late 60's): Excellent sound quality, and fortunately (I think) given the strength of the brass instruments, the highs are slightly soft. Blues Project - Caress Me Baby (1966): Rarely mentioned, but one of the greatest white blues recordings ever. The loud piercing guitar sound at 0:41 into the track is a good test for distortion or other problems. Handled well by the DT-1350. Boz Scaggs - Lowdown (1976): Good sound quality - this is a great test for any nasality in the midrange. Handled very well by the DT-1350. Buffalo Springfield - Kind Woman (~1968): A Richie Furay song entirely, rarely mentioned, but one of the best sounding rock ballads ever. This will sound good on most headphones, but it's a special treat with the DT-1350. Cat Stevens - Morning Has Broken (early 70's): A near-perfect test for overall sound - this track will separate the best sounding headphones from the lesser quality types. Nothing specific, except that almost any deviation from perfect reproduction will stand out with this track. Catherine Wheel - Black Metallic (~1991): Goth with industrial overtones - I like this since it's a great music composition and the sound effects are smoothly integrated into the mix. This may sound distorted or mushy with some headphones, but the DT-1350 renders the deliberate instrumental distortions clearly. Cocteau Twins - Carolyn's Fingers (1988): Unusual ambient pop with excellent guitar details. Commodores - Night Shift (~1985): Good spacious sound with very detailed bass guitar lines. Cranes - Adoration (~1991): Excellent piano sound leading into a goth-flavored song with very unusual vocals. Creedence Clearwater Revival - The Midnight Special (1969??): Classic CCR featured in Twilight Zone, this track has great guitar sounds and a really good ambience despite a mediocre soundstage. Dave Brubeck Quartet - Take Five (1959): Paul Desmond piece - good test of saxophone sound and cymbals, less so most of the other instruments. Dead Can Dance - Ariadne (1993??): Atmospheric goth music - good ambience in spite of mediocre soundstage. Def Leppard - Bringin' On The Heartbreak (1981): MTV goth/pop/metal at its best - good ambience and high energy - the better headphones will separate the details and make for a good experience. Lesser quality and the details tend to mush together. Del Reeves - Girl On The Billboard (early-mid 70's): Classic truck-drivin' country tune with a Thelma & Louise theme, this song's overall recorded quality (almost typical of Nashville in the 70's) is a superb demo if you can get past the peculiar lyrics. d*ck Hyman - Dooji Wooji (1990??): Swing-era composition played with perfect technique by all band members, with excellent recorded sound. Frank Sinatra - Theme From New York, New York (1980): Ultimate Sinatra with big band production and well-balanced sound. J.S. Bach - E. Power Biggs Plays Bach in the Thomaskirche (~1970): Recorded on a tracker organ in East Germany, the tracks on this recording have the authentic baroque sound that Bach composed for, albeit the bellows are operated by motor today. The DT-1350 plays the tones seamlessly through the upper limits of the organ, which are near the upper limits of most people's hearing. Jamming With Edward - It Hurts Me Too (1969): Intended originally as a test to fill studio down time and set recording levels etc., this was released a few years later for hardcore Rolling Stones fans. Although not as good technically in every aspect as the Chess studio recordings of 1964, and in spite of the non-serious vocals by Mick Jagger, this rates very high on my list of white blues recordings, and sounds absolutely delicious with the DT-1350. Jim Ruiz Group - Katerine (1998?): Unusually spacious and ambient indie-pop recording with a samba flavor. Every pop song should sound this good, in my opinion. Jimmy Smith - Basin Street Blues (early 60's): This track has some loud crescendos of brass and other instruments that don't sound clean and musical on some headphones. The DT-1350 provides excellent reproduction. Listen particularly to the second crescendo at 15 seconds in, for maximum detail effect. Kim Carnes - Bette Davis Eyes (Acoustic version, 2006?): Stripped-down ("acoustic") version of the big hit - good voice and excellent guitar sounds. Ladytron - Destroy Everything You Touch (~2009): Featured in The September Issue, this song has heavy overdub and will sound a bit muddy on some headphones. Merle Haggard - Okie From Muskogee (1969): Another good-quality country recording with almost-acoustic guitar accompaniment. Lovely guitar sounds. Milt Jackson/Wes Montgomery - Delilah (Take 3) (1962): The vibraphone is heavily dependent on harmonics to sound right, and the DT-1350 plays it very well. Nylons - The Lion Sleeps Tonight (A Capella version, 1980's): High-energy vocals sans instrumental accompaniment - an excellent test of vocal reproduction. Pink Floyd/Dark Side of the Moon - Speak To Me (1973): Strong deep bass impacts will be heard and felt here. Rolling Stones - Stray Cat Blues (1968): Dirty, gritty blues that very few white artists could match. On some headphones the vocals and guitar lack the edge and fall more-or-less flat. If you're a really good person, playing this song will probably make you feel nervous and uneasy. Tony Bennett - I Left My Heart In San Francisco (1962): Frank Sinatra's favorite singer. Highest recommendation. With some of the best headphones, the sibilants on this recording are very strong, but they're not bad with the DT-1350.

I streamlined the music selections in the original review and added Rock You Gently by Jennifer Warnes as a good test example for the full musical spectrum, especially the bass where there's a lot of detail.

That looks beautiful. Can you describe more?

That's bad luck - I didn't get any distortion or problems on high gain, driving Senn 800's and other headphones.

http://youtu.be/AZ1cIfUWmzo Quick look at SRH-1840 headphone.

http://youtu.be/_odNFwhdAR8 A quick look at the Grado carrycase from HiFi Headphones UK.

Sources: iPhone4s with PA2V2 amp using LOD, various PC's running Foobar2000 using the Audioengine D1 DAC and the D1's headphone out. The first thing people want to know about a new headphone is "How does it sound?" In the case of the SRH-1840 the verdict is: Excellent. The second question people ask is "Is it worth the cost?" That determination is purely subjective of course, and takes into account things other than the sound. My verdict: Yes, with no reservations. I'll get to the details of that sound after first describing the 1840's physical characteristics. The SRH-1840 has a proprietary double-entry detachable cable that's about seven feet long and straight (not coiled), terminated by a standard straight (not angled) miniplug. A 1/4 inch (6.35mm) adapter is supplied and screws onto the miniplug. I can't be certain whether the miniplug would fit into any of the recessed sockets on music players that have such things, but the threaded portion of the plug ahead of the business end is 7mm in diameter including the threads. The cord is made up of two side-by-side strands that are bonded together, where each strand is 3mm thick, and those two strands separate at a strain-relief and join the earcups 'Y'-style. Many people feel that single-entry headphone cables are a better choice because they're more convenient, i.e. they don't get tangled as much as double-entry cables. The price for that convenience is potentially worse sound due partly to the fact that the total cable length going to each driver is different, and partly to the requirement for a thin cable running across the headband to get the signal to the second earcup. Fortunately, the SRH-1840 matches my personal preference. The SRH-1840 comes with two identical cables, the 6.5mm adapter, an extra set of velour earpads, and a semi-hard carrycase that affords good protection when transporting the headphone. Since the 1840's cable has a standard miniplug with optional 6.5mm adapter, one might assume that Shure intended that it could be used with portable music players. Since laptop and desktop computers also have miniplug jacks, and because the 1840 is less efficient than most of the headphones that are typically used with portable music players, I'm going to assume that the intent for the miniplug is to be used primarily with computers. I did try a few relatively low-volume tracks with the iPod Touch alone, and while those were barely adequate for playback indoors where it's fairly quiet, they would not be adequate for playback on-the-go. If you do require that kind of playback with the 1840, you will probably need to increase the volume of at least some of your music tracks. The earpads are fully circumaural and plush velour, with openings that measure approximately 1-5/8 by 2-1/2 inches. The inside of the cups have cloth-covered thin spongy pads so the ears don't contact anything that would cause discomfort. The earcups appear to be some type of high-grade plastic, with a headband of metal alloy that provides good flexibility, light clamping force, and (since the 1840 is so light), good stability with no tendency to shift when I move my head around. The headband has small spongy pads underneath which feel very comfortable on my head, but if there is any tendency for discomfort in spite of the very light weight of the headphone, I recommend pulling the earcups down just slightly more than the minimum, to let most of the weight be borne by the earcups and not the headband. Note that the earcups of the SRH-1840 do not rotate in any direction, although there is a small amount of movement back and forth to allow alignment of the earcups to different sized heads. The SRH-1840 is a snazzy-looking headphone if you've seen photos of it, so it has a modest bling factor that you don't have to pay a premium for. I would rate its appearance as 8.5 out of 10 and I would rate its comfort factor equally high. The reason the appearance doesn't get a 9 or better is because the 1840 isn't a fashion headphone, so my subjective rating of 8.5 is probably as good as you can get for a serious hi-fi product like this. The reason I didn't rate the comfort 9 or higher is because the 1840 is a full-size headphone with moderate clamping pressure to keep it stable on your head. Having said that, I've never had a full-size headphone that felt this comfortable - the next best thing to no headphone at all. I'd like to describe the sound of the 1840 in terms of a predecessor - the Shure SRH-940 - partly because they are family-related, partly because I have both, and partly because it will be a less complex task given certain similarities. The SRH-1840's general signature is best described as: Bass slightly less than the 940, upper treble very similar to the 940, midrange similar to the 940 except where the 940 has a slight emphasis around 500 hz, the 1840 has a slight emphasis about an octave higher. I tend to regard the 1840 as bass-neutral in spite of having less impact than the 940, and for those users who prefer more bass than what the 940 provides, they will have a similar impression of the 1840 - not for bass-heads. The 1840's midrange is essentially flawless with great rendition of voices and instruments, and given the overall smoothness from the top of the treble to the bottom of the bass, as good a listening experience as I've ever had. The standout area for the 1840 is what I call the "presence" area - that part of the lower treble that makes voices and some instruments sound more (or less) "alive". This would be in the area from 4 to 6 khz I think, and whatever the exact specifics, the 1840 has the best reproduction I've heard from any headphone. Where some of the more expensive headphones from various manufacturers have been criticized for being too bright in this range, I believe the 1840 is the perfect answer. I feel like I can listen for hours on end with no letup, hearing the inner details of music tracks I've played many times before, but haven't enjoyed nearly as much. Being an open-back design, the SRH-1840 has almost no isolation. The soundstage is slightly better than the 940's, which might surprise some users who aren't aware of the 940's above-average soundstage for a closed-back design. Listening to the 1840 I never get a sense of constriction, compression or any other such quality - the sound is always airy and effortless. Sibilants seem less bothersome with the 1840 than most other premium headphones I've used, and there is another important aspect of the 1840's sound that merits special mention: The quality of the upper harmonics of instruments and voices is exactly what I would hope for in a premium headphone but don't always get. Now that I've covered the basics of the sound, it's time to describe how the SRH-1840 sounds with a variety of music that's available on CD's or as high-quality downloads from Internet music stores. I've used the following examples in other reviews, so these will serve as good test tracks for this review and the results can also be compared to the results noted in the other reviews. Bauhaus - Bela Lugosi's Dead (~1980): Strong midrange sound effects - this is a good worst-case test for resonant-type sounds in the most sensitive midrange area. Handled very well by the SRH-1840. Beethoven Symphony 9, Solti/CSO (1972): Excellent overall sound and particularly striking how the SRH-1840 reproduces the triangles, bells and other background instruments that are often obscured with other headphones that have limited high frequency response. Of special note for this headphone are the bass impacts beginning around 10:30 of the fourth movement. Blues Project - Caress Me Baby (1966): Rarely mentioned, but one of the greatest white blues recordings ever. The loud piercing guitar sound at 0:41 into the track is a good test for distortion or other problems. Handled very well here. Boz Scaggs - Lowdown (1976): Good sound quality - this is a great test for any nasality in the midrange. Handled very well by the SRH-1840. Buffalo Springfield - Kind Woman (~1968): A Richie Furay song entirely, rarely mentioned, but one of the best sounding rock ballads ever. This will sound good on most headphones, but it's a special treat with the SRH-1840. Cat Stevens - Morning Has Broken (early 70's): A near-perfect test for overall sound - this track will separate the best sounding headphones from the lesser quality types. Nothing specific, except that almost any deviation from perfect reproduction will stand out with this track. Catherine Wheel - Black Metallic (~1991): Goth with industrial overtones - I like this since it's a great music composition and the sound effects are smoothly integrated into the mix. This may sound distorted or mushy with some headphones, but the SRH-1840 renders the deliberate instrumental distortions clearly. Def Leppard - Bringin' On The Heartbreak (1981): MTV goth/pop/metal at its best - good ambience and high energy - the better headphones will separate the details and make for a good experience. Lesser quality and the details tend to mush together. J.S. Bach - E. Power Biggs Plays Bach in the Thomaskirche (~1970): Recorded on a tracker organ in East Germany, the tracks on this recording have the authentic baroque sound that Bach composed for, albeit the bellows are operated by motor today. The SRH-1840 plays the tones seamlessly through the upper limits of the organ, which cover nearly the full range of human hearing. Of special note are the pedal notes - tracker organs have low-pressure pipes and don't typically produce the kind of impact around 30-35 hz that modern organs do. A headphone that's lacking in the low bass may sound bass-shy with this type of organ, but the SRH-1840 provides a satisfactory experience. Jamming With Edward - It Hurts Me Too (1969): Intended originally as a test to fill studio down time and set recording levels etc., this was released a few years later for hardcore Rolling Stones fans. Although not as good technically in every aspect as the Chess studio recordings of 1964, and in spite of the non-serious vocals by Mick Jagger, this rates very high on my list of white blues recordings, and sounds absolutely delicious with the SRH-1840. Jennifer Warnes - Rock You Gently (1992?): The strong deep bass percussion at the beginning of this track has been cited as a test for weakness or distortion in certain headphones like the SRH-1840. Compared to the v-moda M80 which is noted for a strong lower bass, the M80 has a distinctly richer sound with those notes and a stronger impact. It's tempting to assume that the M80 is better, but the final analysis is in the extended listening. Having played this track many times now, I'm highly impressed with the SRH-1840's bass reproduction and detail throughout the track, and even the beginning notes have a nice clean-sounding thump to them. Jimmy Smith - Basin Street Blues (early 60's): This track has some loud crescendos of brass and other instruments that don't sound clean and musical on some headphones. The SRH-1840 provides excellent reproduction. Listen particularly to the second crescendo at 15 seconds in, for maximum detail effect. Ladytron - Destroy Everything You Touch (~2009): Featured in The September Issue, this song has heavy overdub and will sound a bit muddy on some headphones. Milt Jackson/Wes Montgomery - Delilah (Take 3) (1962): The vibraphone is heavily dependent on harmonics to sound right, and the SRH-1840 plays it superbly. Pink Floyd/Dark Side of the Moon - Speak To Me (1973): Strong deep bass impacts will be heard and felt here. Rolling Stones - Stray Cat Blues (1968): Dirty, gritty blues that very few white artists could match. On some headphones the vocals and guitar lack the edge and fall more-or-less flat. If you're a really good person, playing this song will probably make you feel nervous and uneasy. Tony Bennett - I Left My Heart In San Francisco (1962): Frank Sinatra's favorite singer. Highest recommendation. With some of the best headphones, the sibilants on this recording are very strong, but they're not bad with the SRH-1840.

The frequency response curves at Innerfidelity tell the story of the Beats. The Pro series, although way over-priced for their sound, do sound acceptable to some people. The other Beats that sell for USD 200 or less are just terrible. I don't remember Beats ever marketing their headphones as "high fidelity" anyway, so the point is probably lost on those customers anyway.

The Shure 1840 is very different from the 940 - the 1840 has about the same bass and high treble, but in the lower to upper mids is tilted much more toward the lower. I would say the 1840 is darker and more forward, where the forward is in the range around 250-350 hz. The test curve by Innerfidelity looks really flat, but the 1840 does not sound flat. More on this item later...

http://youtu.be/HkLF3vtXkIw My take on the PS-500, unscripted and ad-lib.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eggd6hKnU_I Combination headphone and headphone amps review.

More time with the DT-48A tonight. All worries are over. The sound with the O2 is very good. But I am going to have to find a FLAC copy of Hans' movie track, because where the mass percussions hit, the sound is still not real clear - it's a lot clearer than with the Vmoda V80, but I get the idea that I should be able to at least guess what makes those sounds and right now I can't. I don't have to worry about testing any more with the HD-800 since I donated that to a group who are going to sell it to raise money for a Nikon D800. That makes two hand-made German products I donated this week - the 800 and a Leica X1 - both like new. I wish I had a reason to use them more, but both had limitations.

This is what I get: "The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you. Please login below or register an account with Head-Philes d()b "