|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 17, 2012 3:44:38 GMT
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Apr 17, 2012 21:16:00 GMT
Wow, your latest toy? I envy you. Btw, how long has it been runned in before your review? Any pictures?
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 18, 2012 1:26:26 GMT
Wow, your latest toy? I envy you. ???Btw, how long has it been runned in before your review? Any pictures? No photos yet - tomorrow or next day. I only got about 12 hours on the 1440 before running tests. I do suspect some burn-in is necessary, but I was in a hurry so I gave them the full treatment, which I'll not repeat here. Now, you wanna hear something really scary? Normally I'm not a DIY guy, other than dangerous soldering once in a while. But being that the 1440 is rather bright for me (like the 940), I got to thinking again about padding the earcups, but this time instead of household materials that don't have the scientific acoustic properties that I'm sure Shure corp. developed for their earcups (heh), I just cut the foam backing off of the spare earpads and stuffed those into the earcups. That got me an improvement but not enough, so I cut the foams off of the 1840's spare earpads and added a second layer. So now each earcup of the 1440 has three thin foam layers. How does it sound? You won't believe me, but it's close enough to the 1840 that you'd need blind testing to positively identify each headphone. I compared back and forth for a couple hours today with 50 or so tracks that have significant HF energy - sounds pretty much the same. I think the 1440 still has a tiny edge in brightness. I also ran test tones from 12 to 15 khz to make sure the highs weren't getting a steep rolloff - nope - they stayed consistent with the 1840 at least to 15 khz. So would there be a reason to spend the extra for the 1840? Could be. Probably smoother HF sound (just a guess), greater comfort and lighter weight, better build... Still, quite a discovery. Edit: I also listened quite a bit to midrange stuff - voices, instruments - so far everything is comparing well.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Apr 18, 2012 2:15:50 GMT
But being that the 1440 is rather bright for me (like the 940), I got to thinking again about padding the earcups, but this time instead of household materials that don't have the scientific acoustic properties that I'm sure Shure corp. developed for their earcups (heh), I just cut the foam backing off of the spare earpads and stuffed those into the earcups. That's the beauty of DIY. I also got my Philips wireless SHD 8600 to sound good by using damping sheep wool inside the cups that was given to me. That got me an improvement but not enough, so I cut the foams off of the 1840's spare earpads and added a second layer. So now each earcup of the 1440 has three thin foam layers. Oh, don't the 1840 pads with the foam fit the 1440? If it does, you have wasted good pads there. How does it sound? You won't believe me, but it's close enough to the 1840 that you'd need blind testing to positively identify each headphone. I compared back and forth for a couple hours today with 50 or so tracks that have significant HF energy - sounds pretty much the same. I think the 1440 still has a tiny edge in brightness. I also ran test tones from 12 to 15 khz to make sure the highs weren't getting a steep rolloff - nope - they stayed consistent with the 1840 at least to 15 khz. We should know better as we were long from the manufacturing arms before. Different products usually are only different from the outside and not much from the inside based on the BOMs. So would there be a reason to spend the extra for the 1840? Could be. Probably smoother HF sound (just a guess), greater comfort and lighter weight, better build... Still, quite a discovery. Edit: I also listened quite a bit to midrange stuff - voices, instruments - so far everything is comparing well. Well, we are supposedly audiofools like what some had said, right?
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 18, 2012 2:37:42 GMT
I suspect there are differences even when the parts list is the same. The earcup designs are a little different, but if you've played around with any of the Grados you already know what to do. So no surprise they get pretty close. I don't know what they charge for earpads, but I didn't destroy them anyway - just cut the foam backs off - easy to reattach, sew or glue, or for that matter, put the foamless earpads on the normal way and then just insert the foam into the earcups.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 19, 2012 5:59:04 GMT
Pics are now linked. I took these with a pocket camera, a Nikon S9300, on the kitchen table under a standard light bulb, so there is plenty of purple fringing. Everything should be plain black except the chrome trim, the steel headband, and the gold plug. The photos are 2400 pixels wide when you click to enlarge them.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Apr 20, 2012 12:42:53 GMT
Nice! All plastic? I think I need to change my digicam too.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 20, 2012 16:23:30 GMT
Nice! All plastic? I think I need to change my digicam too. The plastic is that ABS stuff - really good - should last forever. The entire earcups are identical to the 1840, except the 1840 is supposed to have some fancy internal bracing to reduce resonance - can't say I detect any in the 1440. The 1440's headband is steel internally, all the way around,, so that should last too. The 1440 looks much nicer in person than those photos. Note that my photo of the earcup internal has the extra padding inside, but you wouldn't notice because it's the same pads that already line the standard earpads. Now to the sound. More days of listening with the mod'd 1440 (altho you can remove the mod just by yanking out the inserted pads. Just like pads you put into a shoe.) The 1840 sounds just slightly airier or slightly more spacious, but can't be sure which it is, since it varies by what I play. But the 1840 also sounds slightly more strident on some tracks, so right now I am tentatively considering the 1440 to be the better sound. Time will tell. Oh - and where some reviews and tech tests have the 1440 with less bass than the 1840, the mod'd 1440 is better there also.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Apr 20, 2012 23:10:44 GMT
Hi Dale, From the look of things and at about half price to the 1840, it seems that you would recommend more the 1440 to mode than the 1840. Am I correct for better VFM? It seems nowadays manufacturers are coming out supposedly "2nd best" in the range but overall going to "beat" their top models to the finishing line with some minor moding. Senns 700 too? Hmm ..................., an exciting time indeed for HP freaks.
|
|
funk1969
250+
Some things are so easily overlooked...
Posts: 481
|
Post by funk1969 on Apr 21, 2012 0:12:35 GMT
The 1440 is still a bit too expensive if you ask me.
If there is one Sennheiser I might consider it would be the HD650 for the long term but who knows?
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 21, 2012 0:31:14 GMT
Hi Dale, From the look of things and at about half price to the 1840, it seems that you would recommend more the 1440 to mode than the 1840. Am I correct for better VFM? It seems nowadays manufacturers are coming out supposedly "2nd best" in the range but overall going to "beat" their top models to the finishing line with some minor moding. Senns 700 too? Hmm ..................., an exciting time indeed for HP freaks. Well, no modding is needed with the 1840. It has the best highs I've ever heard - way better than any Sennheiser or other Shure or Grado or anything else I can think of. With the 1440 it certainly seems to me to be a much better deal at $399 plus some pads. The only thing I don't know for sure is whether its modded highs are better than the 1840 or worse. If any of the experts try what I did with the genuine Shure foams, then maybe they will offer an opinion. It might not happen though. I did another big Google search today on the Senn 700 - nothing. It's almost like they withdrew it for changes or something.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 21, 2012 0:34:42 GMT
The 1440 is still a bit too expensive if you ask me. If there is one Sennheiser I might consider it would be the HD650 for the long term but who knows? I've had the 600 and 650 for nearly 10 years each. They don't begin to compare to the 1440. With no modding you might find the 1440 too bright, certainly it would be compared to the 600 if not the 650. But you slip those extra foams in and it leaves the 600/650 in the dust. Much more comfy too.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Apr 21, 2012 4:47:05 GMT
I did another big Google search today on the Senn 700 - nothing. It's almost like they withdrew it for changes or something. Maybe the HD700 too scarily good for the health of the HD800. They must do something to it or else the HD800 will be a dead project. As always, try to cover up to the benefit of the shareholders if that's the case. Anyway, wait longer and see what will come out of it.
|
|
elysion
Been here a while!
Team Anti M$ AND Facebook.
contra torrentem
Posts: 2,375
|
Post by elysion on Apr 23, 2012 19:25:01 GMT
I'd like to try a couple of Shure 'phones. So far, I've had none of their 'phones on my head.
The last time I've tried a brand that I didn't know, it was a full success (I've tried Beyer 'phones and found the DT 990 Pro's to be almost perfect for me).
Maybe not a good idea in the next few months. I need a new job first and most RG member will agree anyway that I have already too much 'phones at home. I'm not alone with that problem...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2012 20:23:08 GMT
SRH840 is closest to a 'closed' HD650 in signature. Not a typical 'closed' sound though. SRH940 is closer to K701, SRH1840 is closer to K501 with a bit more grunt. SRH940 and SRH1840 sound aenemic compared to DT990.
The SRH240 and SRH440 have less bass and are less refined compared to SRH840. Owned the SRH840 for quite some time.
The clamping force of the SRH840 is quite high (as well as isolation) as they are intended for professional monitoring. This + having the HD650 made me sell them.
a cheap closed alternative to DT990 may be the Denon D1100 but the bass is kind of strong in this one and may need some EQ-ing. If you can afford buying more expensive gear again and like DT990, the D2000, or even better and more expensive HE500 might be the best upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 23, 2012 21:33:58 GMT
That's a good rundown Frans. Nothing to complain about there, unless you're stuck with one of the non-so-good 'phones. From my side of the fence, since I don't have the 240 or 840 or DT990 or any of the AKG's, I can briefly compare the 1440, 1840, DT48A, Philips L1, Senn HD800, and Grado PS500. The DT48A, Senn 800, Grado 500, Philips, and Shure 1440 all sound quite bright and zingy compared to the 1840. With the extra pads, the 1440 becomes smoother than the 1840 and is the least offensive in brightness. Comparing the modded 1440 to the 1840, the 1840 has a bit of stridency in the highs, along with a sense of more air or space, but it's a very small difference compared to everything else. On the low end the 1440 and 1840 seem fine to me, but somewhat light compared to the Senn 800 or the Philips with Bass Reduction. The Philips with Bass Reduction has the best bass of any of these including the Senn 800. All the way to the bottom. The Grado has a fairly large hump from 70 to 150 hz approximately, and with that EQ'd down I find the bass pretty good into the deep stuff. Although I rate the Grado as bright, it's a very nice 'phone with good tone, as good as the HD800 with slightly less of that fantastic upper harmonics sound. After having my ears cleaned and getting used to the 1440 and 1840, I can't listen to the DT48A any more. The Philips with bass reduction still sounds excellent as a contrast to the Shures, with stronger bass, darker overall sound, slightly more brightness but not bad.
If I could order a sound for $1000 USD, it would be the Philips bass EQ'd, the Shure 1440/1840 mids with very slightly less forwardness at the most emphasized midrange frequency, and the Shure 1840 highs with very slightly more smoothness and slightly more of the HD800 type of harmonic detail.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Apr 30, 2012 4:15:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on May 2, 2012 15:44:14 GMT
At the Stereophile headphone forum (which has view statistics) the SRH1440 review in 16 days has now gotten as many views as the 1840 review got in 39 days. It shure looks like the bargain hunters are taking a good look at the SRH1440.
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while!
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on May 20, 2012 10:28:35 GMT
I am looking for a closed headphone and trying to decide from these two and the dt1350. Wish I had all to compare side by side.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 10:45:59 GMT
The shure 1440 and 1840 are open headphones.
The SRH 440, SRH840 and SRH940 are closed and have good isolation. They are more 'hifi phones', the DT1350 is more like a tool for for engineers and needs EQ-ing to become a hifi phone. When properly 'adjusted' (with velours HD25 pads) and EQ-ed the DT1350 (to my ears) completely trounce the 840 (owned) and 940 but this of course is just my opinion, surely others will disagree.
Comfort: 940->840/440->DT1350 bright to dark sound sig: 940->DT1350->440->840 Technically: DT1350->940->840->440 heat build up: DT1350->940->840/440 All isolate pretty good: DT1350->840/440->940 (marginal diff) clamping force: 940->440/840/DT1350 DT1350 on ear and may start to hurt the ears after some time. 440,840 and 940 are circumaural (when your ears aren't too big)
840 is somewhat similar to closed version of the HD650 440 is a coarser version of the 840 with less bass. 940 is clsoser to Grado/K701 sound and closest to 1840 compared to the other mentioned HP's. DT1350 is 'different' from the others and perhaps described as closest to a DT770 but with better mids, no one-note and slightly elevated bass and no peaky highs. This one you cannot buy on recommendations but is a must audition type of headphone as it is quite sensitive to human factors.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on May 20, 2012 21:54:14 GMT
I do find that when you get the perfect fit with the DT-1350, you hear more. (What did I just say?) - You hear more. It's amazing. Must be those Tesla drivers. But earpads are part of it - if you get a new 1350 it may have the more comfortable headband with less clamping. It doesn't bother me like the original 1350 did.
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while!
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on May 21, 2012 10:24:15 GMT
I will try to see if I can borrow a 940 and a dt1350 before I buy any new cans.
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while!
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on May 23, 2012 10:39:42 GMT
I found the 840 in Amazon for $157 and the 940 for $50 dollars more. I could buy an used DT1350 for about $200. At those prices any suggestions?.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2012 10:59:45 GMT
I would be very careful with buying secondhand DT1350.
There seem to be some quality control issues with drivers not matching closely in a few DT1350's. At least this seems to be the case judging posts in 'the other forum'. These 'duds' maybe selling for less but would you be happy with them ?
The 840 might be somewhat dark to your liking (unless you like HD650) The 940 is considerable brighter but lacks the bass extension of the 840. I really would have liked to see a HP inbetween the 840 and 940.... 890 perhaps with 940 comfort ?
The DT1350 has a different character.
|
|
funk1969
250+
Some things are so easily overlooked...
Posts: 481
|
Post by funk1969 on May 23, 2012 11:07:17 GMT
A mellow version of the DT48E you mean? (Be it with seriously enjoyable bass ;-)
|
|