Shure SRH-1540 Closed-Back Stereo Headphone Review

Here's the first Shure closed 'flagship' they say, now the same price as the SRH-1840. This is a very good headphone.

http://www.hifiheadphones.co.uk/for...re-srh-1540-stereo-headphone-review-dale.html

Update: I was really optimistic about the SRH-1540, being the high-quality headphone that it basically is. But the treble rolloff has become unbearable after a few days. Going back and comparing to the B&O H6, B&W P7, Beyer COP and others, all of the others have the treble extension which is recessed on the SRH-1540. So I enabled the old reliable iTunes Treble Booster, which brings the SRH-1540 treble up to a comparable level (with no noticeable peaks or roughness), I gave it a long listen comparing back and forth among these headphones, and am satisfied that the result sound is OK for the $500 USD I spent for the SRH-1540. The problem with the SRH-1540 seems to be the design - a much stronger than neutral bass, a more distant than normal midrange perspective, and a slightly reduced treble - all combining to render the highs much weaker than the other headphones.

FrantzM said:

Isn't this a nice way of saying those particular headphones are not good.. especially for the $500 tag? Sometimes one must a call a cat, "cat" . Haven't heard it though so I can not pass judgement but from your review ... I'd pass

Click to expand...

If it's a philosophical argument about using EQ, then you'd be correct. But if it's an argument about the results - what I'm able to achieve in sound quality with the simplest of gear (1540, amp, iPod, LOD cable), then I'd say I got a good deal. I just downloaded an album from Lynn Records - Profeti Della Quinta, Salomone, etc. - and it's incredibly good. And there are valid arguments against EQ - especially digital EQ, but those are based on certain facts that may or may not impact quality, plus or minus.