[Bananiq]

   
something like that
 
 
i edited my post above, brother wants to audition them and see if he wants it. Unless I change my mind and decide not to sell it in the first place LOL. I went back to A/B with my VSD3, Havi and IM50 and I am having second second thoughts on selling it now . What peeved me initially was having to deal with comply and and its not easy as slipping in and out in the ears. But listening to them again and comparing it to whats in my stable (besides the Earbuds and Z5) makes me think long and hard whether I should sell them or not. DAMN IT I thought I was sure I wanted to sell it. Shouldn't have gone for that one last listen

I am quite sorry to hear this.....
what aspects of the IEMs you A/B'ed really convinced you to this decision?
 
btw you should probably try sony hybrids before selling them.

 

[BucketInABucket]

Has anyone compared the R2Pro to the FAD Heaven VII?

 

[ricesteam]

I've always been an open-air/earbud user.  But these R2PROs I have is uncomfortable for me.  Don't get me wrong, they sound amazing they're just not my cup of tea.  I want to sell these for the amount I paid for (Early Bird KS price and UPS duties).  If you're in the GTA area and interested, pm me.  I've only used one pair of the comply.  The other two are still sealed.  I'm also going to post in the classified section.

 

[RedJohn456]

  Being a long time Etymotic fan, I not only use Comply for full-on isolation, but I use the P series (extra long), which feel like they actually touch my brain! Anyway,
 
Knowing that the lifespan of the tips is a limited one, a trick I use is to wet (read lick) my fingers and then roll the tips before insertion - this is actually a recommendation in the Ety manual .
 
This has given me 3 big benefits:
1   They are far easier to insert
2   The make a slightly better seal when they expand
3   They last a lot longer

 
Wow I just tried this trick. This is the best seal I have gotten with them yet :O  It didn't even occur to me to wet the tips before. Thank you so much for that  Jamming to some Agnes Obel now

 

[Bananiq]

This is the first time I can say that I somehow experienced what people call  "brain burn-in" with IEMs. While I definitely believe in physical burn-in of IEMs, studio monitors or DACs. I could never imagine that brain burn-in is real thing until now. I got a feeling from these IEMs that you have to kind of "adapt" to the way how they portray sound and after they open themselves revealing their magic.
 
On my second listening session of R2A with complys I was lying in bed before sleeping and have put a low-volume songs from my iPhone 5..... I noticed how the background is black, noiseless. Or should I say 'blackground'? As if there is an abyss where all the noise fall and stay but only desired sound comes up when called upon. The micro-details are not pronounced and brought forward like in B2, but they are there. Seems like the Flares care more about the macro-details aspects of music like dynamic range, imaging and separation. Now when I closed my eyes suddenly I got this pseudo-image of vast space in my head. I did not really know how "big" the space was until I heard specific sounds and instruments coming from such extreme range of positions. Every sound coming from Flares somehow contained this precise information of the placement of instrument in space even in height. As if no sound lie in exact same position as the other. As if the instruments and singers were tangibly generated in my head and I could clearly define their placement aspects and height. Color me very impressed. Fever Ray - Coconut is where I got really excited about this. I was not expecting how this song can sound. And I didn't even have a proper source. I was constantly waking up my GF with my excitement so I had to end the session and go to sleep because she would be really pissed
 
I even like the Y splitter. After so much hate about him I thought that it will be bigger than it actually is. It put some pressure down for over-ear usage and while sleeping it draws cable down which can be useful when rolling from side to side.
I don't know how Flare does this but I don't think I can ever experience such sound from nearfield monitors. I even got suspicious that Flare is somehow using hypnosis to listeners LOL.
Given the fact how ULTRA LIGHT are these, and how small. I can definitely understand the "sleeping with IEMs" talk now. Also not sure who said it first but I also see these IEMs as end-game for Ambient and Downtempo.
 
Thanks Head-Fi and all the people who recommended these. And you saved me a lot of money looking for another IEMs
 
Also thanks James for the trick with the silicone stem. Amazing -

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

*music was playing during taking a photo to preserve authenticity

 
 

 
question corner:
 
has anybody tried double / triple - flanges with them? How was the result?
is GeekOut good source for pairing? I think that the details and energetic presentation of GO can pair nice with Flares
does anybody from UK/EU want to trade his R2S?

 

[The Dan of Steel]

I tried Meelec triple flanges this morning and they fit fine on the nozzle but I personally feel that they close in the soundstage. I would have to try them again but I don't really like the feeling of triples anyway Perhaps I will cut them into biflanges and try again.
 
Is that groove on the back of the housing for airflow? Is covering it with a something going to effect the driver negatively if the port is closed? 

 

[LuckyNat]

  Ok, I've got a pair of R2PROs a few days ago and I've been putting quite a few hours into trying different tips, playing with fit, etc...
 
Out of the 100+ IEMs I've tried, these are probably the most tricky ones to assess, since their sound varies a lot with tips and insertion depth. Heck, they can even tilt inside the ear canal, due to their diminutive size... meaning, that even with the same tips and insertion depth, two consecutive insertions won't necessarily yield the same sonic results.
 
So, here's my humble 2c on how they sound at best:

1. Fairly well-balanced from deep bass throughout the midrange, but with a pronounced 6-8kHz spikiness on top.

 
And here's my humble 2c on how they sound most of the time:

1. A little boomy, due to slight upper bass elevation
2. Oddly skewed in the mids, due to a noticeable 1.5kHz dip followed by a 2kHz resonance
3. Very laid-back in lower treble (guitars lack bite, cymbals sound subdued)
4. Spiky and mildly sibilant in the 6-8kHz range

 
At the risk of me eating my words later on (in case I discover the "magic fit"), so far these are interestingly different in some way, but no threat to top-tiers in my book. 

 

 
That all seems very numerical, over-analytical and over-thought to me. I always think that deeply analysing like that leads to confirmation bias, expectation bias and all sorts of other bias and placebo effect. You think "does that sound louder here at 1.5khz than 2khz?" and so you've already implanted the idea and along comes the stream of potential bias. IMHO you can only do this analysis mechanically. Every real scientific study which comes up across this problem tries to remove the human brain element many times over.
 
You also have the problems of one's hearing not being flat, response varying from person to person and the established effect of the brain becoming conditioned to expect a certain response for a situation (e.g. listening to music, listening to headphones) and quickly picking up new normals dependant on what is normally listened to.
 
I remember reading a piece about Joachim Gerhard's speaker designs (Audio Physic speakers for example) and his insistance on the response being perfectly flat and phase corent. Listeners not used to this flat response would respond by saying it was recessed here or prominant there and that the flat response sounded "flat and boring". Some stuck it out, their ears readjusted to this new flat response and no longer were there recessed frequencies or prominant frequencies and the flat response then helped sonically in other areas. A bit of a paraphrase of the story told but I'm sure you get the idea.
 
For me, a non-analytical approach is more helpful. That of just listening to varied material especially including non-musical natural sounds (not just nature but human-centric environments too) and noticing your instinctive reaction to those sounds.
 
To me these R2Pros sound immensely natural and open whilst also changing so easily with each different recording. I would expect to hear any serious frequency response deficiencies as an unnatural-ness. I'm not saying they are flat but I don't hear any major problems. Then again, I also think that frequency response - due to individual's hearing responses, due to our ability to adjust quickly to a new normal - is one of the least important (within reason) aspects of sound, with speed, detail, impact/bite more important to realism for example. R2PRos definately have speed, detail, impact in abundance compared to many others.
 
I would love to hear some top-flight CEIMs though - I don't have experience with them. I may have to go to that meet in August in London to expand my experience to the top CEIMS just to know.
 
How about living with them as your ONLY earphone for a good while and see what the others sound like after? Might be an interesting experiment.

 

[TwinACStacks]

James444 I absolutely agree with you. They are good but not THAT good. I sold mine for what I pledged. I hope he is happy with them. I won't drop names but IMHO the "other" kickstarter rewards that I recently received  absolutely slay the R2pros, without even a look back in retrospect.
 

TWIN

 

[Selenium]

You didn't even have the Pros. Did you?

 

[Deviltooth]

LuckyNat: I lived with the R2As for days before I put in my CIEMs (CT-500, Jh Audio Pro, Custom Art Pro330v2).  All three CIEMs are sonically superior.  However, all 3 CIEMs are also much more expensive.  For the price paid (Kickstarter pricing) the Flares are great.  What they are not is 'perfect', 'the best' or the second coming of that guy who got nailed up on a cross (I think it was Brian).  Lets not let that hype train drive us all over a cliff.

 

[holden4th]

Let's look at it from another and possibly more important point of view.

My level on the iem tree is quite low as the most expensive ones I own are the Senn IE80s. When I first got my IE80s I went "wow these are really good!" They were a big upgrade from what I'd had previously and provided me with a different experience from my HD580s and Shure SRH840s. What I loved is what they did for me, significantly improved my enjoyment of music which is surely the purpose of any headphone. I still,enjoy using them.

So after I read a post on another thread that said that a review in an important HiFi blog said the R2As would match the IE800s for bass and soundstage I was immediately interested. I've read the whole thread as it has developed and pulled the trigger on a unwanted pair thanks to a very helpful forum member. If these are significantly better than my Senns then I am well ahead of the play. The common points seem to be that these have very good bass, are natural sounding, have very good soundstage with excellent isolation of individual performers and make music enjoyable. This ticks nearly every single one of my boxes.

I don't care that they don't match iem X for top end sweetness, iem Y for pronounced midrange, blah, blah, blah. The IEMs mentioned all cost considerably more than the R2As so it's like comparing apples and bananas for texture and flavour - virtually pointless.

When they arrive I will do an in depth comparison with the IE80s and publish it here.

I have one question for all the forum members who have compared dozens and dozens of IEMs. Are you listening to the headphones or listening to the music and which of those two completely disparate activities is most important to you?

For me it's the music but YMMV and that's OK.

 

[RedJohn456]

 

James444 I absolutely agree with you. They are good but not THAT good. I sold mine for what I pledged. I hope he is happy with them. I won't drop names but IMHO the "other" kickstarter rewards that I recently received  absolutely slay the R2pros, without even a look back in retrospect.
 

TWIN

I have heard some not so flattering things about the iem you're talking about ymmv ofc. I almost pulled the trigger on a set but the impressions brought the hype down to earth for me

 

[Midgetguy]

  LuckyNat: I lived with the R2As for days before I put in my CIEMs (CT-500, Jh Audio Pro, Custom Art Pro330v2).  All three CIEMs are sonically superior.  However, all 3 CIEMs are also much more expensive.  For the price paid (Kickstarter pricing) the Flares are great.  What they are not is 'perfect', 'the best' or the second coming of that guy who got nailed up on a cross (I think it was Brian).  Lets not let that hype train drive us all over a cliff.

Well-said. I don't consider these to be the best or reference flat or whatever else you'd like to call it, but for Kickstarter pricing (I'm growing less convinced by the day as far as retail pricing), the R2A is a great IEM. Might not fit everyone, but the sound signature it carries works very well with my EDM library and I have yet to see an IEM at this size. Not even the Aurisonics Rockets (of which I recently bought a pair to try out) can match up in that regard. Plus, the wire coming out of the end of the Rockets makes the cable feel kinda finicky and fit weirdly as opposed to the better (IMO) way that the wire comes out of the housing on the R2A. I do currently own sonically better IEMs than these, Earwerkz Supra 2 and Tralucent 1+2 to name a couple, but the sound, fit, comfort, and size offered by the R2A at Kickstarter price makes it a winner in my book.....but only at Kickstarter price.
 
Also, Brian was NOT a team player (this is a Leverage reference for anyone familiar enough with the show

).

 

[money4me247]

  Has anyone compared the R2Pro to the FAD Heaven VII?

 
@BucketInABucket, I've recently gotten my R2Pros, but already shipped out the Heaven VII review tour unit I recently had the opportunity to play with. wrote an in-depth review here on the heaven vii & was able to do direct comparisons against the r2a.
 
In terms of sonics (from audio memory), I would estimate that the Heaven VII pretty easily wins overall against the flare audio IEMs. (particularly in terms of perceived sound stage and treble tuning which I thought were especially well-done on the 7s). Other than that, I don't really like to make too much detailed comparisons with items I never got the chance to test side-by-side, but the differences in those two particular sonic attributes was significant enough that I am comfortable talking about without a direct comparison. the flare IEMs are relatively more comfortable for me, and are significantly cheaper even at full retail price. since there is quite a large price difference between the r2pro and heaven 7, it is hard to say whether the extra investment is worth the difference in money for you. I would note that is a noticeable difference to both my ears and my non-audiophile friends' ears between the heaven vii vs the r2a. the difference is relatively much larger than the difference between the r2a vs the r2pro (in my opinion). The differences in technically ability between the r2a and r2pros do not seem to be very noticeable to me with the larger difference being their sound signature. perhaps the r2pros may be slightly faster with slightly better overall clarity and bass tightness than the r2as, but really I think the relatively brighter sound signature of the r2pro over the r2a more bass-emphasized sound signature is the more noticeable difference.
 
I was actually driving myself a little bit crazy with some recent blind testing. Some of my findings were a bit inconsistent, which suggests to me that the differences between them are more subtle than I first initially thought. (Or may also be due to sonic differences from differing fits when I remove and reinsert as well I suppose). I do think you can pick up the relatively brighter sound of the r2pro pretty consistently over the bassier nature of the r2a, but actually a bit hard for me to decide which sound I prefer. Flip flops based on my mood and genre hahaha.
 
From my recent extensive side-by-side testing, I would actually say that really the difference between the r2a and r2pros are more akin to flavor differences than truly significant and easy to appreciate improvements in technical ability. that being said, I am not disappointed with either flare audio IEM at their kickstarter price point and they do offer easy to appreciate improvements over some of the entry-level IEMs I've played with, particularly in their perceived speed. Bass notes are very tight and clean.
 
Anyone else with both the r2a and r2pro who engaged in any sort of non-sighted blind testing?

 

[money4me247]

  That all seems very numerical, over-analytical and over-thought to me. I always think that deeply analysing like that leads to confirmation bias, expectation bias and all sorts of other bias and placebo effect. You think "does that sound louder here at 1.5khz than 2khz?" and so you've already implanted the idea and along comes the stream of potential bias. IMHO you can only do this analysis mechanically. Every real scientific study which comes up across this problem tries to remove the human brain element many times over.
 
You also have the problems of one's hearing not being flat, response varying from person to person and the established effect of the brain becoming conditioned to expect a certain response for a situation (e.g. listening to music, listening to headphones) and quickly picking up new normals dependant on what is normally listened to.
 
I remember reading a piece about Joachim Gerhard's speaker designs (Audio Physic speakers for example) and his insistance on the response being perfectly flat and phase corent. Listeners not used to this flat response would respond by saying it was recessed here or prominant there and that the flat response sounded "flat and boring". Some stuck it out, their ears readjusted to this new flat response and no longer were there recessed frequencies or prominant frequencies and the flat response then helped sonically in other areas. A bit of a paraphrase of the story told but I'm sure you get the idea.
 
For me, a non-analytical approach is more helpful. That of just listening to varied material especially including non-musical natural sounds (not just nature but human-centric environments too) and noticing your instinctive reaction to those sounds.
 
To me these R2Pros sound immensely natural and open whilst also changing so easily with each different recording. I would expect to hear any serious frequency response deficiencies as an unnatural-ness. I'm not saying they are flat but I don't hear any major problems. Then again, I also think that frequency response - due to individual's hearing responses, due to our ability to adjust quickly to a new normal - is one of the least important (within reason) aspects of sound, with speed, detail, impact/bite more important to realism for example. R2PRos definately have speed, detail, impact in abundance compared to many others.
 
I would love to hear some top-flight CEIMs though - I don't have experience with them. I may have to go to that meet in August in London to expand my experience to the top CEIMS just to know.
 
How about living with them as your ONLY earphone for a good while and see what the others sound like after? Might be an interesting experiment.

this is quite an interesting perspective to me.
 
I do agree with you that attempts to do more in-depth analysis can often lead to a lot of placebo effect/expectation bias type thinking. However, I would say that those types of effects are even more pronounced using a "living with them" type approach when analyzing. I personally find the most revealing way to test for differences is rapid back and forth switching on ~10 second or less portions of tracks without knowing which IEM is which. The nice thing about the various Flare Audio IEMs is that they all feel the same in-ear, so truly blinded testing on these headphones is possible.
 
the problem with non-systematic approaches to listening is that you can get a variety of different impressions even using the same pair of headphones due to the way our brain focuses on different aspects of the sound as well as inconsistencies based on the source track. Sibilance/harshness/micro-detail/sound stage and a variety of other factors are source-track dependent and if you don't control the source track, your impressions may just depend on which songs you happen to try on each different headphone.
 
using a live-in approach, I thought the differences between the r2pro and r2a were extremely large, but after I did some systematic blinded testing, I am now feeling that the differences in sound between the two models is nowhere near as large as I initially thought. would be curious of the thoughts of other owners who own both models.