[Arysyn]

You're living in much better country than I am if the store is willing to give you a refund or trade for burned-in OLED. In my location, OLED burn-in is your problem, not the stores and you can't do anything about it. I'm very careful with OLEDs anyhow, and my current LG B7 has built-in mechanism for preventing burn-in from happening - the whole picture moves 1-2 pixels to the left or right every couple minutes (you can't see it, but hopefully it works).

Anyway back to the subject - I didn't mean "burn-in" as some deliberate process, I just meant that after let say 200h of heavy use, the sound of Flares PRO becomes more polished in upper midrange. By heavy use, I mean listening to music at least several hours a day, but I'm often leaving them playing music through the night to speed up the process.
Also, there's one other issue related to burn-in. I've noticed that some IEMs (dynamic ones), left unused for a long period of times, sound different than when used often. So the burn-in might also be just frequent use and after long idle period you need to let them play a while, for them to sound good again. Just a thought.

Burn-in and burn-in are two seperate things for screens and audio equipment. For screens, burn-in means image retention. Obviously that can't happen to a speaker.

Burn-in for audio gear means, for drivers for example, the materials loosen up from their first movement until they reach an average pliability - the driver suspension, driver surrounds etc. In electronics, capacitors can also change property to their intended ESR values etc as the dialectric settles in to the patten of electric charges it experiences. Some people claim burn-in for other things but this can also be simply the brain getting used to and normalising a sound character or placebo too.

The two are not related to each other, it's just the same words to describe two different things...

I think there would have to be some problems with materials used in drivers for them to require burn-in after not being used a long while (unless they're being stored in a different temperature, like cold storage). That change in physical property would probably age the materials and cause premature failures. Manufacturers would be aware of those effects and not use those materials.

Personally, I would put the sound difference down to one's brain normalising one sound and then moving over to another that has a different frequency response and slowly normalising that one. If you listen to something with a suck-out at 5kHz, it won't take long for your brain to normalise that and for it to start to sound normal. Then when you move to something with flat response, your brain's compensation will make the flat response sound like it has a 5Khz hump... until that flat response becomes normalised. Each time to you listen to the heaphone, you will be subconciously expecting for it to sound a certain way.

To begin, its great to see this thread active again with various information and discussion of it. I'm going to post something I received from Flare, which will be in a separate post from this one. Yet first, I'll respond to some posts written here...

I realize of course the meaning and the intent of the Burn-In suggestion, being to allow random audio to play through a new iem for several hours, in order to allow the iem to adjust/to get its tuning operating normally, etc. I made the connection with other types of Burn-In based from the interest I have in how they relate in unique ways that still maintain the key differentials. Burn-In on a tv is not an action, such as with an iem where Burn-in is the act of allowing audio to play for a long time essentially to improve the audio to its "normal" state. Whereas Burn-In on a tv is the visible remnant of sections of picture engrained into the display.

However, there is a connection in the nature of how both involve something playing on the particular equipment associated with its form of Burn-In. Similarly, they both cause alot of debate. Some people refuse to believe burn-in actually exists on a television, despite evidence, meanwhile the same occurs in the debate about burn-in with audio as an effective action to help bring the sound tuning to its normal intended state.

My interest being in the unique attributes of those, is why I mentioned them in a way I realize may still have been unclear to my own intentions, so hopefully this explanation helped to do so. Also, I live in the suburbs of Chicago, Illinois - which has some independent electronics stores left with competitive warranties that will cover burn-in. Actually though I was surprised when the store said they'd take the tv back, because of the reason I heard others online say they can't get a return/replacement for. I'm actually going to try getting a replacement with a newer model tv, but an LED instead of an OLED. I'm waiting a few weeks to see what Samsung will announce of their supposed FALD QLED tvs this year. I'm also in need of a new smartphone, so I might try getting the same brand of both for better interactivity, such as remote connections.

Anyways, I'm still figuring out how to best display the letter I got from Flare, which is a public announcement read it looks like, they sent to me as a pdf. I'm still working through some ideas with them where I can help them, and get to listen to the FlaresGold without them taking a loss on the product if I return it for the upper treble reasons, if they carried over from the FlaresPro. I'm thinking something like a review unit I could listen and return, which I agreed to cover the return shipping costs, or similarly with a prototype with the same exact tuning. I'll see what they say about it. I'd love to be able to give it a review here on Head-Fi finally.

 

[McCol]

Anyone get their Golds today?

My Golds are still stuck at DHL in Exeter due to the weather. Hopefully get them on Monday or Tuesday.

 

[Arysyn]

I'm finding that the harshness/artificial edge can 'mostly' be EQ'd out if you're happy using EQ. Some play around the 8-9khz range does it and maybe a little around the 11-12khz. Makes the sound more organic and instruments more natural but retains much of the amazing resolution and air.

I managed to reduce the harshness of the FlaresPro a bit by EQ, but I found it changed the tuning in others way I didn't like so well at the time, but since its been a while, I don't remember exactly what the result sounded like, except that I know I had to reduce the treble by alot to get a noticeable reduction in it.

 

[LuckyNat]

Let us know when you get those FR graphs for the gold and jet models - really curious to know.

Have there been any thread started about the Jet1 & 2 yet? (maybe I'll do a search) It's the kind of price range I can actually get friends interested in. Why some people wouldn't consider even R2As before is a mystery if you actually enjoy music - such a small investment over a long term, compared to what they probably spend drinking or eating out etc etc. Flare Pros are right out of their wildest imagination at £349 ! . Such a different way to thinking than me.

 

[Arysyn]

Let us know when you get those FR graphs for the gold and jet models - really curious to know.

Have there been any thread started about the Jet1 & 2 yet? (maybe I'll do a search) It's the kind of price range I can actually get friends interested in. Why some people wouldn't consider even R2As before is a mystery if you actually enjoy music - such a small investment over a long term, compared to what they probably spend drinking or eating out etc etc. Flare Pros are right out of their wildest imagination at £349 ! . Such a different way to thinking than me.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/flaresjet-by-flare-audio.873657/

I went ahead and created a thread for the FlaresJet, considering they are a new product that is different enough from the FlaresGold. I'm hoping to learn more about both, so hopefully the new thread helps bring more attention to the Jet, while I figure the Gold is fine here for discussion, but if people want a thread for it, either I could create one or they can.

I also should get the letter up here too.

 

[Arysyn]

This is the letter document I received from Flare. I've added the full image of it after the text :

Flare’s technology is unique in the audio world. Whilst others use some form of chamber to resonate sound in their devices (producing many different distortions) I wanted to try to eliminate resonating chambers altogether as they are the single reason why sound devices have not evolved or achieved super high resolution.

I have spent the last 8 years developing 12 patents that enable Flare to do this and we are now just starting to fully commercialise our technologies into products. Flares® PRO is an amazing earphone but I never stop chasing perfection and if I can hear any flaw in audio I must identify where it is and see if I can destroy it. I wanted to see how far I could push things with Flares® GOLD to create the most perfect sound possible.

I think and design at a particle level, this is what enables me to develop our technologies as I ‘thought experiment’ particle vibrations and their reflections rather than just measuring levels and frequencies which tell us very little in terms of audio accuracy. The tiniest change of a design or material, when you’re at such a high degree of precision, can make significant sound quality changes, thus we have to work in microns of subtle design changes as I work out where any errors are.

Flares® GOLD may look similar to Flares® PRO (i.e. it uses the same Kevlar intertwined cable and wireless module) but that is where the similarities end. At Flare we wanted to take the top spot in terms of audio quality, we wanted to spend time refining our Flares® PRO design to see how far we could push our sound quality and the results stunned everyone at Flare. Realism and the highest frequencies have been improved significantly compared to Flares® PRO, there is more detail and imaging everywhere.

We have refined our JET technology and adjusted the precise design of both jets inside and outside the earphone to remove any remaining traces of audible distortion, especially at the highest frequencies. The new shape of the body has enabled the jets to perform even more accurately and with less shell resonance than before.

Whilst titanium provides a very hard material for Flares® PRO, brass is denser and softer which means that Flares® GOLD has a higher degree of machined precision, which is highly polished and then coated in 24ct gold giving the Acoustic Lens a flawless and extremely polished finish. At an atomic level a highly accurate/polished reflector is better than a harder finish reflector as hard materials cannot be polished to a mirror finish like denser and softer materials can.

If you think of a tennis ball as a particle and throw it at a wall its return trajectory will be determined by the flatness of the wall it hits. If it’s a wall of cobblestones then you will get a chaotic return of the ball whereas a flat wall allows for a predictable return. This is the principle of our Acoustic Lens technology that focuses sound onto our eardrums, the more accurate the acoustic lens is, the higher the sound quality will be. Polishing to such a high degree of precision requires time, repeated measurements and effort, thus we limited the Flares® GOLD production compared to Flares® PRO as Flares® GOLD requires so much more time and effort to produce.

All this work and research has created our most accurate audio product to date. Focussing pure sound directly into the eardrums with even more precision than before, thus the sound quality jump up is significant for the listener.

Flares® GOLD is for those wanting to hear absolute audio perfection; those people, like me, who get frustrated at the slightest flaw in sound. Flares® GOLD is Flare’s new flagship earphone for true audio purists. Don’t forget that as with every Flare product there is a 30-day return option. So, you can hear this for yourselves and compare. We are that confident that you will be totally blown away.

 

[SteveKiwi]

Mine are due Monday NZ time.
They are sitting at the DHL Depot, they don't deliver on the weekend

 

[HiFlight]

Anyone get their Golds today?

My Golds arrived today and are in my ears as I type this. I have been comparing them side by side with my Pro using my DX200/Amp5 playing lossless files.

Can I hear differences?..Absolutely! The Golds clearly are more immersive with the soundstage having more depth and a greater sense of space between instruments. They also more clearly define subtle musical details.

Are the differences night and day? No but I feel certain that I could reliably tell them apart in blind testing.

I do consider it essential to use quality sources in order to justify the difference in price between the Pro and the Gold.

It will be interesting to see if burn-in results in any audible changes.

I am quite pleased with what I hear and do feel that the Gold can be considered a TOTL instrument.

 

[LuckyNat]

What are the differences like on your binaural thunder track?

 

[HiFlight]

What are the differences like on your binaural thunder track?

Most interesting comparison of any so far. The Gold has noticeably greater sub-bass extension which enhances the visceral impact of the thunder, but what is much more apparent is the sound of the rain. It completely surrounds me. The sense of realism is sometimes startling when playing this file. It is very easy to forget that I am not outside getting wet!
BTW, I am making my comparisons using the same tips (everyday audiophile large) and same source volume setting.

 

[LuckyNat]

It's a really nice recording - thanks again for sharing it. I feel like I can totally understand the differences. The thunder stands out as the impressive part, as it moves so far across the soundfield (then when it's over, the water drops and insects coming out). The rain is always there and realistic but not so much that it surrounds you. If the Golds are bringing that out more in a natural way, it sounds like a sense of more detail and immediacy but in a natural way - definately my kind of thing! May have to start thinking about getting the money together before the code runs out....

 

[HiFlight]

It's a really nice recording - thanks again for sharing it. I feel like I can totally understand the differences. The thunder stands out as the impressive part, as it moves so far across the soundfield (then when it's over, the water drops and insects coming out). The rain is always there and realistic but not so much that it surrounds you. If the Golds are bringing that out more in a natural way, it sounds like a sense of more detail and immediacy but in a natural way - definately my kind of thing! May have to start thinking about getting the money together before the code runs out....

You expressed it very well...Yes, it is more detailed but in no way artificial. Nature recordings, especially binaural, are much easier to use as benchmarks as they are what we all hear everyday, whereas listening to mastered, non-live music, our point of reference is uncertain even if the sounds may be enjoyable.

If one was able to quantify the percentage improvement over the original as, for example, 10%, that could result in a much greater enjoyment percentage factor to some users, and to others a negligible difference.

Frankly, I am not certain I would have purchased them if not for the fact that Flare offered the 30 day trial period. I am, however, very glad that I did!

 

[Arysyn]

Sounds like the tuning of the new FlaresGold is very 3d-like. I'm normally a bit concerned when someone talks about more sub-bass, or bass of any kind, but if this is a quality improvement rather than an increase in quantity, especially the awful thumpiness of bass, then its not so bad in my opinion. A more lifelike rain does sound good.

 

[paul2qute]

I'm gonna give the gold flare a miss and get the Chord 2go,love my flares Pro and getting my focal clear pro,who needs the gold,total waste of money in my opinion

 

[McCol]

I'm gonna give the gold flare a miss and get the Chord 2go,love my flares Pro and getting my focal clear pro,who needs the gold,total waste of money in my opinion

Not sure how you can come to that conclusion - have you heard them?