Flare Audio Immerse ear inserts??

[Leejb1970]

Thanks for all your input. Both educational and ultimately, money saving!

 

[Joe Smith]

I was just about to open a thread on this too. Yeah, it also came up on my FB feed as an ad. It's an interesting concept for sure. Price is not insane if they actually DO something. Is anyone here using these yet?

Of course, the other thought that came up was regarding my mild tinnitus, it seems unlikely these would provide any perceived aid with that, or they could probably be bringing that up in their product copy...

 

[Astoneroad]

Of course, the other thought that came up was regarding my mild tinnitus, it seems unlikely these would provide any perceived aid with that, or they could probably be bringing that up in their product copy...

I think that would be the headline selling point. The market for people with Tinnitus, like me and you, is much greater than the niche audio market for such a device. I've resigned to the fact that Tinnitus isn't going to be resolved in my lifetime... a remnant of all those fabulous Dead shows in the '70's.

 

[cavedriver]

It is said to eliminate resonance by up to 21 dB.
On YouTube, I also saw mentions of "removing HRTF."
What could that possibly mean? - or Why would they want to remove it? I don’t quite understand.

googling it, the HRTF is the "head related transfer function", which is apparently the sum of the ways our head and ears modify sound between a source and when we "hear" it:

Head-related transfer function - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[cavedriver]

So basic premise is that the ear's frequency response isn't flat because of its physical shape and they compensate for this. Yet they also say themselves the brain already compensates for this. So using their product will, erm, do what exactly? Don't get me wrong, the basic idea and physics of it might make sense, but it would be interesting to first figure out if this is needed/wanted in the first place, let alone a single device would have the same effect in all persons. Apart from that, it's hard to take this serious because of the sheer amount of buzzwords.

I don't think the main feature is flattening the response curve, in fact, that could be a disadvantage. I think they think the main advantage is removing the ~21% distortion that reflections caused by the outer ear add to the incoming sound.

Having Etymotic IEM's for years I doubt these will significantly improve on the detail those provide, but I am interested in what it would do when listening to a high quality two channel stereo. You really can't experience bass properly with IEM's, even if the frequencies are played at a material-correct volume, so being able to listen to a stereo at a volume where you can also feel the bass and the air pressurization, but with reduced distortion in the 4-8 kHz range, could be an improvement on the experience. Again, though, real scientific data would really help. I'm also thinking about the headphone "listener preference curve" and how that curve is far from flat and has a big hump centered on 4 kHz. Could it be that that curve reflects our desire to compensate for the distortion our brain has to filter out in that frequency range by amplifying those frequency values? Ex of headphone curve:

Dan Clark NOIRE X Headphone Review

This is a review, listening tests, detailed measurements and optional EQ of Dan Clark Audio (DCA) NOIRE X closed back headphone. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $999.99. This is one high quality and gorgeous headphone. It is more compact and lighter than my daily driver, the DCA...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Of course it could be said this conflicts with the research that people prefer relatively "flat" audio reproduction when listening at some distance from the source.

 

[cavedriver]

Found some prior art...

View attachment 412829

they literally make a version of those already, which they call the "earHD 90":

earHD® 90

Non-electrical hearing devices that increases detail and reduces ambient noise letting you focus on sounds in front of you. After a successful crowdfunding campaign earHD launches onto our website.

www.flareaudio.com

 

[antcollinet]

I don't think the main feature is flattening the response curve, in fact, that could be a disadvantage. I think they think the main advantage is removing the ~21% distortion that reflections caused by the outer ear add to the incoming sound.

Having Etymotic IEM's for years I doubt these will significantly improve on the detail those provide, but I am interested in what it would do when listening to a high quality two channel stereo. You really can't experience bass properly with IEM's, even if the frequencies are played at a material-correct volume, so being able to listen to a stereo at a volume where you can also feel the bass and the air pressurization, but with reduced distortion in the 4-8 kHz range, could be an improvement on the experience. Again, though, real scientific data would really help. I'm also thinking about the headphone "listener preference curve" and how that curve is far from flat and has a big hump centered on 4 kHz. Could it be that that curve reflects our desire to compensate for the distortion our brain has to filter out in that frequency range by amplifying those frequency values? Ex of headphone curve:

Dan Clark NOIRE X Headphone Review

This is a review, listening tests, detailed measurements and optional EQ of Dan Clark Audio (DCA) NOIRE X closed back headphone. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $999.99. This is one high quality and gorgeous headphone. It is more compact and lighter than my daily driver, the DCA...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Of course it could be said this conflicts with the research that people prefer relatively "flat" audio reproduction when listening at some distance from the source.

(my bold)

Difficult to see how they are going to do that. Certainly their animations have totally failed to show refraction of the sound waves as they go through apertures at dimensions much smaller than the wavelength.

Meaning there will be reflections along the length of the device itself, as well as in the ear canal once the waves have left the device.

 

[storing]

I don't think the main feature is flattening the response curve, in fact, that could be a disadvantage. I think they think the main advantage is removing the ~21% distortion that reflections caused by the outer ear add to the incoming sound.

You're right, should have worded that differently I didn't really mean 'flatten', more 'make ideal'.. Or shall we say 'immersive', lol. However it doesn't change the vague explanation and what seems like contradictions ('distortions occur naturally' and 'brain tries to filter this distortion which results in a loss of detail').

 

[iGude]

the distortion created by our outer ear

…is called pinna cues of the human auditory system and is considered of vital importance to discriminate between front and back as well as up and down.

If what this company is claiming is true this should be an area of very interesting research

Agree, its either this or marketing BS. My money is on the latter.

On their webpage they show how sound waves travel through the ear canal being reflected inside the canal. Given the wavelengths of sound waves in the frequency range of interest (many centimeters to meters) in combination with the typical diameter of human ear canals (approx. 0.7 cm) laws of physics don’t allow this kind of wave propagation inside the canal. It reminds me of showing staircases to prove that digital signals lack resolution…

 

[cavedriver]

…is called pinna cues of the human auditory system and is considered of vital importance to discriminate between front and back as well as up and down.

Yeah, I think it's assumed that if you were wearing these things you would only be using them while involved in stationary activities like 2 ch audio listening. To be engaged in day to day activities where front/back and up/down hearing are relied on for safety would be dangerous, and even multi-channel listening like a movie in surround sound would be pointless.

 

[eddantes]

So these things attenuate frequencies between 2k-8k. If thats what you need - knock yourself out. For the rest of us - not sure that we need that.

 

[cavedriver]

(my bold)

Difficult to see how they are going to do that. Certainly their animations have totally failed to show refraction of the sound waves as they go through apertures at dimensions much smaller than the wavelength.

Meaning there will be reflections along the length of the device itself, as well as in the ear canal once the waves have left the device.

certainly in the audio reproduction world there is broad knowledge based on research of the effects of various horn shapes on the expanding soundwaves from a point source. What most of us don't know is what happens in collimating scenarios where sound is being "collected" in a horn-type shape towards a microphone. What horn shape is best? What produces the least distortion? What happens at different frequencies? I'm sure someone here knows but I certainly don't. Obviously the various frequencies reach the inner ear because our hearing works, and it works over a wide frequency range, and it is relatively discriminating. In fact, it would be a wonder of the natural world that human hearing is so good (and other animals' hearing) if we weren't so used to it's existence in the first place. So while I am not familiar with the ideal designs for collimating horn shapes it seems like the distortion produced in that pathway leading to the inner ear can't be that bad, whether the reflections occur in a path 1 cm wide, as in the natural ear, or 0.5 cm wide inside their device. Note that the wavelength of sound at 20 kHz is 1.7 cm, so even the shortest wavelengths humans can hear is longer than the width of the inner ear, which makes me suspect that diffraction is not that much of an issue once the sound gets to the inner ear, but I'm just speculating here...

 

[cavedriver]

So these things attenuate frequencies between 2k-8k. If thats what you need - knock yourself out. For the rest of us - not sure that we need that.

View attachment 413099

No, I don't think that's what it does. What they are saying is that the distortion produced by the outer ear is worse at 2-8 kHz and their device reduces the distortion.

 

[eddantes]

No, I don't think that's what it does. What they are saying is that the distortion produced by the outer ear is worse at 2-8 kHz and their device reduces the distortion.

Ahhh, ok. Do they say what kind of distortion?

 

[cavedriver]

Ahhh, ok. Do they say what kind of distortion?

idk, they are rather thin on the details, hence many of the comments above and a general disappointment on my part that they can't seem to point to any scientific data for their claims.

 

[iGude]

you would only be using them while involved in stationary activities like 2 ch audio listening.

For a proper soundstage in front of you from a stereo sound reproduction system those pinna cues are required, too. Otherwise you will have the same experience as with binaural recordings or dummy head recordings listened to via headphones: the soundstage is far too near and above or behind the listener (typically).

 

[iGude]

they can't seem to point to any scientific data for their claims

That makes sense since the „problem“ they want to „solve“ (reflections from ear canal boundaries) doesn’t even exist in the first place. This is a solution asking for a problem…

 

[Duo]

Ok …just got the Flare Immerse Headphone and stereo add ons today. I tried the headphone and the stereo. First -I had gift money to spend.

Secondly, I am in no way an expert.

But I’ll post my thoughts in answer to the questions I had.I’m still forming an opinion so I will change my mind.

It’s a lot of money for me to spend so
1. Is there a difference ?
2. Is the difference worth it?
3. Is there a scientific basis to the difference?

Answering the hardest question -Is there a scientific basis to the difference- is easy.
I don’t know.

Is there a difference?
(My setup was flac/dad on Onkyo HF player and later Tidal Max quality, headphones are trashy sennheiser 559 with Quedlix 5k dac with equaliser and Ifi zen headphone amp with balanced output , speakers to test stereo version of Flares were not so great B&W formation)
Yes but I don’t know exactly what the difference is.


Using tidal max quality because my Onkyo HF player crashed kind of showed the difference depends on

A) the loudness of the music; I needed it only slightly louder than normal to have a sweet spot. Too loud is uncomfortable anyway.

B) the difference was not substantial but enough to be noticed.

C) the difference appeared to be related to more “detail” but I suspect it’s more to do with blocking out some frequencies which I noted without any music. When you close the ends open to the outside it’s like you’ve got earplugs in.

Now I can’t make up my mind if it’s worth the money, but I’ll say if these were $30/£30 they’d be worth a try.

The Flare Immerse stereo, for me at least, has less of an effect on the sound.

I’m going to spend more time before I decide whether they’re worth it.

Personally listening to music is worth more than an elusive sweet spot.

Anyway I’m a bit of a sceptic after watching this about another Flare product and reading the responses before I got these today—-

 

[antcollinet]

Note that the wavelength of sound at 20 kHz is 1.7 cm, so even the shortest wavelengths humans can hear is longer than the width of the inner ear, which makes me suspect that diffraction is not that much of an issue once the sound gets to the inner ear, but I'm just speculating here...

Refraction becomes an issue when the physical aperture is small compared to the wavelength, not larger - which it is for all audible frequencies. Particularly when we talk about the inlet and outlet apertures of this device.

 

[iGude]

Refraction

Refraction happens when a wave passes from one medium to another or wave propagation conditions within one medium change. Here, the medium is air and no other medium is involved, and propagation conditions don’t change. Hence, refraction cannot happen in this case unless I have missed something.