Driving Miss Daisy? For those of you who have seen the movie you might get the analogy.

You hear a lot on HiFi forums regarding the Sennheiser HD650s. Phrases like ‘legendary’ abound in many amateur (and some professional) reviews and you get the impression that these headphones are the best thing since sliced bread. Glowing superlatives regarding sound stage, imaging, bass control, detail retrieval are there in droves. I own the HD580s and love them so eventually I bought a pair of the 650s just to see what the hype was all about. And my initial conclusion after running them in was just that – hype!

Running the 650s through my Burson Playmate 2 what I heard was definitely underwhelming.

Bass – somewhat bloated, not well controlled and it rolled off in the upper levels. Some slam but not really enough and they didn’t go low enough without losing definition

Midrange – smooth, almost urbane but vocals didn’t impress as they often sounded a bit timid

Treble – definitely dialed back and taking all the fun and excitement out of lead guitars

Imaging – three blobs of sound (left, centre and right) that seem to meet up at the edges

Sound stage – narrow and compressed with no depth

Detail – what detail? Things I’d heard on cheaper cans just weren’t there.

So I went back to the reviews and wondered if the pundits were using the same cans as me. Why were these reviewed so positively, what were the factors that made these supposedly so good for the money? After a while one factor from my research began to stand out - scalability - with driving power a major aspect. Quite simply what they were saying was you need the right amp. To cut a long story short it became evident that my PM2 (a great DAC/Amp) that while being classed as powerful still didn’t have the chops to get anything near the best out of the HD650.

Enter the Schiit Asgard3 which I bought just to see what the HD650s could do – not something I’d normally do. With four times the power of the Burson and recommended by many it was also a reasonable price. Would it prove the HD650 fans correct and bring them to life? The answer is Yes.

I’ve spent a few weeks with the HD650s as my only listening device. I wasn’t trying to make comparisons so no need for my Audeze LCD1, HD580s, etc. I just wanted to hear what the Asgard3 did to the 650s without having another set of headphones colouring my opinion. So why did I say yes, what’s improved? Let’s go back to my original criteria

Bass – possibly this is where the biggest improvement is for these Senns. Slam, good definition (but it doesn’t quite go all the way down) and the roll off has been minimized to the point where you don’t really notice it. It’s not bass head stuff but it’s enjoyable and it’s definitely faster and tighter.

Treble – Yay, there is now some sparkle and you definitely hear it on the upper registers of guitars and similar instruments. What’s more it’s cleaner and tighter without getting peaky.

Imaging – also a huge improvement. The three blobs are gone and the whole sound stage is now covered albeit with one or two little dead areas.

Detail – of course with improved imaging then those little details that I couldn’t really hear using my PM2 have emerged.

Midrange – you’ll notice I’ve left this for last as, for me, there are some ambivalences. Often touted as one of the HD650s strengths it’s also a bit of an achilles heel IMHO – or at least with this set up.

The midrange is warm, smooth, almost beguiling. It’s at it’s strongest in the lower mids and I feel that this is to the disadvantage to the higher registers of the midrange which don’t project anywhere near as well. The mids seem to try to smooth over recording imperfections and a good example of this is vocal sibilance which is usually caused by poor use of a mike and a lack of basic vocal technique. I imagine that this drives recording engineers nuts as it’s almost impossible to correct without compromising the recording. On Mary Black's beautiful rendition of ‘Bright Blue Rose’ you can hear the sibilance on just about every set of cans I’ve ever used except the HD650s. The other effect of the somewhat recessed upper mids is to push many vocalists into the background. Imagine that they have taken two or three steps back towards the drummer and are singing from there – that’s the effect that I hear. And it’s also this effect, along with those slightly recessed vocals and the ‘smoothing effect that gives rise to the old chestnut, the Sennheiser 'veil'. I don’t think the A3 has totally removed it.

In conclusion, yes, I believe that these cans definitely scale up when paired with an appropriate amp and what the Asgard3 has done has made the 650s a keeper for me, they now sound great with above the caveats above excepted. The Audeze LCD1s I own blow these out of the water in just about every department but we are talking two different beasts here with quite different sound signatures so the comparison lacks some validity.

I’ve yet to hear all that some claim these 650s are capable of but do I want to spend a disproportionate amount of money for an amp considering the cost of the 650s to find out? No, I’d rather get a better set of headphones and preferably ones that are not so picky about the amp.

AUDEZE LCD-1 Review



There are only two reviews of the Audeze LCD-1 in the reviews section, both from Headfiers who already have Audeze headphones that are considerably more expensive than these ones. With that in mind I thought I’d review these from the point of someone who doesn’t have TOTL gear and is looking for an upgrade that might transform their listening experience.

Background: My headphones consist of three Sennheisers (HD580, HD6XX and the older wired Momentum 2s) and the exceptional Flare Gold iems. I tend to use the Golds as portables and the Senns sit at home attached to my iMac. I also have the Shure SRH840 which I use at work. The HD580 is there for classical music and the Momentums for rock/pop/EDM/etc. I bought the HD6XX on a whim as I’d read that they were exactly the same as the famous HD650. The jury is still out on these for me. The HD580 is still a superb headphone and their strength lies in their ability to reproduce tone and timbre which is ideal for classical music. There are two things that they don’t that well. The first is bass reproduction, yes it’s tight and controlled but it’s essentially anaemic. Imaging and instrumental placement could also be somewhat better. I wondered if, for a reasonable price, I could improve on them. Everything was pointing towards the Shure 1540 but they just seemed a bit overpriced for a closed back headphone.

Deciding to buy: While I was researching the Shures and alternatives I came across a couple of reviews of the LCD-1 and my curiosity was piqued. Many of the audio qualities that planars have seemed to be ideal for my classical music listening but the issue had been price. Suddenly, here was a planar headphone from a highly respected audio company at what seemed a very good price. I plunged into the reviews and at times I was wondering if different reviewers were listening to the same set of cans because they varied so much. Lieven, from Headfonia, has always been a go to guy for me with his reviews and it was reading what he said that made me decide to purchase them. Once again, the nice people at ‘Addicted to Audio’ were the people I went to when purchasing.

Unboxing and Listening: The unboxing has been well covered by the previous two reviewers so I’ll skip most of that apart from saying that these were very tastefully packaged and the carry case (which I probably won’t use) is solid and sturdy. They sit comfortably on my head though you do have to think about how you position them to get the best effect but this only takes a few seconds. I’d have preferred a shorter cable but at least it’s not as long as the stock Senn cable for the 580.

First Impressions: My initial audition straight out of the box was somewhat underwhelming and I began to wonder if I’d made a big mistake. They seemed a little tame in the top end, lacking a bit in dynamics and I’d heard stronger bass from my Momentum 2. The soundstage was somewhat compressed though instrument placement and isolation was simply outstanding and that was one of the qualities I was looking for. As I continued to listen to them they began to improve and I used a variety of music to put them through their paces. It wasn’t until I went back to my Flares that I began to realise how good these were. The Flares originally sold for $AUS1700 (fortunately I got them used for less than half that) and you could hear their price reflected in their sound. I’ll do a comparison later in this review. After a week of using the LCD-1 I was delighted with my decision to buy them.

How Do they Sound? As far as I’m concerned these are exceptionally good and the best sounding cans I own, pushing the Flares into second place. What do I like about them? Imaging is top of the list and was my top purchase criteria. Listening to the Beaux Arts Trio’s recording of Haydn’s Gypsy Trio, each member of the ensemble occupied their own separate space. This is impressive as often with piano trio recordings the piano bleeds into the space occupied by the two string players. With the LCD-1, pianist Menahim Pressler sat perfectly between the violin and the cello and I could hear all three separately. I got a sense of being there in person. The second thing that stood out was how natural they sound and I believe a lot of this is down to their level of detail and resolution. It’s been said that increased detail comes from an increased emphasis in the treble but that’s not what I hear. I’m talking about attack and decay of notes. I’m talking about tonal and timbral accuracy. I’m talking texture and also dynamics and it was the latter really made me sit up and listen. A gradual increase in volume (dynamic range) was accurately portrayed during crescendos as opposed to the impression that the music had got louder.

Treble: One of the comments made in some reviews was of a slightly peaky treble. I did hear this at times but worked out that this tended to be a recording and mastering issue and not mistuning on Audeze’s part. I found the treble to be clean, clear and non-fatiguing yet it didn’t sound as if it was rolled off as it is in the 6XX.

Midrange: The midrange is outstanding yet it doesn’t dominate. I am aware of what is happening both above and below that FR. It is alive and energetic yet not seemingly coloured in any way. This results in excellent PRaT. You could say that the midrange is very close to neutral. What also stands out is the texture and resolution. I can hear fingers slide along a guitar string, that slight intake of breath as a vocalist prepares to sing that next line. Tonality and timbre stand out. Well recorded piano is accurately and beautifully portrayed, vocals sound natural and unless it’s been part of the recording process, sibilance is non-existent. The same goes for vocal harshness or shrillness, if it’s not there in the recording then you won’t hear it through the LCD-1.

Bass: A number of reviewers didn’t like the bass (not enough of it) while others sang its praises. To be blunt, if you’re a basshead then the LCD-1 is not for you as the bass does not dominate the frequency range. Some reviewers said it lacked ‘bass slam’. Sorry, but bass doesn’t slam. It might rumble and grumble and be felt viscerally in the pit of your stomach but it doesn’t slam. What did slam was percussion at the upper bass/lower midrange level and this was ‘impactful’, to use a very hackneyed phrase. One of the aspects I’ve always liked about my Flares is the depth and quality of their bass but with the LCD-1 I heard things that the Golds have never reproduced. They go very deep into the sub bass and what’s more there is an impression of texture and layering in the lowest registers that I’ve never heard before. The ultimate test for this is pipe organ and the reproduction of a 32 foot organ pipe brought out the actual note and not an indistinct rumble. You could also hear the chuffing as the air was forced through the pipe. Where the Flares do beat the Audeze is the dynamics in their sub bass. The LCD-1 is dynamically quieter in this region but that said they are incredibly accurate. I love Robbie Shakespeare as a bassist. He’s really a lead guitarist looking to come out of the closet because that’s how he plays his bass. With the LCD-1 you can follow his convoluted rhythms and hear each note clearly as different from the one that preceded it, no matter how low he goes. However, I did want a bit more oomph in the sub bass and managed it by simply raising the 32hz and 64hz range by about +3dB. It still sounds great and it’s not lost any accuracy, clarity or detail.

Sound Stage: I don’t have any issues with the sound stage while some did say it sounded narrow and compressed it was certainly far better than my Momentums. I thought it was wide enough and while there was depth maybe this could have improved. Then again this might be an artefact of my DAC/Amp.

Other Headphones: This brings me to headphone comparisons. First, my Flare Golds. These are great iems and do many of the things that I like extremely well (imaging, tonal accuracy, good sub bass and musicality) but I feel the LCD-1 does them a bit better. My Momentum 2s sound muffled and distorted in comparison to the Audeze. I love my HD580 and would never part with it because it’s been my go to for classical and acoustic music for ages now. However, the LCD-1 has pushed it out of contention in all aspects. No amount of EQing is ever going to fully bring out the lower registers of the HD580 as Sennheiser tuned this aspect out of it. That said, I can still see me using them for piano music, especially the more historical recordings.

Now I get to the contentious part, comparing them to the venerable HD650. I’m basing my opinion on the fact that everyone says the 6XX and 650 are exactly the same. If they’re not the same then what comes next may not be valid but quite simply, the LCD-1 easily outperforms the Sennheiser in virtually every area. What’s wrong with the HD650? Well, there’s the significantly rolled off treble and imaging that puts everything in just three places - the centre, left and right. (It’s also very narrow). Bass has a middle of the range boost and the midrange is emphasised at the expense of the rest of the FR. People talk about the Sennheiser veil and I’m one of those who thinks that it exists, certainly as far as the HD650 is concerned. “Oh, you need a decent and powerful amp to remove the veil” the HD650 aficionados will say. Will 3.5 watts of pure class A amplification at 16 ohms do? If not, what will?

Final thoughts: This review is from the perspective of someone whose budget is limited but wants audiophile sound. I’m running the LCD-1 out of my iMac through the Burson Playmate 2 DAC/Amp. I’m using the SoundSource 4 app to do that little bit of equalisation I talked about. Music came from my own CDs and Level 5 FLAC files. I also used Deezer’s HiFi streaming which I am trialling at the moment (but will not take up). While writing this, Qobuz came online for Australians and this changed the game for me and put Deezer out of the running.

Would I recommend these headphones? Most definitely, especially to those for whom it would be an upgrade like it was for me. For those with far more expensive planars and other TOTL cans I imagine they will be able to pick holes in the LCD-1 sound though I suspect they might be small holes. I haven’t heard any of those more expensive headphones and the LCD-1 satisfies all the criteria I have for great sound. What is paradoxical is that I bought them with the intention of using them mainly for classical music yet I’ve spent a lot of time listening to other genres that I thought my Momentums and the 6XX would take care of. I’ve used both while doing this review and just want to take them off my head and go back to the LCD-1.

As an aside, the LCD-1 improved in sound quality over the first 20-30 hours of use. Now whether that’s burn in or my ears adjusting to the sound signature of the Audeze I don’t really know. What I do know is that for me they got better with more listening. Did they just need a bit of loosening up? Audeze claim to do a burn in for all of their headphones before shipping them. Maybe it just needed a bit more. I suspect my headphone buying is over for now. I’ve got the Audeze LCD-1 for home and the Flare Gold for music on the move via my A&K Junior or my iPhone.

Burson Playmate 2
After my PLAY died for the third time and the warranty had expired, Addicted to Audio offered me the chance to buy the PM2 for a substantial discount. I’ve had it for nearly four months now and it’s time to pen a few words about it.

Build: The big plus for me is the new heat sink style cover which barely gets mildly warm as opposed to the Play and Playmate which could get very hot. My belief is that the PLAY power supply failed because of the heat generated but that’s only a supposition. I also like the push button power switch on the front and the fact that I do have some sound control via the menu button. The volume pot has a much better feel. In all this a much more professional looking and feeling device.

Review Constraints: I am reviewing this with the standard op amps (JRCNE5532 and JRCNE5534) though I do have some Burson V6 Vivids in my dead PLAY which I will swap over later. I also wanted some continuity in determining what this DAC/Amp sounds like so it became decision time for both source and headphones. I decided to run with playing only CDs – no lossless files or high quality streaming, just CDs. (Good old 16 bit 44.1 khz). I have thousands of them and even though I have ripped them all to Level 5 FLAC I figured that CDs might sound a little better but I can’t really be sure.

I also decided to run with the highest quality headphones possible which initially meant only using my Flare Golds. These are superb iems and easily outperform my Sennheisers (580, 6XX and Momentum 2s). However, I’ve just purchased the Audeze LCD-1s and they offer a different sound. Both of these are very revealing of source. If it’s not the best sound you’ll notice it and the reverse is true.

I used a variety of well recorded music including chamber, orchestral, choral, vocal, solo piano, EDM, rock, folk and musicals.

Looking Back: First, let me say that I enjoyed the sound signature of my V6 Vivid PLAY. It had clarity, great instrumental separation and some very deep bass that was not overemphasised in any area. While it wasn’t warm, it wasn’t cold either but maybe neutral is not the word to use here. The PM2 sound signature is not quite like that. It seems (I’m relying on memory here) a bit smoother but the clarity is still there. Was I hearing some ‘grain’ with the PLAY? When I swap over the op amps how much of that will change? One thing I do know is the PM2 is more resolving than the Play. One of my test CDs was good old DSOTM. I was astonished at what I heard that I hadn’t heard before?

Instrumental Separation: As a lover of chamber music, I want to be in the room with the musos, shut my eyes and hear where each instrument is coming from. The PM2 does this from a width perspective exceptionally well but I know how a string quartet arranges themselves around the room. While I could perceive depth as well maybe this is an area where the PM2 might be slightly lacking. It’s a small caveat but one worth noting. That said instrument location was pinpoint with both the Flares and the Audezes.

Soundstage: The Flares provide an ‘out of head’ experience that you wouldn’t necessarily expect from iems. The PM2 seemed to extend this even further and it was emphasised when I reverted to the Momentums for listening. The soundstage narrowed and this aspect of the M2s (I’ve got the earlier wired version) was exposed. It was the same with the LCD-1s but listening to a string quartet it was incredibly accurate and focussed giving a true representation of where the musicians are seated.

Tonality and Timbre: As a classical musician these are vital parts of my listening experience. The real tonality test of any system involves two instruments – the piano and the human voice. Both produce harmonics that can’t be accurately reproduced electronically (for this reason, digital pianos are never as good as a fully stringed one). So, when a pianist hits the C above middle C I want to hear how the three metal strings that produce that one note are reproduced. Extremely well is my opinion. Listening to the Beaux Arts Trio play Haydn’s Gypsy Trio I can hear how well tuned Pressler’s piano is and the bite and timbre of Greenhouse’s cello as he draws the bow across the lower strings.

Bass: This is a strength of the PM2 and it was well brought out by the Flares. It was tight, quick and goes deep. This was really evident when I used the Audeze’s. Two things stood out. One was the layering and texture of the sub bass which was better than with the Flares. The fact that the PM2 can reproduce this is a major plus. The other is coherence. I’m fortunate in having two well produced CDs that has Robbie Shakespeare as the session bassist. Robbie likes to let his bass guitar speak for itself and it was so easy to follow all the lines he played no matter how deep he went.

Mids: I could detect no artefacts introduced by the PM2 and this is where it definitely betters the PLAY. I believe that there was a touch of grain in that earlier model that is not there in the Playmate2. Vocals were faithfully reproduced as recorded. Ann Murray, singing Schubert’s ‘Nacht und Traum’ was simply spellbinding and she sounded so natural on Hyperion’s high quality recording.

Treble: This is well balanced without being in any way shrill (unless it’s there in the recording). However, I am not one of those treble sensitive people so others might hear things that I can’t. While I wouldn’t describe the treble as sweet, it’s not stark either and fatigue is not an issue.


Final Thoughts: So, do I like the PM2 – you bet I do! Gobs of power to easily drive cans like my HD580s, a sound just slightly north of neutral but not purely clinical. This is a musical DAC/amp. I’m not sure what the competition is like in the same price range but if I upgraded to the next Burson in the range which is the basic Conductor 3 it’s close to double the price.

A couple of caveats. When I opened the box there was only a USB-C to USB-C cable and the connections at the back of my iMac are USB-A. Yes, there is a Firewire input but as my Mac is an older version (2013) connecting it USB-C won’t work as you need a newer version of Firewire. Fortunately I had a USB-C to USB-A connector handy. Also, there is no facility for balanced connection and while that doesn’t bother me it could certainly be a deal breaker for some of you. However, for me these are only minor points. I am very happy with this offering from Burson and rolling the op amps is next on my list.

Burson PLAY V6 Vivid DAC/Amp


There have already been some reviews of the various iterations of the PLAY. I’ve had mine for a few months now and it’s time to comment.


My foray into the world of headphone amplifiers occurred because I bought a pair of Sennheiser HD280 Pros. I bought them for their isolation and their sound as they were well reviewed. It was at this point that I discovered that the resistance in ohms of a pair of headphones doesn’t necessarily reflect how easy or hard it is to drive them. They are a modest 64ohms but I discovered that they needed a good amp to drive them properly.


So I set about finding amps that would do the job. I bought a couple of passive ones from Behringer which were so-so and while researching for something better I discovered the concept of having a standalone DAC included with the amp. This is very important, especially if you listen via Windows though a PC. I eventually settled on the Fiio E7/E9 combination. The difference this combo made was significant via a direct digital stream (kernel) or ASIO and I was happy for a while with what I was hearing.


After buying a pair of HD580s, I realized that that my Fiio combo was not really going to cut it for these excellent cans. I put up with the Sennheiser ‘veil’ for quite a long time but this year I decided to do something about it. I didn’t want to spend ridiculous money but also wanted quality. There were things out there that met both criteria. This included looking at tube DAC/amps as I realised that amplifier power was vital if I wanted to lift the Senn ‘veil’ and a good tube amp could do this for me. The one that repeatedly came up was the Cavalli CTH/Grace DAC combo but there was disquiet about the DAC quality of the Grace. I thought I’d go for it anyway and was waiting for the next Massdrop when the PLAY came up on the radar. Apparently it had buckets of power, the DAC was good, it was an amazing price, I could roll the Op Amps and……it was Australian!


I got the V5i from an Aussie audio company called Addicted to Audio (it was cheaper than getting it from the US). After a month the power supply died. They replaced the PLAY without a quibble and I got them to send me the V6 Vivid instead. I knew from the V5i that burn in was going to be important, hence the wait before making a review.


I’ll not go into details about the construction of the PLAY except to say that the chassis of both the V5i and the V6 were/are slightly warped. When I put the little silicon feet on, the PLAY rocked from front left to back right. Adding thicker and larger feet has solved this and also moved it up from the surface of my wooden table. This hopefully helps with heat dissipation. The supplied 6.25” to 3.5” adaptor has a flexible entry point which I think is a great idea. No matter how much the cable is moved, the flexible ring compensates meaning almost no stress on the cable where it terminates at the connector. I initially thought that the headphone socket was loose until I carefully looked at how it worked.


I run the PLAY out of a 2012 iMac via USB. My headphones consist of Flare iems (R2A, Pro and Gold), Senn IE80s and the Senn HD580s. I bought the PLAY with the 580s specifically in mind and wasn’t worried about the Flares as they are easier to drive. With all three versions of the Flares I run the PLAY volume control somewhere between 5 and 11. It depends on the type of music and the source. The volume goes up for the 580s and I have had it as high as 27 though I noticed that I could pull the volume down lower as the PLAY did it’s burn in. EDM, Deep House, Trance, and all the modern genres via Tidal and Spotify require less volume. Classical music with the iems through these online streamers requires pushing the volume up a few more notches or even further. I like the fact that this gives me much more control over small volume adjustments and I wonder if some sort of gain switch might have been a good idea or alternatively smaller steps on the digital volume control.


So what does the PLAY do to the music I listen to? I’d like to describe the PLAY as neutral but it isn’t. There is a slight lean towards the warmer side of the sound spectrum but not by too much. I like this but it’s not necessarily a bass centric effect. It depends on the track being played. If the bass is already there then the PLAY will bring it out. If it’s not then it won’t. The same goes for mids and top end. In other words the PLAY is very revealing and poorly mastered recordings will be ruthlessly exposed.


The soundstage is something else. With iems like the Flare Golds the width is there but, more importantly, so is the depth – something I’ve never experienced before. I realise that part of this is probably the quality of the Golds but the source has to have it in the first place. With the Fiio combo it’s hard to hear any depth at all. I also notice it when using the 580s with the PLAY. On a well-mastered chamber music recording like the Pavel Haas Quartet playing Dvorak string quartets you can hear that the musicians are sitting in a semi-circle. This is particularly evident with Golds but the 580s produce it too.


Bass extension is excellent and the PLAY added bass to the Senns that I didn’t think they had. The bass is quick, deep and very accurate with little to no bloom (recording dependent of course).


The mids are so smooth and stand out well. Someone described the PLAY as producing a V shaped sound but I don’t hear this at all. The midrange, so important for vocals, holds its own and doesn’t appear recessed in any way.


Treble is also excellent and non-fatiguing. It’s very clear but doesn’t suffer from the brightness you can get for some treble centric systems.


Tonal accuracy is something that I value highly considering the amount of classical music I listen to. There are a few instruments that are very hard to reproduce. These include the human voice, stringed instruments from the violin family and, with its complex harmonics, the piano. Of course headphones are going to play a big part in this but once again, if the source of the music is compromised then no matter how good your cans are you won’t get the ideal sound. The PLAY is outstanding in this regard. Its faithful reproduction of some of my best CDs is outstanding and I’m hearing things I didn’t realize were in the recordings.


Back to the beginning, I bought the PLAY with HD580s in mind. Could it lift that ‘veil’ that has been evident for all the time I’ve had them. The answer is an unequivocal YES! The PLAY makes the Senns do what Axel Grell originally designed them to do – sing! The 580s were revolutionary when they came out and still stand alongside today’s open back cans at a much higher price and the PLAY highlights this fact. This alone has justified my purchase. However, as they say in the commercials, “But wait, there’s more” They also improved how my Flares performed which I didn’t think was possible. The added a sense of musicality that has had me enjoying everything I’ve listened to. They increased all of the good things (sub bass, out of head sound stage, clarity, etc) that the Flare GOLDs are known for.


So overall, what stands out about the PLAY for me.



A wide and reasonably deep soundstage giving a lot of the music I listen to a sense of ‘space’ between the instruments.

Outstanding separation of instruments, pinpointing their exact position in the soundstage.

Clarity across the whole audio spectrum.

Great musicality and a non-fatiguing sound.

Tonal accuracy

Power that effortlessly drives all my headphones

It makes me want to keep listening to the music


The PLAY is easily worth the money I paid for it. Many people when asking about headphone amps wonder if it will drive their HD600s/650s. This DAC/Amp is almost ideally suited to these cans but work extremely well on other top end brands. I don’t think I’ll be looking for a DAC/Amp combo for a while unless Burson can come up with a portable version. Now that would be something!

A few caveats and some background before my review. I have owned headphones for decades and have had some quite good pairs at times because I really like the way that headphones can immerse you in the music without turning the sound up too loud. Budget was a problem in the early days. And I remember distinctly the first time I heard a pair of Sennheiser HD580s in the high end audio store and my jaw just dropped. However, I couldn’t afford them. I had the HD540s at the time and they would have to do.


This has changed in the last ten years and I’ve been able to try out iems and cans that sit above the mass market. Over the last decade I’ve bought headphones from Shure (SRH840s), Sennheiser (HD280s, IE80s and at last that pair of HD580s) and Flare (R2A, Pros and the Golds). I’m looking for a setup where I can sit back and say that I am truly satisfied with what I am hearing and can’t be bothered seeking anything else. Each new headphone purchase was a step forward and I think that I’ve now reached that point where “I can’t be bothered” looking further and that point is the Flare Golds. While I’ve been on this journey it’s also become very obvious that the source and how it is decoded is a vital part of that journey towards aural nirvana. More about that later.


So what do I want to hear from a pair of iems? As a musician, I am very particular about how all instruments are reproduced, especially through a set of dynamic drivers. They have to sound tonally accurate, and this includes timbre, harmonics plus attack and decay. This has to sound natural, as if I am there live with the musicians. This requires the headphones to be able reproduce this over a very wide range of pitch from deep bass to high treble. If any part of that range is compressed, exacerbated or compromised in any way it can be heard. Detail is also important. If I sit in a concert hall that has good acoustics and watch a string quartet play, the four instruments sound distinct and also have their place in the soundstage. I can shut my eyes and still exactly place the position on stage of the four musicians. This is also true of larger ensembles.


Finally, I want the headphones to be able to immerse me in the music and this is the final factor - pace, rhythm and timing (PRaT). For example, if the iem struggles to make the bass line sound coherent then PRaT vanishes. I want the iem to make me tap my feet, play on my emotions, involve me with the music and the performers.


So back to the Gold’s, which I purchased second hand from a Headfi member for a great price.


I opened the box and saw two little gold gems sitting in the stylized ears that Flare has used in the packaging. Taking them out of the box I immediately noticed that they were considerably heavier than the Pros. The rear bores were considerably wider and had a taper into the middle. The same held true for the front bores. Surely this should have a major effect on how they were tuned? None of the reviews I have read have mention this, some suggesting that Flare made some minor tweaks. A completely redesigned bore is not a minor tweak. Flare’s promotional blurb talks about how the gold finish adds t the quality. I believe there is far more to it than that.


The rest of the packaging is the same as for the Pros. It’s impressive but maybe the tips could have been held a bit more securely in the box. The fact that they are the same is a plus for me as I will sell the Pros and use the pristine condition tips from the Gold package in the Pros sell on box as I have no intention of using the Flare tips.


I tested all the tips (using those from the Pros box) and decided that the silicons gave the clearest sound, best soundstage, and had the most controlled bass. The fragile foamies which Flare recommends, tend to draw a veil across the sound and while that might have been a good thing with the Pros and it’s area of scratchy treble, it’s not the same for the Gold’s. The MandarinE Symbio Wides tips are just awesome with the Golds.


So how do they sound? I don’t have a full grasp of many of the terms that fellow HiFiers use to describe how things sound and can only revert back to what I know about sound as a musician and the criteria I use to judge a pair of headphones.


All my listening was done via my iMac/Burson Play V6Vivid DAC/Amp. I ran the Burson at 7-8 for most tracks but turned it up for classical tracks via Tidal to 12-13. This included streaming 320kbps, FLAC, ALAC, and CD 44.1. I don’t have any hi res music to listen to though my Burson will be able to play it. The Burson helped to bring out the best of the Flare Gold’s. Judging on volume levels they aren’t too hard to drive but an amp like the Burson would surely help them shine.


I put them in my ears and my first thought was ‘OMG these are amazing’.


At this point I’ll look back at the Pros. When I got them the bass reproduction was so impressive without overpowering the rest of the spectrum. It was deep, solid, impactful, fast and tonally accurate. Even at very low levels there was no doof doof – you could hear the notes and feel them as well. This included a 32 foot Organ pipe. The Gold’s also do this but there seems to be an extra layer added. It’s hard to describe, it’s like there is an extended sound stage for the bass but this in itself doesn’t make sense. It’s the best bass I’ve ever heard in any headphone. I made that original statement about the R2As but the Golds are better in that department.


The midrange is also well served and this is where vocal reproduction comes into its own. It’s also where I have an issue with the Pros. Some of my favourite recordings seemed to sound more sibilant with an emphasis on the ‘s’. Now I realize that this is a recording issue but the Pros seemed to exacerbate it and I found it annoying. You can still hear it in the Gold’s as they are faithfully reproducing what was recorded but the annoyance factor is gone. Mary Black is no longer aspirating sibilantly into the mike on her recording of ‘Bright Blue Rose’. I imagine that people sensitive to treble would have heard it and Flare have managed to resolve it. (I’m thinking Arysyn here). Others, like me only heard it on some recordings, the rest being fine.


The treble could be best described as seamless because you can’t tell where the midrange ends and treble begins. It’s very clear and not recessed like it was in the R2As. It’s also very sweet, no harshness is evident. Female voices especially sound glorious such as Ann Murray singing Schubert’s “Nacht und Traum”. High piano notes don’t have any unnatural ringing and the complex harmonics of a note two octaves below middle ‘C’ ring deep and true on well-recorded piano. Cymbals and high hat drums sound very natural with no tizz and instruments like the piccolo and recorder do as well.


Soundstage is quite staggering. When I first heard the R2As I was blown away by the ‘out of head experience’ they provided as the soundstage seemed wider than the space between my ears. The Pros went so much further by giving instruments a place on that soundstage that you could easily identify from left to right. How you do that with dynamic drivers is something that Flare have obviously worked out. It makes the Pros a great set of iems to listen to. The Gold’s have taken this into two dimensions with both width and depth. Listening to the Pavel Haas Quartet I can hear how they play in a semicircle. It’s this effect that made me initially go “wow”.


Clarity and detail are superb. There is a part in Dire Strait’s “Private Investigations” where a bottle is dropped and smashes in the back ground. You can now hear how it breaks and tinkles and exactly where it happened.


The final test for me is “do I want to take these out of my ears?” If I’m engaged by the music then the answer is no and that’s what these iems do so well. They present all sorts of music so naturally and as a classical music junkie these are just the bees knees. I also listen to EDM, all sorts of classic rock, Deep House, soft jazz, etc – my music interests are fairly eclectic. The Gold’s do all of it so very, very, well and I’ve yet to find a genre that the Gold’s don’t do justice to. My thinking is that these don’t sound like iems. It feels as if I’ve got a top pair of headphones on my ears.


If there are any negatives then my ears can’t pick them though some might as no iems are perfect. Some might like theirs a little more coloured/lean/Vshaped/whatever. These are very close to neutral but maybe a fraction too warm to be classed as fully neutral. That suits my listening preferences fine.


Epilogue:


As mentioned, I have the Burson Play V6 Vivid which is an amazing DAC/amp with an incredibly powerful amplifier section (2W into 16 Ohms). I have the Flare Gold’s. I can use these out of any system but from my iMac is the most convenient. While some wouldn’t describe it as audio nirvana it’s good enough for me. My wallet will now thank me as I don’t intend to invest any further for the forseeable future.