I get zero chatter on my FRs.
These are probably to two most compared (for lack of a better term) skis this season. Here's a few threads already on them:
(original post isn't about these two skis, but the thread becomes a comparison between the two)
My main points:
FR - WAY more durable (easily the most durable park ski out there right now, not that Aramada is slouching...ON3P is just doing it better), more rocker, more playful tip and tail, stiffer underfoot, symmetrical, super fun turning radius (surf it tight or carve it out wide, either way it's a blast), generally a blast, smaller company (easier to work with if problems arise, more hands on with their build process, better quality control).
Halo - slightly lighter, cap tip and tail (take it for what it's worth...I hate cap personally), minimal rocker, directional shape, flatter underfoot (less camber).
Personally, I wasn't super pumped when I tried the Halo, they seemed dead to me (people will disagree with this, but it's my opinion...they just kinda felt like they were going through the motions), they weren't the worst ski I've ever ridden (far from it), but they just weren't as fun to ski as the FRs were.