Metrum Octave - WOW
Ok the Metrum Octave has arrived. In one word WOW. I blows away any other DAC I have heard except the PDX and Killer and I have to tell you they are under threat - its that good. I have never heard anything quite like it. The PDX and Killer sound natural and real - this thing simply sounds accurate - as if there is nothing between it and the recording. Nothing touches this for $1k - nothing. I simply can not detect any type of character to it - none - zippo - none.
I have it connected via the Off-Ramp 4 with Turboclocks and the Truth Pre-amp and am sitting simply in amazement. Of course the cost with the Off-Ramp is $2.7k and you need a pre amp which you do not need with a DAC like the PDX that has its own volume control so it works out about the same price.
I have my third DAC for a shootout I am looking to arrange of top of the line DAC's - this is without a shadow of a doubt an up there DAC - and at the price - amazing.
I simply can't stop listening to it.
More to come as I keep listening.
Thanks
Bill
Comments
all the best,
matt
What happened to the ADAMs then? And a Rotel amp - you're no longer running active?
(I just googled Vivid BTW - tres cool!)
The ADAM's are currently for sale Alan. They do nothing wrong really it's just that I made the mistake of listening to the Vivid's and knew they are speakers I can live with for a long time.
Oh and the Rotel was borrowed - I've replaced it with some Bantam Monoblocks for the time being. Really should write all this up in a separate post as I've made some interesting discoveries along the way.
Flimm flamm alive and well.
Keith.
KR Keith.
Keith.
James as long as you realise how the equipment is affecting the frequency response ,that's fine, everyone is free (sadly) to buy what they enjoy!
I have to admit I have a valve pre too, I asked the designer to make it as transparent as possible with just the smallest amount of valveyness!
KR Keith.
Now I have valve pre, valve input solid state output power amps, class D with Class A integrated, fully active Genelecs , it is Interesting to compare the systems.
KR Keith.
it doesn't have the last word I resolution but that could be many factors.
Keith.
Actually I have heard it said often that once you get past a certain standard of DAC performance (which seems to have become more accessible in recent years) then it is all about personal preference as technically there isn't a cigarette paper between DACs at that level. I have only heard that said by those fortunate enough to try multiple decent DACs though.
I am impressed as a (slightly green) onlooker that you can still search out your own preference in these high end DACs; Not that my opinion or expertise amounts to anything at all on this subject. With so much HiFi there are users who get to 'a certain level' and stop looking, believing they 'have the best' so 'what's the point in looking elsewhere?' To my mind this is as closed minded as the old objectivist contention that 'they all sound the same anyway'. Congratulations, James - I am glad you have found something you really like.
Ultimately you must choose what you prefer.
Keith.
This is because in some ways the Metrum Octave is similar in approach to the XX High-End Phasure DAC (also NOS, but capable of receiving 24/768!). Although the DAC in both cases are Non Over-Sampling, they are best used with a computer to oversample for them. Peter St has developed his own software (XX High-end) to do exactly that for the Phasure, and I'm sure it sounds anything but a 'traditional' NOS DAC.
The Metrum Octave also reportedly sounds best when used with computer source that upsamples to 24/96 or 24/176 (the Octave doesn't really support 192kHz, but some have got this to work). The Audiophileo 2 USB > SPDIF converter is reportedly outstanding, but the new HiFace 2 would be interesting to try.
Interestingly, it is said that when used with redbook material and no oversampling, the Octave sounds like a mushy mess (much like many other NOS DACs then).
The odd thing with this DAC is it has no USB input, but from the POV of keeping the price down it makes sense to me. I could likely buy a HiFace or similar for less than Metrum would have to add to the cost to license or develop a really good galvanically isolated Async USB input.
Seeing computers take over digital processing/filtering etc and DACs just doing D to A conversion really simply is where things ought to go IMO; software will be integrated with electronic room correction and perhaps even digital crossovers eventually.
DAC designers can then K.I.S.S. - concentrate on really top notch conversion and whatever exotic parts the deem necessary then (although on a side note, the Metrum Octave uses non-audiophile 'Industrial' DAC chips) - whatever works best.
You guys will believe anything, have you seen the inside of the Phasure dac?
It is kitchen table stuff, no over sampling because they can't no async because they can't!
KR Keith.
To take your points in turn:
Industry? Probably radar as that is the trade of the designer. Although he won't say what chips they are, his clear implication is that they are ten-a-penny, nothing special compared to standard audiophile components. In other words, they work well, and are cheaper than Sabres and Burr Browns.
As regards the Phasure DAC - "kitchen table stuff" as in cottage industry? Is this a reason to dismiss it (or have you heard it - I hope you have). BTW, I understand the actual DAC chips themselves in the Phasure are $3-400 on their own.
If each of these DACs don't do Async because they can't - then that underscores what I said; that their attention is better spent elsewhere leaving the user to select a suitable USB>SPDIF converter, than developing or licensing something which will add to the ticket price.
I still contend that oversampling or upsampling and filtering handled by a computer is an interesting approach, rather than a chip sharing space within the DAC. For you to dismiss this out of hand is disappointing.
Finally, the "You guys will believe anything..." bit. You guys as in who? You are saying I'm gullible, and who else? I certainly would be if I simply took you at your word. You must see that this remark can only put you in a bad light, it is breathtakingly arrogant of you as a retailer, and utterly condescending as an audiophile. Is James gullible because the Metrum sounds great to him? Am I because I think oversampling might be better done within a computer?
All points of view are welcome on 'Chews, discussion is encouraged, but disrespect or dismissal of others' views is not what we expect.
You aren't a superior authority on all things audio just because you happen to be in the trade. Have you actually heard the Metrum? I suspect not.
Sorry didn't mean to sound condescending, but there is a lot of hype and hyperbole in audio.
As long as you like it that is the important thing.
Keith.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Phasure without having heard it, either! The design and packaging may be a bit Heath Robinson, but by 'eck is it good where it matters.
what sort of transport have you used with it? Bill likes the OffRamp 4, but also rates the Audiophileo.
Just on the point of transport choices for the Metrum I agree that it is sensitive to the source. The Jkenny hiface mk3 sounded better than my Sonos. I can imagine people hearing the Metrum with a jittery source and thinking that it's nothing special. With the right transport it sounds very nice indeed.