|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Model: | Octave |
Category: | DAC Processors |
Suggested Retail Price: | $1083 |
Description: | NOS DAC |
Manufacturer URL: | Metrum Acoustics |
Model Picture: | View |
Review by sbrians on March 22, 2014 at 08:33:25 IP Address: 99.46.90.131 | Add Your Review for the Octave |
I have the Mark I Octave, with the power supply in a separate housing. After a lifetime of building a stereo system and ~15 years of trying to get music out of CDs, my journey has ended.
I have finally found what I was looking for with this DAC. Satellite radio and CDs are quite enjoyable. I prefer this DAC to Schiit Gungnir (more detailed, but too aggressive which made us feel tense), Channel Islands Audio VDA-2 (very nice, but not as dynamic nor as involving). I now feel that delta-sigma DACs may be a fraud to which I fell victim for a very long time. I think that people who are trying to like delta sigma DACs have not heard this one. I cannot imagine someone preferring that other type over this for music enjoyment (I could imagine a mastering engineer using the other type). After years of trying to listen to CDs from various other sources, I thought that most CDs were just mastered poorly and were not enjoyable. It turned out that it was the DACs, not the CDs. Now, I can listen to all of my CDs for the first time and all of the things that prevented me from enjoying CDs before are not there.
I think that this DAC also sonically gives me everything that I can get from vinyl.
Whereas the OverSampling DACs give you apparent detail and therefore draw attention to themselves and spark more reviews, I think that this DAC gives you music and those of us with one of these no longer think about the playback hardware because we are enjoying music so much. Sonically, there is nothing between the music and the listener with this. I think that the analytical DACs achieve apparent detail through some form of dynamic compression which does not sound like compression until you hear a DAC such as this.
After years of listening for certain aspects in comparison to other equipment, I eventually learned to just notice how I feel. This has resulted in a much more musically satisfying sound, especially when it comes to DACs. In terms of that, no DAC that I have heard, comes close to the Octave.
I have slight tinnitus and so am very sensitive to some sort of artificial high frequency noise that I hear from OS DACs, but not from live music. This DAC does not exhibit this type of noise nor listening fatigue.
Another interesting attribute is that previously, when I would expect a dynamic impact in a song, other sources never really delivered the impact when it was expected; it was as though they compressed the music. A strength of this DAC is very open micro and macro dynamics.
I have buried the housings in sandbags, top and bottom to eliminate boominess in the bass, but I would not want to have a more expensive unit that does not need this, because then it would be beyond my budget.
My goal was to have CDs sound great, and this does that. I do not even prefer high-resolution DVD-A discs, which surprises me based on theory, but does not bother me.
Some comparisons:
Order of preference based on feeling:
Octave
Bifrost
Channel Islands VDA-2
Uber Bifrost
Gungnir
Order based on "objective" sound (but not feeling):
Gungnir
Octave here maybe?
VDA2
Uber Bifrost (or maybe this goes up one slot)
Bifrost
Build quality (or apparent housing resonance):
Channel Islands
Schiit
Metrum
I think the Octave is comparable to my vinyl set up. I no longer need to play vinyl for musical enjoyment, only to play records which I do not have on CD.
Product Weakness: | Resonant housing. |
Product Strengths: | Natural, realistic music. |
Amplifier: | Channel Islands D-200s, Anthem Amp 2SE, bi-amped. |
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): | Conrad Johnson PV-10BL |
Sources (CDP/Turntable): | Oppo BDP-83 |
Speakers: | Magnepan 3.3 w/ KMF active crossover |
Cables/Interconnects: | Morrow MA-3 ICs, Zcable & Transparent speaker cables. |
Music Used (Genre/Selections): | All; much Jazz, 70s |
Room Size (LxWxH): | 27 x 16 x 9 |
Time Period/Length of Audition: | 4-5 months |
Type of Audition/Review: | Product Owner |
Just curious as to what your vinyl setup is as I don't see it in your system setup above
Not great, but as stated in my system:
Music Hall MMF-5 Turntable w/ Goldring 1042 cartridge and Parasound phono preamp.
My experience of the Metrum Octave II was quite different. I do have a good amount of experience with so-called NOS DACs. Presently I have an older NOS dac, modified, that is based on the 1545 chip and also the Audio DAC Kits 3.1 Signature. Both have that lovely flow and timing that NOS dacs seem to have. I found the Metrum to also have that same lovely flow, a kind of 'fluency' that other dacs seem to miss. But also, like you, I have Tinnitus and found that it had a bit of a hyped, thin high end; this tended to make my tinnitus worse. Compared to my other DACS, it seemed to have a less rich tonal quality, though it did have a very nice clarity in the mid-band. I heard this thinness on a friends Octave I as well.
I'm posting this not to contradict your experience, but I've found it helpful in the past to get variety of views of a product, with different experiences. One possible explanation is perhaps I didn't have enough hours on it. But I did try it out for a couple of weeks and had run it in for a couple hundred hours. It might be interesting for you to compare it to other NOS dacs and see if you find the same qualities you like in them as well.
I do not doubt you. Of course, I have spent years getting my system to not sound cold or analytical (I went down that wrong path years ago, where only audiophile recordings sounded good). Maggies really take work to get to sound good; stock is very bright to me.
I really wanted to hear the MHDT Stockholm, Altmann, etc, but could not afford those. I did consider the Scott Nixon DAC in the more affordable category. But then I came across the Octave at ~$800 and figured that it was worth a try to get the sound that I wanted, and it worked out very well for me.
What I heard was that the Metrum is much closer to the sound that you like, with much more texture, smoothness, musicality etc. than the other OS DACs that I have heard, I could imagine that the older chips could have more texture, etc.
Speaking of thin-ness, this was the property that varied most during during break in. It never became harsh or had glare, but was a little thin and less involving at times. By thin here, I don't mean so much a lack of texture as lack of warmth in the low end. This aspect would oscillate on the order of a day; if it was a little thin one day, it would be a little different in a day or two. Until about 3 months of power on, mostly w/ signal going in. At 4 months, the sound quality became constant.
I would imagine that using 1 or 2 old R2R DAC chips would have more texture, but less dynamics than the 8 chips in the Octave. I'm sure the design around the chips would affect dynamics a lot. I can only imagine, since I have not heard.
Although I am sure some folks would disagree with you, I am not surprised by your comments. I've not heard one, but considering the experiences and sonic preferences of some of those that like Metrum DACs (eg. Srajan) I would expect them to present music with enhanced contrast and in a possibly lean manner, at least with the music I mostly listen to.Disclaimer: I seem to be sensitive to brightness/ enhanced transients/ metallic flavour/ midrange glare et al, so others' MMV... But, I won't let said sensitivity get in the way of listening to music I enjoy.
Cheers
“As long as we have any intention to be right… we should be wary. So long as words have the slightest ego attachment, they are dishonest.” Charlotte Joko Beck
Edits: 03/25/14
I rarely post on ANY forum, but thought I'd chime in. I methodically went up the NOS food chain, Ack Dac to Ebay Valab to modded Tera Dac to Metrum Octave to finally, audio NIRVANA, HEX!!! All y'all can stop right there.The Hex is AMAZING!!! I have tons of vinyl and a Marantz TT and Graham Slee preamp sitting around, collecting dust, because of Metrum's products. I can't sleep because all I want to do is listen to all the music I missed in the last 30 years!!! I have an IPOD (go ahead and laugh) into a Pure i20 into a Nordost Silver Shadow ( And a Sony DVP-3000 previously owned by Steve McCormack) to a Monarchy Combo at 24/96 to another Nordost Silver Shadow to the Hex to a Promitheus Reference TVC balanced out ( Harmonic Technology Truth-Link) to Odyssey Stratus Monoblocks to Gallo Reference 3.1's with sub-amp. Holy Moly Mother of Music!!! Heaven!!!! Nuff said!!!!!
Follow up.
At about the 150-200 hour mark and I'm in love. Liquid, palpable, empty black background, moving, resonant and voluptuous. Plus a million other adjectives, all good. Just had to say 'cuz I'm amazed and in love with the Hex. Beyond great vinyl without the noise, you can almost touch the music and hold it in your hand. Buy it.
Well that may qualify as a good review of the Hex.
It's like I suggested - that Metrum owners become more interested in listening to music than reading/posting about listening to music, so there are few reviews.
Thank you for the "Realistic" review of this product. It proved you weren't an "Optimus" as the comments were in line. It didn't see that you used a meter for measurements. Of course it would have been a "Micronta" if you did. I like the cabinet design and its "Minimus" clean look. Inside it has a well engineered "Modulaire" design as well. You don't need to be an "Archer" to see this product hits the bulls eye.
OK many will understand the lame theme here. I couldn't resist. Thanks for the review, my wife is Dutch and her brother has some of their gear and likes it.
ET
I forgot to mention in my review that it does indeed take 4 months for the sound to fully stabilize.
The "magic", so to speak, happened at about 3 months. It was never bad before that, it's just that the sound varied a little day to day prior to 3-4 months. At 4 months, it sounds the same every day.
So, no review prior to 3 months should be relied upon for this.
I also left out this source in my system:
Music Hall MMF-5 Turntable w/ Goldring 1042 cartridge and Parasound phono preamp.
It's good to read that you are finally enjoying your CDs. Many of us had feared that the CD era would leave decades of forever lost musical performances behind it. Relatively recent DAC products are starting to erase those fears, even for audiophiles shopping at sane price points.Regarding sigma-delta versus fully multi-bit conversion technology, I suggest not being too quick in assigning the sound of your Metrum DAC to that difference. There are many factors which determine the sound of a DAC. There are any number of musically well regarded DACs utilizing sigma-delta conversion, such as from dCs, not to mention DSD is a sigma-delta based technology.
FYI - The DIY DAC design community strongly suspects that the DAC chip which Metrum probably utilizes in the Octave is the DAC8581 from T.I. This chip is a generally available DAC chip that's targeted at waveform synthesis applications, but not specifically at consumer digital audio. The DAC8581 features a voltage output, so, doesn't require an external I/V converter circuit.
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 03/23/14 03/23/14
I think that cannot be it, if the TAS review measures more resolution than 16 bit? But I don't care what it looks like or words or numbers that describe it. I only care about the sound, which works great for me.
TAS doesn't normally perform lab tests, so, that would be interesting to read. Is this report available online somewhere?
_
Ken Newton
I linked it below, and again here. I thought about it - I still have not read it, but the effective resolution could go up with the number of paralled chips, for all I know, so that may not be much of an indicator? But I doubt that paralleling can get you more than the inherent # of bits in a DAC.I just corrected my link here. Also it is not TAS, it's this other one:
Edits: 03/23/14
That TAS review is for the Hex, not the Octave. In addition, it's a subjective report without any lab testing. Your suspicion that paralleling DAC chips does not increase net bit resolution (lower the quantization noise) is correct. It lowers the thermal noise floor, which is a different thing. What also produces confusion is that many vendors say their DACs accept 24-bit audio data, but what they don't often say is that their DACs may actually convert only 16 of those bits.
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 03/23/14
..."many vendors say their DACs accept 24-bit audio data, but what they don't often say is that their DACs may actually convert only 16 of those bits."
I remember being furious as Stello Audio for this very thing. I had the Stello DAC 100 Signature that their website went out of its way to highlight that fact that its USB input accepted up to 24/96. They made it a selling feature. What they didn't tell you is that the signal was then downgraded to 16/48. Deceptive dogs! I will never buy any product from them again.
...have changed things they are correct only in that it'll "accept" 24/96 but then downgrades it. I first found out about it on a forum somewhere I then had them admit to it in an email where he then tried to sell me their USB convertor thingy.
Some, like the MHDT Stockholm do say that they accept the high res. signals, but use a 16 bit DAC chip.
Stello DA100 page says:
"True 24Bit Delta-Sigma DAC" at the link below:
nt
I corrected/edited my post prior to your reply. I have the correct link now.
Okay, thanks, I've now read the review by Martin Colloms. While the review states that there's approximately 18-bits of resolution, I don't see that figure basked up by the printed lab data. At best, the data appears to indicate approximately 16-bits of resolution. Perhaps, there's a misprint somewhere. At any rate, it wasn't my wish to argue over which mystery DAC chip Metrum might or might not be employing. I'm glad that you are enjoying CD format music like you never have before.
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 03/23/14
Your past posts summarizing what you found to be strengths and weaknesses of different DAC design aspects helped me very much in finding what was critical to me which helped to lead me to this DAC.
I enjoyed your review for its honesty and authenticity. For me, this makes a compelling read. I'll add this one to the list of good impressions of Metrum's Designs. Since Metrum's DAC are not widely available where I am, I may have to 'buy blind' again but at least the reports are good!
big j.
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
Thanks for the review.
I like that you ranked the DACs based on your own observations.
Since you mentioned the Schiit DACs which have been very popular over the past several months, I thought I would mention that an Asylum inmate sold his Schiit Bifrost and replaced it with the PS Audio NuWave DAC and thought it was much better. The NuWave LISTS for $1000 but can be had for around $700 - $800 street price.
I've never owned a Schitt DAC but comparing the PS Audio NuWave to the Wyred4Sound DAC2, I thought the NuWave was more resolving overall. I also think PS Audio gets a bad rap because they are too well known and well established (common?) within the audiophile community.
You may recall that I had the Wavelength Brick V3 DAC in my system last year. I was very disappointed with that DAC. It was veiled, dynamically boring, and rolled off. Sorry Gordon but here is yet another example of an over hyped Stereophile Class A rated component that was pretty lame, IMHO. Lame unless you like that sort of sound where all 'edge' and 'digititis' is washed away at the expense of detail, frequency extension, dynamics, and resolution. Gag me! That was the worse DAC I ever heard!
But I'm rambling. Try the PS Audio NuWave someday if you ever get a chance and thanks again for the review.
Although the constant feeling that I have had for ~40 years of always wanting to improve my stereo went away w/ this DAC, if I did upgrade I would only want a Hex. I love the sound of the Octave. Likewise, I have no complaint of the Bifrost in my secondary system since it (non-Uber) is rolled off enough to not let the bad stuff from the DAC chip through, but I do hope one day to replace it w/ a Quad.
It's such a great feeling to have upgraditis go away, that I don't want to mess w/ that.
...process hi-rez files or do they only put out redbook?
according to the website . There is some speculation about whether this is guaranteed or not, given variation in the chips performance. This may have changed since the first model.
big j.
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
It is my understanding that the other NOS DACs which use chips made decades ago, only process 16 bits (maybe at 44.1 kHz sampling rate?); their receiver chips pass that reduced-resolution data to the DAC chips. The Metrum DACs however, (Quad (4 mono DAC chips, 2 in parallel/channel), Octave (8 DAC chips), Hex(short for hexadecimal, 16 DAC chips) utilize 24 bits at up to 96 or 192 kHz. I think that the mark I Octave only goes up to 96 kHz, but mark II does 192 kHz).
I believe that these are unique in the marketplace for this reason. Also, they are claimed to need no current/voltage conversion (I/V) on the output for greater clarity and accuracy, but whether they actually have internal I/V conversion, I do not know. The DAC chips used are highly proprietary, not being used by others supposedly.
However, after trying SACDs (which are pretty good through my Oppo) and DVD-A even through my Octave, I get great music from CDs and satellite radio and do not prefer "hi-res".
If I am wrong on this, someone will correct me soon.
Information is hard to come by on this, but here is a quote: "Metrum converters will run at up to 24-bits/15MHz", linked below.
Then another clue that it does more than 16 bits: " The actual resolution is about 18-bit, which is not unexpected, and rather better than the old Philips-based designs," from: http://www.nosminidac.nl/downloads/octavehificritic.pdf
...I have trouble trusting a company that is so secretive about their technology. You never know what you're getting. Other manufactorers are very upfront about their offerings but, to be fair, those can be dishonest too.
One must distinguish the formats that are accepted from the bits and speed that are actually processed. One must further distinguish the accuracy of the processing of those bits, as can be seen to a certain extent by noise and distortion measurements. But mostly, one must listen to see if the result sounds good. It is possible to gain more resolution by paralleling chips and the amount can depend on specifics of how this is done. There are also expensive R2R chips that give about 18 bits of accuracy. There is a USB DAC that takes 24 bits at up to 768 Khz and claims to have 18 bits of resolution. (See link.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
If I'm not mistaken during the initial launch Metrum Acoustics claimed the Octave would resolve up to 24/176. Some users claimed theirs could do 24/192. It was more a matter of getting better resolution than claimed with some units. I would call that an unexpected bonus rather than a trust issue on the part of the manufacture. The single chassis MKII Octave as well as the HEX both have updated USB receivers and are capable of 24/192.
The manufacture did, and may still, scratch out the model numbers off the converter chipsets used. Design implementation dictates a DACs eventual sonic character and not simply which brand or model chipsets are used. In the case of Metrum Acoustics their implementation of Non Over Sampling sounds and feels different to me than some other NOS DACs I've auditioned. Beware of any comment that generalizes the sonic presentation of a DAC based on design and/or parts usage.
I encountered the same digital revelation as sbrains did in his review with my original version Octave. While I now find myself enjoying digital playback I still prefer the fundamental presentation from my LP front end along with all the LPs I own that never made it to digital. By the same token I find LP playback lost on music originally recorded digitally.
I found a further improvement using an Audiophilleo 2 USB converter in front of the Octave. Recently I had an opportunity to audition an Antipodes server/streamer and I'm convinced the beginning of the digital signal stream is as critical, if not the most critical portion of digital playback.
"I'm convinced the beginning of the digital signal stream is as critical, if not the most critical portion of digital playback."
I feel the same since switching to my current front end. It has been a revelation...
what?
Running Server 2012 with the Audiophile Optimizer in core mode and JPlay.
I am using a CAPS server and the PPA Studio USB card. The Optimizer is amazing IMO, I have used many OS and configurations and nothing comes close. The OS doing nothing else but play music IMO is the key.
But in this case, we have the TAS measurement, which I did not read closely, just enough to try to answer your question. I had read before that the effective # of bits for the old 16-bit R2R chips was 3-4 bits, so 18 bits is way more.
On the other hand, I really dislike how the maker of my automobile does not say anything about how certain firmware is set up or how it works, but the overall result is good, nonetheless.
Either way, no matter what other people measure, I enjoy the Octave way more than any other that I have heard. I've had enough of measurements in audio that did me no good. My ears know better.
BTW, I'm not the only one that prefers 16/44.1 to 24/96, it seems. I can't explain it. I definitely would not have believed it until I heard it.
...if I was in the market for a DAC I would have the Hex at the top of the list as well as the Perfect Wave DAC MK2 that Underwood HiFi has, which they were just selling for $1800! That might be my top choice.
I found an additional component that may ampliffiy the strengths of Octave & Hex a bit
more. The Synchro Mesh Reclocker.
The SMR sits between your DAC & a Digital source being used . Unless you don't mind moving the Digital cable from source to source , I would say just leave it connected to
your highest priority source & connect other sources to the DAC as you normally would.
After you hear what things sound like with the SMR in line you may be tempted to switch
a Digital cable back & forth.
I honestly don't know how good a source components clocking ability has to be for the
difference in sound using the SMR to not be noticeable.The primary source component I use talks about having very low jitter measurements in their online literature. My getting a SMR was'nt in response to.any disatisfaction in the performance of the component. It was more of a "leap of faith" that the SMR could raise the performance even higher. I got lucky as it seems to have.
I have removed the SMR from my system configuration a few times only to re-insert it's placement as the same positive sound characteristics became less distinct each time.
I bring this up because if you are able to appreciate how the Metrum DACs are able to
resolve Digital music like few DACs , the SMR may allow you to hear even a bit further into
these strenghts
But my budget has already been exceeded : ) I was lucky to get the mark I on close out price and I achieved my dream system finally (at least one that does not make me keep thinking that I need something else). For example, although I liked the Bifrost, I knew that my system could resolve much more than the Bifrost could put out.
I can imagine how the Hex could be better w/ more power, etc., but am not left wanting that w/ the Octave.
I think the French TOTALDAC and the British CAD1543 also offer NOS DACs with similarly high sampling rate accommodation.
MSB does too, with R2R DACs but I don't think they're NOS (?).
big j.
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
The total DAC seems to be 24-bit (w/ 14 bit effective resolution? per 6 Moons review). So Metrum is indeed not unique in that sense.
The CAD is based on the old 16 bit chips and I'm sure that 16 of them sound great, but: "Bit depth: 16-bit (will play any bit-depth)" from their brochure:
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: