Matrix Quattro Dac and Amp Impressions
 
If you just want to hear what I thought about the Matrix combo, jump down about five or six paragraphs! This first part may be a bit extraneous for many readers…
 
First off, major thanks to @project86  for  his generosity in lending out some gear for us Head-Fi’ers to try, but more importantly because this sort of program produces honest feedback on products.  We’ve got no “horses” in this race!  This may be self-evident for an internet forum, but it allows readers to calibrate themselves to different writers.  Everyone here has music preferences, levels of experience, and general biases.  These are pretty easy to pick up from previous posts and preferences in gear. This allows me to better understand which reviewers I relate to and has really helped me pick gear that I have a better chance of liking.
 
I lean towards the more “euphonic”, choosing tubes/vinyl over “incredibly resolving” gear.  I enjoy mixing up my selection of headphones- but when push comes to shove I will usually grab something full and potentially darker sounding…say the LCD-2.  Musically, I’m all over the place.  My youth was filled with listening to punk.  Even a poorly-recorded, live “7Seconds” recording will get me rocking out and re-living a live show I was able to catch.   Punk was the music that gave me a charge while growing up, but now I find my favorites are blues and alternative (think R.E.M., The Decembrists, Bloc Party).  I told you I was all over the place!  I have been exploring classical recordings, but I am very much a newcomer to understanding the genre and I never use it when evaluating gear (except for some brief sampling).
 
As for experience with DACs, I would put myself in the “somewhat-limited” camp.  I have spent more time with my Stello DA100 than any other DAC, closely followed by the Cambridge DacMagic.  I also have an AlgoRhythm Solo, a Pico DAC/Amp and a HeadRoom Micro DAC, all of which I have used extensively.  I’ve been lucky enough to sample @CEE TEE’s Benchmark for several extended periods, so I am pretty familiar with it.  Anything else, or high-end, I have only sampled in meet conditions.  I’ll also say that I find hearing differences in DACs very subtle and I have to concentrate carefully to hear them. 
 
I was able to resist reading the others impressions before writing my own in an attempt to stay unbiased.  Well…the one exception was a little bit of @purrin’s “6Moons Google translator”- it was just too good not to read.
With the exception of portable equipment, I spent over a month listening almost exclusively to vinyl before I had the chance to listen to the Matrix.  I am sure this had some influence on my “somewhat critical“ initial impressions… 
 
@CEE TEE was kind enough to leave his Benchmark with me when he delivered the Matrix combo. It seemed the perfect DAC to make some comparisons to, if only because of the similarities in appearance.
 
I started by feeding the Matrix DAC and separate Amp (DAC/Amp connected with balanced XLR cables) by the optical output from my iMac and listening to some headphones from the single-ended output.  I cued up some tracks to just get a good feeling for what I thought of the sound. 
 
Out of the box, what stood out was that it was a bit “flat”.  Music was a bit dull, lacking dynamics, and a little edgy.  Switching to the DACs built-in amp didn’t do much, except to further recess some of the vocals and mids.  Wait- maybe it was a bit more of the bass being a little overdone (or uncontrolled) that was pushing things into the background?  While listening to some Van Morrison, I decided to try some balanced headphones from the amp.  I did notice some better dynamics and the mids came back towards me, improving things.  I then spent the rest of the night just sampling everything.  Like many things, the Matrix grew on me. Though I noticed that there was separation between instruments, there was little else to the “soundstage”.  It was as if everything was close mic’d and sent back through the board with little thought around how it was put together.  I struggled to get any kind of “live room” feeling from recordings that normally give it to me (like Van’s Caravan).  I also felt a little fatigued after the first long listen, but I was also convinced that this was good-sounding gear.
 
With more time, I acclimated to the “Matrix sound”.  As the week progressed I felt the DACs built-in headphone amp gave up enough to the separate Amp that I spent much more time listening to the separate amp with the DAC.  I would say the same for the balanced outputs.  Everything just sounded “a little more fun and dynamic” from the balanced outputs.  I really started to enjoy the set up, and as a complete balanced combination I was fairly pleased.  While I don’t think I could see myself with the DAC alone, I could live quite happily with the combination of Matrix DAC/Amp.  While not having the same power delivery as my vintage receiver, I found that the amp drove my LCD-2 and HE5-LE well.  Either headphone with this combination would be a great set-up for your digital collection.  With the wide range of inputs, you have great source options. 

Next up: Combining the DAC when listening to an amp I was intimately familiar with.  I paired it with my WA6SE.  To my surprise, the Matrix was bass-biased. I was expecting it to be treble-tilted.  In spite of this bass-bias, I still felt the Matrix sounded a bit “thin” and ended up more in the the DacMagic/Benchmark camp, the later two because they seem “cold”.  The Stello DA100 comes across warmer, fuller, and more “musical” to my ears.  Yes, I am splitting some hairs here...  The Matrix sounded pretty darned good.  Pairing it with the right tubes, this is a DAC I could live with.  Switching between different DACs with the Woo proved that differences were subtle and difficult to pick up.  The Matrix’ bass (at first) seemed stronger than the Stello DA100, but after some careful listening I felt the Matrix DAC was a still a bit overdone and lacked control.  While the Benchmark often seems “treble-tilted” to me (even lacking in low-end), it never sounds like it loses control.  For me the Benchmark does highly resolving well.
 
Speaking of control…the Matrix seemed like it was sometimes overwhelmed with really fast and complex music.  It was not a glaring problem, but did become apparent with some tracks such as Fugazi’s Appreggiator.
 
The last session I had with the Matrix gear was a head-to-head with the Benchmark DAC1.  We selected just a few tracks and went between the built-in amp of both DACs, then used the Matrix amp with both DACs.  One particular track, “June Hymn” by the Decembrists, really made one thing stick out to me.  The matrix seemed to separate Colin’s and Jenny’s vocals but just didn’t deliver the pitch changes from the singers, especially Jenny’s background track.  While subtle, I continually felt that the subtle pitch control was lost with the Matrix.  In a later test, I found that the Stello DA100 actually seemed to reduce the separation between singers, but presented all of the subtle pitch changes in the singers voices, which I prefer between attributes. 
 
Both the Benchmark and Matrix DACs tended to provide a slightly “grating” presentation to the high-end of the Decemberist vocals, which I don’t get at all with the DA100/WA6SE combo.  The Matrix definitely bested the Benchmark on low-end quantity, but always by giving up some control at the same time.  (When I felt like I needed a little more low-end with the Benchmark, bassier headphones like the Denon D7000 always delivered). 
 
I really feel like I’ve been a bit critical of the Quattro. This is some pretty sweet gear.  It’s well-built with an amazing set of options at this price point.  I enjoyed listening to it and I’d have no problem recommending it to someone who was interested in it.  As a stand-alone DAC, I prefer the Benchmark, but by the slightest margin. 
 
The separate  Matrix amp is pretty good, made better when feeding my balanced headphones.  Single-ended, I felt like it was OK, but the improvements in dynamics and fullness from the balanced outputs had me really enjoying this amp.  I liked it enough to think about how good it might be as a small footprint, complete balanced set-up at the office…
 
I left out a lot of details about individual impressions with different headphones, tracks selected, etc... but if there are any questions I'm happy to answer what I can!

Fang (Head-Direct, HiFiMan) was kind enough to donate some door prizes for our recent Bay Area meet.  I was pretty happy to win, but at the time I really had no idea what exactly was in the nice little black box I had won.  Turns out it was the RE-262.  I had heard the buzz about the HE-x line up, but I hadn’t paid a lot of attention to the IEM offerings.  I’ve been happy with my Shure 530’s for travel and portable use for years.  When I hit the gym I’ve got some well (ab)used Superfi 5 pros that fill in.  I simply wasn’t looking for an IEM so I was blissfully ignorant, a good way to keep from opening the wallet!
 
 
 
RE-262 details:
 
Frequency response: 20 - 22Khz
 
Weight: 0.6 Oz
 
Sensitivity: 95 db
 
Impedance: 150 ohm
 
 
 
 
After a quick listen I came away with good initial impressions.  So much so that when I recently had a short trip to Europe I decided I’d listen to the 262’s for the entire trip.  Use included the typical chores for an IEM including time on the plane, on the move, at the coffee shop, and in the hotel room.  Let’s just say that the RE’s were not to blame for not getting an audition in the gym, that was all me!!  I had a little over a week to try living with them. As a “seasoned traveler” I always bring back ups, but I never used them.  This should be an indicator that my impressions are going to be on the good side.
 
 
 
 
While I do have a few IEM’s that I could try and make comparisons to, I clearly don’t have the experience to go down that road.  I might make mention of one or two since they are my reference, but I don’t intend to compare the 262’s directly here to any other IEM.  Instead I hope to offer a simple impression from my experience living with them full time for a week or so.
 
 
 
I wanted to add that I decided not to read any other reviews or impressions prior to listening and assembling my opinions.  This turned out to be a fun challenge, and a refreshing approach, as I was able to evaluate what I was hearing without trying to compare to what others had reported or listening to find something specific that another listener heard.  No golden ear here, no great experience to make detailed comparisons, just some real world impressions by a regular guy who likes music. 
 
 
 
 
So, after getting home from the meet I had a chance to open the nice little box and see what was inside.  The box itself is pretty nice, but like many others it’s not what you’d likely consider carrying for travel.  I opted to choose the accessories that I thought I might need and put them into one of my extra Shure 530 zippered pouches. 
 
 
 
 
Accessories included (I did not carry them all, of course):
 
5 flanges, 3 “olive” style of various sizes, 2 “bi-flange” large and small
 
Balanced 4-pin mini (female) to regular mini (male) adapter
 
Reversed phase (L/R) balanced 4-pin mini (female) to regular mini (male) adapter
 
Reversed phase (L/R) balanced 4-pin mini (female) to balanced 4-pin mini (male) adapter
 
1/8" Female to Stereo 1/4" Male adapter
 
10 replacement screens for driver tubes
 
Cable shirt clip
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I took some photos to give a general ideal of what you get:
 

 
The IEM’s themselves are plastic, and had me a little suspect upon first inspection.  After roughing them up a little changing flanges I quickly gained some confidence and wasn’t that concerned when I had to simply throw them into my bag in a rush instead of properly protecting them in a pouch.  They held up fine.
 
 
A closer view showing off the bi-flanges.
 

 
 
 
The cable is well put together.  Length is reasonable for a portable rig, not so long that you have a lot of extra cable hanging around.  It’s not too thick and fairly flexible.  I opted to use the included shirt clip since I ended up mostly listening with the wires straight down from my ears instead of looping back over the tops.  When you do want to go over the top the design of the buds requires you to reverse them in your ears so left becomes right, and right left… this is when you use the adapter.  It’s kind of neat the way it works.  Without some memory cable  I didn’t care for the way that they laid over my ears, so I stuck with the standard straight down arrangement.  Like most IEM’s with the flanges sealed well they are quite microphonic.  I didn’t notice it much unless the volume was all the way down or very low.  Over the ear or use of the shirt clip reduced it to acceptable levels.  The mini plugs (I had two since I was using the balanced to regular adapter)  have 60 degree bends.  They never got in the way, but of course you end up with a little extra clutter because of this extra gear.
 
 
 
 
I ended up doing a lot of flange testing on the 10+ hour flight.  I wanted to be sure that I picked something comfortable with a good seal.  Isolation was very good.  The large olives fit me well but I found them a bit uncomfortable after any length of time.  The larger bi-flange turned out to fit well, sealed easily, and was all day comfortable for me.  The thing that surprised me was the major impact on sound that flange selection had.  Flanges for my other IEM’s have been tools for getting a good seal and providing comfort.  By design the drivers of the 262’s end up close to the end of the olives with essentially no cavity.  This provided a very intimate sound with more low end impact.  The bi-flanges end up offering a pretty large cavity.  The result was a much more open and airy sound with less impact, especially from the lows.  I’ll touch on this a bit more when commenting on sound quality.  Isolation seemed slightly reduced with the bi-flanges.
 
 
 
 
The earpieces themselves were comfortable in either the over ear or straight down configuration.  If I noticed anything in my ears it was the flanges, the earpiece disappeared for me.
 
 
 
 
Overall if I had to sum up the sound of the 262’s I’d use the slightly overused and perhaps too generic description of musical.  The sound was smooth and euphonic but managed to maintain a decent amount of detail.  I found them warm, without approaching dark.  Highs never approached harsh, and I noticed no sibilance.  Here is where I will offer a comparison; I did not find them as technically orientated as either the Shure E3 or 530’s.  That’s not to say they don’t provide details, but they are definitely not biased in this direction.  I want to mention the choice of flanges again.  If you want to maintain the impact of the lows from the 262’s I’d consider sticking with the olives.  However, when I wanted to let the soundstage open up and to let the mids and highs start to sing the bi-flanges really shined.  With the olives I felt that the mids and highs got a bit muddied.  With the bi-flanges the sound was more balanced and refined.  The trade off in loosing a bit of low end grunt was well worth it for me.  With the bi-flanges details became clear, I could pick out and follow along with single instruments.
 
 
 
 
When listening today I had a thought that if I had to compare the sound signature to any of my full sized headphones I think it would be my HD-600’s.  I am finding that I lean towards a warmer sound signature in general, and the 262’s fit right into that category, so perhaps this accounts for my general appreciation.
 
 
 
 
Typically when I select IEM’s it’s for one of three reasons.  I need good sound isolation (either from or to the outside world).  I am traveling and want to set up a portable listening rig.  I need to be portable, on the move.  In all of these cases I don’t like to restrict my selection of music genre because a particular IEM is biased in some way.  The 262 is capable of letting me enjoy my music, any of it, in any situation.  This is exactly what I require from an IEM.  Certain genres may have showcased the 262 (vocals, blues, classic rock) but I never found any genre that I simply thought was lacking to the point of not wanting to listen.  I will add that during this audition I listened to very little classical, so I made it a point to select a few tracks to specifically make sure I could make this statement without exception.  It still holds true.  From my limited listen I found that I was quite impressed with the sound staging of classical from this IEM.  Take that for what it’s worth, as I don’t listen to that much classical, it’s something I am trying to get a better ear for.
 
 
 
 
Since the 262’s are 150 ohm I was expecting to find them demanding amplification.  They are harder to drive than any other IEM I’ve used.  Here are a few notes on how they faired with different sources I used during my week plus of listening in varying conditions:
 
 
 
 
On the plane I was able to connect my Pico DAC/AMP to my iPad with the camera connection kit and a USB cable.  I always ended up selecting high gain.  The Pico was up to the task and clearly I found that it really helped to keep these IEM’s up to speed and provided the clearest details compared to any other configuration (more on this when I talk about un-amped operation).  This was also my hotel set up and provided me with great quality listening while on the road.  Using the iPad also allowed me to mix FLAC playback, iTunes, and some streaming audio.  The combo provided fast, dynamic, and detailed sound.
 
 
 
 
I tried the iPad HPO and was a bit disappointed.  While I often find that the SQ difference between an external amp and portable devices can be marginal, in this case the iPad just did not seem up to the job and left the 262’s sounding thinner and struggling with the speed of any complex music.  Without the Pico I’d probably have chalked the 262’s up as being a bit slow.
 
 
 
For moving through the airport and walking the streets of Glasgow I tried an iPod classic to keep things portable.  After the iPad HPO I was not expecting much, but the iPod HPO turned out to be a pleasant surprise.  It required some pretty high volume settings yet the results were pretty good.  Details were not quite on the same level as they were with the Pico, but overall the listening experience was quite acceptable.  Adding the Pico fed by the LOD made little difference in the sound quality, although it did of course provide some additional gain.  I found that I was happier to go fully portable and leave the little Pico behind in favor of a small package.
 
 
 
 
I never really consider home amps much when talking about IEM’s, however since I do sometimes set up in my office I did take the time to do some listening with a few of my home amps.  First up was the Little Dot I+, often an amp I take to the office, with music being delivered from an airport express and Headroom Micro Dac.  I found the amp revealed even more details and as expected drove them with aplomb.  I was expecting more bass impact, but the lows didn’t strike me as any more apparent than they did on the portable rig.  Rolling some tubes might have changed this impression.  Next up was the WA-6SE.  Yeah, complete overkill for IEM’s, but it sure made them sound good.  I have to say that the 262’s step up nicely with amplification.  For those keeping track of the details, and to throw even more inconsistency into these impressions, I used an iMac to Stello DA100 to provide tunes to the Woo.  The mids and highs really came to life and the deep, tight bass had full on impact and thump.  I’m not sure how often, if ever, these IEM’s will get head time with this amp, but as I write I am rocking out with this combination and loving every minute of it.  I didn’t try any home SS amps, I should.   I’ll add some impressions if I do, but I doubt most are considering these IEM’s for significant use with these types of amps anyway.
 
 
 
 
Major bass heads, you’re likely not to find the RE-262 to be your new choice for a club in your head.  Detail junkies, you’re likely to find another IEM to monitor the heart rate of the cellist in the fifth row.  For the rest of us the RE-262 is a good IEM that will have you enjoying your music, all of it. 
 
 
 
 
I want to thank Fang, Head-Direct, and HiFiMan again for the great door prize. 
 
 
My Shure 530’s have been the only IEM I grab when hitting the road since 2007.  The RE-262 will definitely be stealing some of that head time!