Nice...! I am eager to hear about that too and if you get to try it with the Pavane even better. 

grizzlybeast said:

Nice...! I am eager to hear about that too and if you get to try it with the Pavane even better. 

Click to expand...

Unless I decide to buy a Pavane, I won't since I already did the audition on that unit ... just haven't written it up yet.

Ahh so pavane lost to yggy then.

grizzlybeast said:

Ahh so pavane lost to yggy then.

Click to expand...

I didn't say that, and it won't be revealed either way until I actually write it up!

I've auditioned all the DACs listed in blue in the first post. The only ones you can make any determinations about win/lose wise at this point are those I've posted my thoughts on and updated the indicators for in the original post.

Some of those I still have to comment on didn't measure up, some made it through the to the next round, but you'll have to wait for the individual comments before you'll know which is which.

I auditioned Pavane a little while ago, so I no longer have it around to try with my Rednet 3 (actually, I went to it, rather than it coming to me, so even that wouldn't have helped) I'd have to buy one, or arrange another audition (which would be tricky), to do that. That's all. It's not, in anyway, a commentary on whether it won, lost, or cooked a turkey as a side show!

You'll find out where it sits so,entire this week.

torq said:

 

grizzlybeast said:

Ahh so pavane lost to yggy then.

Click to expand...

I didn't say that, and it won't be revealed either way until I actually write it up!

I've auditioned all the DACs listed in blue in the first post. The only ones you can make any determinations about win/lose wise at this point are those I've posted my thoughts on and updated the indicators for in the original post.

Some of those I still have to comment on didn't measure up, some made it through the to the next round, but you'll have to wait for the individual comments before you'll know which is which.

I auditioned Pavane a little while ago, so I no longer have it around to try with my Rednet 3 (actually, I went to it, rather than it coming to me, so even that wouldn't have helped) I'd have to buy one, or arrange another audition (which would be tricky), to do that. That's all. It's not, in anyway, a commentary on whether it won, lost, or cooked a turkey as a side show!

You'll find out where it sits so,entire this week.

Click to expand...

I keep poking.... lol

I will stop poking sorry 

grizzlybeast said:

I keep poking.... lol


I will stop poking sorry 

Click to expand...

LOL, it's all good! I just don't want anyone getting the wrong ideas!

torq said:

  A note on my references to listening to "Carmen" (which is always, for these purposes, going to be the "Jessye Norman" version) ...
 
This is not something I got to do with every DAC - this only occurred if I had the DAC at home or if I was listening to a friend's unit, and then only if I had the time.  Some of the units I heard weren't something I wanted to spend another 3 hours listening to, so even if/where the opportunity had presented itself, I might have skipped it there too.

Click to expand...

I can see why you chose that particular album.
 
Very NICE! 
 
JJ

torq said:

I'm looking forward to trying it though and seeing how it compares to my other ethernet interfaces/streamers, all of which improved what I was getting out of Yggdrasil. The Auralic Aries fed over either ethernet or WiFi and driving Yggdrasil via AES is a definite improvement over the direct connections. Likewise using my Linn streamers, again via ethernet, and then via BNC COAX w/ S/PDIF into the DAC.

Click to expand...

Very much looking forward to the comparisons of Rednet vs Auralic Aries or Sonicorbiter SE using Toslink... Not entirely sure why would one be (much) better than the other.

Hey Torq, I just wanted to say thanks for all work you are doing here and the valuable information you are providing here. All the best to you. You are one of the best contributors here ever.

rgs9200m said:

  Hey Torq, I just wanted to say thanks for all work you are doing here and the valuable information you are providing here. All the best to you. You are one of the best contributors here ever.

Click to expand...

 
Thanks!
 
Of course, these are just my opinions based on what I like, my own (self-acknowledged) biases and preferences, and are just one perspective among many.

Metrum

[size=17.03px]Pavane [/size][size=17.03px](+)[/size]

As clichéd as it will no doubt sound, the first impression I got of Metrum’s Pavane was of a highly musical, and very analog reproduction.  It plays music, and it plays it well.  Not many components “just get out of the way” and let the music flow; in my experience with this process it’s been the rare exception rather than the rule.
 
The Pavane is definitely one of those exceptions.
 
Instrumental timbre was extremely natural, separation clear and well defined, tonality was very pure with no emphasis anywhere that I could hear.  Detail extraction was remarkable, among the best I’ve heard in fact, but was not accompanied by any sense of brightness or shift of balance which has not been the case elsewhere (most of the other DACs that seemed highly detailed were really just “bright”).
 
Attack and dynamics are startling.  Notes start and stop instantly when they’re supposed to, yet the slower more organic decay of physical instruments is preserved in an entirely natural way.  Backgrounds were black, and the music emerged from a seemingly untainted backdrop which has the effect of making everything seem more vivid.  Rendering is incredibly delicate when it’s supposed to be, and can still slam you hard when called for.
 
I’ve made a comment once before, and it was about Yggdrasil, and that was that it has the ability to make everything appear emphasized all at the same time, which isn’t possible of course (emphasizing one thing would deemphasize another, and if you emphasized everything you’d be right back at neutral), but still Pavane manages the same feat.  That means with something like Tune Dem, you can effortlessly follow either the entire piece, or any individual element or instrument.
 
Vocals, especially female, were a real treat and hung in space in a manner in which you could almost reach out and touch the performer.  And the breathy exertion audible on several intense violin pieces was unmissable (it was sometimes all but inaudible on other DACs).
 
PRaT was excellent … fast pieces retained their speed, slower, mellower tracks/compositions stayed relaxed.  Sounds like that should be a given, but some units somehow make everything sound “fast” or “slow” even though they’re not actually changing tempo at all.
 
Listening to this was addictive.  Whether it was Infected Mushroom, Kate Bush or Bizet, it just played music, consistently, and did so engagingly, with precision and emotion, transparency and detail.  "Just one more track" syndrome was definitely well in effect.
 
I found it slightly smoother than Yggdrasil, in, for once, a good way.  I never would have described Yggdrasil as having any grain to its sound whatsoever, and I still wouldn’t, but somehow Pavane plays a little more smoothly all the same.
 
Yggdrasil projects a more solid and tangible soundstage, but the difference isn’t huge.
 
Detail is very comparable between the two, and while I do not consider Yggdrasil to be at all bright or overly energetic up-top, Pavane seems to be able to pull the same detail, and sense of air, while having a very slightly warmer rendering (a softer glow, but at similar intensity, if that makes any sense).  And sparkle, where appropriate, was still fully retained.
 
Cymbals, an area that I also find Yggdrasil excels in, particularly with brush-work, was very close.  I’d still give Yggdrasil the edge here, with a more realistic sheen to those sounds, but Pavane was hard to tell apart when compared to how other units have faired.
 
I still find I prefer piano works, overall, with Yggdrasil.  Some very aggressive pieces, which push the piano into discordancy, were noticeably more realistic to me on Schiit’s unit.  And even with more seasoned pieces the tone and timbre were more natural with Yggdrasil too.  But again, the difference wasn’t that large.
 
In fact none of the differences are big here, regardless of which unit is ahead, but overall this sounds just a little more refined in a musical sense.  Things have a slightly more “analog” feel to them than Yggdrasil, but I don’t think I can express quite why or how.  And again, it was not a big difference.  This is, I (and I alone, I am not trying to say that Mike would think this way) imagine, where Yggdrasil would next go if Mike could have D/A converters built to his ideal specifications, a small increment in several areas over the Schiit DAC, and not in every area, but in enough and in the right places (for me) that it has to be taken very seriously, even given the higher price.
 
Definitely, and enthusiastically makes the shortlist.
 
--
 
Interestingly, the optical input only supports up to 96KHz, which I note not because it was a problem for me (I used the AES input) but because it was unexpected.  This is not the only high-end DAC I’ve come across now that has unusually low limits on either its TOSLINK (Pavane) or both TOSLINK and COAX (other units) inputs, but I’ll cover that in the appropriate write-up.

very interesting and unsurprisingly, the metrum pavane delivers! Do you find the Pavane a bit analytic?
 
Ive been reading carefully hifi advice about his recent DAC comparisons and review and he seem to really like the metrum but at the same time seem to find it a bit analytic...
 
I think you should consider trying the Wadia 521 as it seems to be his favorite DAC. He compares the metrum pavane to many dac in his blog.
 
heres a excerpt
 
"

I wonder most often about the differences in bass between the two. Two people mention the Pavane being more spacious but the yggy having more bass slam.

Thanks for thw write up!!!! I'll be keeping mine.

murphythecat said:

  very interesting and unsurprisingly, the metrum pavane delivers! Do you find the Pavane a bit analytic?
 
Ive been reading carefully hifi advice about his recent DAC comparisons and review and he seem to really like the metrum but at the same time seem to find it a bit analytic...
 
I think you should consider trying the Wadia 521 as it seems to be his favorite DAC. He compares the metrum pavane to many dac in his blog.
 
heres a excerpt
 
 

Click to expand...

 
That was an interesting read.
 
But, no, I didn't find (or feel) anything that I'd describe as analytical about the Pavane's presentation - I found it to be musical, fluid, organic and largely analog in sound.  There were moments where I felt Yggdrasil had a bit more soul, but they were offset in the other direction as often as they occurred, so that was a bit of a wash.
 
Thanks for the Wadia 521 suggestion ... but I think, at this point, I don't want to add any more DACs to the list.  The remaining auditions are daunting enough, without adding to them!  And then there's writing up even my brief impressions/thoughts, which feels very repetitive!  The listening is definitely the more fun part, but I may have overdone that already and I'm barely halfway through!

grizzlybeast said:

I wonder most often about the differences in bass between the two. Two people mention the Pavane being more spacious but the yggy having more bass slam.

Thanks for thw write up!!!! I'll be keeping mine.

Click to expand...

 
Both were tuneful, detailed, dynamic, with slam where it mattered ... and I didn't make any specific notes that indicate anything really different in the lowest registers.  Might be something a different system would exhibit more readily. 
 
In terms of spaciousness, the size of the sound-stages I found to be similar (with speakers, Yggdrasil had a taller projection) enough that I couldn't make a call about it, but the image Yggdrasil presented was definitely more solid.