[jk47]

i really wish the aurix had a remote control for volume.  [i said i was lazy.]

 

[zilch0md]

i've been listening to the hex on and off, sometimes through my integrated amp [nad c375bee]  to speakers, sometimes with my [new] hd800 via the aurix.    i picked up the gear just 3 days ago, so the equipment doesn't have that many hours on it.  

via speakers, my wife, a very good amateur pianist, newly noticed a kind of 'boing" at the hammer strike in uchida's playing a schubert sonata - something she doesn't care for, but something that some pianos do.  i plan to play it again for her in a few more days to see if the sound of the attack has changed.  

the hd800 via the aurix sounded great from the beginning. i never thought of buying an hd800 until i read this thread, btw.  i'd always read it was so picky about amp pairing, and when using headphones at home i had just been using the headphone out on the integrated amp, which i wasn't convinced would drive the hd800 well.  

i've seen the hd800 as incredibly resolving with a huge soundstage, but criticized as too bright in the treble, too lacking in the bass, and overall a lean and fatiguing sound.  i haven't heard any of that bad stuff.  the highs are great - this morning  i switched my listening from classical to jazz, and i'm listening to chet baker as i type this sentence.  his horn sound is beautiful, and only made more realistic by the slightly rough mid frequency texture produced by his embouchure much of the time.  the bass is clean and tight, and there is nothing thin or fatiguing about the sound.

i want to do some comparisons of the hd800 with my k812's and alpha primes, but i'm not ready to do that yet.   i want to give the hd800's and the metrum equipment more time to settle, and also i'm both lazy and just enjoying listening with the sennheiser's at the moment.

i haven't come to any conclusions about the hex versus its predecessor here, a schiit gungnir, when played through my nad amp and speakers [focal 836v's].  so far the sound is not remarkably different, although there is some.  perhaps this is testimony to the quality of the gungnir, or it may also be that i haven't played the right music through the speakers to bring out the differences.

i'll post some more remarks when and if i have more to report on this.  the one firm conclusion i've reached so far is that the aurix is a great pairing for the hd800s.

Reading your early impressions affirms my opinion of the Aurix > HD800. The lack of fatigue is most remarkable and I firmly believe Cees Ruijtenberg's contention that the HD800 needs a zero feedback amp. In posting such comments at the HD800 thread, all I get is crickets, even when I suggest people try other zero feedback designs, like the Audio-gd Master 9. Adding links to articles explaining and praising zero feedback designs - written by people like Nelson Pass, Dan Cheever and Robert Harley, also garners little interest from most subscribers to that thread.

I feel as if I'm onto the best kept secret in Head-Fi, despite my efforts to spread the word. Meanwhile, everyone carries on talking about modding the HD800 and using amps that color it, darken it, and/or soften it - all of which degrade, to varying degrees, the desirable traits that most distinguish the HD800 from every other headphone out there.

The Aurix allows the HD800 to be "itself," in every way, while acting almost as an inert conduit to your DAC. I'm convinced there's no better tool for evaluating DACs than the Aurix > HD800 duo.

I used to think the Aurix imparted some sort of "musicality" or "naturalness" to tracks that sound "sterile" through other amps, but now I'm convinced that the "sterility" I hear with other amps, especially with multi-stage, high-feedback designs like the OPPO HA-1, is actually due to those amps adding something to and/or removing something from the DAC's signal. They're simply not honest - much as oversampling DACs are not honest.

At first consideration, especially with a less finicky headphone like the Audeze LCD-2 or OPPO PM-1, the HA-1 amp section, when driven by the Metrum Octave MkII, sounds perfectly neutral and transparent - brilliantly so. But moving the HD800 over to the Aurix, still driven by the Octave MkII, you soon realize that the Aurix isn't adding or subtracting anything - rather, it's just getting out of the way.

The complete absence of local and global feedback, ostensibly (and excessively) used by other amps to reduce distortion that they themselves created in the first place (an irony that few seem to appreciate), is but one of several things that the Aurix has going for it. The DAC is thereby given a pure, clean and uncorrupted path to the HD800 - the proverbial "powered wire" that we all dream of finding - and in the case of the Aurix, you can even turn off the power for a passive connection to the DAC.

I confess, I'm a big fan.

Mike

 

[zilch0md]

i really wish the aurix had a remote control for volume.  [i said i was lazy.]

Yes! When I'm in my recliner, the Aurix is out if reach, down within the side table...



I've learned to just turn just leave it alone, at a setting that's not too loud for the loudest tracks in my library. I just let my ears adapt to the lower level signals. It helps that I have almost no ambient noise - I even turn off the AC or heat when I listen to silence the rush of air from a ceiling vent about 10-feet away.

But yeah, a remote control would be nice. Maybe we could work something out with some tape, some twine, cuphooks, and small pulleys?

 

[jk47]

But yeah, a remote control would be nice. Maybe we could work something out with some tape, some twine, cuphooks, and small pulleys?

sure, let's adapt this:
 

Flame from lamp (A) catches on curtain (B) and fire department sends stream of water (C) through window. Dwarf (D) thinks it is raining and reaches for umbrella (E), pulling string (F) and lifting end of platform (G). Iron ball (H) falls and pulls string (I), causing hammer (J) to hit plate of glass (K). Crashof glass wakes up pup (L) and mother dog (M) rocks him to sleep in cradle (N), causing attached wooden hand (O) to move up and down along your back.

 

[zilch0md]

Haha! Perfect!

 

[preproman]

Reading your early impressions affirms my opinion of the Aurix > HD800. The lack of fatigue is most remarkable and I firmly believe Cees Ruijtenberg's contention that the HD800 needs a zero feedback amp. In posting such comments at the HD800 thread, all I get is crickets, even when I suggest people try other zero feedback designs, like the Audio-gd Master 9. Adding links to articles explaining and praising zero feedback designs - written by people like Nelson Pass, Dan Cheever and Robert Harley, also garners little interest from most subscribers to that thread.

I feel as if I'm onto the best kept secret in Head-Fi, despite my efforts to spread the word. Meanwhile, everyone carries on talking about modding the HD800 and using amps that color it, darken it, and/or soften it - all of which degrade, to varying degrees, the desirable traits that most distinguish the HD800 from every other headphone out there.

The Aurix allows the HD800 to be "itself," in every way, while acting almost as an inert conduit to your DAC. I'm convinced there's no better tool for evaluating DACs than the Aurix > HD800 duo.

I used to think the Aurix imparted some sort of "musicality" or "naturalness" to tracks that sound "sterile" through other amps, but now I'm convinced that the "sterility" I hear with other amps, especially with multi-stage, high-feedback designs like the OPPO HA-1, is actually due to those amps adding something to and/or removing something from the DAC's signal. They're simply not honest - much as oversampling DACs are not honest.

At first consideration, especially with a less finicky headphone like the Audeze LCD-2 or OPPO PM-1, the HA-1 amp section, when driven by the Metrum Octave MkII, sounds perfectly neutral and transparent - brilliantly so. But moving the HD800 over to the Aurix, still driven by the Octave MkII, you soon realize that the Aurix isn't adding or subtracting anything - rather, it's just getting out of the way.

The complete absence of local and global feedback, ostensibly (and excessively) used by other amps to reduce distortion that they themselves created in the first place (an irony that few seem to appreciate), is but one of several things that the Aurix has going for it. The DAC is thereby given a pure, clean and uncorrupted path to the HD800 - the proverbial "powered wire" that we all dream of finding - and in the case of the Aurix, you can even turn off the power for a passive connection to the DAC.

I confess, I'm a big fan.

Mike

 
 
Good post Mike.  I agree with you about the 0 feedback design.  
 
How does the LCDs and other headphones sound with the Aurix?

 

[zilch0md]

Thanks, preproman!
 
Everything I have except the LCD-2 rev.1 sounds as good as it can on the Metrum stack, but the LCD-2 is just inefficient enough to have me preferring the awesome power of the OPPO HA-1's amp section (still fed by the Octave MkII) - for tightening up the bass and adding speed all around. Every time I've heard the LCD-2 with lots of power, as when directly connected to speaker amps, its resolution actually improves, by nature of the amp being able to more tightly control its moving parts.  Plug an LCD-2 rev.1 into a Sansa Clip+ and it gets woolly from the bass all the way up into the high mids.  It just likes a lot of power.
 
Another factor is that the LCD-2 rev.1 has enough color that I slightly prefer it with the "sterility" of the HA-1. In fact, the LCD-2 rev.1 is even "OK" with the HA-1's ESS9018 DAC, which I've learned to dislike with every other headphone, since spoiling my ears with the Octave MkII. I think the shelved highs of the LCD-2 rev.1 help to compensate the ESS oversampling "glare."
 
I could live without the HA-1 if I were willing to part company with my LCD-2, but I'm not.

 
The Aurix comes close to making the LCD-2 all that it can be, but not quite. It's just a matter of power vs. the efficiency of the headphone. The Aurix is not lacking in any other way with the LCD-2.  If I'd never heard the LCD-2 with lots of power, I'd be perfectly content with using the Aurix as my only amp for every headphone.  
 
The PM-1 is somewhat the opposite of the HD800, in that it doesn't seem to morph in response to changing amps. The PM-1 pretty much always sounds like a PM-1, until you get into really low power outputs. I run it on the HA-1, instead of the Aurix, only to conserve the Aurix.  I tend to think of everything I own as a bar of soap that will eventually wear out, so the Aurix is reserved exclusively for use with the HD800, even though it's more than enough amp for the PM-1, and in truth, a more "honest" amp than the HA-1, as I'd written earlier.
 
I've posted this before, but this graphic shows how I connect everything - with the Aurix serving only the HD800.
 

 
 
You might find this bit of trivia interesting... 
 
When I was still beta testing the HA-1, I asked an OPPO engineer how many parts lie between the HA-1's analog RCA inputs and its RCA outputs, when the HA-1 is used in Bypass mode as a pre-amp.  I don't have that correspondence handy at the moment, but it was shocking, frankly.  The signal passes through a couple of relays, some switches and other stuff. I'm sure this is why some people on the HA-1 thread have promoted using the HA-1's headphone out instead of the analog outputs on the rear of the cabinet for driving other amps (as when using the HA-1 as a pre-amp for a speaker amp).
 
So, when I first got the Aurix, I asked Cees Ruijtenberg a similar question: How many parts lie between the RCA inputs and the RCA outputs?  Answer:  Just one relay, with gold-plated contacts.  Needless to say (referring to my photo, above), that's why the Aurix sits between the Octave MkII and the HA-1's amp section, instead of putting the HA-1 between the Octave MkII and the Aurix.
 
Cees explained that the Aurix' relay will redirect the incoming analog signal to the RCA outputs only when you unplug your headphones from the TRS jack. That negates the need for a Bypass switch - another component in the signal path, but there's an interesting feature of that relay that Cees didn't tell me about - I just discovered it on my own:  No matter what state that relay is in when you power off the Aurix, the relay will remain in that state!  This means that I can unplug my headphones right before turning off the Aurix, then plug them back in, leaving them connected to the Aurix while it's powered off, but the relay continues to supply a signal to the RCA outputs. I love that because I don't have to leave the Aurix turned on with the headphones unplugged, just to relay the signal from the DAC to the HA-1. 
 
I normally think of relays as having two possible states, with one state requiring power, while the other state is the default state, when no power is applied to the relay's coils. This relay in the Aurix is different, in that it remains in whatever state it was in when you turned off the Aurix.  I think that's really cool!
 
Maybe I get too excited about the little stuff.  

 
 
Mike

 

[knowhatimean]

If you can't get a "kick" out of what you enjoy doing, what's the point of doing it !

 

 

[beyerdude]

   
No USB input on my Hex, and it had stock output transformers. I think the output transformers on the Hex give it a slightly different flavor over the Quad (and I've read the same for Octave Mk1 or 2), which I believe are both more direct coupled to the output.
 
I'm not saying the Hex wasn't an improvement over the Quad, just that they're much, much more similar in the grand scheme of things when compared to the wide world of other DACs. Both were still the least resolving DACs I've heard out of the bunch I tried over a few months, even compared to the NOS1704 from Audio-GD. I haven't actually heard the Octave Mk2, but based on what I heard with the Quad and Hex, I find it hard to imagine the Hex really offers much over the Octave Mk2 in terms of technicalities unless you need stuff like balanced outputs. But, again, haven't heard the Octave Mk2, so I could be VERY wrong. Hex just strikes me as the type of DAC for people that have money to spend, where as the Octave Mk2 likely captures most of what the Hex offers but with less options and a much better value proposition.
 
It could also be that my JKSPDIF Mk3 coming from my PC source was the limiting factor.
 
 
Don't get me wrong...the Metrum DACs sounded more natural to me than most other DACs. But I know some disagree and find them too smooth and laid-back - so your thoughts on other DACs just being overly aggressive comes down more to personal taste. When you get down to it and compare them with other DACs, they are indeed quite far down there on the laid-back to aggressive scale (in that they're more laid-back and fatigue free than most other DACs). Whether or not one finds that more "right" or "natural" over other DACs comes down to various physical and mental factors.

I have both the HEX and the Octave MKII plugged in here and there is no need to do any long comparisons or A-B ing - the HEX sounds more lively, resolving, dynamic, wider sound scale, gentler, more transparent - the Octave MKII has broadly speaking the same sonic signature but that is like saying a Ferrari is similar to a fiat because it's made in italy and it has 4 wheels.  The Octave sounds Flatter, tends to smear vocals, lacks the same definition but most of all has far less of the 'magic' that just makes me smile when i listen to it.
 
I always keep DACS when upgrading long enough to tell the differences between new and old and quite often I have spent hours A-B ing between the two components to try and quantify the differences (often with a little disappointment that the 2x to 3x cost has not made a substantial difference) - in this case it took 2 tracks to know that the HEX is substantially better in all the metrics that matter but most importantly in the emotional link to the music.
 
I know opinions vary widely but one thing I have here is the 2 devices plugged in simultaneously with the identical downstream components (Metrum AURIX, WA6SE, high end preamp and speaker setup, HD800 and HE500) - It would appear to be a rarity to have both so hopefully this may have some bearing on my opinion
 
All too often in reviews and online opinions nobody takes much notice about what the source is actually feeding - I could quite legitimately put an opinion up here about the HEX having bought one and plugged it into a 20 year old technics midi system but somehow my opinion would carry some weight

 

[beyerdude]

Oh - and if you only used the HEX with the COAX input the Metrums are VERY sensitive to Jitter - mine sounded crap with older CD players and some upstream devices - it plays best with my macbook pro and audirvana - anything else I have tried doesn't compare (X5 comes close but still not as good as the USB input)

 

[zilch0md]

I have to pretend I didn't read any of that Beyerdude, because I just can't allow myself to spend that much money (for a Hex), but I'm in awe of what you must be experiencing.

I, on the other hand, must retreat to my cage where ignorance is bliss.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for the $250 Battery DAC to arrive from Paris...

 

[beyerdude]

I have to pretend I didn't read any of that Beyerdude, because I just can't allow myself to spend that much money (for a Hex), but I'm in awe of what you must be experiencing.

I, on the other hand, must retreat to my cage where ignorance is bliss.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for the $250 Battery DAC to arrive from Paris...

Haven't enjoyed music this much for many years - just hope it's not another incremental jump to the next level up because this really really really was the limit of my spending and about 3x the average amount most of my friends spend on their entire system

 

[zilch0md]

The good news for you is that the Hex appears to bring value proportional to its price. I've too often taken a hit reselling an "experiment" that didn't pay off, so congratulations on rolling the dice and winning!

 

[jk47]

Listening through speakers I had noticed that my gungnir sounded a little lean. Not so with the hex.

 

[hans030390]

beyerdude, did you get your Hex with the upgraded output transformers? Are you primarily using it single ended or balanced out? Either way, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I only had the Quad and Hex (stock transformers, no USB) side by side. I'm glad you found the difference between the Octave Mk2 and Hex to be substantial. I just found the price delta to be too much for what gains the Hex offered (and it did offer gains, but the difference between the Quad and Hex was smaller than you'd get comparing any Metrum DAC to about, well, any other DAC, good or bad), though keep in mind the model I heard if yours is upgraded. No doubt they will have somewhat different characteristics due to the output transformers in the Hex vs. direct coupled output of the Quad/Octave. I'm not sure the car analogy is fair given the Octave Mk2 uses the same board as the Hex (just one vs. two) and doesn't have quite as beefy of a power supply, but that's besides the point.
 
I should be getting my Audial Model S DAC in within the next few days. On paper, it should be considerably more accurate across the board than the Metrums (not counting Pavane, which I have no experience with). Very excited to see how it pairs with the Aurix.