[Clemmaster]

   
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.

 
Let's blame your source, indeed 

. I owned the SA-1 and SA-2. The Octave is easily as detailed as these 2 

 

[knowhatimean]

 

 

  I disagree with calling the Hex "laid back", I think it's actually an attempt to be "polite" about feelings for most other DACs being overly aggressive in their processing  & less "musical" sounding by a very large margin .

 
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.

Good points, all, but for myself it comes down completely to how I feel it fares with  the listening material of my choice & that
specifically. As a result of that it doesn't sound laid back "to me" just "correct"
 
I was only referring to how other DACs seem to handle reproduction of "Acoustic" music only ! "Aggessive" & "Acoustic"
really don't mate that well . There is a lot more "time" based occurrences going on in) music that is "acoustic" in nature that let's
you know it is indeed an "acoustical" generated sound you've heard.
 
I rarely hear this much attention to detail "native" to" this type of music" paid to by other DACs (to capture this type of information has nothing to do with "aggressive" or "relaxed" . It was either captured or "glossed over" according to the design objectives chosen for that particular DAC)
 
(That is pretty funny to think of a DAC  you are "only" going to listen to "Acoustic" based music "too smooth & laid back"...um, it has be to capture this kind of detail & Yes, everything anyone talks about is definitely a "matter of taste" why else would you even talk about it !!!!)
 
There is however one other option that I  have'nt considered... That would be that would be that my Equitech 1.5 Q line conditioner
makes every component that I have sound better than it may actually be . Who knows ? maybe if I just figure out how to hook up
my digital file player to an old transistor radio  then plug everything into the Equitech  things would sound great & I'd be saving a ton
of money ? Nah that idea lacks a lot of "credibility" even if it did work !!!
 
Have a great day
~steve

 

[hans030390]

 
Let's blame your source, indeed 

. I owned the SA-1 and SA-2. The Octave is easily as detailed as these 2 

 
Haha, I mean, maybe the Octave Mk.2 is more detailed than the stock Hex? Those stock output transformers could play some sort of role in that. But I could certainly pick out details from the NOS1704 that I could not from the Hex on the same source (but, again, doesn't rule out source sensitivity on the Metrum side).

 

[knowhatimean]

 

 
Let's blame your source, indeed 

. I owned the SA-1 and SA-2. The Octave is easily as detailed as these 2 

 
Haha, I mean, maybe the Octave Mk.2 is more detailed than the stock Hex? Those stock output transformers could play some sort of role in that. But I could certainly pick out details from the NOS1704 that I could not from the Hex on the same source (but, again, doesn't rule out source sensitivity on the Metrum side

OK,  I'll bite ! what were the details you could pick out from the NOS1704 but not from the Hex. Just so we're on the same page name the type of "musical" detail. (What does source sensitivity have to do with anything If the amount of gain from the source wasn't
high enough it invalidates any comparison.) (who even tries to connect components they're not even sure will work together due to a sensitivity mismatch & then attempts a comparison ?)
 
I think we just might have a different idea as to what we consider details ( & curious as to how after having the Hex for a few years
never wondered if the Hex was not giving enough "musical" detail ?) It would explain a lot if I were to find out you're not talking specifically about "Acoustic" music. As it is I have to remain skeptical due to what I've experienced
 
If you wouldn't mind, could you give me a few more details about these details
 
thanks
~steve.

 

[hans030390]

I generally thought the Metrums did really well with transient details and micro-blackness (those tiny, fast empty spaces in between the notes). The NOS1704 was a bit mushier or syrupy in that regard, but generally most oversampled DACs (not all) seem a bit hazier to me in that regard. Metrums have always resonated with me really well aside from some technicalities I think they lack, and that's more important to me than anything.
 
Far from what I'd consider a truly high-fidelity track, but on the acoustic portion of Opeth's "Porcelain Heart," the Hex tended to smooth over the sound of picking and fingers sliding across the fret board even compared to the NOS1704 (and the NOS1704 is less resolving than most good oversampled DACs). This was very noticeable in back-to-back comparisons with the rest of the gear chain remaining the same. Those details are certainly there and not artifacts. The Hex just smoothed over them, sometimes to the point where they were not audible. So it's not just a NOS R2R thing, but likely the fact that the Metrum DACs (excluding Pavane) use chips with inherently, relatively poor accuracy in terms of linearity and such. The 1704 chip used in the NOS1704, while some may say it doesn't compare to its predecessors, is at least much more accurate when you compare datasheets. But, again, the Metrums connected with me on a musical level better than basically any other DAC, so it wasn't something I cared about.

 

[knowhatimean]

  I generally thought the Metrums did really well with transient details and micro-blackness (those tiny, fast empty spaces in between the notes). The NOS1704 was a bit mushier or syrupy in that regard, but generally most oversampled DACs (not all) seem a bit hazier to me in that regard. Metrums have always resonated with me really well aside from some technicalities I think they lack, and that's more important to me than anything.
 
Far from what I'd consider a truly high-fidelity track, but on the acoustic portion of Opeth's "Porcelain Heart," the Hex tended to smooth over the sound of picking and fingers sliding across the fret board even compared to the NOS1704 (and the NOS1704 is less resolving than most good oversampled DACs). This was very noticeable in back-to-back comparisons with the rest of the gear chain remaining the same. Those details are certainly there and not artifacts. The Hex just smoothed over them, sometimes to the point where they were not audible. So it's not just a NOS R2R thing, but likely the fact that the Metrum DACs (excluding Pavane) use chips with inherently, relatively poor accuracy in terms of linearity and such. The 1704 chip used in the NOS1704, while some may say it doesn't compare to its predecessors, is at least much more accurate when you compare datasheets. But, again, the Metrums connected with me on a musical level better than basically any other DAC, so it wasn't something I cared about.

Hmmm, that the NOS1704 was overemphasizing the sound of picking & fingers sliding across strings only denotes that its holding
on to the fundamental of the sound a little bit longer then it should & that would be why the sound between musical activity is a bit mushier . The actual transient information of when different notes start is being masked by the transient sounds that are being "showcased" & only other starting transients that are stronger than others are replacing those transients. There aren't really any transients that are more important than others, but there aren't many DAC designs that treat the musical signal this way they don't pay nearly the attention they should to the decay of notes (which can add as much dramatic effect as the start of the following notes)
 
In a lot of musical genres the amount of inner musical detail isn't nearly as attention grabbing as the starting transients simply because there may not be that much significant inner detail. While these details are not artifacts & add interest to a lot of music, it really can't be said they are more detailed due to their design emphasis. Once again this comes down to a personal preference of what is more important to your musical listening experience . The Hex isn't actually smoothing over details that seem to be more present with other DACs , it's just a difference of emphasis & that emphasis can be over influencing you in the whole scheme of things.
 
Most of my listening time is spent listening to Orchestral music, so it goes without saying I live for the the various intricacies of
the inner detail that exists within the passages of the various symphonies,tone poems, concertos etc. that I listen to . The spatial relationships between the various instrumental sections & the ongoing dialog that these sections have between themselves has to have a balance of sound that allows you to view the separate elements of the music along with sum of all activity as a whole as choirs of instruments step into a larger or smaller roll in the music making  & so on. The distinctness of what you're hearing without dynamic incoherence is no easy feat,but the Hex does this on a consistent basis for me !
 
Measurements, I suppose one of these days I'll have to educate myself on this part of my hobby (but after 35yrs of not finding out what they mean it may not happen : As you can't teach an old dog new tricks)
 
One other thing ,I don't know how particular they are about "Off topic posting" here , but we should probably move these DAC discussion posting to a "separate" thread that is specific to this subject (or not) (as "They say"...."just saying!")

 

[beyerdude]

  Don't know about the mk11 as I only had the original, but if I had to put my finger on how the Hex differed from the Octave, I would probably say that it has a more relaxed & higher scale of total dynamic control than the Octave seemed to have.
 
The more challenging Orchestral pieces I play seemed have a more complete sense of dynamic fullness & articulation that the Octave (though better than most DACs I heard) didn't control quite as well & sound as "Musical" in the process !
 
I thought the Octave was a pretty good DAC, while I think the Hex is a "great" DAC (I can only guess those who say the difference isn't that much, weren't challenging the Hex enough to see where it's greater capabilities lie !)

Well I have the two (MKII and HEX) sitting next to me attached to the Aurix - Hex is fresh out of the box - all I can say is that they are very different animals indeed - whoever said the Hex and the Aurix were an amazing combination was right  

 

[jk47]

 
Well I have the two (MKII and HEX) sitting next to me attached to the Aurix - Hex is fresh out of the box - all I can say is that they are very different animals indeed - whoever said the Hex and the Aurix were an amazing combination was right  

well, i drank the kool-aid too.  
 
i'm picking up a hex and an aurix this afternoon.  i'll also be using the hex for my [focal chorus 836v] speakers, and i'm curious to see if they generate much of a different sound than with the schiit gungnir the hex is replacing.

 

[zilch0md]

Well I have the two (MKII and HEX) sitting next to me attached to the Aurix - Hex is fresh out of the box - all I can say is that they are very different animals indeed - whoever said the Hex and the Aurix were an amazing combination was right  

well, i drank the kool-aid too.  

i'm picking up a hex and an aurix this afternoon.  i'll also be using the hex for my [focal chorus 836v] speakers, and i'm curious to see if they generate much of a different sound than with the schiit gungnir the hex is replacing.

Congratulations, gentlemen!

 

[beyerdude]

Congratulations, gentlemen!

Why thank you - I played my wife the new Bruce Springsteen album with the HEX and Aurix (she's a real fan of the Boss!) and all thoughts of 'not another bloody Dac how much was it this time' melted away
Only problem is I promised to sell the Octave mkII but am having a job letting go - maybe next week!

 

[TokenGesture]

Nice - what are your thoughts on the much discussed issue of the differences between the Octave and the Hex?  Go on, torment me 

 

[beyerdude]

I have plans to run them side by side and will come back with some impressions - bearing in mind that burn in time takes a while. All I can say is at this point out of the box I am very happy with the sound and don't feel like I have a product that is only slightly better than the Octave - the Hex does have a lot more energy/sparkle and initial impressions are  of greater transparency. If it weren't so damn hot here I would have it on 24/7 burning in but not when the room gets to 30+ degrees in the day!

 

[knowhatimean]

  I have plans to run them side by side and will come back with some impressions - bearing in mind that burn in time takes a while. All I can say is at this point out of the box I am very happy with the sound and don't feel like I have a product that is only slightly better than the Octave - the Hex does have a lot more energy/sparkle and initial impressions are  of greater transparency. If it weren't so damn hot here I would have it on 24/7 burning in but not when the room gets to 30+ degrees in the day!

You're speaking in terms of "C" not "F" when you talk about temperature, right ?
 
It's 33 here in "New Jersey", but there is several inches of snow on the ground ! (Can't you guys just walk around in the "buff" drinking lots of "Iced Tea" while the Hex is burning in ?; It is the Hex you're talking about after all !!
 
While I"m making suggestions on how you can end up as "broke" as I became, I have a "reasonably" priced (& now that I think of it a great sonic impact) item to use with your Hex, a JPS labs Digital AC - X power chord. About a month ago I switched some things around in my playback chain & for some reason I had put this power chord that was connected to the Hex on my Auraliti's power supply & that chord to the Hex.
 
I didn't think too much about the difference in sound, as I've been playing around with mods to my HD800 headphones, but the other night I got to the point where I noticed my sound characteristics just didn't seem to going in the direction that the mods should have been taking them, but even when things aren't quite what could be through the Hex, they still sound so good you pay that little mind !
 
I then remembered that the JPS chord was'nt on the Hex. Needless to say after putting things back, the characteristics I'd been missing"popped" back into place. For a "mere pittance" of "$400" this chord adds even a little more "magic" to this "exceptional" DAC
 
Just tell the wife it was an "automatic upgrade" that was sent to you from Metrum (Hey, you're a smart guy, "you can pull this off")
 
 
~steve

 

[beyerdude]

  You're speaking in terms of "C" not "F" when you talk about temperature, right ?
 
It's 33 here in "New Jersey", but there is several inches of snow on the ground ! (Can't you guys just walk around in the "buff" drinking lots of "Iced Tea" while the Hex is burning in ?; It is the Hex you're talking about after all !!
 
While I"m making suggestions on how you can end up as "broke" as I became, I have a "reasonably" priced (& now that I think of it a great sonic impact) item to use with your Hex, a JPS labs Digital AC - X power chord. About a month ago I switched some things around in my playback chain & for some reason I had put this power chord that was connected to the Hex on my Auraliti's power supply & that chord to the Hex.
 
I didn't think too much about the difference in sound as I've been playing around with mods to my HD800 headphones, but the other night I got to the point where I noticed my sound characteristics just didn't seem to going in the direction that the mods should have been taking them, but even when things aren't quite what could be through the Hex they still sound so good you pay that little mind !
 
I then remembered that the JPS chord was'nt on the Hex. Needless to say after putting back the characteristics I'd been missing
"popped" back into place. For a "mere pittance" of "$400" this chord adds even a little more "magic" to this "exceptional" DAC
 
Just tell the wife it was "automatic upgrade" that was sent to you from Metrum (Hey, you're a smart guy, "you can pull this off")
 
 
~steve

Yeah I should just run it 24/7 but I have just had an amp pack up and I think it's was just the heat - it was however a design that was inherently susceptible to heat (Audiolab 8000a). 
 
I run reasonably decent power cable (Supra Lorad 2.5) - DIY approach but I have a feeling that a proportion of the expensive (in my price range) power cables use Belden cable anyhow with some nice (branded) sleeving  and Supra Lorad looks to be at least on par with the Belden cable - I'm pretty happy with them but haven't sampled a decent commercial offering to compare it to! - I certainly notice a difference when I run the Octave it on a standard kettle lead.

 

[jk47]

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 described 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.