astrostar59
BannedMember of the Trade: Aries Cerat Espana, Auriculares High-EndAKA Headstage, headphoneweekend
I would guess that "audible distortion" is a language translation issue.
One advantage the Pavane has over TotalDAC is that there is only one Pavane model.
There are far too many TotalDAC variants and options for me. Whichever one I chose, I'd be forever fretting about upgrades etc.
Of course, for some people this choice would be very attractive.
I see your point. I was /thinking at some point in looking to upgrade my Audio Note DAC 4.1 kit. However so far I haven't heard anything that makes me jump. So I am upgrading pretty much all the parts count in my DAC to max it out. I feel happier with tubes in my system chain, I went all solid state before and it wasn't for me, even with R-2R.
I am sure the Pavane is much better than the little Octave MK2 I have. One of my problems is the Pavane has no volume pot. My Audio Note DAC has transformers on the output thus very low impedance so can run longer interconnects. This has allowed me to use a passive pre-amp and miss out a stage and the SQ loss of that.
I think Metrum should bump up the output and add the volume pot like on their headphone amp. Most folk have one source nowadays.
The TotalDAC has volume option and a good amp stage I read.
Back to the review by Kalgerman's buddies, I am wondering if the input method affected the SQ? I find it odd how a CDP sounds better than a well setup Mac or PC on USB. I have bettered my CDP by at least 20% or more, and it was a 10K CEC belt drive unit. 90% of the users on computeraudiophile.com agree.
It may be the guys liked Delta-Sigma better, it can come across as more exciting and 'hi-fi' IMO, but R-2R as non oversampling on RedBook sounds right to me and wins in long session with less fatigue or more realism. If the data is up sampled at the input or by the PC software, it will wreck the sound IMO. Too many variables here to know. We need more info to judge. Maybe other users can chime in?