432 EVO MASTER REVIEW

The 432 EVO MASTER is the range-topping music server from the Belgian brand 432 EVO. It comes with a separate power supply with three individual PSUs and uses the company’s 432 tuning. Read on for more about this interesting and novel approach to serving files to your DAC.

BUILD AND FUNCTIONALITY OF THE 432 EVO MASTER

The 432 EVO MASTER is a two-box system with one box having three power supply units housed within it and the other box having the CD ripper, SSD and streaming gubbins in it. The company’s website says these are true triple linear power supplies with triple AC filtering, triple shielded transformers and triple dual-stage DC regulation, with buffering inside the triple DC cables. Three high-end silver colour-coded DC cables are included to join the two units. The PSUs are from Sbooster but 432 say each is for specified voltages and specific to the MASTER.

You have onboard and bit-perfect CD ripping via a TEAC drive, 2TB of onboard SSD drive that sits in its own sprung housing to minimise vibrations, SATA noise filtering and SATA protocol tuning for lower EMI on the SDD, upsampling with 10 selectable and tweakable upsample filters, Bit-perfect mode, upsample only mode or upsample with 432 Hz post-processing, remote supported Linux with realtime kernel, and dedicated CPU core for audio, and separated cores for the library management (Roon or LMS), and no reclocking with 432 EVO saying “our high-end USB board is directly clocked (not reclocked) from a dedicated ultra-low jitter clock board, and both are powered independently.”

Very little of the above really interests me if I’m perfectly honest and personally I don’t need to know how my car runs, I just want it to work when I put petrol and the keys in it. 

However, the 432 EVO MASTER two-box package looks really excellent and sleek on the rack. 

SET UP

The setup of the Master is pretty straight-forward and was completely hassle-free – plug the main unit into the power unit via the three colour-coded wires, plug in the mains socket to the power unit, plug the main unit into the ethernet switch, connect to the DAC via USB, add it to the Roon app as per usual with a new bit of kit and it’s there on your network displaying all the tunes it has onboard or playing from Qobuz…or whatever streaming service you choose. I’d expected this to be a pretty long and drawn-out process as network kit often is, but it was honestly as plug-and-play as I’ve come across.

The two units sit on top of each other and I used some rubber pucks I was given a long time ago to separate them, but I don’t suppose there is anything to stop users from either sitting the server unit on top of the power unit or, indeed, having them on different shelves of your rack as the connecting cables are long enough to allow this. Frederic gave us some supports to sit the bottom unit on but said they were purely for “effect”, but I actually thought they looked pretty cool and should be made available to buy. 

SOUND OF THE 432 EVO MASTER

There are, of course, many people who will claim that the source in a digital set-up is of little consequence and that so long as the bit-perfect digital signal is fed to the DAC correctly, then the only thing that can affect the sound (over and above the obvious effects of amplifier, speakers, and cables) is the DAC and that it is the flavour of the DAC that dictates the sound of the digital system. Personally, this has not been my experience, nor the experience of others on the HiFi PiG team and the streamer, the switch, the cables used and other factors can and do have an influence on the overall sound quality of a system. However, and from experience, I would broadly agree that the quality of a DAC has a bigger effect on the sound than the streamer, but we are in the game of small differences coming together to make a greater and better sounding whole with regards to this level of HiFi kit and so I am keeping an open mind.

From listening so far, I would suggest that the 432 EVO does something clever with the software and filters used in its processing of the digital signal and that the use of the divided power supplies affects the noise floor on the macro and micro scale. That all sounds like we are getting into HiFi reviewer claptrap mode, but I promise that I won’t be talking about veils being lifted, or as if listening to the music now is like listening through a new set of ears. The changes here are not night and day differences, but then (as I mentioned a moment ago) we are not looking for night and day differences and as audiophiles or music lovers looking to get the best sound they can in their home, it is these small changes that we are looking to identify. This seeking out the best performance possible from our setups is what the world of the audiophile is all about, but that performance need not (and I’d suggest should not) come at the expense of convenience, and as I suggested earlier in this review, the set up of the 432 EVO MASTER is as simple as can be. 

I have used a good few streamers in my time ranging from the very simple (but actually quite good-sounding) Raspberry Pi-based unit to much more expensive units. I ended up with a Stack Audio streamer with an external PSU in one system and an Auralic unit in another system. I think the level of these units and the mention of the Pi kind of suggest that I’m certainly not impressed with the cost of a piece of kit and how it affects performance and that I’m certainly someone who will use a less expensive product IF it performs well sonically. However, the 432 EVO is substantially more expensive than products I have actually bought for use and at the start of this review process I set out to judge it pretty harshly (but fairly) given its not inconsequential asking price. 

My first impressions when I actually sat down to listen properly and intently were, as outlined above when listening to it uncritically, that the noise level of the system as a whole was dropped and this allowed me to hear further into a recording than with either of my other digital sources. This was particularly evident on acoustic recordings (voices and real instruments mic’d) where the tiny details of the recording and the spatial cues and decays of the room and instruments were really obvious. To my mind, the 432 EVO is not adding anything clever here, but rather it is taking away extraneous noise in the system to make what is presented to the listener without any smearing of the sound. Well recorded piano sounded live with each differently weighted fall of the hammer on strings being clear to hear, as well as the different points in the soundscape where the mic picked up the bass and treble strings – the bass strings were clearly picked up over to the left and the treble the right as they left the piano. I really enjoyed this detail and particularly the sense of liveness it gave to recordings of this type. Similarly, on vocals that were recorded in a live space, it was clear to hear an element of the room in the recording. The old audio show favourite of Hugh Masakela’s Stimela had all the percussive sound of Masakela’s voice presented gloriously with each carefully “spoken” part of the introduction coming across with rhythm and preciseness that was there with my other sources, but just a tad more so with the 432 in the system. Again, I think there is something to do with the noise floor going on here, but also something to do with the way the code in the 432 deals with the signal – I’m guessing here, of course. What was exceptionally apparent, though, was the vastness of the stage laid out in front of me on this track. I have no idea of where this was recorded or on what kind of stage, but what was laid before me was a big and wide physical stage with Masakela placed centre and the players quite apart. The backing singers I perceived as being closer and more to the front than the players. I could be absolutely wrong on this, and I’m sure if I am someone will be in touch to point it out, but that is what the recording and the 432 presented to me and, for whatever reason, I was more aware of it than I had been with my other digital sources playing the same tune. A similar spatial effect was evident on Kind of Blue.

All the above is not something I have not heard before and with my own kit, the difference with the 432 in the system is that it is somehow easier to hear and a smidgen more pronounced in its effect. These slight differences in, for want of better words, clarity and definition do add to the overall experience in tangible and recognisable ways that make it a little better and a little more high-fidelity. Whether or not you are willing to make the outlay for the pleasure is a wholly different and personal consideration that only you can make having auditioned it alongside what you currently use and as I have done here.

Changing the mood only a little I popped on Cymbeline from Pink Floyd (24/192) and what I found most interesting in listening to this tune (I play it a lot) was the apparent increased hollowness of the percussion drum. Again, a small detail but one that made that part of the recording a little more live and a little more real. Again, I was taken by the way the track seem to hold together in a timing sense ever so slightly “better” than what I’m used to. Something is definitely going on with the timing with the 432 EVO! I note here that this is a really difficult bit of kit for me to review; its effects are clear to be heard when you compare directly with the products I have to hand, but also the kind of things that you very soon begin to take for granted as you fall into the musical performance – and I did just this with a good number of recordings that were mainly acoustic in their nature. 

Random Access Memories (is this the new reviewers’ cliche record) (24/88.2) is a very different record to the ones I’ve mentioned so far, but it is another that I have played over and over. Give Life Back to Music sounded a little more “fresh” and with Nile Rodgers’ guitar having a more stop/start to it – more staccato, I suppose. Overall there was a sense of more detail to background noises in the mix on this track, but also a sense of it being a little too precise. I know this latter is an odd statement and it may well be that my taste has been dictated by the products that I have been using over a longer period, but I did feel that musically everything was there, just a little less connecting –  a tough one to describe, for sure. I thought long and hard about this point after reading my notes and I went back to listen to the same record over a few times and eventually, it clicked with me – the 432 has you listening in a more analytical way purely because there is a sense of there being more information for your brain to process. As I listened more intently I could hear that the gentle cymbal hits at the end of Game Of Love were more apparent and I began to really get into the sound more and more. This was an odd feeling and to begin with not a wholly satisfying one  – give it time and everything does fall into place and you do start to appreciate the extra detail and the sonic experience this brings. The thing that particularly excited me about this once it had all clicked into place in my brain was the way the top end of the frequency scale had more sharpness to it and that staccato feel and shimmering cymbal sounds were the things that really added a degree of excitement to the music. Look, this is not night and day differences from what I’m used to, but the differences are definitely there and do add to the listening experience. I also enjoyed the way that the bass line and the kick drum sound on The Game of Love played off against each other in a way I’d not really fully appreciated before – again, not a huge thing to talk about, but definitely, one that was an improvement over my usual sources. 

Playing a less hi-res album in the form of Dusty Kid’s epic III recording (16/44.1) I was hard-pressed to hear that the 432 had any impact at all on the sound over and above the Stack streamer I had in the system…at first. This led me to believe that the real benefits of the 432 are only to be appreciated with somewhat higher-resolution recordings. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the way the 432 presented this recording, it just wasn’t any better (to my ears) than the way the Stack streamer performed. However, listing more closely and swapping the Stack in and out on the same bit of track the 432 did present the bass in particular slightly differently – the low bass and distorted (almost to nothing) kick on Crepuscolaris seemed somehow dirtier (in a good way) with the 432 playing the track with the filtered (and I think gated) sound having a more impactful feel. The same feeling of their being a more palpable feel to the music occurred on the track Sandalyon, with the falling (a Shepard tone sequence) having more of a psycho-acoustical falling effect than with my other streamer in place.

CONCLUSION

This is an interesting machine to have in the system and one that I would be happy to have live in there on a permanent basis if funds allowed. Full disclosure is that I don’t have to hand the GRIMM MU1, Lumin, Innuos, or other streamers at this kind of price point with which to directly compare the 432 EVO Master, and I’m not one that is going to pretend I can remember kit from years or even months ago…or kit that I may have heard at shows. However, what is evident is that particularly on high-resolution files, the 432 brings something to the party that is hard not to sit up and take notice of. 

My own opinion is that a streamer of this quality will not make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear of a system and that to truly benefit your system needs to be proportionally revealing and resolving. With that former statement made, having the 432 EVO Master in the system for this relatively short period has made me reassess my thoughts on where I may need to go with regards to getting the best out of digital audio files in this, our reference system. Truly, I will find it hard to go back to the already excellent-sounding digital front end I had before, though, as I have stressed throughout this review, the differences and improvements are not night and day, but they are there.

And this brings me to the elephant in the room with regard to the 432 EVO Master (and potentially others) – the price. We are talking about a big jump in price from what I use on a day-to-day basis and the benefits are clear but not huge. The question (isn’t it always) is, how far as a music lover and audiophile are we prepared to go to eek the last little bits of performance from our systems? If you want the best and can afford it then, with the caveat that I haven’t heard all the options, then the 432 EVO ought to be on your list of devices to audition. 

Is the 432 EVO Master presenting the recordings exactly as the producers and artists intended… I don’t know. My thoughts on this are that there is potentially something rather clever going on with the coding in the box that adds something to the sound that our (my) brain took a moment or two to adjust to, but ultimately really liked -the 432 Tuning. Something psycho-acoustical in the filtering process that allows our senses to appreciate the music that is played in a more palpable and enjoyable fashion…again, I don’t know and I am only guessing. 

Whatever my thoughts and conjectures may be with regards to what the 432 EVO Master does to the signal that is fed to the DAC is kind of immaterial, but it does throw up the question that if this is what is happening (along with other obvious benefits like lowering the overall noise-floor), then it may be that one person may prefer one effect/manufacturer over the other. Again, I’m thinking out loud here. Personally, I absolutely loved the 432 playing high-resolution files in this system and found the whole experience somewhat enlightening. 

As a bit of an addendum; I wrote all the above and then headed over to the 432 EVO website, more to pick out the technical spec of the MASTER more than anything else, and came across a page on the whole “philosophy” behind 432 Hz tuning. If it’s of interest then head on over to their website and have a read, but what particularly interested me (and having written what I have with regards to “filtering and coding” above) was this series of comments “Working as audio dealers Klinkt Beter, we began testing various ways to convert our 440 Hz based music from several genres into 432 Hz, and organized small focus groups. Combining our research results, 58 out of 60 listeners found 432 Hz versions of our test tracks sounding better than the originals in 440 Hz.” Now, having read that it makes sense, that whilst this may well not be “as intended by the producer”, the MASTER is doing something our brains perceive as being “better” and here is what the company’s site says is going on in the box: “The 432 EVO stores all of your CD rips in its original pitch. We do not alter the music during ripping via the bit-perfect Teac drive. The same applies for your files on the local storage of the EVO. It’s all happening on the fly, in realtime: During playback, users can either choose between live on the fly 432 Hz conversion (default factory setting), upsample-only mode, or bit-perfect mode. These modes work with any music the 432 EVO can play, independent of the source such as Tidal, Qobuz, Internet Radio, files etc.”

Whether you think all the above is “cheating” and getting away from the purity of feeding a DAC only what’s on a file is your business, but have a listen to this interesting concept and see what you reckon! 

So where do we go with awards on this one? On the one hand, my perception told me, and reading the 432 EVO website confirmed that the output of the MASTER to the DAC is not exactly as per the bit-perfect file – this may irk purists. On the other hand, there is no disputing that whatever the 432 Tuning does appeals to me, with the caveat that it does take a moment for your brain to readjust. My gut says to give this a five-heart rating based on the file being manipulated and not “true” (whatever that is in the digital domain, anyway) but my heart then says “But this did sound incredible on hi-resolution files”. So, I am giving this my Editor’s Choice Award, but with the caveats I allude to in this explanatory paragraph.

AT A GLANCE

Build And Features:

Onboard ripping of CDs to large SDD

Individual PSU outputs to control specific functions on the main unit

“Retunes” output to 432 Hz tuning which is very interesting

Well put together and good-looking

Sound Quality:

Exceptionally detailed sound that is at first slightly unusual to listen to until your brain attunes to it, thereafter it is a joyous machine to listen to

Value For Money:

That is going to be down to personal opinion and your own listening when compared to other offerings in the market. That’s a bit of a cop-out answer, but the 432 EVO is a very different machine to listen to as outlined in the review. Personally, I think it offers reasonably good value. Others may well think that it offers exceptional value and if put in a flashier case could well command a much higher price tag. Something clever is definitely going on with the algorithm and I think this “IP” makes up a good proportion of what you are paying for

We Loved:

The exceptionally detailed sound that you fall into without noticing

Totally unfatiguing

We Didn’t Love So Much: 

This is not an immediate “I get this” kind of product but once you get it, you get it.

Elevator Pitch Review: The 432 EVO MASTER is the 15K Euro range-topping music server from this Beligian brand that takes a wholly different and innovative approach to how files are served to your streamer. It’s a very interesting concept that once your brain “gets it” is hard to ignore. It gets my Editor’s Choice Award but you must read the review in full to appreciate why!

Price: 14500 Euros for the 2TB version plus 500 euros for the 3D shield, upgraded SATA cable and SSD internal 4th linear rail PSU (as tested). Prices include VAT.

Stuart Smith

SUPPLIED BY 432 EVO