Thanks
78 responses Add your response
Attention all T+A DAC 200 owners! It's not described in the owner's manual, but you can switch between the six different filters using the remote. I just stumbled upon how to do it today:
If you didn't already know this, you're welcome 😉 |
@blisshifi : thanks for chiming is as always |
@mgrif104 and @blisshifi - It always helps hearing about other people's experiences. Thanks. <<I don’t want to sell them on an experience they may not replicate in their own home>> I very recently had a conversation about that notion with my local dealer (Lance of Forefront Audio) in the context of amps driving speakers that customers are shopping. He knows he can make any speaker sound really good if he connects them to his Vitus integrated, but he's honest, like BlissHiFi, and chooses an amp to give them an experience more on par with what they'll likely experience in their own home with their usual amplification. And again, I'll report back once I've done the A/B of the T+A's preamp versus my Classé. |
I agree with Juan at BlissHifi in that it’s implementation and not file type that makes the biggest difference. My previous Dac could also play DSD files natively and indeed sounded good doing so through the Sirius processor, but the differences between DSD and PCM were far smaller than through the DAC200. I’ve also heard other DACs where PCM sounded better than DSD. Hope this helps. Best, |
Also, not related to 501 vs DAC 200, but when I most recently took in the Weiss 501, I was curious to try it as a headphone amp. I recently got myself a pair of Hifiman HE1000SE, which are not hard to drive, and the 501 has a good reputation as a headphone amp/dac/streamer combo. In my experience, I much preferred a much less expensive stack - a Topping E70 Velvet R2R DAC and matching Topping L70 Balanced Headphone Amplifier. The Topping stack had better control and more engaging presentation, when hooked up to my MacBook Air’s Roon / HQPlayer output in DSD in comparison to the Weiss, which was more refined but not as engaging. The Weiss felt quite passive to me in this configuration. And despite the Topping Stack sounding great with Roon and HQPlayer out of a MacBook with DSD format, it still sounded superior in PCM once I switched the source to an Aurender N200 using coax. So the source component’s quality does matter a heck of a lot here, too. |
@roccity As with any dialogue around format, I believe it is not about the format but about the implementation. T+A is one of the pioneers in DSD playback and the first manufacturer to achieve true 1-Bit DSD 1024 playback (established in the SDV 3100 HV and evident in the DAC 200). But it’s the design of the DSD DAC that enables it to perform in a superior manner than the PCM side. Of course, I’ve heard some DACs that support DSD and still prefer PCM. FWIW, I often demo the DAC 200 with PCM content as a good share of my customers don’t have any DSD, and I don’t want to sell them on an experience they may not replicate in their own home. If the streamer is up to par, synergy with the DAC 200 still yields excellent results, for example when pairing the DAC 200 to an Aurender N200. |
@mgrif104 I exclusively play digital content, almost exclusively local files. I've just recently been playing DSD content and the sound quality is definitely superior, with much greater separation of instruments and levels of detail. I wonder how much of that better performance is DSD versus PCM and how much is the T+A's superiority, though it sounds like @blisshifi believes the T+A is a standout performer when it comes to DSD content. |
@mgrif104 Thank you for the kind words, and I agree with your assessment, though my comparisons have been with the original Weiss 501 2ch and not the newer 501 4ch. I had another customer more recently purchase the DAC 200 to move past two DACs he owned, a 501 2ch used for PCM and a T+A DAC 8 DSD. I took both units in to sell for him on commission, and I was able to make him his money back spent on the DAC 200! But more importantly, I was able to take both units in and compare them to the DAC 200. The Weiss is a great DAC, but the DAC 200 in DSD playback is a very special unit at its pricepoint. As an Aurender dealer, I’m still talking with them about the opportunity to convert to DSD on the fly because of the improved performance that would result with T+A. I have a lot of DSD material, but it would be great if all formats could be converted. Also, to answer @agisthos’ question from a number of months back, the DAC 200’s volume control is quite good, and the unit I believe has a 5V output, so very high current for a DAC (compared to the Weiss’ 4V output). This is also why I do still prefer the unit as a standalone DAC vs a preamp, though, as it uses all of that even in fixed mode. While I advocate for the DAC 200 to be used as a preamp in some systems and would recommend it as the DAC to use if that is the configuration of choice, I still truly value what a quality, dedicated preamp can add to the mix in terms of improved power and harmonics. @roccity, I am very curious to hear your learnings of your comparisons with the Classé preamp in and out of the chain. Let us know what you find. I would like to think that as long as cables are up to par, the Classé Delta pre will add to the performance. I equate the preamp performance in the DAC 200 to be more at the $3K range of preamps. Better than most mid-fi, but not endgame. Shameless plug - I have no regrets using the reference level T+A SDV 3100 HV as both a DAC and Preamp (or even a streamer). That preamp is by far the best I’ve ever heard in my setup, even for analog sources. Of course, that unit costs over $30K more, but at least the trickle down of that technology exists in the DAC 200.
|
I purchased a DAC200 late last fall from Juan @blisshifi (great dealer to work with BTW!). On PCM vs my previous Dac, it was only slightly better - more different than better. However, using the DSD converter path, the DAC200 is superior. Upstream, I have an Auralic Aries G2 and Auralic Sirius processor which i use to convert to DSD 512. I was going to sell the Sirius but the DSD channel of the DAC200 is so good, it made sense to keep it. Functionally, it’s doing the same thing as HQPlayer. I’ve auditioned several much more expensive DACs - and I was willing to purchase any of them. That list includes the Linn DSM/3, Ideon Absolute and DCS, among others. All are different. Sourced properly, the DAC200 is pretty competitive with them - and a vastly better value. On PCM, it’s fine. On DSD, it’s a standout in my view. |
@ljgm You've inspired me to try the direct DAC-to-amp connection. I'll report back once I've had the chance to A/B. I think I'll be happy no matter the result; if it sounds better with the Classé, I'll be glad for having bought it. If I prefer the sound without the Classé, I can sell it and have some extra scratch to put towards speakers! I may try the A/B with the T+A M200 monoblocks I have on loan (very generously) from my local dealer, but I'll wait until the Vitus is here and broken in before making a final ruling. |
I rolled through the filters a few times and landed on BEZ2 as my ultimate set-it-and-forget-it choice. I had a friend’s TT2 for a while and had the chance to do a direct A/B comparison with all other variables remaining constant. The winner: T+A DAC 200. While still offering every bit as much detail as the TT2, it’s fuller and richer sounding. Not a huge gap, but perhaps some would prefer the somewhat leaner presentation of the TT2 or it may be a better choice for use with other speakers or electronics. @ljgm I’m waiting on a Vitus RS-101 that I ordered a few weeks ago. I’m using a Classé Delta Pre for preamp duties. I’ve not yet compared it to the DAC 200’s preamp section. I’m guessing the Classé is likely a bit better. |
I’ve got the Weiss and the T+A predecessor to the DAC200, the DAC 8 DSD, side by side in my system. I don’t know how much changed between the two T+A DACs, and while they have very similar feature sets, you would have to think T+A changed or improved some things in the 6 or so years between the two DACs. But FWIW, on plain PCM files the Weiss is a little smoother, slightly warmer, and has better depth of soundstage. The T+A on some files sounds a little sharper (in the way of detail or brightness) but in a good way depending on what you’re in the mood for. On pure DSD files (which the Weiss converts to PCM but of course the T+A has the 1-bit DSD converter in it like the DAC200) the T+A can sound very similar to the Weiss and in some cases/files sounds better than the Weiss in terms of spaciousness and detail. For PCM upsampling right now I can only go up to DSD128 based on my current configuration. I find real DSD files sound excellent through the T+A but upsampling PCM files to double rate DSD doesn’t sound any better than the Weiss. I’ll have to work my way up to DSD512 to see if that improves things in a meaningful way, which most users seem to attest to. Overall, and for me this is the biggest difference, with PCM files the Weiss sounds more natural and realistic than the DAC 8. DSD files the DAC 8 takes a step up. |
Yeah this DAC is in a "second" (or less extravagant) system that resides in my office. My reference for line stages is a silver Emia AVC. And while the Emia does sound better, it’s overkill in this system and I use it in my big system. The DAC 200 with it’s preamp stage sounds fantastic in this setup. And it saves the extra pair of interconnects that would be otherwise necessary for an outboard preamp as well! Win win. |
@ljgm Thanks for sharing your configuration. I especially appreciate your comment on the quality of the preamp stage in the DAC 200. I have commented similarly, stating that I find it to be as good as dedicated preamps in the $3-5K range. It is definitely a differentiator for the unit, as most DACs even double its price do not have as impressive of an analog output stage or volume control. In many cases, I can recommend someone to use a DAC 200 straight into their amp, whereas I rarely advocate going from DAC straight to amp for most other competitors. |
@blisshifi no, I haven't even tried the DAC200 filters at all. I've only been using HQ Player. Of course, HQPlayer has many many more filter choices and there as well, you get the same effect of seemingly listening to entirely different DAC based on your configuration. So I've really only used the wide bandwidth NOS setting and have been upsampling in HQP. I've actually settled on a DSD configuration that sounds phenomenal. I'm also using the preamp volume control of the DAC200. My Vitus SS-020 integrated amp has a preamp bypass so that it can be used as a straight amp, and I've found the DAC200's volume control (which can also be optionally bypassed) sounds better than the one in my Vitus. |
@ljgm Have you played with the DAC 200’s filters to see which one you like the best? This is one of my favorite feature of the unit and enables you to have what sounds like six different DACs in one, and this is a feature set in the DAC 200 that is not discussed enough. For me, the BEZ2 filter performs the best in terms of natural delivery and resolution. Many people find themselves using BEZ1 or one of the NOS filters, but I have tested across both a very high end reference stereo setup and with high end headphone setup that BEZ2 performs best (personal opinion, of course). I also appreciate the WIDE bandwidth setting that enables it to go up to 200KHz. The extra headroom improves the ambient performance for detail retrieval and larger sound stage. |
After about a month, I really do like the DAC200. It really does have a beautiful sound. I’ve also found that its preamp is better than the preamp in my Vitus SS020 integrated amp. So now, I bypass the Vitus preamp internally and use it as a straight amplifier and control the volume with the DAC200. I am looking for negatives with the DAC200 and I would say some people might find it a bit reticent. But with HQP, that can be alleviated to my tastes. I prefer a natural sound, not a hifi sound. And I think the DAC 200 achieves it. I prefer to enjoy the beauty between the notes rather than be slapped in the face by their leading edges. To me, the DAC 200 neither sounds reserved nor sounds over hyped. It sounds like real music. But I know some will prefer a faster, more exciting sound. I just strongly prefer the DAC 200’s approach. This DAC has so much detail naturally presented within a very deep soundstage. And I find tone and timbre to be extremely well executed. The main reasons to buy the DAC 200 would be its high level of detail retrieval that is naturally presented (completely non-fatiguing) including micro details and decays - the hallmark of a high resolution component imo), its wide and deep soundstage with believable imaging and fully fleshed out images, its fabulous tone, and its spot-on timbre. So much to like. it’s a great feeling to finally be satisfied with and even excited about digital playback in my otherwise analog front end. |
@milpai I think you will find the T+A DAC 200 to be superior to both the Wavelight and TT2. From personal experience, the DAC 200 is more organic. The Waveligut and the TT2 are quite different from each other such that the Wavelight is a bit rounder at the frequency extremes and focuses on punchiness vs tonal correction. The TT2 on the other hand is more analytical than the DAC 200. In both cases, the soundstage of the DAC 200 is also more expansive than the DACs you mention I’ve said it before but I still believe the DAC 200 to be the best DAC under $15K. As a T+A dealer that has taken on trade ins, I’ve been able to compare it to a lot of equipment. If you have any other questions about it, feel free to message me direct. I’d be happy to chat things through! |
@ljgm , Congratulations on the T+A. Good to know that you really dig the new DAC. But please do let us know what your previous DAC was. What are your listening preferences - as in laid back or forward presentation, genre of music, etc. Will be great if you can compare the T+A to the previous DAC or any other you might have auditioned in your system. Have fun with your re-NEW-ed listening experience 😁 |
I just got a T+A DAC 200, and wow, I'm impressed. The sound stage is spectacular, as is the level of detail and nuance. These are the first two things that jumped out at me. The tone is very linear. Neither warm nor bright, but just a tad of euphonic richness. A very organic tonality. What's great is that the abundance of detail is presented naturally. This DAC never sounds analytical. Decays are never truncated. A very, very musical DAC. I've only had mine less than 24 hours though. I've got a lot more listening to do! |
I recently purchased the T+A DAC 200 and I'm very happy with it. It replaced a Chord Qutest which, should be noted, is a fantastic little DAC for the money. I bought the T+A new from a local dealer (Forefront Audio in Rochester, NY; Lance, the owner, always takes care of me, If you're going to buy the T+A, you may want to give him a call). The T+A costs roughly six times what a used Qutest goes for, but it's not six times better. My experience, however, is that it does present a much wider, deeper soundstage and greater detail while being smoother and sweeter sounding. I know that sounds like a contradiction, but it's like how a Mercedes or BMW can have a ride that's stiffer and better-handling than, say, a Ford Focus, but at the same time provide a much more refined driving experience. It's definitely worth checking out if you're shopping around this price point. |
@troidelover1499 : Maybe reading the product description page on the T+A website can help? It’s in English too. In addition to German
https://www.ta-hifi.de/en/audiosystems/series-200/dac-200-d-a-converter/
Under the Specifications section you will find your answer. But here, I will copy paste making it easier for you:
PCM Double-Differential-Quadruple-Converter with four 32-Bit Sigma-Delta DSD T+A-True-1Bit DSD D/A converter, up to DSD 1024 (49,2 MHz), native bitstream |
I am looking at the reviews for this T&A DAC and I can’t tell if it is a delta sigma unit or r2r. The Absolute Sound review as usual is worthless. They used to be so good but nowadays they seem to just put out sheer marketing cr!p. Harry Pearson would roll over in his grave if he knew what they have done. |
@thibaultgeoui You were curious about the performance of the MP 200 but also mentioned you don’t like that it has a CD player. I am a dealer for both T+A and Aurender and conducted a thorough evaluation of the MP 200, comparing it to the Aurender N200. Long story short, the MP 200 is a great value if you will use it for everything it offers - streamer, disc spinner, internet radio. The CD player is actually really quite good. That said, if you’re looking simply to stream and serve, the Aurender N200 delivers greater sonic performance in terms of clarity, air, and soundstage size, both width and depth. Message me if you want me to share my full evaluation, and I’ll dig it up. Happy to answer any other questions you have. |
@jasbirnandra The DAC 200 uses eight Burr Brown DAC chips. |
@milpai The DAC 200’s preamp / volume control can be bypassed and set to a line level output. Most of my customers use the DAC 200 in this way, and only a few I know are using it for its preamp capabilities. The preamp/volume control is really quite good, though, and much better than most DACs even twice its price, but the DAC 200 is well worth it even if you use it set to line level. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
I agree with you. I also appreciate Huff's efforts to provide viewers with a POV on the latest and greatest DACs; but he is also not running a charity. Youtube pays you by the views and you also have ads on Youtube pages. So I would take whatever he says with a grain of salt. It is HIS system and HIS listening preference - so nothing is gospel. Based on whatever I have been following and users on THIS forum, who currently own - the DAC 200 seems to be the one to got for the long haul. If T+A came up with a "DAC only" unit just like the Weiss, my check to any dealer would be ready right now. |
Huff is constantly having a BEST of breed because he HAS TO......he has to keep changing out equipment to do what he does. The T+A Dac is great...The Aavik U-150 is also fantastic and the Weiss DAC is also great.....There is ALOT of great equipment and if one brand was better than all the rest...No one else would sell anything. Demo in your setup and buy what sounds to you ! It's ( almost) All Good! |
My system comprises only world-class components; the speaker system is 2 levels beyond a model that AV Showrooms and Enjoy the Music awarded Best of Show @ 2022 FLAX. I have heard the $100k dCS rack and also the $85k MSB rack. IMO HQ Player (about $300) w/settings defined by the author Miska (upscaling everything to DSD, Miska’s recommended modulator is mandatory/not optional) > DAC 200 defines current state of the art digital playback. Miska + T+A co-designed DAC 200’s proprietary true-1 bit DSD circuit, one of audio’s all-time best design teams. Note the above-described settings for HQ Player requires an advanced dedicated computer (not in the sound room.) I also employ a small NUC for renderer function next to DAC 200 in the sound room (an Intona isolator inserts in-between the NUC and DAC 200.) HQ Player and the NUC both employ only Miska’s unique OS, not Linux-based. It takes only about 20S to switch between DSD and PCM in the HQ Player menu (the menu allows -6 dB PCM setting to match DSD level.) Anyone who heard this AB test would permanently swear off PCM. In every potential aspect DSD upscaling just incinerates PCM even HR. IOW this rig allows you to enjoy state of the art performance with Red Book; you don’t need to rely on HR PCM. Yes, still, the original source recording quality defines ultimate performance but not the bit #/sample rate. If you own DAC 200 you won’t know its potential till you hear it with HQ Player with Miska’s recommended settings on a dedicated high-powered computer. If/when you read users who preferred PCM over DSD on HQ Player > DAC 200 I feel 100% confident they used settings other than what Miska recommended since DAC 200 arrived for sale. (Note that earlier using HQ Player > May Audio Spring 3 Level 3 DAC I too preferred PCM on about 66% of the music programs I compared to DSD. But that AB test is irrelevant to the AB test described above.) The payoff for the effort required to get the appropriate computer and settings for HQ Player as described is to know you shall likely never hear better digital playback. Considering how mediocre digital playback can be, that is a high-value reward. BTW, HQ Player has huge EQ and bi-amp potential for persons interested in those features. The reason people tend to burn through gear is because their room and its boundaries define audio performance more than any single component or combination of components. I suggest such persons hear something "different" with a new component, "different" temporarily appears "better," then the room signature finally makes itself known again, they swap in a new item, are temporarily infatuated with the new "different," rinse, repeat ad nauseum. Visit your local movie house and listen carefully to the bass, how it is absolutely seamlessly integrated into the whole experience and sound stage. (That gear there is dirt cheap compared to our gear.) Now go home and notice how utterly disconnected is bass from the rest of the music and the sound stage; some bass notes are gone while some bass notes are +9 dB. And your gear costs tons more than the theater gear (at least per watt.) This single difference comprises the single biggest difference between the sound of live music vs. reproduced, the effect of a small room's boundaries vs. a larger commercial space (a commercial space has bass modes but they are all sub-audible, below 20 Hz.) This difference comprises a bigger difference than any swapping of components above mid-fi level. Yes, you can hear component differences but the magnitude of bass mode effects exceeds differences between any component (you can't know or hear or understand this till you hear a small room that solved the bass mode problem.) And EQ can't fix these bass problems; it's impossible to fill in a 9 dB dip (1000x power boost) and smoothing a 6 dB bump degrades quality somewhere else in the sound room. |
makes me chuckle over my morning coffee what is the half-life of what is a ’current generation’ dac, or what is huff saying is the best, that he is using??? ... approximately 15 minutes... to select a dac for one’s own system based on these criteria is, well, not too wise 🤣😂 |
@ronboco If you don’t understand or didn’t know that your gear plays a HUGE role in soundstage depth and width (regardless of the room) then you owe it to yourself to find a store or a fellow audiophile who can demonstrate the affect using different gear! The room only accentuates/increases the affect. |
All these conflicting and opposite perceptions of these DACs (and some others) should give you a good idea that you will have to make the determination on your own with YOUR gear! You have NO idea what associated gear all these responders have and therefore NO idea how either DAC will sound in your system. Personally, I would buy used so you can move the one you don’t like along for about what you paid for it. |
@mbmi it doesn't change the fact that he has it listed for sale on his website at the above link. Huff's latest video its also clear that he has replaced the T+A dac with the Weiss dac. I don't have a dog in this fight but the fact remains that on Huff's for sale listing on the Aavik, he clearly states that he is rolling his Pass Labs gear back in so the Aavik is for sale. Its clear he has moved on from the T+A to the Weiss 204 and is moving on from the Aavik as well.
What does all this mean? Well, nothing really. He rolls through gear pretty frequently so take it with a grain of salt that he once had something in his system. I enjoy his reviews and videos but has to be taken in context and that's all. Try not to let it hurt your feelings that he once had an amp and a dac and is moving on from it. |
@ghastley... (293) These NEW Reference MONITOR Speakers are STUNNING! Soul, Beauty and REAL BASS! - YouTube...look at the date on his garage sale .. Early MAY........now check this video 10 days ago where he states that the Aavik is his Reference integrated and the BEST sounding amp with the new speakers that he reviewed...C'mon man...you gotta get up to speed....it's june 26th. You're still livin' in May...haha, SORRY! |
No need to be sorry @mbmi however, if you take a moment to click on the below link before Huff deletes it from his garage sale section, you will clearly see that his Aavik is listed as "sale pending". https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/hifi-garage-sale/ You're welcome.
|
@dougthebiker Ok, here are some key differences: A 300b amp would have a more gentle presentation than mine (BTW, what speakers?). I have a pair of AGD Tempo stereo amps bi-amping my Fyne F1-8s. The Tempos are very detailed and smooth, but not in the least bit shy... a bit forward compared to Pass, and I would bet a good bit more forward than your 300B amp. And the Fynes are similarly detailed. I want to replace my M3 because it is a bit too forward in my system, and at least so far the T+A has a very similar presentation. All summed in my system, just a bit too much of a good thing. I readily admit to being very sensitive to brightness. At one point I replaced the slightly aggressive tubes in my preamp with others for a more gentle presentation. Regarding bass, yes, the T+A has plenty. But in my estimation it is like monitor speakers where there is an emphasis in the mid-bass. That is not so with the DS 2, and I think that is why my perception is better definition in the bass region with the DS 2. The very low frequencies are not masked by a hump an octave or two above. My sub, BTW, is a KEF 9 something, and it really does reach the limits of hearing with authority. Anyway, I think the differences in our systems explains some of the differences in our perceptions of these DACs.
|
