T+A DAC 200 Burn-in

@mgrif104 ​​@audphile1 ​​@mclinnguy ​​@milpai 

Thank you all for your comments.  This evaluation has been much more difficult than any I have performed in 35 years.  I didn’t bring the DAC200 into my system until I had logged 120 hours of burn-in time. It sounded great on my old college speakers.  The DAC200 now has 250 hours on it and it sounds the same as when I first started evaluating.  

I’ve played with all 6 combinations of filters and oversampling.  I much preferred FIR1.   Detail from the DAC200 is pretty amazing.  I thought my digital playback was providing very good levels of detail in its presentation, but the DAC200 is far superior to the Krell Studio.  High frequency playback is much better through the DAC200 (I thought it was my old ears that were cutting off high frequency playback).   Midrange frequencies and above are much clearer than through the Krell Studio.   On great recordings with vocals and acoustic instruments, the DAC200 is outstanding.  

The down sides (on my system) are that the upper midrange has become more forward.  Consequently, on lesser recordings, multi-instrumental group recordings, and just about anything with trumpets and saxophones, I find myself turning down the volume to less than 70 dB in my seat just to keep the music listenable.  My second concern is that while I was performing the initial burn-in, I was learning about my system with the new REL T/9x subs installed.  They’ve been a great addition to my stereo.  My finding is that the Krell Studio provides superior bass reproduction compared to the DAC200.   Through the DAC200, I get the same low frequency thump in just about everything I play.  The Krell provides better bass detail and I find it easier to distinguish the different bass frequencies being played.  

The bottom line is that with the addition of the REL T/9x subs to my stereo using the Krell Studio as my DAC, I found myself bringing out and enjoying a lot of music I haven’t played for a while.  With the DAC200 in the digital chain, while I find the increased level of detail seductive, in the end, I don’t enjoy listening as broadly across a wide array of music styles and recording qualities.   Of course, the faults/issues may well lie in the rest of my stereo system.  But I am not looking to get back into that race.  I tried to follow @audphile1 ‘s advice and not change the set-up.  But I did switch the DACs back and forth to make sure I was hearing what I thought I was hearing.  The results were the same.  Unfortunately, I don’t have capabilities for streaming and I won’t be able to evaluate DSD reproduction through HQPlayer.  I think my evaluation is done.  

@sealegs excellent work with the evaluation and a very good and informative summary!

It’s extremely rare where a major component change is simply plug and play. Because the system was assembled over time with carefully selected components, speakers and cables, there’s always a ripple effect. Usual remedies are adjustments to speaker placement to tune the voicing of the system, changing cables, and even chamomile preamp and amp. Is it worth the trouble? Only you can determine how much effort you should put into trying to make it work. There are no guarantees that it will. 
If you’re enjoying the way your system sounds with your current, pre T+A configuration, just keep it that way and may be focus on room acoustics and cables to fine tune it. Most importantly, trust your ears. 

@audphile1 

This has been the first time in my efforts to upgrade my digital playback when more detail had a negative impact on SQ.  
After my Theta Data Basic burned out, I replaced it with a Moon 260DT CD transport.  It was so much better sounding that I got over my disappointment with Theta’s lack of support.  
I had been listening to reviews of Denafrips DACs and knew they didn’t supply power cords because they believed everybody would replace the stock power cords.  So, rather than buy the DAC first, I tried upgrading the power cord and the digital interconnect first.  Again, additional substantial bumps in SQ.  I upgraded the power cords on my preamp and Moon 260.  The preamp upgrade was great, the transport was a little better but not like the DAC and preamp power cord upgrades.  
Then recognizing that I needed real subwoofers, I bought the RELs and the digital playback was even more detailed and enjoyable.  
So, the DAC upgrade was my last step.  It has been a lot of work and I am disappointed that the qualities I liked about the DAC200 did not pan out across my music collection.  
I may try another DAC or two in the future.  

@sealegs it’s a cool experience. Nothing to be disappointed about since you were just auditioning it.
Add Meitner MA3i to the list of dacs to evaluate next. 

@audphile1 

Meitner MA3i was my initial intent for evaluation.  But this T+A opportunity popped up that was too good not to try.  
 

I’m a little bit concerned that the Meitner outputs at 3.0 V through RCA.  I am already using so little of my preamp’s capabilities at 2.0-2.5 V that I’m not sure how that combination will work.  Typically, I listen around 75 dB.  But as you said, ears are what matters.  They have always been my guide.