T+A DAC 200 Burn-in

@sealegs that’s great news! Giving a component sufficient time to break in is key. The old Rowland preamp may or may not be a bottleneck. You’ll know it when you try it. I’m suspecting the preamp might get in a way of the DAC’s transparency and you’re most likely going to start shopping for a new preamp unless you run your CDs thru the DAC 200. 

@sealegs 

The engineers at T+A said that using its preamp capabilities to feed my Rowland preamp would put two preamps in the signal path and should be avoided. The fixed output does not go through the internal preamp.

I have to thank you for making me reconsider how I was using the DAC200 in my system. When I initially inserted it in my system, I was using Foobar2000 and did not have the option to play with software volume. Hence I had set it to -15dB and used it in “Variable” mode. Later I switched to HQ Player but never thought of switching the DAC 200 back to “Line” and experiment with volume control in HQ Player. After your response on 4/19, I decided to set the DAC 200 as “Line” and manipulate the volume control in HQP. Jussi from HQP confirmed that there will be absolutely no resolution loss even till -30dB. I found the sweet spot at -10dB in HQ Player. I gained a slightly expanded sound stage and a bit of clarity/openness. Love the improvement.

Congratulations on reaching a decision. I am glad that you gave enough burn-in hours to the DAC200. It is a gem that never ceases to amaze me. My next experiment will be to upgrade the power cable, at some point.

If the Rowland provides only a slight improvement in SQ, I’ll need to deal with a trade off of SQ vs. convenience.  The current set-up that has given me the first remote control of volume since I bought the Rowland around ‘93 or so.  The T+A preamp’s volume control of its preamp is stepped.  But I’ve not had any concerns about finding enjoyable listening levels.  

I don’t have that particular DAC, but I did purchase T+A’s $19K R 2500 R receiver last year, which incorporates a very similar model -- same topology & PS design.

I listened carefully and found very little benefit in break-in.  I thought the SQ improved nominally over the course of 50-100 hours, but the difference was so subtle that I can’t swear that confirmation error wasn’t at play.  A T+A engineer confirmed my observations, stating that break-in was not particularly critical for any of its DAC offerings.

I agree with other comments here that the T+A DACs are pretty remarkable, especialy at each unit’s respective price point. Innovative power-supply design and dual signal path, coupled with solid build quality. These DACs have quite a rep in Europe, but the company (HQ'd in Germany) has only begun aggressively marketing its electronics in the U.S.the last few years.  So you may be ahead of the curve on this purchase..

I thought the SQ improved nominally over the course of 50-100 hours, but the difference was so subtle that I can’t swear that confirmation error wasn’t at play.

I think this depends on personal listening experiences and how good your system can resolve them. If you don't think it made a difference, then that's all that matters. Just ignore what others say and believe your ears.

A T+A engineer confirmed my observations, stating that break-in was not particularly critical for any of its DAC offerings.

That is different than what the R&D head at Audiophilestyle mentioned. But again, it's a difference of opinion and one should believe in one's ears and not in other folk's experiences/opinions.

BTW, the T+A DACs have quite the fan following here in the US as well. It started with Stereophile reviewing the T+A DAC8/DSD and many still own this and the newer DACS.