T+A DAC 200 Burn-in

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.

@cundare2  As with the other participants in this thread, I appreciate your comments and experience.  Hopefully, others considering similar possible changes to their stereo system will find value from both of our experiences toward their evaluations.  I almost returned the DAC200 to the dealer and even informed him of my initial decision.  Fortunately, he was very patient as I changed my mind and pursued additional testing.  

I still have additional work to do in understanding the DAC200’s characteristics and capabilities.  But I’m no longer beating myself up whether or not to complete the purchase.  For now, I’m pulling out CDs from my collection and enjoying them.  

Shout out for the engineers at T+A.  They were very responsive to my questions.  

@mgrif104, @audphile1 ​​@milpai , @mclinnguy ​​@benzman ​​@cundare2 , et al.

I owe you guys an update.  The new units (T+A DAC200 and REL T/9x subs) are well broken in.  Since my last report, I’ve found that most of everything I previously described does not reflect my current feelings about the T+A DAC200.  Realizing my continued evolution in appreciation for the DAC200, I needed to challenge all of my previous impressions.  So, my updated findings are:

While the DAC200 sounded really good as both DAC and preamp, it definitely sounds better to me using its fixed output through my Rowland Coherence One Series Two as preamp (I love that preamp).  

My choice of filters changed after I switched back to the fixed output using the Rowland as preamp. I have consistently found that the filters that sound more like analog lose bass extension and definition.  My current favorite filter is NOS2.  Occasionally, I’ve found recordings that are still a bit aggressive with that filter.  For them, the more ‘analog’ sounding filters (e.g., FIR1 or BEZ1) have served well in making those albums quite enjoyable.  Using those filters, bass is not as extended or well-defined, but those recordings probably didn’t have qualities at those frequencies originally.  

I don’t find that I am more tolerant of higher volume playback using CDs than in my previous set-up.  But the improved definition and presentation have made the unit a major improvement for my system. I never understood claims of digital playback that sounded like “analog”.  But I am beginning to understand those claims.  I listen a lot more to my CD collection (my original reason for upgrading). Since I did not go through the growing pains of DACs as they evolved, I can’t say if a unit that was less expensive would have satisfied my interests in upgrading DACs.  But the DAC200 has exceeding my expectations for reinvesting in digital playback.  I like it - a lot.

Many thanks again for the responders to my thread.  You’ve been a great sounding board as I went through these growing pains.  

@sealegs Thanks for the update, and I'm glad you are enjoying your new DAC!

Happy listening!

@sealegs good to hear the new DAC has settled into your system nicely. Thanks for the update and enjoy the music!

@sealegs 

Glad to hear you’re enjoying the DAC! Your evaluation was more thorough than many attempt. We hope you enjoy the unit as long as you enjoyed your Krell!