T+A DAC 200

[jonniema]

On 3/15/2023 at 7:23 AM, Nkam said:

It’s wonderful partaking in these forums.   
 

chit chatting about stuff we love.  
 

but at the same time I can’t help thinking……

 

what is everyone listening through?

can we see a freq response graph of their room and what is going on RTDecay wise? 
what other equipment are they using?  Amps , speakers? 
 

 

Please no offense as I do not mean it in a bad way. 
 

i just know that when I started my first setup and first room.  I hired someone to teach me REW and my journey of setting up my speakers and room with what I already had , had begun.    
because I am not a pro , it took me around two years to make a HUGE a difference in the sound quality.  
measurably as well 

 

and I remember listening to some DACs back then or other gear , now knowing my speakers and everything else wasn’t setup nearly optimally.  
 

 

just pondering.  
 

Rant over. 
 

 

 

I once bought a UMIK mic and measure the hell out of my room, only to loose my mind over bad response curves on REW (and the sweaping sound). Then started playing with filters (i had a bump around 80Hz driving me crazy) it did good things, but also did harm in other ways.

As far as room treatment, i don’t own a dedicated room for listening so treating it with dispersion, absorbtion etc. is not an option.

 

Now i just place the speakers the best i can in my roon and listen to where it is sounds best.

I have been able to detect improvements everytime i do a significant upgrade like this, and to be honest do not know the current decay, response graph etc. That was fun for a while, but not for long. :)

 

Regarding setup, i currently use:

• Streamer: NUC on akasa plato fanless case, tuned down for linearity and Win10 with audiophile optimizer
• Player: Roon DSD512 (7th CLANS, precise min phase)
• Power Supply for source: SoTM sps500
• DAC: T+A DAC200
• Integrated Amp: T+A PA3100HV + PS3000HV (power supply)
• Speakers: Magico A3
• Power care: an Audiotricity power conditioner
• Cabling: mainly a combination of Nordost Heimdall2 (USB and Speakers) and Frey2 (Interconnects)

 

I would also be interest knowing more about what other people use with their DAC200, especially regarding streamer and DSD upsampling with HQP. I would like to explore using HQPlayer, but i am totally lost with the countless threads and posts about the streamer and HQP topic.

 

Cheers!

 

[1125FPS]

I searched and found no place to post system description.  Did I miss such?  

 

My engineer recently re-built my server/streamer, allowing me to move the big HQ Player Audiolinux computer from the sound room to my office next door for a welcome lower noise floor.  There's a separate little NUC renderer in the sound room near DAC 200,  He also fixed my separate Roon NUC for library function only, no Roon processing.

 

Last night I upgraded from $2500/pr Infigo Signature RCA to $3500/pr Infigo Signature XLR IC from DAC 200 > $3800 SRP Wyred 4 Sound STP-SE Stage 2 analog preamp with remote phase (a great feature) > $2500 Infigo Signature RCA IC > $20k Infigo Method 6 stereo power amp 100W sliding class A (runs cool) > $30k/pr Illusio Audio Alana wave guide satellites (natural 75 Hz cutoff) atop Illusio LORAstand reverberant field accessory speakers.  Sub system comprises (two) kilowatt amps > four AudioKinesis Swarm subs in distributed array.   

 

After a couple nights and a day of moderately intense use, I can hardly contain my enthusiasm for HQ Player (specifically using Jussi's latest/all-time best DSD modulator) > NUC renderer > Infigo Signature USB > T+A DAC 200 NOS DSD mode.  Based on my experience to date, even if funds existed to spend multiples more, I have no idea what could outperform this specific combination.

 

I have to add, besides modern recordings done very well I also sprinkled in some mediocre recording quality but great music from the 70s.  Re. the latter, there's no question of the lack of quality of the recording chain but DAC 200 just imparts so much density, dynamic presence and musical liveliness that it still massively improved the pleasure quotient vs. my lesser Spring 3 DAC.  It was positively not the unwelcome case of DAC 200's resolution causing me to have to eliminate less well recorded work, in fact the opposite.   

 

  

[1125FPS]

4 hours ago, 1125FPS said:

My engineer recently re-built my server/streamer, allowing me to move the big HQ Player Audiolinux computer...

 

  

Edit: my main computer for HQ Player server runs Ubuntu with Jussi's kernel (not Audiolinux.)

[Allan F]

12 hours ago, 1125FPS said:

I searched and found no place to post system description.  Did I miss such?  

Click on your name icon in the upper right corner of the page. Click on Profile. Click on Audio System. Click on Edit Profile and enter the components of your system.

[Nkam]

On 3/13/2023 at 2:08 PM, OE333 said:

 

To say it with the words of  Ludwig Mies van der Rohe: Less is More

 

or

 

in an integrated OP-Amp there is no choice - all components have to made from silicon. In a discrete amplifier the designer can choose the best possible type of component for each part of his circuit He can also tailor the circuit exactly to the specific needs and requirements of the device he is designing.

Very often this results in less complex circuits with fewer but higher quality parts and less chances for errors and imperfections.

So in many cases an experienced analog designer can tweak a discrete circuit to higher performance levels than a universal-to-use  off-the-shelf integrated standard part can deliver.

 

also , if I may.  Why did you choose that much older DAC chip over the newer ones?  
Don’t the newer ones offer any advantages in technology for a ‘ better sound’?

 

me personally out of a ton of DACs I’ve tried tend toward the Cirrus sound.  And I’m a musician of over 40 years.   But I don’t see Cirrus taken seriously in hifi.  
nowadays it’s just AKM and ESS.   With some older BB chips. 
 

thank you 

 

 

ah also.  Does the older model DAC8 have the same exact PCM architecture as the 200 and same analog output stage?

 

 

[Miska]

1 hour ago, Nkam said:

me personally out of a ton of DACs I’ve tried tend toward the Cirrus sound.  And I’m a musician of over 40 years.   But I don’t see Cirrus taken seriously in hifi.

 

The Cirrus CS4398 (for example in HD-DAC1) is pretty old chip too. I have couple of tubes of those, from some 15 years ago, and it wasn't new at that point either. Later they updated the on-chip DSP on CS43198 but the conversion stage or the modulators didn't change at all.

 

At some point, Wolfson was also popular, and I think sometimes still used. But then Cirrus Logic bought Wolfson and the line is dead now.

 

1 hour ago, Nkam said:

Don’t the newer ones offer any advantages in technology for a ‘ better sound’?

 

Not necessarily. ESS has been good at implementing new bugs on their chips. 😅

 

[OE333]

4 hours ago, Nkam said:

Why did you choose that much older DAC chip over the newer ones?  
Don’t the newer ones offer any advantages in technology for a ‘ better sound’?

 

We have a long experience with the PCM1795 knowing how to make best use of it (including completely a discrete I/V stage). The converter stage of the PCM1995 is a very good design - and that's all we use from this chip. The rest (oversampling/filtering etc.) is completely bypassed.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Nkam said:

ah also.  Does the older model DAC8 have the same exact PCM architecture as the 200 and same analog output stage?

 

 

The PCM circuit design of DAC8DSD and DAC200 is similar but not identical.

For example the DAC200 uses newer clock circuits having much lower jitter. Furthermore a new DSP and new improved upsampling algorithms are used.

 

The analog stages are completely different. DAC200 uses fully discrete analog circuits derived from the T+A "HV" series.

An other big difference is the analog volume control. In DAC8DSD the volume control used integrated circuits, in DAC200 the volume control is by hermetically sealed gold-contact relays and audiophile high precision resistors.

 

[jrsub]

4 hours ago, Nkam said:

 

also , if I may.  Why did you choose that much older DAC chip over the newer ones?  
Don’t the newer ones offer any advantages in technology for a ‘ better sound’

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can assure you that the DAC 200 is better sounding than my last DAC which used a newer ESS9038PRO chip.   Design/implementation engineering trumps the actual chip used in my experience. 

[Allan F]

On 3/21/2023 at 4:32 AM, jrsub said:

Design/implementation engineering trumps the actual chip used in my experience.

 

Design/implementation engineering trumps the actual chip used...period!

[pavi]

On 5/31/2022 at 3:19 PM, Miska said:

I'm now using two very similar devices. HA 200 + Solitaire P for one of headphone systems and DAC 200 for my main loudspeaker system. So I'm very well covered in this respect! 🙂

@Miska: what is the ideal bitrate setting for hqplayer with the dac 200? am comparing it with the holo may, both on dsd1024

[Miska]

45 minutes ago, pavi said:

@Miska: what is the ideal bitrate setting for hqplayer with the dac 200? am comparing it with the holo may, both on dsd1024

 

It depends. I run mine at DSD256 or DSD512, but most of the time at DSD512.

 

You have number of variables. Fifth and seventh order modulators in HQPlayer, 60 kHz and wide analog filters in DAC 200. And then rate.

 

Then you can consider which aspects you want to optimize. Best in-band SINAD, lowest out of band noise, bandwidth etc?

 

In my case, living room loudspeaker setup with Dynaudio speakers is set to 60 kHz LPF on DAC200. Running at DSD512 using ASDM7ECv2.

 

Office headphone setup with T+A Solitaire P headphones is set to Wide LPF on HA200. Running at DSD512 using ASDM7ECv2.

 

[pavi]

On 3/30/2023 at 6:50 PM, Miska said:

In my case, living room loudspeaker setup with Dynaudio speakers is set to 60 kHz LPF on DAC200. Running at DSD512 using ASDM7ECv2.

 

Office headphone setup with T+A Solitaire P headphones is set to Wide LPF on HA200. Running at DSD512 using ASDM7ECv2.

do you prefer dsd512 with asdm7ecv2 over dsd1024 with amsdm7ec 512+fs? am listening to both, trying to make up my mind. 

 

do you prefer the default filters with this setup? 

[Miska]

53 minutes ago, pavi said:

do you prefer dsd512 with asdm7ecv2 over dsd1024 with amsdm7ec 512+fs? am listening to both, trying to make up my mind. 

 

Yes, I've been primarily on DSD512 with ASDM7ECV2. But it doesn't mean that it would be kind of definitive answer and everybody should use the same. This is not a black and white thing.

 

53 minutes ago, pavi said:

do you prefer the default filters with this setup? 

 

Yes, those are the defaults because I consider those as best generic all-rounders. I may sometimes change settings for some specific material, but that is what I use most of the time.

 

[pavi]

thanks @Miska… appreciate it

[dsyzling]

@pavi Do you have any early impressions of comparing the T+A 200 vs your Holo May with HQ Player?

[pavi]

4 hours ago, dsyzling said:

@pavi Do you have any early impressions of comparing the T+A 200 vs your Holo May with HQ Player?

 

very early days, and i really have not done a fair comparison yet, but i am surprised how much i liked the dac 200 right away. both the may & the dac 200 are super transparent to hqplayer. fwiw i'm using only dsd1024 & dsd512, no pcm at all. 

 

can't really go wrong with either dac, tbh — but for now if i had to pick i'd take the dac 200. could totally be new-gear-syndrome, so there's that of course.

[dsyzling]

6 hours ago, pavi said:

 

very early days, and i really have not done a fair comparison yet, but i am surprised how much i liked the dac 200 right away. both the may & the dac 200 are super transparent to hqplayer. fwiw i'm using only dsd1024 & dsd512, no pcm at all. 

 

can't really go wrong with either dac, tbh — but for now if i had to pick i'd take the dac 200. could totally be new-gear-syndrome, so there's that of course.

 

Thanks, appreciate your thoughts and I understand it's probably too early for definitive conclusions. Glad you're enjoying the new dac and hope to hear some of your future thoughts. Certainly a good headphone setup you have there with both the HM1 and Envy with the Susvaras.

 

[nmcleod]

Had an opportunity to listen to the T+A DAC200 while also having the following dacs in house:   holo may, denafrips t+, and mola mola tambaqui.

 

In my opinion and in my system the TA is a better buy than the May or the T+.  All are excellent DACs but the TA brings most of what what is special about those R2Rs and then some in terms of clarity and naturalness.  However, it didn't quite exhibit the soundstage depth of the May or the complete width of the T+.  But, different filters can accommodate different tastes and the overall presentation was superior.  

 

I listened to ANADIALOG TA review where he described it as a leap over the May.  I don't agree it was a leap, but certainly a progression.  

 

In terms of it being a giant killer vs the likes of tambaqui, I don't think so.  Tambaqui has a holographic nature and rhythm and drive that the TA cant quite match. 

 

All that said it's a great product for it's price range and had I not had the Tambaqui would gladly live with it over the May or T+.

[Allan F]

3 hours ago, nmcleod said:

Had an opportunity to listen to the T+A DAC200 while also having the following dacs in house:   holo may, denafrips t+, and mola mola tambaqui.

 

In my opinion and in my system the TA is a better buy than the May or the T+.  All are excellent DACs but the TA brings most of what what is special about those R2Rs and then some in terms of clarity and naturalness.  However, it didn't quite exhibit the soundstage depth of the May or the complete width of the T+.  But, different filters can accommodate different tastes and the overall presentation was superior.  

 

I listened to ANADIALOG TA review where he described it as a leap over the May.  I don't agree it was a leap, but certainly a progression.  

 

In terms of it being a giant killer vs the likes of tambaqui, I don't think so.  Tambaqui has a holographic nature and rhythm and drive that the TA cant quite match. 

 

All that said it's a great product for it's price range and had I not had the Tambaqui would gladly live with it over the May or T+.

 

Nothing personal and perhaps I am somewhat dense, but I found your use of abbreviations very confusing in terms of knowing which DACs you were referring to in your comparisons until I had read your post about five times. 🙂 Of course, the Tambaqui sells for almost twice as much as the DAC 200 - $13,500 vs $7,125.

[Miska]

3 hours ago, nmcleod said:

Had an opportunity to listen to the T+A DAC200 while also having the following dacs in house:   holo may, denafrips t+, and mola mola tambaqui.

 

Just curious how did you drive these DACs?

 

[nmcleod]

4 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Just curious how did you drive these DACs?

 

 

Holo May, T+A Dac200, and T+ were fed by Holo Red streamer and FTA Callisto USB used NAA or as an endpoint depending.   The NOS modes on May  and T+A were tested some with hqplayer, and some without.  Tambaqui was fed via ethernet as it's own roon endpoint. 

[nmcleod]

5 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

Nothing personal and perhaps I am somewhat dense, but I found your use of abbreviations very confusing in terms of knowing which DACs you were referring to in your comparisons until I had read your post about five times. 🙂 Of course, the Tambaqui sells for almost twice as much as the DAC 200 - $13,500 vs $7,125.

Even with the Tambaqui at twice the price the T+A DAC200 was competitive in many ways.   Specifically it's horizontal soundstaging is immaculate, and there is proper tone and weight to key instruments like piano (I found the r2rs struggle here, but TA delta sigma did well). It's a nice piece of kit, it just isn't the last word like I've been reading from reviewers.

[Miska]

38 minutes ago, nmcleod said:

Holo May, T+A Dac200, and T+ were fed by Holo Red streamer and FTA Callisto USB used NAA or as an endpoint depending.   The NOS modes on May  and T+A were tested some with hqplayer, and some without.  Tambaqui was fed via ethernet as it's own roon endpoint. 

 

HQPlayer producing what kind of output? What settings?

 

Of course, from T+A arsenal you still also have the better 3100-series DACs.

 

[nmcleod]

18 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

HQPlayer producing what kind of output? What settings?

 

Of course, from T+A arsenal you still also have the better 3100-series DACs.

 

 

Long story short is I preferred T+A 200 own Bezier filter 2, which I primarily used when I listened to it.

 

For the May, I found it best using Sinc Mx with LNS15 at 1536 PCM set to 20 bits. 

 

I tried to find the best that each could do amd compare from there.  I didn't test either of those DACs DSD output, which is probably a travesty for some as they are major features of them both.  

[Miska]

28 minutes ago, nmcleod said:

Long story short is I preferred T+A 200 own Bezier filter 2, which I primarily used when I listened to it.

 

So pretty suboptimal, IMO. If you want to run it optimal, run DSD256 or DSD512 from HQPlayer using ASDM7ECv2 and default filters.

 

28 minutes ago, nmcleod said:

For the May, I found it best using Sinc Mx with LNS15 at 1536 PCM set to 20 bits. 

 

This is suboptimal too. Same settings as above give you optimal results.

 

In addition, sinc-Mx is total opposite of the filter in Mola-Mola, which is super short. So maybe something like poly-sinc-gauss-short would be closer match.

 

28 minutes ago, nmcleod said:

I didn't test either of those DACs DSD output, which is probably a travesty for some as they are major features of them both.  

 

Remember that Mola-Mola runs always at "DSD", it internally produces 1-bit stream to it's conversion stages. So you would have been much better running T+A and Holo in DSD. Also objectively better.

 

(Mola-Mola has similar D/A conversion section as T+A and Holo DSD D/A conversion sections)