[ThanatosVI]

Is that filter for PCM section of it?

Yes

 

[medon]

Is that filter for PCM section of it?

yes

Isn't that what the Bezier filter is in intented to be?

... when I had the DAC200 here, I indeed liked the Bezier filter best.
I listen almost exclusively PCM (either Qobuz streaming or my CDs as ripped files from my NAS).

But there's other upsampling algorithms which many seem to like even better than the built-in Bezier filter.

 

[ChJL]

Again, I cannot recommend enough to double-check on Audiophilestyle

I've gone through that over the last few days and feel now confirmed in my previous "suspicion" that this DAC makes most sense for PC upsampling users. I would kind of feel buying a device and then using only 60 to 70% of it's capabilities.
switching from a "regular" streamer to a PC would be an expensive hassle.

 

[newToAudio100]

I've gone through that over the last few days and feel now confirmed in my previous "suspicion" that this DAC makes most sense for PC upsampling users. I would kind of feel buying a device and then using only 60 to 70% of it's capabilities.
switching from a "regular" streamer to a PC would be an expensive hassle.

The dac sounds amazing with the built in upscaling as well.

 

[Soundguy123]

I've gone through that over the last few days and feel now confirmed in my previous "suspicion" that this DAC makes most sense for PC upsampling users. I would kind of feel buying a device and then using only 60 to 70% of it's capabilities.
switching from a "regular" streamer to a PC would be an expensive hassle.

Either way you are using 50% of capabilities. I use a Benchmark LA4 preamp so I don’t use the built in volume control in the T+A Dac200 (which by all accounts is excellent). I also tend to upsample everything - so I am using maybe 40% of the DAC and even so I feel it is a bargain - it just sounds great with the rest of my gear YMMV.

 

[ThanatosVI]

Either way you are using 50% of capabilities. I use a Benchmark LA4 preamp so I don’t use the built in volume control in the T+A Dac200 (which by all accounts is excellent). I also tend to upsample everything - so I am using maybe 40% of the DAC and even so I feel it is a bargain - it just sounds great with the rest of my gear YMMV.

Nobody really uses everything.
I mean do you have a device connected to every input?
In case of Ha200, do you use EQ and crossfeed?
Do you regularly switch through Oversampling filters?

All these questions are meant in general, not directed at you personally.
Even if using only key parts, it is a great Device imo.

 

[ChJL]

Either way you are using 50% of capabilities.

Nobody really uses everything.

Alright, I probably should focus more on having a "trump card" if ever needed. Now or in 2-3 years I want a streamer with HQP upsampling capabilities or some special audio PC. Since all my files are "redbook" standard and I believe all those DAC 200 users who also suggest what Lothar Wiemann described using himself in an interview when Ha200 and SolP came out...

 

[Soundguy123]

Alright, I probably should focus more on having a "trump card" if ever needed. Now or in 2-3 years I want a streamer with HQP upsampling capabilities or some special audio PC. Since all my files are "redbook" standard and I believe all those DAC 200 users who also suggest what Lothar Wiemann described using himself in an interview when Ha200 and SolP came out...

Do you mean this or another interview ?

 

[Davidv100]

I've gone through that over the last few days and feel now confirmed in my previous "suspicion" that this DAC makes most sense for PC upsampling users. I would kind of feel buying a device and then using only 60 to 70% of it's capabilities.
switching from a "regular" streamer to a PC would be an expensive hassle.

Hi ChJL,

FWIW, just like you,
I do not want to mess with a computer in my audio chain, although I would humbly define myself as very tech savvy.
I just want audio listening to be very straight forward, and not a neverending nerd quest (no offense to anyone, I am a nerd too, but I am trying to cool down).
Audio should be pure enjoyment, quality time, chill.

I understand many people are using HQP (I don't). And HQP will always require a computer if you want to extract the most out of it (meaning : always more). Because of this neverending induced need for more CPU power, HQP is better located in a computer, and not embedded in something else, like a streamer or a DAC. Reading around, everybody seems to agree with this, especially the streamers and DAC builders. Plus, located inside the streamer or the DAC, it would very much mess with the power stage and induce other perturbations. And obviously, a computer is the best solutions for further upgradability.

Also, note, reading around, your comment about having HQP upfront is true for absolutely every DAC (Holo May, Tambaqui, DAC200,...).

Now, although I trust HQP might improve the sound, I also think it might be a tad overblown. I have the feeling there might be a significant HQP lobby across all audiophiles websites. The company building HQP is sponsoring all of them. Please, HQP lovers, let's not start a war about this, I spontaneously acknowledge I may be totally wrong. As I said, I have never tried HQP. So, it really is not my main point here, let's skip it. Let's just say I made the conscious choice not to add a computer in the chain, so no HQP for me is a consequence of this personal choice.

My message is just that all these high end devices have been built to deliver a splendid sound, even without HQP. And I very much enjoy my DAC 200, even without HQP. Of course you can always wait years and years for the next wonder DAC that will rule them all for the 10 years to come. But... 1) this will never exist, 2) do not forget every day your ears become weaker... So, let's fully enjoy high quality sound while we still can .

PS: Side note, I use an USB connected iPad as streamer, my source is Apple Music 192/24, and the source quality indicators of my DAC200 confirm DAC200 is very happy with the input quality. I am not referring to HQP here, but more about another question (not asked though) that might be : Do I need a multi-thousand Euro/Dollar streamer ? For me the answer is no. Let's remember that if iPads where sold in the thousand of units instead of millions, they would probably also cost much more than they do.

Have a nice day, all of you.

 

[finbad]

New T&A Dac200 owner 60 days old.
Upgraded from my 10 y.o. Auralic DAC ($5.500, bought new at end of production run @ $2,500), and the SQ upgrade was simply staggering whereas the Auralic's filters were slightly identifiable, with the T&A (streaming from Aurender and all manner of ripped to it's hard drive CD's and HD 192 downloads) the presentation is filter selected to sound best with my favorites from the 1970's to sounding shockingly great in relative contrast now to the (good) Auralic .

NOS2 filter can be found to be preferable on great remastered 192k recordings, although Bezer2 is mostly used here on 70% of "my" music and it just sounds sublime in presentation.

I have not auditioned in home the other likely candidates in the near price range, granted - However I am totally impressed with my system(s) upgrade with what I'm hearing getting lost in the music, easily forgetting about the gear doing the magic.

* Associated gears in profile

- Happy listening's to you all, also

 

[ChJL]

Do you mean this or another interview ?

No but thanks will check it out...

This one:


Lothar made most sense, no wonder his experience.

 

[TonyNewman]

Had the T+A DAC 200 for about a month now and it seems to have settled down nicely. I have found the PCM to be very good, but the DSD performance is next level. Curious if others have found a similar jump in SQ going from PCM to DSD using the DAC 200. I am using HQP DSD1024 and Roon DSD512. Running a PC based rig, details in my sig. The JCAT XE has a separate LPS. For heaphones I have a bunch of nice ones, mostly using the ZMF Caldera, Verite Open & Closed, HD800S, HE1000v2and DCA Noir.

 

[lsantista]

nice Tony.. what do you mean by " HQP DSD1024 and Roon DSD512" ? if 1024 is set on hqp, it will be the same when you play via Roon, what am I missing?

 

[ardbeg1975]

Had the T+A DAC 200 for about a month now and it seems to have settled down nicely. I have found the PCM to be very good, but the DSD performance is next level. Curious if others have found a similar jump in SQ going from PCM to DSD using the DAC 200. I am using HQP DSD1024 and Roon DSD512. Running a PC based rig, details in my sig. The JCAT XE has a separate LPS. For heaphones I have a bunch of nice ones, mostly using the ZMF Caldera, Verite Open & Closed, HD800S, HE1000v2and DCA Noir.

What HQP settings are you using?

 

[TonyNewman]

nice Tony.. what do you mean by " HQP DSD1024 and Roon DSD512" ? if 1024 is set on hqp, it will be the same when you play via Roon, what am I missing?

Roon tops out at DSD512 via Muse. It doesn't support DSD1024 - at least not yet. So if you want DSD1024 you have to go to HQP. Note that I run these applications independently - I don't run HQP from within Roon, as this kills my PC, the processing overhead is just too much. I run HQP using its rather pedestrian interface, but it gets the job done.