Best DACs under $7,000.00

Check out the T+A DAC 200, which retails at $6900.

I am an authorized T+A dealer but have owned T+A for years prior to becoming a dealer. I personally own T+A’s $38.5K reference DAC but also have the DAC 200 on my floor. I prefer the DAC 200 to many higher priced DAC’s like the Mola Mola Tambaqui, which which I’ve done direct comparisons. The Mola Mola is more analytical and clinical in delivery, where the T+A DAC 200 has the same level of detail and separation but with more tonal richness and gravitas in delivery. The T+A  DAC 200 also has separate DACs, up to 32-bit 768Khz PCM and 1-bit DSD 1024.

Great review by The Computer Audiophile on Audiophile Style, just came out:

I’ve written about it before, but I’ve compared the T+A DAC 200 against a modded DirectStream DAC, a Lampizator Baltic 3 with $1K in NOS tubes, the Mola Mola Tambaqui, and the $38.5K T+A SDV 3100 HV. While the T+A reference was the clear winner, the DAC 200 was also a clear winner across the remainder of the competition. It has nearly as much body and harmonics of the Lampizator with all of the speed and detail of the Mola Mola while being more fluid and coherent, where the Mola Mola can come off to be more clinical/analytical. Decay and bass definition is much improved in the DAC 200 where in the Mola Mola it can sound dry and processed. 

@niodari I would simply characterize the DAC 200 as much more capable across the board in delivering a more realistic reproduction. While the DAC 8 has a neutral tone with liquid pace, I would characterize the DAC 200 with being a bit fuller bodied with richer tonal density and texture, combined with improved separation and detail retrieval. In case it’s for interest, while I prefer using the DAC 200 as line out into a dedicated preamp, it’s build in variable gain preamp stage is much, much better than that of the DAC 8.

@niodari i wouldn’t call it coloration. It’s not warm and bloomy (and somewhat slower/rounder) like the Lampizator Baltic 3, nor is it on the clinical side as the Tambaqui. It is more confident than the DAC 8, and it’s character can be adjusted slightly based on which of the four DAC filters are set.

The DAC 8 is a great unit and you have plenty to be happy about with it. The DAC 200 just levels up appropriately. 

@tvad I would still say the Lampi Baltic 3 is still warmer and does have some bloom compared to most DACs on the market. Maybe not in comparison to other tube DACs, but certainly compared to the DACs I listed. I agree that there is a dimensionality and wonderful midrange to it, but I tried my very best with it and felt it was lacking in speed and control in the bass and did not articulate highs as well as the T+A DACs, the Tambaqui, or a fully-modded PS Audio DirectStream DAC.

In all honesty, I A/Bed the Lampi Baltic 3 against a 10 year old Modwright Transporter which uses the same tube set, and I could barely hear a difference between the two. There was a slight improvement in detail and clarity the Baltic 3 brought, but it was minimal upon multiple times of switching back and forth.

The lack of speed, and the sonic similarity to a much older unit I already owned were the reasons I found it easy to part with. For sure it was a very engaging DAC, but at the end of the day I longed for more.

@tvad Regarding the Modwright Transporter, one is able to use a 6922 to 6SN7 adapter and accommodate 6SN7 tubes. I did so successfully for years in a second system. That unit was what made me so drawn to the Baltic 3 when it was announced.

Also, like you, I did not love the Mola Mola Tambaqui. I found it to be too clinical and dry, but it has admirable speed, separation, and decay. T+A helped me land the absolute best of both worlds. 

@tvad Good point on the additional tubes on the Baltic 3. Noted, though my experiences still remained what they did. Always a pleasure discussing with you. 

@gregjacob Elliott is wonderful to deal with, and I’m glad you spoke with him.

I’ve spent a lot of time with the DAC 200 since June or so and know it very well, though I can’t compare it with a Golden Atlantic TRP. I was able to compare the DAC 200 to a Lampizator Baltic, but I’m betting the Golden Atlantic TRP is a different beast. It’s also hard to compare the two as the Golden Atlantic TRP can use a variety of tubes. I have a hard time settling on EL34s (one of my favorite tubes), let alone dealing with other pentode variants like the KT88, KT150, etc.

What I can say is this. The DAC 200 is quite neutral and natural. It does not have added bloom, perhaps slightly better tonal density and richness compared to other DACs in its price range, but it’s not enough to classify it as “colored”. What I love about it is this character combined with speed and a ridiculously low noise floor. It can be articulate and immediate without fatigue, and it is wonderful to have that hint of tonal richness combined with the speed and definition in the bass that is really hard to accomplish with a tube DAC.

On the DAC 200 you need to remember that there are six DAC filters to choose from. I prefer Bezier 2, which is a bit-perfect algorithm. Two customers who have purchased the DAC 200 from me have found they like Bezier 1 more (which provides a softer, and they claim more organic, delivery that is reminiscent of analog). 

One other consideration is that while Lampizator often comes with other inputs aside from USB, most will state that Lampizator sounds best over USB. The DAC 200’s clock is very good, using special Femto clock oscillators with extremely low jitter and phase noise to synchronize the digital audio signals, and some of this tech is still utilized even if leveraging SPDIF inputs like AES, Coax, or Toslink, which inherently prioritize the digital source’s clock over the DAC’s clock. This means that while it can prioritize even better clocking from the source, it has technology within that basically synchronizes both clocks, acting as a masterclock internally. So if you are using a digital source (server/streamer) that has a very good quality clock internally, then the DAC 200 might have the upper hand over the Lampi with regards to clocking. 

If I had more than one floor model of the T+A DAC 200 I would happily send it your way to demo and a return policy. Unfortunately it is currently one of my more inquired pieces and I have customers here often that are interested in listening to it. 

Feel free to PM me if you have interest in discussing in-home evaluation options in more detail.

@gregjacob You’re welcome. I would say the DAC 200 has soul, and many other characteristics. It’s a DAC I could likely live with if I didn’t already have the SDV 3100 HV. That one definitely has much greater tonal density, richness, and decay, but it’s scary how well the DAC 200 performs at a fraction of the SDV’s price.

If the Lampi Atlantic TRP has the better Mundorf caps in them, they might be worth considering, but you’ll also have to land the right tubes which will give you the balance of soul and resolution, and that can be either very rewarding or very frustrating. I know in all my time, I’ve always wanted my solid state to have more tube characteristics, and my tube gear to have more definition and improved performance at the frequency extremes like SS. It wasn’t until I went T+A that I got the best of both worlds and likely will never look back. Prior to that my primary system had anywhere from 10-30 tubes in it. Now… zero.

Hey @patrickdowns - Perhaps this is a convo that is better suited through PM or call, so I’ll follow up to get in touch. That said, I’ll also answer your inquiry for anyone else interested on the thread.

The T+A DAC has a very good preamp section for its price point compared to other DACs that are in its price range (e.g. much better than the PS Audio DirectStream DAC’s preamp section is, or even the Mola Mola Tambaqui’s volume control direct to amp, for instance). The one caveat I would share is that in my personal experience, T+A’s preamps are very linear - it is not the component where one will enjoy added bloom or harmonics. This is true even with their HV series, where more of the harmonics come from the DAC and A 3000 HV amps. The HV preamp is exceptional in its own way for delivering sonics, and though it is not colored, but it does have exceptional harmonics. If I were to compare the HV preamp, it would be a step above the ARC REF 6 SE, but in the same sonic character. The same is true for the 200 series, where the DAC stage has more of the harmonics, the preamp within the DAC 200 is linear, and if paired with the A 200 amp, the amp is also very, very linear (despite the amp having a warmer setting by adjusting the damping factor).

What does this mean? If you are wanting to run a digital-only system, you should have no issues using the DAC 200 going straight into an amplifier. If you have an analog source going into it, however, you will want to ensure that the sonics are to your liking, as it will not add the color or harmonics a tube preamp will. But I have no hesitation to use the DAC 200 as a preamp straight to amp for many systems and have typically had this concern/challenge with just about any other DAC I've used to go straight into an amp. The DAC 200 has a true preamp stage.

Hope this helps!