T+A DAC 200 or WEISS 501

The DAC 200 can be set as a pure DAC as its volume control can be set to a line level output. I have demoed both and prefer the DAC 200, but take that as you will as I am a T+A dealer. 

The DAC 200 has a wider bandwidth resulting in a wider, deeper soundstage. It is also a bit more organic and revealing in character. The 501 becomes more worth it if you take advantage of its room correction capabilities, but sometimes it as a bit more of a sterile sonic signature, obviously sucking some of the color that your room adds to the final result. I have typically shied away from DSP room correction because of this. 

@milpai The DAC 200’s preamp / volume control can be bypassed and set to a line level output. Most of my customers use the DAC 200 in this way, and only a few I know are using it for its preamp capabilities. The preamp/volume control is really quite good, though, and much better than most DACs even twice its price, but the DAC 200 is well worth it even if you use it set to line level.

@thibaultgeoui You were curious about the performance of the MP 200 but also mentioned you don’t like that it has a CD player. I am a dealer for both T+A and Aurender and conducted a thorough evaluation of the MP 200, comparing it to the Aurender N200. Long story short, the MP 200 is a great value if you will use it for everything it offers - streamer, disc spinner, internet radio. The CD player is actually really quite good. That said, if you’re looking simply to stream and serve, the Aurender N200 delivers greater sonic performance in terms of clarity, air, and soundstage size, both width and depth. Message me if you want me to share my full evaluation, and I’ll dig it up. Happy to answer any other questions you have. 

@jasbirnandra The DAC 200 uses eight Burr Brown DAC chips. 

@milpai I think you will find the T+A DAC 200 to be superior to both the Wavelight and TT2. From personal experience, the DAC 200 is more organic. The Waveligut and the TT2 are quite different from each other such that the Wavelight is a bit rounder at the frequency extremes and focuses on punchiness vs tonal correction. The TT2 on the other hand is more analytical than the DAC 200. In both cases, the soundstage of the DAC 200 is also more expansive than the DACs you mention  

I’ve said it before but I still believe the DAC 200 to be the best DAC under $15K. As a T+A dealer that has taken on trade ins, I’ve been able to compare it to a lot of equipment. If you have any other questions about it, feel free to message me direct. I’d be happy to chat things through!

@ljgm Thanks for sharing your configuration. I especially appreciate your comment on the quality of the preamp stage in the DAC 200. I have commented similarly, stating that I find it to be as good as dedicated preamps in the $3-5K range. It is definitely a differentiator for the unit, as most DACs even double its price do not have as impressive of an analog output stage or volume control. In many cases, I can recommend someone to use a DAC 200 straight into their amp, whereas I rarely advocate going from DAC straight to amp for most other competitors. 

@ljgm Have you played with the DAC 200’s filters to see which one you like the best? This is one of my favorite feature of the unit and enables you to have what sounds like six different DACs in one, and this is a feature set in the DAC 200 that is not discussed enough. For me, the BEZ2 filter performs the best in terms of natural delivery and resolution. Many people find themselves using BEZ1 or one of the NOS filters, but I have tested across both a very high end reference stereo setup and with high end headphone setup that BEZ2 performs best (personal opinion, of course). 

I also appreciate the WIDE bandwidth setting that enables it to go up to 200KHz. The extra headroom improves the ambient performance for detail retrieval and larger sound stage. 

@roccity As with any dialogue around format, I believe it is not about the format but about the implementation. T+A is one of the pioneers in DSD playback and the first manufacturer to achieve true 1-Bit DSD 1024 playback (established in the SDV 3100 HV and evident in the DAC 200). But it’s the design of the DSD DAC that enables it to perform in a superior manner than the PCM side. Of course, I’ve heard some DACs that support DSD and still prefer PCM.

FWIW, I often demo the DAC 200 with PCM content as a good share of my customers don’t have any DSD, and I don’t want to sell them on an experience they may not replicate in their own home. If the streamer is up to par, synergy with the DAC 200 still yields excellent results, for example when pairing the DAC 200 to an Aurender N200.

@mgrif104 Thank you for the kind words, and I agree with your assessment, though my comparisons have been with the original Weiss 501 2ch and not the newer 501 4ch. I had another customer more recently purchase the DAC 200 to move past two DACs he owned, a 501 2ch used for PCM and a T+A DAC 8 DSD. I took both units in to sell for him on commission, and I was able to make him his money back spent on the DAC 200! But more importantly, I was able to take both units in and compare them to the DAC 200.

The Weiss is a great DAC, but the DAC 200 in DSD playback is a very special unit at its pricepoint. As an Aurender dealer, I’m still talking with them about the opportunity to convert to DSD on the fly because of the improved performance that would result with T+A. I have a lot of DSD material, but it would be great if all formats could be converted.

Also, to answer @agisthos’ question from a number of months back, the DAC 200’s volume control is quite good, and the unit I believe has a 5V output, so very high current for a DAC (compared to the Weiss’ 4V output). This is also why I do still prefer the unit as a standalone DAC vs a preamp, though, as it uses all of that even in fixed mode. 

While I advocate for the DAC 200 to be used as a preamp in some systems and would recommend it as the DAC to use if that is the configuration of choice, I still truly value what a quality, dedicated preamp can add to the mix in terms of improved power and harmonics. @roccity, I am very curious to hear your learnings of your comparisons with the Classé preamp in and out of the chain. Let us know what you find. I would like to think that as long as cables are up to par, the Classé Delta pre will add to the performance. I equate the preamp performance in the DAC 200 to be more at the $3K range of preamps. Better than most mid-fi, but not endgame.

Shameless plug - I have no regrets using the reference level T+A SDV 3100 HV as both a DAC and Preamp (or even a streamer). That preamp is by far the best I’ve ever heard in my setup, even for analog sources. Of course, that unit costs over $30K more, but at least the trickle down of that technology exists in the DAC 200.

Also, not related to 501 vs DAC 200, but when I most recently took in the Weiss 501, I was curious to try it as a headphone amp. I recently got myself a pair of Hifiman HE1000SE, which are not hard to drive, and the 501 has a good reputation as a headphone amp/dac/streamer combo.

In my experience, I much preferred a much less expensive stack - a Topping E70 Velvet R2R DAC and matching Topping L70 Balanced Headphone Amplifier. The Topping stack had better control and more engaging presentation, when hooked up to my MacBook Air’s Roon / HQPlayer output in DSD in comparison to the Weiss, which was more refined but not as engaging. The Weiss felt quite passive to me in this configuration. And despite the Topping Stack sounding great with Roon and HQPlayer out of a MacBook with DSD format, it still sounded superior in PCM once I switched the source to an Aurender N200 using coax. So the source component’s quality does matter a heck of a lot here, too.