Sound differences between Devialet 200 and Devialet 250

[ogs]

The internal ADC/DAC in the Devialet is remarkably transparent as a pure amplifier though.
I have it in my head, without much understanding of these things, that this could well be down to algorithms for both the AD and DA processing being more or less the same, but used in reverse in AD compared to DA? Whatever, the evidence seems to be that if you plug a superior DAC into the Devialet via analogue input, you will hear the superiority of that DAC over the Devialet's one.

I started with Devialet by using my Klimax DS (KDS/1 I think - or was it /2 by then, can't remember). I have to admit I've been one of the few who wasn't massively enamoured with the KDS/1, even before owning my Devialet. I've owned a first-gen Akurate DS and also a Renew DS (based on the original KDS/0).  The Akurate DS from the second-gen onwards which I'm guessing Stigmater has (?) was vastly superior to the first-gen Akurate DS which I had. The Renew DS based on the KDs/0 was wonderful and I personally preferred it to the KDS/1 (this is almost heresy).  What I'm trying to say in a roundabout way is that the second-gen Akurate DS onwards is a great DAC/streamer and should sound terrific into a Devialet via analogue inputs.

I am not suggesting the ADC-DAC in the Devialet is not transparent. If it wasn't, the phono input would not be top class. Devialet may indeed have special correction or algorithms in place to improve the AD-DA performance. But connecting analog to the line input is not bypassing the internal processing and everything is digital going through DSP before DA conversion and entering ADH.