CAL SIGMA II upgrade 24/96?

I was going to switch to the Delta/Sigma combo maily due to their size and tried the new 24/96 on my CAL Ikon MkII. It had more detail, dynamics and better defined LF's but it did something to the midrange that I did not like. Since vocals are important to me I did not go with the DAC and prefer the stock Icon. This is just my personal take and I have not heard the older version of the DAC. I understand that it received a rave review in some magazine recently, maybe Sterophile, I am not certain which one and do not read the mags.

I have both the 16 bit Sigma and the 24 bit Sigma II. I would say that the 24 bit offers a much more open sound with better high frequency resolution and detail whereas the 16 bit is definetly much warmer sounding. Either can work very well but would be both personal and system dependent. As to Dekay's comments above, i would like to add that there IS a difference in the interconnect used between the transport and the dac. Like anything else, there can be quite a bit of trial and error done before you are able to pull the best performance or sonics out of the specific pieces that you are using. Just like on standard analogue outputs, some of the differences are subtle while others are quite noticeable. For the record, i'm currently using a Delta transport in that system along with an FMS digital cable between them. Sean >

I am trying to decide between a Cal Sigma 2 or an MSB Link 3 with upsampler? Has anyone listened to both?