Audioguy, you're right. I use a Sigtech. Thanks for the reminder but I do have it set on 24 bits. A few comments. At the level of performance we are talking about, I believe that without VERY accurate DSP room correction and very impulse coherent speakers that the differences in the upsamplers/DACs cannot be accurately assessed because how the DAC converts the time based info is where many of the differences lie. Room and speaker interaction can not only obscure the difference but actually cause the DAC’s to act like mini DSP units analogous to using cables as tone controls.
I’ve played around with the 972 upsampler in front of some other DACs in addition to the Elgar. These experiments have convinced me that much of the difference in high end DAC’s subjective performance are due to the audible artifacts created by the D to A algorithms and the filters implemented in the DAC’s. I highly recommend the technical paper on this on the dCS site. This paper is not a self serving marketing paper but is some rather sophisticated musings on how the common choice of algorithms for the conversion back to analog and the filter implementation may have some rather fundamental flaws in the underlying mathematical assumptions. It is interesting that in the various threads that the DAC’s that vie for the top position, for the most part, use “nonstandard” algorithms or conversion circuit topologies.
Changing the upsampling in front of any DAC will change the audible analog artifacts. Changing the frequency, impulse characteristics of the music (Joni Mitchell vs. Bartok’s Concerto for Orchestra) will change the analog artifacts created by the DACs. This makes getting a bead on “the best” very hard in my opinion.
Lornecherry is right that these points are subtle but they are real and do matter for the listening experience. Many of the performances I want to listen to are only available as digital recordings on Redbook CDs so I am quite interested in optimizing my digital chain. Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.
