EMM Lab DCC2 & CDSD Better connection?

The margins are too good in these cables to not come up with a new one. Think about the costs of manufacturing and the selling prices. It is a great business. I have realized a lot of things about cables through experimintation recently. One is that price makes little difference to it being better or not. 2nd is that they need time to settle down on an A/B comparison. 3rd, the same exact cable model and brands might sound different between 2 samples. Now on to this question. I switched my cables on my EMM from some old ones that came with my original Philips to kneew ones that came with the CDSD and did realize a major difference. They can get dirty & go bad if not handled carefully. Saying that, EMM is emphatic to not use gels or after market cables as it is a waste of money. If you want to spend thousands of dollars on cables to tune you system by a TACT. It will give you more versatility.

I have found that locking the signal of the EMM DAC 6e w. the Philips to the Philips produced much better sound than slaving the Philips to the EMM DAC 6e. I then thought maybe the ST cables were defective. I then did compare them w. the new cables supplied w. my CDSD and found that the new cables were much better but still the sound was better w. the SACD 1000 as a master to the DAC 6e. Still the CDSD is much better than the SACD 1000 on CD. Not on SACD. In the case of SACD it is only slightly better. The CDSD upsamples SACD to 2 times & outputs it to the DAC 6e. The CDSD upsamples CD to 4 times & outputs it. I didn't ask EMM if this is via the only select inputs or if the SACD 1000 does the same. They mentioned w. the CDSD they were able to design a transport from the ground up to do exactly what they want it to do. I asked them what? They replied in reference to the oversampling. I assume the SACD 1000 does not oversample the outputed digital signal. I also know that they can do a ROM update that will change the sampling algorithm on the CDSD.

I never compared the AES/EBU to the ST cables but they are very emphatic about the glass cables being superior. They also felt using any gels etc. can ruin the sound.

I wonder if the oversampled signal is output via the AES/EBU output. If not then this could explain the difference & your dislike for the oversampled signal.

Also running the AES/EBU on the Philips SACD 1000 elminates the ability to slave the SACD 1000 to the DAC 6e. This might be a similar change to my experience. It might be that the sound w. the SACD 1000 running as the Master is superior. This again might also be the situation w. the CDSD but I haven't experimented here yet. Maybe I will, but I am spinning vinyl these days.

Play w. the switches & set the SACD 1000 to Master instead of slave & post your responses. I am curious if I am alone in my observations. I had some musician friends over who confirmed my result. I am not sure if this is specific to my unit alone or did everyone experience this.