should I notice the upsampling?

Upsampling should make for noticeably smoother sounding highs for the most part and it may also help some with imaging and/or soundstaging. Sometimes in budget systems other components can mostly mask the difference...from the looks of it, I wouldn't be pointing at the DAC per se, although just possibly the C370...maybe???...if you end up not being able to tell a difference, that is. Dunno about the feet lighting up. Hope this helps.

Thanks, Ivan. I'm going to do the obvious and run it in both modes for some time and see if I develope a preference. The dac itself is a huge upgrade from the Yamaha sacd I was using(and am still as a transport). Probably my best craigslist find and great timing. My neighbors on both sides of my townhome are gone for the weekend and I've been enjoying the new life it has brought to my huge CD collection and my cheap Jamo e855 speakers(my next upgrade). I just guess I expected something akin to standard def tv to HD or something.

I have to agree with Ivan's post. Personally, I like upsampling. In your case, though, you need to get your system set up on a more fundamental level before you notice the difference in processing.

If you are starting out in audio, I can give you some good advice. I've always been good at getting really good sound while spending the least amount of money. You already have a good dac and a decent integrated amp. If you want to get your system good enough so you can hear the differences in your dac, you need to do 2 things. First, is speakers. You don't list any so I'm guessing you will probably need them. My favorite entry level high end speaker, by far, is the Vandersteen 1c. Its an incredible value. If for some reason you can't go with the Vand, there are quite a few alternatives, as well. Monitor audio and JM Labs (Focal) are also great entry products that I like very much.

You can probably stop with a good pair of speakers. To really take your system to the next level, however, I recommend doing 1 other thing. Its not that expensive either. I would get a passive preamp/volume control. Your NAD has a really great and useful feature. If you look on the back of the unit, you will see the amp and preamp sections are connected by RCA jumpers. This allows you to use it just as a preamp or just as a poweramp. In your case you would go from the dac to the passive unit, and then go from the passive directly to the amp section of the NAD. That will bypass the NAD's preamp. I know that probably sounds a little odd but doing so will yield a big step up in sound quality.

It is NOT an "upconversion" button, it merely selects between 96 and 192 kHz; you should NOT hear much difference. It is, still, a nice DAC. Steve

Forgot to say, if you are not already doing so, be sure to use a decent coax from the transport to the DAC and NOT a TosLink (even a pretty good one really) - IME a TosLink will more than likely act like a bottle-neck for this kind of sound difference. I have a roughly $5k CD-only system and in it the difference between 44.1 and 96k is very nice indeed (wouldn't be without it, really). But, the difference between optical and coax was even more obvious and across the board. It could just be the cheapie transport I'm using, but many others report a similar improvement too. Cheers.

Speakers are my next step. The Jamos are sounding better than they ever have, but I know I need an upgrade. A friend recommended vandersteens as he sold them in the past. but I have a cat and he told me they are giant scratching posts. I'm a single father so I'm on a budget. Couple more paychecks and I'll be looking. Thanks for thel guys.

As far as the cat goes, you have 3 options to fix the problem; the right way, the wrong way and the audiophile way.

The right way: Build a listening room.

The wrong way: De-claw the cat.

The audiophile way: Buy a bunch of expensive cables.

I've seen a few pairs of Vandersteens on CL here in Denver recently for $500-750. Just make sure you know what you're buying since there have been at least a half dozen iterations of the Vandersteen 2 model over the years (some with subtle refinements, some not so subtle).

I've been watching over the last year or so. Are Vandersteens foam surrounds? I will bring someone more knowledgable when I look. I see psb speakers alot as well. My Jamo's actually sound pretty good for now, but speakers are my next upgrade.

1977 – Vandersteen Model 2 debuted
1979 – Vandersteen Model 2a
1980 – Vandersteen Model 2b
1980 – Vandersteen Model 2c - last model using perishable foam surrounds
1989 – Vandersteen Model 2ci - 1st model using butyl rubber surrounds
1992 – Vandersteen Model 2ce
2000 – Vandersteen Model 2ce signature
2007 – Vandersteen Model 2ce signature II

Source: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1344778166

very helpful! Thanks, Mrvco