24/96 Upsampling


I've got a SFD2 Mark II, a very good class A type DAC. SF tells me that they will have a 24/96 upgrade for this DAC out this summer. They also have a D2D-1 stand alone box for $600. Anyone experienced the difference in a good DACs performance using one of these new upsampling digital to digital boxes?
keis
He said it would appear on his website, and not a post here (not that this matters). Anyway, I'm sure Mr. Halverson would agree that Jeff Kalt of Resolution Audio is his peer as a designer.
I believe if anyone asked Jeff Kalt of Resolution the same question as to his opinion of Kevin Halverson at Muse, you would get a similar response. I believe it is already known they have worked together on a number of projects of mutual interest over several years or more. The April 99 Recommended Component issue bears this out in a very informative interview with Halverson titled "Musing on 24/96. This same issue has a extensive review of the Muse Model Eight Transport & 296 DVD/CD Processor as well. This particular issue talks of the Universal I2S Interface, originally designed by Muses' Kevin Halverson, and its undergoing extensive further development to meet the needs of DVD-based Audio was itself a joint effort with Jeff Kalt. You can see both by going to: www.museelectronics.com. AS for the so called War of DVD-AUDIO & SACD it has for some time now been quite obvious as to the reason for Sony & Phillips promotion of the CD based SACD format. You only need to take into account the fact that the HIGHLY valued income to Sony from CD royalties are at an end, and the continuation of a format based on CD is essential to alleviate this loss. Muddy the waters, stir up controversy, confuse the consumer, whatever it takes to advance their interest and self serving goals seems to be the battle plan. What they have decided to do to the consumer is a D__ shame. The technology exists for both formats to co-exist but they absolutely seem to be opposed to it. There is no need for doing what they are. It hurts the industry as well as the average individual and for NO other purpose than to benefit themselves. Based on past experience can you possibly think they would hesitate to do otherwise? I know I can't.
dkuipers or any other of you may shed some light on my problem in regards to all this i have a lexicon dc-1 it is 20/48 dacs.i run a adcom 700 as a transport and want better play back .how do i go at it.the lexicon has a a/d to d/a that can not be bypassed (serves me right for wanting a home theater) so if i put a levinson or a wadia half of my investment dies at the hand of the pre.if i go with a transport i stay at 20/48 that is why i was attracted to your discusion.the way i see it i will have to run the cd direct to the amplifier and then get a stereo pre latter when the sacd comes our way and have 2 systems having to go to the process of changing cables every time i want to see a movie.thank you for your help
OK, I'll wade into this as I now have my Sonic Frontiers (SF) D2D-1 installed as well as the 24/96 filter chip for my SF DAC 3.0 (which has 24/96 processing capability ONCE you replace the HDCD filter chip). Both have been broken in with about 50-60 hours of time. First off the DAC 3.0 is an exceptional DAC. The only reason I got it was because I was getting the D2D-1 and wanted to see (hear actually)what upsampling of the resolution and frequency REALLY does. I had the DAC 3.0 for almost 2 weeks before I decided to hook it up to my Muse 5 and compare it to my Muse 2+. Even though I was using the BNC connection, a 3 dollar Radio Shack BNC-BNC, 75 ohm cable, and the DAC 3.0 was stone cold and brand new, it was fully the equal, and in some ways superior to my Muse 5/2+ combo using the 13W3 interface. Interesting Observation No.1 : The difference between 16/44.1 and upsampled 24/96 was not subtle. EVERYTHING improved, imaging, dynamics, transparency, depth....everything. What really got my attention was the bottom end. Much tighter and dynamic. Interesting Observation No.2 : Using my Pioneer DVD-05's digital output, I compared upsampled 16/44.1 versions of the soundtrack Glory & Muddy Water's Folk Singer (Mo-Fi version)to the 24/96 versions. Again the differences were not too subtle and tracked with those while comparing straight and upsampled 16 bit stuff. But the upsampled stuff still sounded REALLY good. Kinda like the difference between really good DVD video and HDTV. The HDTV can look REAL and noticably better when compare to good DVD but, taken on its own DVD is also REALLY good. Interesting Observation No.3 : The better the 16/44.1 disc, the better the upsampled result. For example, the difference between the upsampled 16/44.1 version of the Glory disc and the 24/96 verion were noticably greater and less subtle than between those of the Muddy Waters disc. This has been my experience. I,ve also made other comparisons (HDCD vs upsampled 16/44.1 for example)if anyone is interested. Jeff