What the heck is Resolution Audio

The price is higher for the DAC-1, since you have to have a linestage that is as good as no linestage at all ($10,000+ ??), and you can get a CD50 used for a couple hundred more than the DAC-1 costs. According to Jeff Kalt at Resolution (who supposedly has been quoted in another thread "upsampling dacs...pepsi yada yada"), upsampling is just hogwash. I'm not sure I agree, but I know I'll be happy with my CD50 for a long time to come. Having an extrenal DAC would be nice to use with my DAT recordings, though.

Carl, Jeff Kalt didn't say upsampling is hogwash, just that it is not a "new technology" and is identical to oversampling. The jist of his e-mail (as I interpreted it) is that oversampling (or upsampling) allows the use of more sophisticated (and usually proprietary) filtering algorithms, preserving the frequency/phase relationship that lesser filters muck up. He did admit that mfg's are using the term "upsampling" as a marketing ploy to draw interest. For Jeff Kalt's honesty (as well as his technical genius), I greatly respect him. As audiophiles we are still left with the same chore: find the components that do it for us. I, for one, am going to give Resolution Audio a crack at my money!

I'm glad for you. As for upsampling, my understanding is different, as I've said before. It's not a matter of filtering or dithering or algorythms, it's a matter of sample rate conversion to a digital data rate other than redbook. Oversampling most certainly does NOT do that, and I don't feel that the "up" in upsampling is hype, or ahything else untoward. I mean, John Atkinson has always prided himself on knowing all the latest digital technology, and when he heard the earliest "upsampling" units in the professional recording realm, like 4 years ago, he knew it would change everything. The idea that upsampling and oversampling are the same thing is FALSE, and I don't care what you, or anyone else here, believes or disbelieves about the subject. No one who has heard CD audio, that has been upsampled, and then converted to analog through a 24/192 DAC thinks it's "hype", that's for sure.........................I wonder, first of all, what your real name is, Mr. Squirrel, and if you are in the USA? And, I also wonder what motivates you into thinking that innovation in the world of digital technology is "hype" so often? It seems to me, that products that need "hyping" are those that are in areas that aren't in a constant state of flux, i.e. outside the digital realm.

I can't resist. I just have to chime in on this one too! Carl, I think you are correct (yikes!). Upsampling is probably not ALL marketing hype; I'm sure that when implemented by a SKILLED DESIGNER, it provides sonic benefits beyond what can be achieved with typical oversampling technology. However, there are perhaps too many companies offering "upsampling" DACS these days, AND using this "keyword" to sell units. I'm not sure if EVERYTHING that upsamples is better than a well designed oversampling player. For instance, I'm sure that your CD50 will CLEARLY outperform most new, inexpensive upsamplers. So certainly SOME companies are using "upsampling" as a marketing gimick, while clearly others (dCS comes to mind) are not.It all seems to be in how the technology is implemented. But to paraphrase Jeff Kalt again, different is not always better or more acurate, and I guess it remains to be seen if upsampling is a more ACURATE technology, or just different. No one I know who has heard the dCS gear thinks upsampling is "hype", so maybe we need to be a little more open minded about all this. As I've said in another thread, not all things can be fully explained or measured; our brains are obviously much more advanced than todays test equiptment. For example, I bet many SOTA loudspeakers measure just about the same, yet SOUND totally different. So even if some digital designers see no real difference between upsampling and oversampling, that does not mean the two technologies SOUND the same. But I still fail to see how something that converts digital data to a HIGHER sample rate (ie, upsampling) can be the SAME as oversampling, which to the best of my (limited) knowledge NEVER converts the digital data stream in this way. But once again, I digress. Back to the topic. I do need to get my hands on a Resolution Audio player soon I feel!I have a friend in Atlanta that was/is TOTALLY FLOORED BY THE CD50, AND CAN NEVER IMAGINE A TIME WHEN HE WILL BE WITHOUT IT. And he was a DIE HARD Wadia man; he now feels that the Wadia is arcahic by comparison. Its so good in fact, that he seems to have NO interest in upgrading to the RA CD55! So that is "what the heck is Resolution Audio"...they seem to make the very best digital playback systems availabe today. Chow!

My experiences totally bear out what deborah1 has stated: the BEST digital playback I've heard is the 47 labs combo. It's the simplest, it has no filters, oversampling, or anything. It's a 'simple' 16/44 redbook player, yet it sounds like . . . music. It's very musical. The cd55, on the other hand, does employ 'up' sampling, and also sounds very good. Technically, it's very different (that collage education coming into play here) from the 47labs digital stuff. All one has to do is open a road & track magazine, and look at one of their tests comparing cars; there are many different ways to get from point a to point b (and rather quickly).