Upsampling the way to go? ?

Zaikesman ... I think you're being a bit pedantic. Increasing the sampling rate is the goal, and it is necessary to have some sort of interpolation in order to be able to assign a value to those new samples. One cannot interpolate without increased samples, one cannot increase the samples without interpolation of some sort.

Word length is a completely separate thing.

Using a multiple of 44kHz would seem to me to make the job of the upsampler easiest, especially with linear interpolation, since the original samples are preserved ... but I think a non-multiple could also be made to work, albeit with a bit more complexity.

Of course oscillators are used ... an oscillator is no more than a clock ... so they are saying they have extra clocks within the DAC ... I'm guessing from this that they are stating that they generate their own clocks at the higher sampling frequency instead of deriving them from the (potentially less accurate) digital source signal. Any reclocking DAC does the same.

I try to describe things as clearly as I can ... your response seems to be worded in an deliberately obscure way. Is there are reason for this ?

Actually I think Sean's (the other one) original post was spot on. The format is not the problem .. it's the implementation. That said SACD is a superior format, if not yet a superior implementation.

No, Sean T. - pedantic is *all* I'm being! Sorry if my writing seems obscure, it's not deliberate. I just tend to write densely (or is it that I'm just a dense writer?!).

Or could it be that maybe you're just not closely reading my posts (certainly your perogitive)? Your first three paragraphs above essentially reiterate things I believe I've already stipulated throughout my posts on this thread. Thanks for trying to be of help, though. :-)

Zaikesman ... your accusations are quite valid ... I usually don't have much time to do a thorough read. Re-reading the thread we are in close agreement.

Thanks also to dan2112 ... this white paper was very interesting. Perhaps if I get the time and money I'll have a listen to an upsampler. However much SACD is theoretically better I'm certainly not in the mood to replace several hundred CDs, especially since many were (unfortunately) digitally recorded, probably at 44kHz !

http://www.dcsltd.co.uk/papers/aes97ny.pdf

Anybody interested in reading about the results of my auditioning of my new upsampling DAC against my reference that I referred to above, should be able to see it shortly on the forum in a new post titled Upsampling Put To The Test (hopefully it'll show up there later today). It's a long article though, don't say you haven't been warned... :-)

The Theta III would not be the one I would use as a comparison as to upsampling and non upsampling devices. I have always found them to have great bass and dynamics but not much in the musicality dept. We have compared MANY upsamplers to the Audio Note DAC's and it has always been no contest. We have done many shootouts here with customers and it doesn't take but 5 minutes to know that at this point anyway, upsampling is a great marketing ploy. We have extended the offer numerous times to allow any Audiogon member in the Bay Area CA to bring their upsamplers over and compare to non. No one ever takes us up on it. It seems people like to throw technical mumbo jumbo around as to benefits of one over the other. Or they compare a new upsampler to some antiquated DAC and say wow what a difference. Bring it on:)
I will state the rules again: Be open minded. I will be. Lets have fun and you can report back here since my views will be taken with a grain of salt as a dealer. Who by the way has sold and heard many a DAC.