Accessible, yet elite sounding, musical CD machines. Current vs next upgrade

@zx10 not quite, just 8 x the sampling rate.  SACD is DSD 64, DSD 512 exists.  DSD 1024 can be found at Native DSD Music - but has just been up sampled from a lower res master.

When I buy high res stuff from HighDefTapeTransfers I look to see the provenance - source, mastering etc. and choose my high res format appropriately.  I have found the DXD 352.8 24 bit can sound better than high res DSD.  They appear often to convert the tape to DXD and master at that.

@jbuddha882 a few months ago I sold a Playback Designs MPD-8 DAC and MPs-X streamer , for a few reasons but mainly after realizing I really loved playing local CDs and was more or less fed up with the inconsistencies of a streaming only setup. That’s another conversation, so to keep this short I rounded out my Accuphase stack by purchasing a DP-770 SACD machine. This beast is 65 pounds and has an incredible transport design/ all custom in house by Accuphase. It’s like a Swiss watch in precision and a tank in terms of mass. The sonic performance has knocked me out- I can find no fault with it. I owned the MPD-8 for a year and know that amazing DAC well. The DP-770 offers at least as much sheer resolution and performance - and makes playing CDs and SACDs an absolute joy. The voltage drive is a perfect match for the gain structure of the C-2900 preamp. The MPD-8 has a hot output and can be reduced with menu options. For streaming sessions I use a Lumin U2 and love it. I can’t say enough about the DP-770. If you are hunting for a top SACD player with a USB input id put it on your radar.

I am not ready as of yet to take my investigations into what I am to suggest as the following audio devices to be considered, but do get the idea that there is most likely the need to experience this type of Digital Source equipment as my learning progresses.

Fortunately, I am good friends with an individual who has a very good relationship with a person who has invested substantial time and money into learning about a Digital Source that is a keeper in their own audio system. This person is on a round trip somewhere near 300 miles, probably 6-ish hours, with no travel issues encountered. For approx' £40 in fuel, £20 for Wine, along with a day dedicated to being social and meeting a like-minded individual regarding audio. Especially an individual who is 'streets ahead' of me with their Digital Source investigations. I would be introduced to quite a lot of information worthwhile being exposed to, and receive demonstrations of audio equipment that is worthy of receiving a demo of.

The person in question has been rolling Digital Sources over the past decade, but quite intensely across the past five years. I would suggest that the cost of equipment brought in for evaluation over the past five years is bordering on £100K, with the most expensive Digital Source nearing £15K. Streaming and Hard Media are both investigated and at certain times compared to each other. Over the past two years, streaming has fallen to the wayside and Hard Media has been the permanent successor.

Currently, a TEAC 701T, TEAC 701N, Denefrips Avatar and Rockna DAC are in use, which are a combined value of near £22K if I am correct about the Rockna DAC Model.

The TEAC's and Denefrips, along with a cheaper in the range Rockna, are designs I am willing to consider as part of my learning. I would certainly consider these a benchmark against more expensive options. I know the individual who is using the TEAC's are very familiar with Esoteric designs and has found plenty to say about the TEAC's being hard to surpass. 

I also know the Avatar is thought of as a very, very capable Transport. 

The Rockna, has a history of being used, and the model present now is a revisit to this brand. It is yet to be used as a given period at the frontline with the available CDT's. 

Not a recommendation from personal experience, which is the method I do advocate. I suggest the above be looked into to help decide if a model is a worthy candidate for a shortlist.  

@richardbrand 

"When evaluating dacs, I really recommend getting hold of their data sheets.  You then have to look for what is not there.  If they don't mention DSD, it is London to a brick they have to be fed digital down-converted to PCM.  Down-converting loses resolution or timing or both."

Again, I don't know where you get your facts but there is no support for mixing or manipulating a high-resolution recording whether it starts life as PCM or DSD as DSD. All of it is done in the PCM domain often DXD which is the most widely supported and then authored to one of the DSD or PCM formats for release. A you said, upconverting a lower resolution doesn't add anything but noise except maybe in the case of a Chord Electronics product (Hugo M Scaler) that uses algorithms in an attempt to simulate or fill in the missing data while upconverting to 768 Khz PCM.

Most SACDs contain information in their printed insert regarding the native format they were recorded in and the equipment used to mix and manipulate the original recording before authoring to whatever release format. Interestingly, you'll find most are recorded on 24 bit, 96 Khz PCM. At least all the ones I've collected though Reference Recordings has recorded some works in DSD.

One of my first DACs was PSAudio DAC3 and at first I was entranced by its upscaling results.  It increased the soundstage and seemed to create real space between the musicians.  Then after using for a while it seemed to otherwise subtly distort others.  Subsequent DACs with upscaling capabilities made much less of an impact, good or bad, and on my Bryston DAC3 I just leave the feature off