Amen!

Like Peter and earflappin is pointing out: You have to respect the voltage, of course, and differ between AC and DC ;-).

A product like the PurePower2000 can be used with all kinds of equipment, sharing the same AC voltage (220-240V in Europe). It replaces "the wall" AC outlet.
The same goes for typical UPS units ment for computer envirements. (Like I said earlier, computer UPS's are cheaper than PurePower/PPP, but I am not shure if they really provide more pure AC out).

If you wanna build your own battery supply (feeding DC to a DAC, for instance) of course you must know what you are doing in terms of regulations and internal voltages, normally between DC 12-20V.

Most UPS units made for PC market use switching technology which itself infects HF noise into the powerline (and all connected equipment, consequently).
Eventually it will work better if you pull out the wallplug every time you listen. Then you will (probably) get true battery voltage.

BTW: I had a true battery supply for my previous DAC, some years ago, and it DID improve the sound quality. It was a DIY construction. Battery cells wore out after a couple of years, though.

Here are my inital impressions:

24/96 Flac converted to WAV
vs.
16/44 CD rip + 4x upsampling + ARC:

The 24/96 improves on the 16/44. But only in subtle ways, and mainly with better microdynamics. The "attack" (start up) of the guitarstrings are more precisely reproduced, more real. Also some violin tones are slightly better resolved, not as thick/broad as on 16/44. Also the drumkit is more "sudden", with a litle more "drama" in 24/96, compared with 16/44.

I have some DAD albums which offers both 24/96 and 24/192. The relative improvement from 16/44 to 24/96, happens also when going from 24/96 to 24/192. The last step up gives another degree of realisme. More realistic microdynamics.

I think (unfortunately) the "real thing" doesn't appear before you get music at 24/192. I say unfortunately because there is so little music available at this samplerate at the moment.

-This is with a traditional filter DAC. Maybe a filterless DAC, or one of these new software-based DACs without pre-ringing, might change my opinion?

-----------

han: Thanks for the tip. I'll buy and try!

Manisandher's listening impressions are quite similar to mine:

I never tried this function, but want to try it out now. I have a dropout every 2-3 minute which might disapear with "Stop services". (Eventually, I suspect it is due to some security scanning by Windows or Sophus).

Question: Is the old (for Vista) HotKey instructions still valid, also when using W7?

Tip: The HotKey downloads and instructions are somewhat buried in the forum. You might collect everything and pin it in the download forum?

Thanks for reminding me! I bought those Chesky titles on CD many ears ago. Havn't listened to them for a long time.

An old favourite is "Live from Studio A" - Johnny Frigo with Bucky & John Pizzarelli (together with a dynamite backing group, including Ron Carter on bass).
Sound quality is superb. Single stereo mic recording with no manipulation what so ever. Drumkit is captured very realistic with scary dynamic scale. Turn up the volume and be amazed!

The 16/44 CD played through XX sounds surprisingly good. In fact, I can't recall a better "U R There" experience. The instruments and the recorded acoustics surounds you like the wet air in a sauna. Can it be better than this?

Of course, it was a forced move for me... Last night I had to download the 24/96 Flac file from HDtracks.com. Only $17.98 (less than a budget CD!). Can it improve on the CD? - I am eager to find out tomorrow, when alone in the house!

BTW: I'm not an opamp fundamentalist, but last year I upgraded all the vital opamps inside my pre- and poweramps. I went from the previous "best" models to the very last new generation opamps from National Semiconductors (se link above). The SQ improvment was quite big. The change reminded me somewhat like the sound of a very, very expensive tube preamp. The previous sound was in comparison more "ordinary", the new SQ was slightly "darker" but more organic, more resolved, more body. Fex. cymbals sounds so much more "rich" AND detailed.

I've been a little offline last year, due to kids and work, so havnt been so active here. But it's nice to see that XX gain more and more satiesfied users.

At the moment I'm enjoying the Sabre DAC, but consider me a potentional customer when your filterless DAC is ready for shipping!
You are located in Holland? I have some business there. Not impossible I'll pay you a visit later on.

And I have a tip for you too:
It’s true that many DAC’s implement opamps in a bad way. The explanation is that (from the beginning) many DACs were build by amplifier companies without much DAC knowledge. The fashion was to buy a semi-finished solution. (Chip suppliers like Crystal, sold integrated chips with DAC and opamp). The only thing missing, was the filter, which the end manufacturer could add by own choice.

The problem then, is that all the HF distortion which a DAC chip outputs, enters unfiltered into the opamp. It’s a severe punishment for any opamp, and they start to sound unnatural.
The solution is to change the order: first DAC, then filter, then opamp. This takes more engineering work, but let’s the opamp perform optimal.

SOURCE: An amplifier manufacturer, producing a DAC in the 90s, who actually knew what he was doing.

-------------

To repeat myself: The best opamps sound wonderful when implemented correctly!

Today this is a myth. Opamps used to sound bad, but that is history. I have the very recent opamp models from National in both my preamp and poweramps. The treble is silky and sweet, with body and details like a (quality) tube amp! 

Interesting read by John Atkinson in Stereophile: http://stereophile.com/news/072307national/#

John Atkinson/Stereophile reported some so-so measurements from a Benchmark DAC (a 2009 review I think). In respons, in a letter from Benchmark, they showed measurements how the jitter increases 10-fold when a typical laptop is run by it's standard powersupply. Most such power supplies are el-cheapo switchmode types, which generates a hell of a lot distortion.

Just installed 0.9y-5-02. The new "KS" alternatives poped up in the Output Device window, as expected. Engine #4 working just fine. When switching between Output Devices (with/without KS) XX automatically switches between Engine #3 and #4. Thats nice!

Listening: (Jazz at the Pawnshop, from original CD issue)
Engine #3: Slightly more "distinct" in the treble region. Sometimes I think the microdynamics definition is better, but sometimes it sound just "thinner". Engine #4: Sounds "fuller". Vibes sounds more rich, more "kick" on the kickdrum. Drumsticks are more "woody".

Anyway, quite small diferences in my system. (You can get bigger diferences if swapping interconnects). Hard to choose an overall favourite for all music tracks. Maybe long term listening will decide. When I started writing this post I prefered #3, but right now I think I'll leave it on #4, he-he.

A dCS dealer told me that dCS had some dificulties with XX player. There was some "technical" mismatch between the two. The problem has been studied and discussed at dCS factory in the past. I don't know the year, or if this "mismatch" problem is still relevant to new dCS DAC's of recent production.

A request directly to dCS will prove useful.

I disagree! It is true that "audiophile releases" with unknown artists often sounds boring, but this album is great musicianship. IF you happen to like simple rural blues. But, ok, let's be honest, I wouldn't spend $40 for this 12 track album, if it wasn't because of the 24/96 SQ   
I truly enjoyed this album, and will play it again, from time to time.

Hmmm. It's a hard choice between hi-rez and sex, but on second thoughts.......... Good night!