Thanks again Johan for enlightening into some of the valuable implications into doing both EQ and 384 kHz. Now I read up on some things in the mean time.
When it comes to sampling rates (384 kHz etc) there is the interesting fact of how small time differences we can hear. Like some displays are said to be “retina” display, meaning small enough pixels to not be able to see the pixels by the eye, there are the same fact of sample rates. When the sample rate is 192 kHz each time between the samples are 5,2 microseconds. Our hearing of time differences are very good, about 6-7 microseconds, which makes a sample rate of 192 kHz small enough to not distinguish any smaller difference. But of course it´s easier to make a good filter on a higher sampling frequency, so the DAC in Allo Boss (TI PCM5122) is working internally on 384 kHz. This means the signal is up sampled to 384 kHz. So internally the filter then can be more optimal having 384 kHz than “only” 192 kHz, but taking samples above 192 kHz is probably not going to make things much better.
What does matter is having a very good clock signal, like Allo Kali have. Actually, Allo Boss I didn’t see data on the clock jitter. Maybe you have data on how the Boss’s clock compare to All Kali’s?
The other factor is having a stable and clean voltage feed to the analog circuits and clock generator, as this becomes direct distortion added to the output signal. The Allo Boss is designed, as far as I understand, with this philosophy in mind. Correct me if I got it wrong.
So the gain in audio quality is much bigger handling jitter and a stable voltage feed than 192 to 384 kHz to my reality.