Be that as it may, your response has the potential to leave us in the dark when it comes to the question of upsampling…
…when iFriend has already confirmed that he hears sound degradation…
I have been trying to shed some light on things by explaining that MusicBee uses Bass as the audio engine, and that Bass will also take care of the upsampling part.
I am not saying input from MusicBee's developer couldn't shed extra light on the matter, but for as far as I read this thread there are two things going on here:
1. What the technical details of the upsampling algorithm that MusicBee uses are.
2. A user stating that he heard a clear difference using 'another' upsampler.
The first item should be asked to the Bass developer, using the Bass forum. (I gave a link to that before)
And if anyone is convinced that Bass is using an inferior method of upsampling, it would be good if he would then present any assumed flaws, and suggest possible improvements to the Bass developer (un4seen).
The second item should be substantiated a bit better to have any chance of being a benefit to other MusicBee users.
What upsampler? How was testing done exactly? Is it available in any way or form so that it has a reasonable chance to be used by MusicBee as e.g. a plugin?
(and to be factually correct; he did not say that there was a 'sound degradation', he said that he could hear a 'clear difference')
About the technicalities of upsampling and discussing them here, I agree with what Sveakul just said:
Discussions on the technical details, usefulness, purposes or differences between upsampling methods are best to be had on fora that pertain to the technicalities of audio.
There are many fora that are frequented by, and contributed to by audio professionals that have experience and expertise on such matters.
The quality of both the discussions and the answers about something like resampling will likely be higher there.