Right now it's the internal 48kHz that's a deal breaker for me. I was so looking forward to this as it's a less expensive option to the Trinnov units but at 48kHz internal that's undoubtedly one major reason for that.
Maybe I'm a bit different to most but even listening to music an analog bypass is no good to me because I often like to apply matrix surround processing to my music and I wouldn't be willing to drop my high res files down to 48kHz. Unless your source is a turntable the file starts as digital anyways not analog so keeping it digital all the way through to the speaker out is an advantage and being able to apply any processing and EQ at the higher resolutions is the desired option. One could argue though that for ripped CD's 48kHz is upsampling to a higher resolution so there could be an ever so slight advantage there however that's only true of CD's as I believe most low resolution digital files from say HDTracks are at 48kHz vs 44.1 like a CD although there certainly are 44.1 files on HDTracks.
So it only sounds good when you listen to at least 24/96? I am willing to bet that in a controlled environment, with the focus purely on the music, you will not even be able to hear the difference between 320 mp3 and 24/192 flac.
How can I be so sure? Because trained mastering technicians can barely tell the difference, and they know what to listen for.
You're not a dog, a cat or a bat. 24/48 is plenty, and well over the limits of your hearing range.
Good sound comes from recording, mixing and mastering, not from resolution.