I'd like to know as well because most people cannot hear clearly above 18KHz. However, the human ear can definitely distinguish dynamic range above the 16-bit threshold. The sonic effects are small, but remember that to true audiophiles, even a 5% difference is enormous. People like Monty probably consider 5% to be nothing --thus their dogmatic conclusions.
LOL. So some software programmer is more credible than Bob Katz (whom Monty regards as THE authority in digital mastering) when it comes to digital audio? OK, sure. Lavry chose 75KHz as the sampling frequency because it's slightly more than double the 35KHz that he thinks some people can hear. The Nyquist theorem calls for sampling rates at twice the audible frequency range. I would certainly trust Lavry over a software programmer who has very paranoid worldviews...
No need to read entire thread after the first few pages.
Dan Lavry: http://www.monoandstereo.com/2008/06/interview-with-dan-lavry-of-lavry.html
"Regarding bits: The ear can not hear more then about 126dB of dynamic range under extreme conditions. At around 6dB per bit, that amounts to 21 bits, which is what my AD122 MKIII provides (unweighted).
Regarding sample rate: The ear can not hear over 25-30KHz, therefore 60-70KHz would be ideal. Unfortunately there is...
I would trust Fostex to deliver consistent drivers.
What is your musical taste? I have VG+ to Mint albums from Pink Floyd, CCR's remastered Steve Hoffman box-set, Beatles, some U2, Radiohead, Roger Waters, a few Led Zep, etc...
All cleaned 3 times with Nitty-Gritty vacuum and solution and played on Clearaudio Maestro MM.
PM me if interested.