Not many people can hear frequencies as high as 22,050 Hz which is the theoretical limit -- vaguely speaking -- of a 44.1kHz signal. Increasing the sampling rate to 88.2kHz means, again in theory, the DAC can reproduce frequences up to 44.1kHz. However, humans can't hear those frequencies. There's essentially no benefit to the listener.
Why might another manufacturer support 88.1kHz or even 192kHz (which has zero benefit to humans)? Ask them why. Don't forget to mention Nyquist rates. I predict the response, if any, will be "science doesn't apply to our products."
Yes, I was about to add to my last post that I might not notice the difference between 44.1kHz and 88.2kHz (or 96 kHz) sampling rates.
This topic has been all over this site and the Internet.
But, I still do not understand why do HDTracks.com and others sell 176.4 KHz and 196 kHz tracks? The only reason seems to be that they want to make more money,
because albums in very high resolution (176.4 KHz and 196 kHz) cost more,
usually $30 vs. $20 (96 kHz, 88.2 kHz or 48 Khz).
So, that's a 50% rip-off!
Edited by JakeJack_2008 - 2/19/13 at 11:25am