Could you help me setup how to rip CDs into FLACs?

[Massiveattack]

Wow, Most Excellent!
I feel like a kid in a candy store, I was not expecting so many responses. Ive been dragging feet to sign up because I didn't think I would get much help.
I have no idea where to start.
(I wish I had my setup with me here at work so I could read off some of the settings I have, Ill try to go by memory and answer as many questions as you all asked.)

The newest PC I have, is using an AMD 5900x CPU. I would hope this would be enough to encode... Maybe I need to try turning down error correction.


I will take a look at some of these links you dudes gave me... Maybe it is time to move on from EAC and try out this dBPowerAmp program instead. I feel like I understand EAC pretty well and I have really clean mp3 Metadata and tags... except for that fact that, for an example, when I load my MP3s onto my phone, the phone will add ALLLLLLL the album cover artwork as photos into my camera... kind of annoying...
I do use accuraterip with EAC, also if I remember correctly, I installed some plugin called LAME as well, to help with ripping MP3s... I’m obviously a little rusty with how I built my setup. It was somewhat supposed to be "set and forget" for future use.
I also try to use a slightly heavy error reading setting... although 99% of my CD collection is in perfect condition, I just .... guess I feel better "measuring twice cutting once" when it came to ripping for long term cataloging.
Although I am not fully versed in the teachings of the "Redbook" standardization: I understand that "The CD" was never fully pure and in this day and age, you can get better quality by downloading FLACs from websites- However, the first is the cost. I will admit I don’t have the biggest desire to seek out things that I own and re-buy them.



On a personal level/desire for how I live my life:
I think I own a lot of obscure stuff, like early 70-90s trance/techno/ambient trip-hop sound or small one off labels of bands no one has ever heard of... I just feel like I wont find some of the stuff I own available for download. I might take a hit in quality but I am fine living my life with my collection and nothing more.
Guess I am showing my age here, but I remember when you could choose between a tape and a CD at the store. At a young age I felt like I "could see the future" and I started replacing my tape purchases with CDs.
I know we could argue against it, but I feel like, to a degree, owning a CD is technically the most purest form of a recording you can get your hands on. It technically reaches all the spectrums that you can hear and comes in a relatively long term archival form.


-I also like to own physical copies and play CDs when I can. I have an old classic sports car with a CD player, and I typically like loading disks into it. Besides listening, its the "act" of using CDs that I still enjoy. Makes me still feel like a kid again.
-I do have an AUX cord installed in that car, so I did start relying on an mp3 player in the past, but it recently quit on me... Thats why I need a new DAP to replace it.
-I'm not big on new music, so really I like to live in the past and I simply collect old CDs of things I like and that keeps me happy. I’m pretty simple in that aspect.



The thing is:

Ive realized that ripping the data and using a DAP will always give me better quality than the physical CD being played, because the hardware in players themselves can be subjective.
With that being said, years ago I tried to archive all of my CDs in the best form possible, while trying to also save some space.
My "at home" setup is a Fiio K5 Pro DAC, with AKG K712 Pro headset.
I feel like I did a lot of testing and it got to the point where, I could hear the difference between the 192k mp3 and the FLAC, but I just felt like it wasn’t enough to warrant taking up more HD space.
It seems I was mistaken about things mostly being in the 320k range. Now that I scroll through my stuff on my phone, it looks like its all ranging from 162k-320k... Its frustrating because I feel like I went through so much trouble to create an equal standardization within my collection- and yet I STILL have things all over the place. It just feels cumbersome to me and that’s what spurred this whole "lets just go ahead and redo everything FLAC.... I cant get much better than that"

Basically I feel like tinkering again, and wanted to see about re-doing my collection with a better standardization vs the varying "162-320k" I did in the past.

I just thought going ahead and copying my collection in FLAC this time around would just put things to rest as having the best quality.
Maybe I’m stressing too much and the 192k I have is good enough for my life, or maybe I could go ahead and really make sure I redo my collection into 320k mp3. I don’t know really. I guess that’s another topic.
My main reasoning for this topic was just doing my due diligence to get the best out of my CD formats for my enjoyment and use. I guess I was curious if "a rip is a rip" or you can actually still get better quality based on the program or process you use to rip the data.
If I setup the program to get the simplest form of ripping... would it be of less quality than a program setup to make sure it was doing the best job possible?




So now that Ive word dumped a bunch of useless stuff.... I hope I helped answer something after getting so much feedback, maybe I need to just relax and stick with mp3 format? I guess I got excited with the idea of a new DAP, and an entire catalog of FLAC files, but maybe I need to just stick to the 192k mp3s I have, or I could even just redo them in guaranteed 320k mp3?

However, maybe for as powerful as EAC is, its just kinda cumbersome to setup, probably its time to pay some money and buy a better program, like the DBPowerAmp.
Ill study some of these links listed and see if I cant find a better way to use EAC, maybe thats just the problem. I'm trying to setup too much and need to simplify the EAC settings.

 

[tgray]

Storage is cheap enough now just rip them as flac/uncompressed. Then you don’t have to worry anymore. 200 CDs shouldn’t even take that long. I wouldn’t bother with mp3 unless you are strapped for space somewhere. If so you can reconvert from your lossless rips as needed. Treat the lossless rips as you master archive.

I finally finished ripping my collection uncompressed a few years ago.

 

[MarkBee123]

I am almost finished ripping all of my CDs to flac using EAC. I originally used what I thought was a very good Samsung low profile USB cd player, however I recently switched to a Plextor FX891SAF internal CD drive and a vantec USB adapter that plugs into the back of the drive (no enclosure) and let me tell you, it is night and day. The Plextor rips CDs in a couple minutes, versus 5-10mins using the Samsung low profile drive. The plextor is only $25 on amazon. the adapter was also around that price.

 

[Miguelón]

Wow, Most Excellent!
I feel like a kid in a candy store, I was not expecting so many responses. Ive been dragging feet to sign up because I didn't think I would get much help.
I have no idea where to start.
(I wish I had my setup with me here at work so I could read off some of the settings I have, Ill try to go by memory and answer as many questions as you all asked.)

The newest PC I have, is using an AMD 5900x CPU. I would hope this would be enough to encode... Maybe I need to try turning down error correction.


I will take a look at some of these links you dudes gave me... Maybe it is time to move on from EAC and try out this dBPowerAmp program instead. I feel like I understand EAC pretty well and I have really clean mp3 Metadata and tags... except for that fact that, for an example, when I load my MP3s onto my phone, the phone will add ALLLLLLL the album cover artwork as photos into my camera... kind of annoying...
I do use accuraterip with EAC, also if I remember correctly, I installed some plugin called LAME as well, to help with ripping MP3s... I’m obviously a little rusty with how I built my setup. It was somewhat supposed to be "set and forget" for future use.
I also try to use a slightly heavy error reading setting... although 99% of my CD collection is in perfect condition, I just .... guess I feel better "measuring twice cutting once" when it came to ripping for long term cataloging.
Although I am not fully versed in the teachings of the "Redbook" standardization: I understand that "The CD" was never fully pure and in this day and age, you can get better quality by downloading FLACs from websites- However, the first is the cost. I will admit I don’t have the biggest desire to seek out things that I own and re-buy them.



On a personal level/desire for how I live my life:
I think I own a lot of obscure stuff, like early 70-90s trance/techno/ambient trip-hop sound or small one off labels of bands no one has ever heard of... I just feel like I wont find some of the stuff I own available for download. I might take a hit in quality but I am fine living my life with my collection and nothing more.
Guess I am showing my age here, but I remember when you could choose between a tape and a CD at the store. At a young age I felt like I "could see the future" and I started replacing my tape purchases with CDs.
I know we could argue against it, but I feel like, to a degree, owning a CD is technically the most purest form of a recording you can get your hands on. It technically reaches all the spectrums that you can hear and comes in a relatively long term archival form.


-I also like to own physical copies and play CDs when I can. I have an old classic sports car with a CD player, and I typically like loading disks into it. Besides listening, its the "act" of using CDs that I still enjoy. Makes me still feel like a kid again.
-I do have an AUX cord installed in that car, so I did start relying on an mp3 player in the past, but it recently quit on me... Thats why I need a new DAP to replace it.
-I'm not big on new music, so really I like to live in the past and I simply collect old CDs of things I like and that keeps me happy. I’m pretty simple in that aspect.



The thing is:

Ive realized that ripping the data and using a DAP will always give me better quality than the physical CD being played, because the hardware in players themselves can be subjective.
With that being said, years ago I tried to archive all of my CDs in the best form possible, while trying to also save some space.
My "at home" setup is a Fiio K5 Pro DAC, with AKG K712 Pro headset.
I feel like I did a lot of testing and it got to the point where, I could hear the difference between the 192k mp3 and the FLAC, but I just felt like it wasn’t enough to warrant taking up more HD space.
It seems I was mistaken about things mostly being in the 320k range. Now that I scroll through my stuff on my phone, it looks like its all ranging from 162k-320k... Its frustrating because I feel like I went through so much trouble to create an equal standardization within my collection- and yet I STILL have things all over the place. It just feels cumbersome to me and that’s what spurred this whole "lets just go ahead and redo everything FLAC.... I cant get much better than that"

Basically I feel like tinkering again, and wanted to see about re-doing my collection with a better standardization vs the varying "162-320k" I did in the past.

I just thought going ahead and copying my collection in FLAC this time around would just put things to rest as having the best quality.
Maybe I’m stressing too much and the 192k I have is good enough for my life, or maybe I could go ahead and really make sure I redo my collection into 320k mp3. I don’t know really. I guess that’s another topic.
My main reasoning for this topic was just doing my due diligence to get the best out of my CD formats for my enjoyment and use. I guess I was curious if "a rip is a rip" or you can actually still get better quality based on the program or process you use to rip the data.
If I setup the program to get the simplest form of ripping... would it be of less quality than a program setup to make sure it was doing the best job possible?




So now that Ive word dumped a bunch of useless stuff.... I hope I helped answer something after getting so much feedback, maybe I need to just relax and stick with mp3 format? I guess I got excited with the idea of a new DAP, and an entire catalog of FLAC files, but maybe I need to just stick to the 192k mp3s I have, or I could even just redo them in guaranteed 320k mp3?

However, maybe for as powerful as EAC is, its just kinda cumbersome to setup, probably its time to pay some money and buy a better program, like the DBPowerAmp.
Ill study some of these links listed and see if I cant find a better way to use EAC, maybe thats just the problem. I'm trying to setup too much and need to simplify the EAC settings.

I can understand that physical discs make pleasure to handle the support, putting into the player and appreciate that.

But only works on psychological level, not acoustics: a CD is filled with notches that encode a number in 0s and 1s. Just is what you can do with a DAP.

CD quality means that music has 16 bits encoding the intensity of a signal, and the signal is sampled 44.100 times per second. This allows you to hear all music you want.

At a recording studio, they utilize 24 bits to encode the intensity and 48.000 to 96.000 times per second sampling.

This is not made for technicians super ears, is to manipulate many times the track and still preserve a good fidelity. Intense equalization, adding effects and filters can degrade the accuracy of sound.

When a studio has a master, the definitive copy, they use an algorithm to reduce the resolution to CD quality which is enough to all ears including those of musicians or composers. Is made like that to not occupy a lot of place on device memories.

MP3 is a form of encoding CD quality in less than 1/4 of memory, at the price of loosing some accuracy. To see if you perceive or not the difference you can ask for online blind tests and compare non-compressed WAV files for example.

In my case I perceive well the difference so I would use FLAC, ALAC, WAV or other loseless encoding formats to rip my beloved collection.

If you don’t find an audible difference, rip and store your collection on MP3 and you will save a lot of memory on your device.

All the formats classified as “loseless” are by definition bit perfect and are impossible to distinguish from an original CD bought on a physical store, doesn’t matter if you have a CD turning on your CD player or was transferred to a solid state memory: is just a huge binary number.

24/96 resolution, as I mentioned, is dedicated to studio management and offers no advantage to consumers: weather you listen to techno 70s or you are Herbert Von Karajan (well, he’s dead so perhaps file resolution is even less important for him actually…)

Don’t worry so much about FLAC or WAV, ALAC or AIFF: just ensure your device handle the chosen format

 

[Miguelón]

Ive realized that ripping the data and using a DAP will always give me better quality than the physical CD being played, because the hardware in players themselves can be subjective.

The quality is the same, only issue with CD players is delicate when falling because the engine, track system and lens

 

[Miguelón]

I could hear the difference between the 192k mp3 and the FLAC, but I just felt like it wasn’t enough to warrant taking up more HD space

In classical I feel it worths the difference, subtle dynamics and instrument differentiation are more key points.

Dance, and electronic music in general are more “compression” friendly to my ears.

On average, 200 CDs will be maximum 120 Gb in the roughest loseless algorithm, probably less depending on the complexity of the music.

 

[Robin L]

Maybe this is heresy, but ALAC has the same data density as FLAC, can be downloaded as iTunes and takes less than 15 minutes per CD. It will be lossless Redbook, but as regards sound quality, that should be more than enough. I've copied about 1600 CDs that way. Metadata includes artist's name, album name and song name.

 

[Miguelón]

Maybe this is heresy, but ALAC has the same data density as FLAC, can be downloaded as iTunes and takes less than 15 minutes per CD. It will be lossless Redbook, but as regards sound quality, that should be more than enough. I've copied about 1600 CDs that way. Metadata includes artist's name, album name and song name.

I used iTunes and ALAC also: I found it faster than others at least on my Mac. I don’t know if is the same speed performance on a PC, don’t imagine why not though

 

[Massiveattack]

I am almost finished ripping all of my CDs to flac using EAC. I originally used what I thought was a very good Samsung low profile USB cd player, however I recently switched to a Plextor FX891SAF internal CD drive and a vantec USB adapter that plugs into the back of the drive (no enclosure) and let me tell you, it is night and day. The Plextor rips CDs in a couple minutes, versus 5-10mins using the Samsung low profile drive. The plextor is only $25 on amazon. the adapter was also around that price.

This sounds like what I have, almost. I have a Plextor PX891SAF-R in a Vantec NexStar DX2 USB 3.0 external enclosure. I hook it up to my USB 3.2 port just for ease of mind for speed.

In classical I feel it worths the difference, subtle dynamics and instrument differentiation are more key points.

Dance, and electronic music in general are more “compression” friendly to my ears.

On average, 200 CDs will be maximum 120 Gb in the roughest loseless algorithm, probably less depending on the complexity of the music.

Actually thank you for answering that, since I didn't ask. I believe my current collection is somewhere in the 60gb range.
The past 5+ years or so, Ive amassed a new collection of CDs that I have yet to rip to my collection. Maybe somewhere around 60 CDs... and it just keeps growing. I love the Media Resale shop we have in my city.
120gb would not be terrible for me to handle. I like being efficient and saving space, but 150-200gb seems doable on a small 256-512gb SD card inside of a DAP.

I have something like 70TB of space for my DVD/Bluray collection which I have also digitally preserved, so, I have some space to play.

Maybe this is heresy, but ALAC has the same data density as FLAC, can be downloaded as iTunes and takes less than 15 minutes per CD. It will be lossless Redbook, but as regards sound quality, that should be more than enough. I've copied about 1600 CDs that way. Metadata includes artist's name, album name and song name.

Some of my collection is still .m4a from iTunes in the past, Ive been trying to replace it as I can. Unfortunately I have a small history with Apple products, and as much as I proactively tried to buy into the whole Apple ecosystem, it just never works for me. At one point I WAS buying my music from iTunes.
Half of my devices are bricked from talking to each other because Apple wants to "protect my safety" by locking out old devices from communication, So I can no longer access iTunes or drop music onto ipods/iphones. It just seems like a ploy to make me buy new things, so I personally have just decided to try and move away from Apple.

 

[Miguelón]

This sounds like what I have, almost. I have a Plextor PX891SAF-R in a Vantec NexStar DX2 USB 3.0 external enclosure. I hook it up to my USB 3.2 port just for ease of mind for speed.




Actually thank you for answering that, since I didn't ask. I believe my current collection is somewhere in the 60gb range.
The past 5+ years or so, Ive amassed a new collection of CDs that I have yet to rip to my collection. Maybe somewhere around 60 CDs... and it just keeps growing. I love the Media Resale shop we have in my city.
120gb would not be terrible for me to handle. I like being efficient and saving space, but 150-200gb seems doable on a small 256-512gb SD card inside of a DAP.

I have something like 70TB of space for my DVD/Bluray collection which I have also digitally preserved, so, I have some space to play.




Some of my collection is still .m4a from iTunes in the past, Ive been trying to replace it as I can. Unfortunately I have a small history with Apple products, and as much as I proactively tried to buy into the whole Apple ecosystem, it just never works for me. At one point I WAS buying my music from iTunes.
Half of my devices are bricked from talking to each other because Apple wants to "protect my safety" by locking out old devices from communication, So I can no longer access iTunes or drop music onto ipods/iphones. It just seems like a ploy to make me buy new things, so I personally have just decided to try and move away from Apple.

Yep, I hate this part of Apple “ecosystem”.

But iTunes can be used alone as a CD extractor and organizer without need for adding media on the iTunes app. I think is what was suggested. ALAC format is similar to FLAC and iTunes is friendly to metadata management.

Sorry, I missed my earlier answer to another member who was confused about file formats and resolutions, and I addressed it to you

 

[Robin L]

I don’t know if is the same speed performance on a PC, don’t imagine why not though

It is, currently using it on a PC. However, for whatever reason, am currently defaulting to playing my CDs and SACDs.

 

[dualazmak]

Just for your possible reference and interest, you would please find here my policy and practice of digital music file organization.

Please find here my backup policy and practice of digital music library.

Spoiler

Here, I wrote;
"Backup of our treasure digital music library" is really an important issue; we may even better to start new thread on the issue.

I am living in the land of typhoon, earthquake and tsunami; of course I always keep multiple backups, therefore, of my entire digital library in several SSDs (within PCs and also in portable USB 3.0 SSDs), HDDs and NAS at my home and also in remote at my daughter's home and son's (300 km and 100 km away!). Of course, I periodically update the backups in my home at least once in a month and update the remote (daughter's ans son's) backups at least once in 6 months through high-speed optical internet connections.

I essentially do not like, do not fully trust, any of the cloud storage services especially for my large digital music library; I daily use Dropbox, however, for my daily business and for occasional "music sharing", but even with my Dropbox contents I always keep local and remote backups (in off-Dropbax folders) in SSDs, HDDs and NAS.

Fortunately my current iron-frame house is on a little hill with solid ground (free from flood), but almost no way to avoid possible mega earthquake (once in 600 years?) which might happen any place in Japan...

 

[stoo23]

if I find a proper blind test online I will share to you

Please, there is No need,...

My reference, was more to do with Studio applications.
Using higher bit depths during studio recording can make headroom available while maintaining the same dynamic range. This reduces the risk of clipping without increasing quantization errors at low volumes.

 

[Timcognito]

Ditto on dBPoweramp after 900 CDs in FLAC since 2017. If they have trouble with metadata or do not rip put in pile to fix later in one or two fixing sessions is better a half hour fixing one to learn all the nuances of fixing. Then the vast majority will be available to play while messing with the duds. Wipe all with a damp cloth and dry before ripping. Car headlight cleaner on the NON-printed side only fixed a few that would not rip.

 

[sq225917]

If your cds play without skipping on cd player using EAC is a waste of time. Just use dbpoweramp or media monkey.

Way back when, I tested 12 cds on various apps, all gave identical rips. I only use EAC for damaged discs.

 

[Massiveattack]

Please, there is No need,...

My reference, was more to do with Studio applications.
Using higher bit depths during studio recording can make headroom available while maintaining the same dynamic range. This reduces the risk of clipping without increasing quantization errors at low volumes.

This theory is similar to one applied in digital photography. Photograph your media in a slightly overexposed/blown out shot, then in processing, bring the entire level down to "being what you wanted". The idea is that on a "pixel/data" scale, you will have more data available to adjust if shot brighter, vs the data available in a darker pixel. I can understand how an audio file can be made better with the same principle.

Ditto on dBPoweramp after 900 CDs in FLAC since 2017. If they have trouble with metadata or do not rip put in pile to fix later in one or two fixing sessions is better a half hour fixing one to learn all the nuances of fixing. Then the vast majority will be available to play while messing with the duds. Wipe all with a damp cloth and dry before ripping. Car headlight cleaner on the NON-printed side only fixed a few that would not rip.

Thanks for that. Thats some pretty good tips for problem childs. I'm about to sit down and spend some time looking at dbpoweramp, then I feel like starting some past time rips today.

If your cds play without skipping on cd player using EAC is a waste of time. Just use dbpoweramp or media monkey.

Way back when, I tested 12 cds on various apps, all gave identical rips. I only use EAC for damaged discs.

Thanks for this comment. I think you kind of brought a subject to light for me, that I didint realize about EACs use.

 

[stoo23]

Strangely, some time ago, I purchased a copy of a particular Steely Dan CD, at a great price from the UK.
On arrival, I was (and have Still been), unable to successfully PLAY it on ANY CD player, it has a profusion of multiple errors,.. LOL
I contacted the seller and they happily gave me a refund,... but,.. the thing is, I managed to RIP a Perfect copy from the CD, using EAC.
I really only tried ... just to see if it would work and was amazed that I got a listenable copy from an unplayable source,..lol
I informed the supplier and they were happy and kind/generous enough to let me keep the CD and the refund.

 

[Miguelón]

Please, there is No need,...

My reference, was more to do with Studio applications.
Using higher bit depths during studio recording can make headroom available while maintaining the same dynamic range. This reduces the risk of clipping without increasing quantization errors at low volumes.

Oups, too soon defense of CD…
Lots of people searching the “studio master” quality and paying extra money for absurd convictions apart studio recordings

 

[raif71]

I do my ripping on a Mac using XLD. It rips using the AccurateRip database which means it will rip once if it can verify the rip is good using the db. Otherwise it rips twice. I only rip at 1x if there’s some problem reading the CD otherwise it’s full speed which ends up being like 8-14x.

Then use Picard to add metadata.

I’m sure there’s a similar setup on PC.

 

[dualazmak]

Just for your possible reference and interests, I assume;
- Summary of rationales for "on-the-fly (real-time)" conversion of all music tracks (including 1 bit DSD tracks) into 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz PCM format for DSP (XO/EQ) processing: #532

Spoiler

in post #532 on my project thread, I wrote as follows...

Summary of rationales for "on-the-fly (real-time)" conversion of all music tracks (including 1 bit DSD tracks) into 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz PCM format for DSP (XO/EQ) processing

Hello @adLuke san,

Welcome to this project thread! Your above inquiry is nice and important point, indeed.

My present answer for you is "It is quite feasible enough and even ""needed"" to feed all the audio digital signals in 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz PCM (or 192 kHz, if you like) by JRiver's on-the-fly format conversion to be sent into DSP (XO/EQ) software EKIO. "

Various background and justifications for this answer are as follows;

Before starting this project, I had been enjoying music with ordinary PC audio setup with one DAC (OPPO Sonica DAC)) and one HiFi integrated amplifier (ACCUPHASE E-460) driving all the SPs through passive LC (inductors capacitors resistors) network. And I had been sticking to "native format feed" into OPPO Sonica DAC up to 1-bit/DSD256(4x), as you kindly pointed.

When I started considering possible multichannel multi-driver multi-way multi-amplifier project with software DSP (XO/EQ), I did intensive search and desk evaluations on various DSP software solutions, and I found the maximum PCM processing format is 192 kHz 24 bit in these DSP software solutions. (Even with the extraordinary expensive TRINNOV ALTITUDE 32 DSP processor, actually having PC in it, the internal DSP processing is up to 192 kHz).

I carefully considered the pros and cons of "DSP processing all tracks in 192 kHz or 96kHz" instead of "native format feed", and concluded that multichannel multi-amplifier approach would surpass the cons, at least in my system setup with still amazingly wonderful Yamaha SP drivers and cabinet.

Consequently, I decided to go into "multichannel multi-amplifier" world of "max. 192 kHz 24 bit processing", as you kindly have read through this project, including the "all in max. 192 kHz ASIO I/O within PC".

Then, rather recently, I (we) fully discussed and evaluated the UHF (ultra-high frequency) noise issue in poorly QC-ed HiRes music tracks including DSD formats, as you clearly noticed;
- "Near ultrasound - ultrasound" ultra-high frequency (UHF) noises in improperly engineered/processed HiRes music tracks, and EKIO's XO-EQ configuration to cut-off such noises: #362-#386, #518
I wrote that such a high amount of UHF noises would be "possibly" harmful (and useless, meaningless) for our tweeters and super tweeters. I also pointed they would be highly possibly harmful for our beloved pets including dogs, cats, birds.

Having my intensive objective measurements of these "poorly QC-ed" HiRes tracks, and having so many intensive discussions on "enough PCM sampling rate in HiFi audio", now I conclude that 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz processing (i.e. up to 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz in L and R channels) would be just enough and feasible in my setup (and I believe so also in your setup) since I decided always having high-cut (low-pass) -48 dB/Oct filters at 25 kHz in my EKIO configuration to cut-off any of the possible UHF noises very frequently existing in HiRes tracks.

This means that I have finally landed on agreement with @mikessi's "enlightenment and belief" of "There is really no audible benefit to playback beyond 24/96 sampling, especially with any recordings other that those done with the most advanced high res gear and high fidelity values."　

Another important aspect of this issue would be relating to our hearing ability in high frequency zones. Recently, I participated in the interesting thread entitled "Audio Listening With Age Diminished Hearing". You would please read my posts #70, #72 and #74 on that thread.

BTW, as I wrote here, here and here, my digital music library of about 25,000 files consists of mixture of various formats;

16-bit/44.1kHz CD ripped non-compressed aif (majority!),
24-bit/192kHz down-sampled or up-sampled aif,
24-bit/96kHz flac,
24-bit/192kHz flac,
1-bit/DSD64(1x) 2.8MHz dsf,
1-bit/DSD128(2x) 5.6 MHz dsf,
1-bit/DSD256(4x) 11.2 MHz dsf,

and now JRiver MC feeds all of the tracks usually (mainly) in 88.2 kHz 24 bit (i.e. max. 44.1 kHz Fq window in 2-ch stereo) by on-the-fly conversion into EKIO for crossover/EQ processing. As I have high-cut (low-pass) -48 dB/Oct LR filters at 25 kHz, max. 44.1 kHz in L & R channels are more than enough.