I cant disagree with DBLT of redbook vs high res on technical merits of each.
Redbook has become a marketing term. Like "Audiophile Grade." Products at bestbuy bear this.....
I can say that the redbook spec doesn't regulate dynamic range --or sonic quality standards.
In fact, different releases of the same album or song in CD format ie. greatest hits vs original release often sound different! They still meet the redbook standard though. (Greatest hits are sometimes worse BTW
.) Prince albums vs the "Ultimate" 2cd are a good example. Not a prince fan? How about the Beatles "1" vs other releases. Terrible.
The issue is often not only that the format spec is technically better, but that these formats are produced better-often from scratch. Their intended users, audio enthusiasts, demand the best. I think re-issue 180gram Vinyl and DSD are often regarded as better sounding partly because the dynamic range is often better than that of their counterpart CD or MP3/iTunes equivalent.
Now, on an SACD with Dual layer CD and DSD audio, the differences would be trivial, as the dynamic range would be the same. But a CD version of an album vs a remastered SACD years later? could be huge. Look at multichannel DSOTM....
The dynamic range database backs up this hypothesis:
http://dr.loudness-war.info/It is a cool tool to see how formats stack up given the same album\artist etc.
The new Daft punk album Random Access Memories is a current example of how the Vinyl version sounds "better" than the CD equivalent. The numbers back it up too.
Currently, buying DSD gives you the best chance of getting a pristine version of an album. It doesn't suffer physically, as Vinyl does. It is the best spec technically. It is mastered with highest sonic quality standards in mind.
