Does the RCA input on a receiver recognize audio at 96khz?
This is your second post about this, and I told you going to 96K is waste of bandwidth. I will go further and tell you it is wanton waste of bandwidth.
Let us go into the history of digital audio.
At the beginning one of the great pioneers was Harry Nyguist. He determined the sample rate needed to reach the limits of human hearing. It is accepted that this is 20 KHz, although as a retired medic I can tell you that many can never hear above 15K even as children. There is progressive HF loss with age, and by 60 or so if you can hear anything over 12 K you are lucky and unusual.
Now Harry Nyquist determined that sample rate of 40 KHz was required to reach the maximal limit of human hearing. So to give a margin 44.1 KHz was selected for the CD. With a 16 bit rate it gives you a dynamic range of 96 db. which is adequate for 99% of program. It is also at or exceeds the signal to noise ration of most reproducing systems, when you take the whole chain into account. If you increase the bit rate to 24 then you get a dynamic range of 144db. That exceeds the S/N of any reproducing chain I am aware of.
So why does 96 K exist. The reason is in mastering it could happen, but rarely does, that you need to slow the program down. At 96K if you halve the speed you still have 48K.
So back at the dawn of digital audio the 16 bit 44.1 was a perfectly rational choice and still is. There are few works, and in fact very few that would require a dynamic range beyond 16/44.1 and none that require anything above 24/48. Only classical works with huge forces require a dynamic range above 96 db. That is why the CD has been so successful.
We actually need to fight against this 96K nonsense, as it potentially deprives other users. It is akin to delivering water to some customers and having them pour half their supply on the ground. So rather then promote 96K, the ethical stance is actually to campaign against it.
So I hope this is your last post about this nonsense.