There has been a lot of discussion in this thread that takes the focus away from the OP's request. This is a Wishlist, and Rob/Rap is entitled to state his request. We should not be arguing with him, only inquiring if there is something not clear. I think his posts have been very clear.

And I would certainly not argue with the premise that 24-bit recordings would be better; I use that rate in my own recordings.

Perhaps a little history will help.

The audiophile version has been around since the beginning of RealTracks, as an option. I bought it, and have continued to do so. In those earlier versions, it admittedly made more of a difference, not only in sound quality from .WMA to .WAV, but in performance. BIAB converts the .WMA files to .WAV, but if there is also a .WAV version in the same folder, it uses that and loads the RealTrack faster. That was a serious performance benefit at the time. Once the Elastique algorithms were introduced, the number (and size) of RealTracks was cut by two-thirds, and yet the quality and adaptability of each was better. The performance difference between regular and audiophile became less, as well as the quality difference.

I need a good set of monitors and a good listening environment to tell the difference anymore, unless I am mixing many RealTracks, where additive noise begins to show up with the compressed .WMA files. There are also a few instruments, like solo guitar and piano, where the difference between audiophile and regular RealTracks is more readily apparent. Perhaps it would be better just to call the audiophile version "uncompressed" but I'm not sure how many people would understand the impact of that.

Hope that helps a little.

BIAB 2025 Win Audiophile. Software: Studio One 7 Pro, Swam horns, Acoustica-7, Notion 6, Song Master Pro, Win 11 Home. Hardware: Intel i9, 32 Gb; Roland Integra-7, Presonus 192 & Faderport 8, Royer 121, Adam Sub8 & Neumann 120 monitors.