It's sad, C# is almost an excellent replacement for C++. As a pure language, it extends C++ is many useful ways, while fixing most of its idiotic syntax and inconsistencies. The problem is the runtime model. C# at this time runs only on the .net VM architecture, which has its uses, but is _not_ a replacement for the direct machine model of C/C++. For example, C# / .net cannot be used for hardcore games: it requires the user to have the correct version of the .net runtime installed, it compiles only to an intermediate language, that is finally compiled only with a JIT, it has no provision for targeted assembly coding, it has mandatory garbage collection, with its inherent unsuitability for real-time apps, its object/memory model is high-overhead, compared to the simple stack-based model of C, etc. I love C# as a language -- much cleaner and more fun than C++. It was a fresh start, and has evolved in a much more sensible way than C++ in the intervening years. C++ has jumped the shark -- all the new features of 0x are grafted on with horrible franken-syntax, and weird exceptions and compromises abound.

I'm really looking for a format that sounds better than CD quality, and is also more compact than FLAC. I'm not convinced that 44 kHz 16-bit linear audio is the best you can get, for the bitrate. Music these days is commonly created at 96+ kHz and 24-bit, and then "compressed" down to 44 kHz 16-bit for CDs, then further compressed to MP3 etc for electronic distribution.

I think the most important question is: for a given bitrate, which format gets you the closest fidelity to the 96 kHz 24-bit original? Losslessly compressed 44 kHz 16-bit, such as FLAC, runs at around 800 kbps for music. At that enormous bitrate, is FLAC really the best you can do? Wouldn't an MP3-like codec, that operated in 20 or 24 bits, and at a maximum frequency of 96 kHz, sound better for the same number of bits? (Only a small amount of information would occupy the frequency range between 48 and 96 kHz, so unlike linear formats, it's not like doubling the frequency range doubles the bit count).

I'm really curious -- at what bitrate would an MP3-like codec, compressed from a 96 kHz 24-bit original, sound as good as 16-bit CD quality, in a high-fidelity listening test with high-quality components? My guess is somewhere less than 800 kbps. This is the format we should use moving forward, not an inefficient 1980s linear standard.