Thanks Dr Aix, I appreciate the reply, while I agree with you that there should be standards, I suspect that you get the most resistance trying to group a medium above or below a another, because then it becomes subjective. Right now I believe we are beginning a resurgence in the interest of high fidelity and higher quality audio which really hasn't been seen since before the CD. It is companies like yours, HD Tracks and others that are fueling this resurgence. Not only do I applaud this resurgence, I'd like to encourage it.
I have listened to absolutely horrible 24bit live recordings, but also I have heard better than CD quality master tape "192/24" recordings with much better sound and dynamics than the original RBCD. To put them in a "SD" category would not only not do them justice, but also may hurt this "HD" resurgence we are enjoying.
I have also recently listened to a well put together vinyl set up and while noisy as heck, there was a quality to it that I missed in CD's, after getting through all the work, noise and pops there was much more airy feel to sound stage and as much as I wanted to resist enjoying vinyl, I found myself more immersed than I do with CD's, on par with DVD-a and SACD's multi channel or stereo. Given the choice, DVD-A/SACD, pure 192/24 digital recording would far preferable to an album, however an album to me is far more enjoyable over a CD. That's why I rate it as an HD format.
With audio being so subjective, I don't think you can apply the same kind of rating system as you can with video. a tiered system may work, maybe like CD's you can use "analog to digital HD" or "pure digital HD"
Anyway, I applaud what you and others are doing for the industry. I hope it continues and brings back the days when audio was a fun and enjoyable hobby and not just a digital medium.