Dumb file size question.

@lowrider57  Agree, but many hi res download files have similar DR compression to the CD so you can't just assume the hi-res file has been engineered differently. In the case of this album it clearly has though.

The recording at the studio was mastered at either 24/96 or more likely 192 kbps. The file was sent to the mastering studio where it was processed for CD, vinyl, and download. All started with a hires file.
As you say, in this case the download is vastly superior.

Nowadays iTunes or streaming services are all sent the hires file. They compress it at their end.

On that DR page, in the comments section, the files were FLAC. They either converted them in their computer for analysis or they were sent FLAC files.
I don't know if this affects the DR numbers, probably not, but I usually see wav files being analyzed by their software.
As stated before, the highly compressed results are not listed as CD, but listed as lossless, source unknown. But, odds are it's a Redbook CD.
  Just some additional info for you.

I think there are bar code and catalog numbers that coincide with the CD but I have not confirmed that.

As much as I hate that CDs are being engineered this way and as much as I hate buying what, to me, seems, like a bloated file at a bloated price......at least with this album there is a digital option with decent engineering.

The ratio of data is about 3.3.
(96 * 24 ) / (44  * 16) ~= 3.3
3.3 * 300 = 990

So 1.2 Gigs is actually a little on the high side. ALAC and FLAC are compressed, but with FLAC the compression is user selectable (somewhat).
It might be worth seeing if you can improve upon that.

Keep in mind that while FLAC (and maybe ALAC) let you select compression effort, but being both lossless, there's a limit to how compressed a file can be.

Best,
E