Hooch Tan
02-25-2011, 10:00 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://gizmodo.com/#!5768446/why-24+bit-audio-will-be-bad-for-users' target='_blank'>http://gizmodo.com/#!5768446/why-24...e-bad-for-users</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Apple and other digital retailers are planning to offer 24-bit audio to consumers. It should be an easy sell; recording studios use 24-bit, it's how the music was mixed, and it's how the consumers should hear it. Right? Wrong. 24-bit audio might be the staple of recording studios, but there's a reason it should stay there."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1298658116.usr20447.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>Does everyone really need 24-bit audio? I am sure tha audiophiles will respond with a resounding yes, but us mere mortals have been living with 16 bit audio for quite some time. Sure, there is a market for better fidelity, but when many of us use stock earbuds or speakers, that extra quality might be lost. Of course, there are also other applications like playing music through your fancy home theatre or Beats headphones.</p><p>I think we have already reached the "good enough" point with 16-bit audio. It has served us well for decades and if we have been willing to live with lossy codecs on top of that, I do not think there is an appreciable enough jump in quality that 24-bit will be the next must have. That being said, I can easily see everyone switching to 24-bit audio simply because that is what is offered. If there is no increase in cost, why not? Storage is becoming less of a problem, and as for streaming, connection speeds have long outstripped what is needed for high quality audio. Unless, of course, you are worried about something like Usage Based Billing, in which case, you probably will lag behind and become some sort of backwater user in a backwater country.</p>