24-bit will not fix computer audio
Articulate argument from Tim Anderson on why 24-bit will not fix computer audio and why 16-bit is fine:
[What] are the limitations of 16/44 audio? We can be precise about this. Nyquist’s Theorem says that the 44,100 Hz sampling rate is enough to perfectly recapture a band-limited audio signal where the highest frequency is 22,500 Hz. Human hearing may extends [sic] to 20,000 Hz in ideal conditions, but few can hear much above 18,000 Hz and this diminishes with age.
In fact, despite the claims of audiophiles, most people cannot tell the difference between studio-quality output and an MP3 file, especially given that output is usually sub-optimal (car stereos, crappy headphones, TV speakers, and so on). And given that music is distorted beyond belief in all commercial recordings these days (to make everything sound ‘loud’, audio is compressed and peaks are clipped, wrecking dynamic range), upping the audio from 16- to 24-bits won’t make the slightest bit of difference in the vast majority of cases, even if you have high-end kit.
To my mind, as long as sources are offering ‘high enough’ quality lossy files (256–320 kbps AAC or MP3), that’s enough. Any move to 24-bit will just be corporate PR wankery—a pissing match that aims to snare users who think higher numbers are better. And I bet you’d get charged more for the privilege.
I agree with what you’re saying, but any move towards better quality encoding, whatever marketing phrases they choose to go with (I assume they’ll couple 24-bit with significantly higher bit-rate encoding anyway), is fine by me. I listen to most of my music on ‘moderate’ quality Sennheiser HD202 headphones that weren’t expensive, and on quieter tracks (particularly with classical music) I can hear a lot of hiss and distortion that are almost certainly products of the encoding process, and probably wouldn’t have been there on the CD/master. Now, I know CD is 16-bit, which I guess kind of backs up the point you’re making, but like I say, I’ll be happy if they just get those tracks re-encoded and get rid of the hiss/artefacts, 24-bit or not.
Also, it might be nice if studios took the opportunity to remaster some of the tracks when they create the 24-bit versions — release them as special editions to justify the price, maybe.
The idea that humans can’t hear frequencies above 20,000 Hz and therefore recording higher frequencies is a waste of time has always been controversial and is nowadays a little old fashioned. We now know that there are harmonics at these higher frequencies that we can discern and that make a difference to how we respond to music. Also bear in mind that that for while now there have two distinct schools of thought on how to evaluate the fidelity of sound – there are the arch-rationalists who believe that if you can’t measure something then it doesn’t exist. Then there are the subjectivists who can demonstrate equipment that measures badly, but sounds wonderful. As you might of guessed I am in the latter camp.
As for modern pop recordings and the “loudness war”, not everyone listens to that stuff, some of us enjoy acoustic instruments and voice recorded well and properly mastered. I hope Apple goes 24 bit.
Hari