Comment by coldtea
20 hours ago
>I feel like this should have been 24-bit at 192 kHz.
As if anybody is going to notice the difference? Even the 24-bit vs 16-bit difference is gratious (it makes sense during recording and mixing, when listening it's just a check-mark item).
> "As if anybody is going to notice the difference?"
I don't think so, no.
But since 24-bit/192 kHz music is already available in the Apple Music catalogue, I was wondering why they wouldn't just embrace it.
It costs extra money to properly support it, so why would they? For a listening device it shouldn't matter one bit. As an output (i.e. their headphone outputs), I could see some marginal benefit for recording... but not as an input to your ears.
Nope. Nobody is physically capable of noticing the difference. That doesn't stop people from claiming they can, though!