When I line up thye features between BIAB 2017 Everything PAK and Audiophile Versions, I don't see a difference. Can someone let me know the difference?
Much obliged
The difference is the RealTracks content.
The non-Audiophile versions contain compressed versions of RealTracks, although not highly compressed and lots of folks can't really tell the difference unless they know to be listening for differences compared directly against the uncompressed version. That makes for a much smaller distribution (about 100GB versus 1TB for uncompressed).
The audiophile version contains the source uncompressed WAV files (however, I believe they are recorded at 16-bit/44.1Khz (some folks have requested 24-bit/96Khz).
Otherwise, all the application programs and utilities are the same, all the styles are the same, all the effects are the same, and everything works the same. The difference is that you are not mixing together compressed WMA files, but WAV files.
Yep.... same exact thing except for the way the music files are compressed.
I, for one, can't really hear a difference in the files by folks who have the AP version over the version I have, which is the "normal" compressed version.
It all sounds really good.
This image created by one of the PG Music forum members shows the differences in more detail.
Here's the link to the article
FYI. I've been working with the 2017 Audiophile version for about a month now. IMHO it's a night and day improvement!
I'm glad it's right for you.
To be clear for anyone who is interested - I updated from the 2016 Audiophile version. I'm saying that I'm getting very noticeable improvements using the 2017 Audiophile versions of BIAB and RB.
Oh, that's a very different point. I thought you were comparing pro to audiophile.
The Natural Arrangement feature, new in version 2017, explains a lot of the improvement in what you hear, but there are other reasons. They rerecorded some of the RealTracks and also made some adjustments in mixes and styles.