Originally Posted By: Matt Finley
I play all my songs on a crystal radio.

.. and yet he has the Audiophile version, go figger .. <grin>

Back on subject; for the internet the smaller file sizes work better.

Plus the next 2 points;
Most users get the regular tracks (not audiophile)
Even the ones with the audiophile version will end up compressing for posting on the web usually (or getting compressed by the site they post to).
So your real life end result will likely be like the demos.

If you 'need' better track quality the audiophile version can add a slight improvement, IF you are keeping everything uncompressed all the way through.
How much better? That value can only be determined by the user, but most RTs in standard wma format mix well with 16/44 or 24/48 tracks in my experience.
They don't stand out much (if at all) and when they do a little EQ or compression usually brings them up to snuff.

I am involved in one CD project currently where the Realdrums for one song out of fourteen were generated from BiaB wma tracks and not a single listener has noticed the difference in those drums compared to the live drums we recorded with 8 mics in raw WAV format on 8 separate tracks on the other songs.
Not a single one. And we intentionally picked a few 'audiophile' type listeners for input. (they invest thousands and thousands in sound systems for detail and critical listening .. and would likely not be happy if I pointed out this result)

It's not empirical evidence, but it is some pretty convincing real world results. We really were open to see if anyone noticed and nobody did.

I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!