[nseggs]

I think the bigger issue is likely to be a trash computer mic, a trash preamp/adc, trash dac, trash speakers, trash room. I don't care if at some point you're sampling and sending that signal at 1000-bit or whatever, it's still trash, just very accurately sampled trash.

[SomeoneFromCA]

I disagree, I do not own trash equipment. Every time I install Linux, i switch Pulseaudio settings from 16-bit to 24-bit; the difference is immediate, although subtle. Everyone I know who tried to do this, noted that listening fatigue is a lot lower with the new settings.

[sneak]

In my direct experience, everyone who claims this to me, so far, is unable to distinguish 16 bit and 24 bit recordings in an ABX.

The audiophile world would do well to adopt the concept of double-blind study.

[SomeoneFromCA]

I am talking about listening fatigue, first of all, which is a long-term effect. Second, I think double-blind test are worthless, if they are done in isolation; first, you need to run non-blind tests, let people play with audio equipment as much as they want, in any combination, completely open; only after that, when people have figured out what to look for, run the double blind test. Forcing unprepared people to go through very subtle test surely won't give useful results.

[sneak]

If you can’t distinguish A from B reliably, none of the rest matters at all. The idea that you have to “figure out what to look for” is nonsense if you cannot distinguish the two reliably.

“Listening fatigue” when you know which is which is simply placebo.

[SomeoneFromCA]

You should probably read more attentively. I did not say you do not need double blind test.I said, once you learn what to look for, only that there is a point to do the blind test.