A perhaps philosophical question: if you have to train yourself to be able to perceive the higher-quality audio, do you end up enjoying the audio more, or are you just training yourself to dislike the lower-quality audio?
It's similar to listening to a song over good headphones instead of crappy notebook speakers for example
You start hearing all the details that were added to the sound.
It's like seeing a movie on the cinema rather than in a small TV for example
Would you prefer to be blind because if you can see you can also see a dead body?
Why not watch high-resolution images of corpses? People working in medicine do this all the time.
You’re clearly making a Luddite argument: under the circumstances of two things being the same but one of them providing a worse resolution anyone reasonable would pick the higher resolution, because you can always go back to a lower resolution but not vice-versa.
A Luddite argument would suggest all media was better at lower resolution, but that’s not what I am saying. Rather specific media for specific people is. Clearly some people want all the gory details even if I don’t.
PS: > you can always go back to a lower resolution
Having a preference is not the same as having a willingness to edit every YouTube video etc I see.
Regular display pixels only became annoying after using a Retina display for a while and then going back. They were fine before.
C.f. any other record with good dynamic range and interesting stuff below 80Hz.
Not really. I noticed fewer headaches and eyes getting dry less often after about a month.
(Not that the UK commercial radio space is exactly in a good place anyway after the global/bauer radio-pocalypse).
It might be appreciable at home, does it still apply in a moving vehicle? I personally can't tell the difference.
The extremely low bit rate used to broadcast some DAB stations is absolutely noticeable even on “cheap” equipment. The low bitrate issue is compounded further by DAB being mpeg 2 based, which is a hugely inefficient codec by modern audio standards. A 64 Kbps mono mpeg 2 audio stream is not great frankly, and common in DAB.
I have dab/FM in the car now, and It’s noticeably better than FM. I use dab almost exclusively, but there are remote areas where only fm reaches.
I really disagree there. The difference in quality between FM and DAB (not even DAB+) is very significant, and I’m not even an audiophile.
The problem is that 1) you don’t know it until you actually make the switch, and it’s not like you can borrow a car stereo system for a week to try it out, and 2) that’s pretty much the only advantage of DAB, from consumers’ perspective, so the price/value proposition is not good enough to make it a no-brainer purchase.