[bluebarbet]

Somewhat convincing analysis.

But I should add (contrary to the rebuttal my provocative take attracted) that I am in fact very finely tuned to esthetics. As a photographer I'm obsessed with getting everything right (composition, light, texture, color, details) and routinely delete everything that doesn't make the cut.

It just seems obvious to me that in consumer products, most of the differences are pretty small in substantive terms. Big economic interests are at stake in amplifying them, and conjuring up demand through marketing, and generally manipulating us.

[dml2135]

The example I had in mind was actually audio equipment. Like, clearly the high end stuff gets into diminishing returns to a point somewhere between absurdity and mysticism. But I’ve also had a friend that was completely convinced that vinyl sounds the same as spotify, and that anyone who thought otherwise was just a pretentious poseur.

[majormajor]

> But I’ve also had a friend that was completely convinced that vinyl sounds the same as spotify, and that anyone who thought otherwise was just a pretentious poseur.

This is a great example because the ambiguity could go either way (e.g. spotify lossless FLAC vs vinyl will set off picky people on each side).

Sometimes different is just different, and each will be better to some.

[bluebarbet]

Years ago I looked into this when ripping some CDs, because the question has of course been tested under controlled conditions. From memory, the general finding is that most people are incapable of distinguishing audio quality over 128kbps, and even self-declared audiophiles have trouble at 256. So I picked 192.