this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
92 points (96.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43941 readers
541 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It often surprises me to see people with time, money, and knowledge settling for subpar experiences that have night and day differences to me. Even at my brokest (pretty darn broke), speakers, headphones, and glasses were always worth researching and some saving up, and the difference between what I'd end up with and the average always feels like it paid off tenfold.

I've got a surprising number of friends/acquaintances who just don't seem to care, though, and I am trying to understand if they just don't experience the difference similarly or if they don't mind. I know musicians who just continue using generation 1 airpods or the headphones included with their phone, birdwatchers who don't care about their binoculars, people who don't care if they could easily make their food taste better, and more examples of people who, in my opinion, could get 50% better results/experiences by putting in 1% more thought/effort.

When I've asked some friends about it, it sounds as much like they just don't care as they don't experience the difference as starkly as I do, but I have a hard time understanding that, as it's most often an objective sensory difference. Like I experience the difference between different pairs of binoculars and speakers dramatically, and graphical analysis backs up the differences, so how could they sound/look negligibly different to others? Is it just a matter of my priorities not being others' priorities, or do they actually experience the difference between various levels of quality as smaller than I seem to? What's your take on both major and, at the high end, diminishing returns on higher quality sensory experiences?

(page 2) 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vortexal@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago

To some extent. For audio, I don't really have to much experience with expensive headphones/earbuds but I do notice a difference. I still usually go with cheaper headphones though because the difference in audio quality and durability aren't really enough to justify the price difference.

For visuals in games, I do prefer to have the best experience but what settings I use depends on the game. There are some settings that are universal to me, like for example, if anti-aliasing is available, I always have it set to 2x (or 1.5x if the game has it) because every option for anti-aliasing in every game I've tried looks exactly the same to me, so going higher is just a waste of system resources. For similar reasons, while both of my monitors support higher resolutions, I still prefer to use 720/768p.

I think the only time I really don't care about visual quality, is just when I'm watching videos online.

[–] HipsterTenZero@dormi.zone 2 points 3 months ago

I grew up really poor, so high definition audio isn't something i've really ever had access to growing up, and I've never felt like I was missing out once I had the money to spend on new stuff.

[–] DJDarren@thelemmy.club 2 points 3 months ago

I always wanted my music to sound nice, but could never afford the best equipment.

These days I have a set of Sony MDR-7506, and while I appreciate there are ‘better’ headphones, the detail I hear when listening to lossless audio through them is astonishing. I can listen to tracks I’ve heard dozens of times and hear elements that I’ve never noticed before. And these headphones are relatively cheap at £80.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

Yes and no.

I own a nice pair of studio headphones, and monitor speakers. I have a large collection of vinyls and a hard drive full of FLAC files. High quality audio is great.

But I also don't care about quality all the time. I wear Bluetooth bone-conductor headphones most of the day because they are comfortable and open-ear. I can passively listen to music and remain alert to my surroundings and I like that.

But there are noticeable differences between things like MP3 and FLAC, digital and analog, and different kinds of speakers and headphones that I can appreciate when I am actively listening to music.

[–] minibyte@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I’ve always been pretty picky with audio, but have made some changes recently. The 5.1 system was absolutely worth it. In fact, I got rid of my turntable speakers and just run it through the surround sound and it sounds great.

Although, for reference – even before tinnitus I couldn’t tell the difference between 320 and FLAC/lossless.

[–] blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk 1 points 3 months ago

Big fan of good quality music reproduction. I'm no audiophile, but I have a HiFi I'm happy with. Had the same set of speakers for 20 years, bought an Audiolab 6000a last year after suffering with a poor second hand receiver for a few years and it's so nice to have dynamics and some punch back. Mostly paired with a Wiim mini or a NAD CDP.

I can tell the difference between 320 mp3 and FLAC (there's some online comparison test / quiz that I can get right 80% of the time). I don't have particularly good hearing, bit once you know what to listen out for then its quite apparent when it's not there. Storage is cheap so all my CDs are ripped to FLAC now, because even if I can't hear the difference on every track, why not?

My Mrs happily listens to music through her phone speaker or some cheap Bluetooth headphones. I know it shouldn't, but it really annoys me. She's also the kind of person who won't stop to take a stone from their shoe and end up with a big painful blister on their foot

[–] Moonguide@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Depends. I'm aware of the difference, but how much I care about it depends entirely on how much I like the hobby or tech. If it's food, PCs, and clothes (as in, no cheap materials that won't last a year) I care and will go beyond reasonable expectations to ensure that whatever I buy or cook is the best within reason. Anything else, as long as it works.

I don't have the energy for more than that.

[–] Ildsaye@hexbear.net 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Never let perfect be the enemy of good enough. Do you want to do the thing or do you want to stress about the thing for days, delay it for months while you save up then suffer regret anxiety about whether it was the correct choice? For a lot of people the latter is the part they enjoy about the hobby. For others it isn't worth the time and resources requires, they'd rather do the thing now with what they have and enjoy it as it is. Where does the inflection point lies between hassle and enjoyable results is personal and everyone has different criteria for different goals and contexts, and that is OK.

[–] rcbrk@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What are your tips on glasses? I choose standard uncoated lenses nowdays after finding that anti-reflective/anti-scratch coatings often scratched easily or had an optically-rippled surface, but maybe things have improved?

[–] Please_Do_Not@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

Going to a legit optometrist that either cuts their own lenses or tells you where to get good ones rather than trying to find the cheapest option online is probably the biggest thing. They tend to recommend or automatically go for the other top tips, like avoiding any coating that will ripple/peel/fade over time, using high-index materials for high prescriptions (expensive, but drastically reduced the necessary thickness and curvature + distortion of the crystal), and spacing the lens centers to your personal measurements.

[–] keepcarrot@hexbear.net 1 points 3 months ago

I notice it but don't care. Also, is wifi "wire fidelity"? I notice and care when my wifi is crap

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

Depends. It's a mix of all the reasons you've mentioned, and I'm sure this will vary from person to person. For me, high fidelity audio matters only with headphones, and if I'm listening to music. I can absolutely tell there is a difference with speakers but I don't enjoy them as much so I don't care as much.

Similarly I'm not much of a HD4k+ person when it comes to video. I do see the difference but for the most part my brain will filter most visual noise, issues and distortion away while I'm engaged in narrative. I don't need large TVs nor too much high resolution. PC monitors/laptops/phone screens? I want every pixel you can give me, the higher the resolution the better. Completely different experience than TV. I'm annoyed when I can see the pixels on a screen I'm working on.

I'm with you on the binoculars and microscopes. Yeah, quality does make a huge difference and I would absolutely get the best if I can afford it.

Food- I'm a lazy cook and very picky about condiments. I really enjoy most foods plainly. I don't mind if my stir fry got a bit soggy or if I forgot to salt the roast. I'll eat it all the same and be content with it like it had been perfect. For me to really appreciate the difference in food quality you need to add significantly more than 1% effort, so I leave that to professional chefs.

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 1 points 3 months ago

I can't tell the difference between good audio and great audio but I can definitely tell when it's shit. I have no experience listening to high quality audio formats but I do have a pair of senhessier headphones that made me never want to go back to cheap gaming headphones.

You only know what you know. So if shit audio quality is all you know then you won't value spending money on a better experience. Once you do get a taste of that better experience you will never want go back to that shit quality.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago

Yes. I spend a good amount of money on my home theater equipment. I want to see and hear the best media available to me. It's why I went all-in on amassing a large collection of Blu-Rays and ripped them to Plex uncompressed. But I settle for convenience most of the time with streaming for new content.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

I'm interested in this when buying a product, but I can't always buy new products. I also tend to go with the "buy once, cry once" mentality, which means I get something with high fidelity, but it's a rare occasion when I can upgrade something else.

[–] coffeejunky@beehaw.org 1 points 3 months ago

I spend about 300 euros on a really high end usb DAC for my desktop. I honestly don't hear the difference between the desktop output and the expensive DAC. But I do totally hear the difference between a decent and cheap pair of headphones. I do still like my DAC because it's able to power basically all large headphones and it also powers my speakers, so I don't see it as money wasted.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Do I value the better picture on a TV? Yes

Same with music. I don't enjoy watching TV /movies using TV speakers.

Listening to music using phone speakers is not worth it at all.

[–] SteposVenzny@beehaw.org 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I am very aware of the differences in quality but am mostly okay with bad equipment and/or bad settings. The most important thing is to be able to clearly see and hear what’s supposed to be clear and only especially incompetent or especially pretentious media doesn’t get mastered to work well on shoddy displays and/or speakers by those standards.

The one thing I absolutely cannot tolerate is HDR mode on TVs without enough of a maximum luminance to actually do HDR, so they and up looking way worse than SDR.

The idea of not caring about binocular quality is truly mystifying. Binoculars’ only job is to make things as easy to see as possible.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›