You say you do wedding photography? Say Sony (or Cannon, Nikon, whichever) tried to sell you a new camera body. maybe a bit better eye focus, but a sensor with lower resolution and lower dynamic range for more money. "You're clients can't tell the difference." Would you think that a good value? Even if you did, you should be annoyed with the downgrade in some of the engineered aspects.
I think you have to separate the issue of "I can't hear a difference" from genuine engineering improvements. CD's and 16 bit resolution appeared over 40 years ago. So manufacturers have had 40 years to incorporate engineering improvements into basic amp and DAC design. If we just assume a leisurely rate of ONE bit improvement per decade, we should be at the average new enthusiast audio product having 20 bits of headroom. So why, in 40 years of audio advancement, Denon is offering a midrange product that doesn't quite get 16 bit and has lost over a bit of resolution while increasing the price. And it's not that it can't be done with DAC's that cost a couple dollars more, a bit more PS filtering, a bit more copper shielding. a bit more attention to layout etc. While in many cases we cannot hear a difference, it's reasonable to target the full dynamic range of human hearing, which is 120dB or maybe a bit more...
Part of the problem is that historically, we've had fluff magazine reviews with claiming orgasmic improvements with products like this. Despite no improvement in measurable resolution, the "veil has been lifted" for forty straight years running. Amazing!
I actually think that manufacturers are quite aware of forums like this, and in some way, they will push the envelope forward. It's much more likely someone on the internet with a AP, a Klippel, a cliowin, hey even a soundcard and free FFT software will test and call out these folks.
The "average" consumer doesn't really buy a 3800. They buy a soundbar. OK, if you want a soundbar, 85dB is probably "good enough."
Anecdotal answer:
I've shot with 6MP, 10MP, 12MP, 24MP, 36MP, and 45MP sensors for weddings. I'd gladly go back to 12MP (read, Sony a7sIII if I shot Sony). I know people who use Sony a7sIII for weddings and corporate events because it's infinitely better high ISO performance, even though it may suffer a bit in terms of dynamic range. I'd gladly buy a Nikon camera if it had a 12MP sensor that performed significantly better than the Z6II in terms of high ISO for low light venues.
When it comes to dynamic range, if I can't recover highlights or shadows, that's a feature that's detectable by the human eye. My clients will know if the dress is blown out on a sunny summer afternoon because the sensor sucks (Nikon D3 issues).
And it all comes down to: if I can "SEE A DISCERNIBLE DIFFERENCE" would I buy the camera? Because that's not what I've been saying about the AVRs.
Here's an illustration: I waited until the Nikon Z6 II arrived because, while the performance of the Z6II sensor is technically, a bit lesser of a performer in terms of color bit depth than the first Z6, but a bit higher in terms of dynamic range, it gave me other features I found compelling to buy into. A) dual card slots. B) improved Autofocus. Those were significant enough to not worry that the IQ may have been a bit worse in one area over another. In fact, the dynamic range of the Z6 II is slightly less than that of the old Nikon D750. Are any of those shortfalls perceptible to me or the client? No. So I don't care. The Z6 II offers features the D750 completely lacks (EVF and auto live view), and definitive upgrades to the Z6 I felt were incredibly important for a once in a lifetime event (dual card slots for redundant data).
...and that goes back to, "if I can't tell the difference, does it matter"? ...my answer is "No". Am I annoyed because there's a measurable different on some piece of electronic measuring device I can't detect? No.
Does this answer your question?
I agree. The average consumer doesn't care at all.
The average audiophile who does care, can't afford a $2,000 AVR. This is an excessively lot of money for most people. So they're relegated to less expensive gear. $2,000 is about at the top end for my family. "Audiophiles on a budget".
How much lower res and lower dynamic range? At some point a reduction will obviously be visible (depending on output size of course)
And with audio, at some point reductions in measured values will become audible too.
What many of us would like to know, in order to interpret many of the reviews, is where those thresholds are, but nobody seems to know .....
Your last paragraph is what I’d like know. Wish that info was easily available — like pinned to the top of this AVR forum.