I am. And guess what? I like it. LOL.
Right, that's my point. Obviously you know that measurements and blind tests show that audiophile Ethernet cables make no difference. You don't care, and you like it anyway, for reasons that are unrelated to measurements and blind testing.
And so when it comes to the Strato K and the Cinematic format, we're in a situation where it is
absolutely certain to be measurably different, because there is literally more data in the signal. The only open question is how significant that is for human perception. It's like 320kbps MP3 vs FLAC -- the objective truth of the situation is that you're getting a measurably better thing, and
how much better is just a subjective personal response.
So if you're a person (like me) who is wary of sighted preference tests and unstructured anecdotal reports, you need to look to blind tests to get more information about how noticeable and significant this is.[1] But if your epistemology is such that you put more value on sighted tests and anecdote than blind tests, as seems to be the case... you're golden, man. There's enough sighted anecdotes to make you very comfortable about the merits of this thing. You can relax and enjoy without waiting for more detailed reports to come in.
[1] (Although for me personally, just the fact that it is objectively a higher quality signal was enough to sell me on it. My general operating theory is that if you have a format that's provably better and which at least
sometimes falls inside of human perceptibility -- and there are absolutely images where any human could tell the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 or even 4:2:2 -- there's no point messing around with worrying about how significant the difference is. If I get the worse format, seeing/hearing literally any flaw will make me wonder if it would have been better with the better version, and it's worth it to get rid of that question in my head.)