I can't imagine anyone thinking any audio book could be better than reading one.
I've listened to maybe a dozen, half of them I had read before listening.
When you read a book your whole mind is engaged. Listening to one is like listening to the radio. I imagine most of the people who do listen to them do so in their cars, while driving, as I did with every one. You miss too much.
Even worse, you're at the mercy of whatever voice has been chosen to read it. I never much liked any voice doing the reading. Not a one of them had the talent for it.
I can understand the convenience of audio books for people who don't have the time to actually sit down and read a book. But it isn't even close to actually reading one.
If people were given a test on a book - one reading and the other listening - the listener would always come up very short.
I think it comes down to whether you're an auditory or visual learner. I think I'm a combination, as most are, but with the skew toward visual.
Also, some of the best audiobooks are the Star Wars ones. They actually have the music, lightsaber and droid sounds, and great voices. It's pretty cool.
I listed to The Warded Man and The Desert Spear on audio and the narrator was perfect. It really can depend because I've listened to some that just ruined the book - like Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter. Honest Abe's voice just sounded all wrong to me, although that may not be the only thing that turned me off that book.
I suppose some people might actually learn more from listening than reading. But I think that would be a very small percentage.
To me, it's like having someone else do your work for you. Do you learn more by watching and listening or by actually doing it for yourself?
Books are written. . . For people to read.
Recording them for listening is, uh . . .
I work for B&N part time. I have been able to read many advance readers copies of books and audio CD's. Over the past 2 years I have been able to listen to many books on audio CD while I am stocking the shelves and removing the deadsellers. I do not know who chooses the people who read the books but they are terrible. I think these people shold take some lessons from radio. They do not know what they are doing. If the voice isn't enjoyable to hear who is going to sit through 1000 pages of a voice that annoys you at the first 10 pages?
As a reader of thousands of books since i was a 12 year old I have to chime in say I do not retain as much by listening as I do by reading.
I am a college student. You can listen to teachers every day, but those same teachers will tell you you have to do the work yourself to really learn the material. Textbooks and your own desire to learn are the real teachers.
i'm honestly not a fan. There's just something special about holding and READING a book for me.
I would say I prefer reading the book (with my eyes), but I find audiobooks a great way to constantly be happy (i.e. reading books). When I'm in the car, I can listen, when I'm on the go in really any capacity where I need my eyes elsewhere, audiobooks are the best.
Lately, I've found them a great way to read books I've been meaning to get to for a while. As a blogger, I constantly feel the need to read the newest, shiniest thing that comes across my doorstep either because I feel bad about not reading them or just to stay with the times. I realize this is self-inflicted and I AM getting better.
Audiobooks are a way to read those things I've been meaning to get to for years and not feel bad. So, while I definitely prefer to actually read books, audiobooks are extremely convenient.
Also, I always have that inner-monologue going when I read, or as I prefer to think of it - soliloquies (Heroes Die), so I feel like audiobooks are essentially just that. Someone else doing the inner-monologue for me. Obviously less work for me, but essentially the same thing. I also realize this is the slow way to read, but for some reason I just can't kick it when I read for pleasure.