I think there is a lack of understanding regarding the power and potency of an omniscient narrator. How many books have you read in that pov? The execution IS smooth, IS easy to follow, and tells what it needs to tell. It has just as much power to entrance and immerse readers as any other pov.
I never said that it didn't have the power to entrance readers, I just find that it's easier to do with a limited narrator. I like Lord of the Rings as well. Yet, when I first read it I found that I struggled to connect with the characters, possibly in part due to the omniscient perspective.
I've never kept a running tally of books which I've read are told from an omniscient perspective, but given that I've read hundreds of books in my lifetime I'd be willing to put the count at least in the several dozens. Granted, though, I don't really pay too much attention to the narrator if the story is being told well. I didn't realize that the Hunger Games was written in present tense until years later when someone mentioned it on this site. Then again, omniscient is the only perspective where I'll be reading along and think "you know, this story would be better if written from a different POV." I've also noticed that stories written in omniscient have a huge tendency to tend to tell instead of show, but I'd consider that more a failing of the author than the POV.
Maybe I should rephrase my opinion a bit. Any POV has the power to be immersive, but I've noticed that omniscient is easier to abuse and tends to fail more often than others, and when it fails it tends to fail hard and completely drag me out of the immersion.
Like you said though, it's a matter of personal preference. You might have the exact opposite experience from me.