Why do intelligent people deny audio differences?


In my years of audiophilia I have crossed swords with my brother many times regarding that which is real, and not real, in terms of differeces heard and imagined.
He holds a Masters Degree in Education, self taught himself regarding computers, enough to become the MIS Director for a school system, and early in life actually self taught himself to arrange music, from existing compositions, yet he denys that any differece exists in the 'sound' of cables--to clarify, he denies that anyone can hear a difference in an ABX comparison.
Recently I mentioned that I was considering buying a new Lexicon, when a friend told me about the Exemplar, a tube modified Dennon CD player of the highest repute, video wise, which is arguably one of the finest sounding players around.
When I told him of this, here was his response:
"Happily I have never heard a CD player with "grainy sound" and, you know me, I would never buy anything that I felt might be potentially degraded by or at least made unnecessarily complex and unreliable by adding tubes."

Here is the rub, when cd players frist came out, I owned a store, and was a vinyl devotee, as that's all there was, and he saw digital as the panacea for great change; "It is perfect, it's simply a perfect transfer, ones and zero's there is no margin for error," or words to that effect.
When I heard the first digital, I was appalled by its sterility and what "I" call 'grainy' sound. Think of the difference in cd now versus circa 1984. He, as you can read above resists the notion that this is a possibility.
We are at constant loggerheads as to what is real and imagined, regarding audio, with him on the 'if it hasn't been measured, there's no difference', side of the equation.
Of course I exaggerate, but just the other day he said, and this is virtually a quote, "Amplifiers above about a thousand dollars don't have ANY qualitative sound differences." Of course at the time I had Halcro sitting in my living room and was properly offended and indignant.
Sibling rivalry? That is the obvious here, but this really 'rubs my rhubarb', as Jack Nicholson said in Batman.
Unless I am delusional, there are gargantual differences, good and bad, in audio gear. Yet he steadfastly sticks to his 'touch it, taste it, feel it' dogma.
Am I losing it or is he just hard headed, (more than me)?
What, other than, "I only buy it for myself," is the answer to people like this? (OR maybe US, me and you other audio sickies out there who spend thousands on minute differences?
Let's hear both sides, and let the mud slinging begin!
lrsky
there is a field in psychologyb called psychophysics.

essentially its concern is the ability of a person to hear differences between stimuli.

with respect to sound there have been experiments which show that at certain frequences, given a an spl of a signal, the just noticeable difference varies from individual to individual. its been a while since i studied psychology, but the concepts of differential thresholds and adaptation level could help explain why some people perceive differnces and others don't.

i hope this provides a reason why some people deny hearing differences.

the relationships between perception of changes in frequency and spl is not linear, and it all depends upon the baseline of the independent variables.
Mrtennis,
The phrase 'sensitivity threshold' comes to mind.
Some of us are 'tuned in' to exceedingly small incremental changes in pitch and volume--others not. Sort of like friend who's wife can 'remember colors'...she can see a paint chip of a color and remember what seems to be the 'exact shade' that that color is. So she is tuned in to color shadings.

I've spoken of another guy on here before, but a dear friend of almost 30 years, (previously a customer) is blind and has been since birth--and, knowing that some folks ascribe to the old chestnut about sight loss and hearing...and I actually had this happen. Joe, my friend was in my store, and this 'Beverly Hillbilly' lout comes in, sees Joe, with his Guide Dog, listening to music, and blurts out, "WOW, YOU'RE BLIND, I'LL BET YOU HEAR EVERYTHING..." or something else equally innane.
Joe and I listen together sometimes, new product eval and such...and we agree on virtually all things audio--the only difference is, we've noticed I'm quicker on the uptake for whatever reason...maybe a smaller 'threshold' than most people.
Over the last 30 years, observing him...I can only say that Joe pays exceedinly 'close attention' to all things audio--moreso than most people, and therein lies the difference he experiences.

Good listening,

Larry
hi larry:

i think you have nailed it.

some people can detect differences of 2 db , while others don't detect them unless they exceed 3db, so i guess it's a matter of aural acuity.
He obviously has very little understanding of digital. So little it would be hard to argue with him because he's blinded by the same frame of mind many other "smart" people have in the belief bits is bits. If it was all 1's and 0's and perfect it would make all our lives much less expensive and we would all be happily enjoying "perfect" audio in our listening rooms. Is anyone here experiencing perfection? :)