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
If your brother cant hear the difference of the sound
of your cables, and your Halcro, I would consider him,
Still very intelligent, but I would suggest,for him
to see Ear specialist, He might have a hearing problem.
I'm NOT about to type out the novels that i did last time all of this "evidence" was introduced. Rsbeck failed to respond to any / all of my previous rebuttals on the subject because he couldn't refute the information that i used as a reference. That's because my reference was his reference. Refuting my statements would be the same as impugning his own reference point, hence his silence.

Since that thread has since been deleted ( hmmmm... wonder why??? ), i'm not going to argue with a brick wall. He keeps arguing the same thing, over and over again, which only covers a very narrow part of the big picture. When it is repeatedly demonstrated to him that cable bandwidth is directly related to the impedance of the speaker load that it is terminated with, he seems to go deaf / refuse to face the facts.

Pabelson: Most EE's know what their text books have taught them. The smart ones are the ones that use the text book as a guideline and then learn on their own. This is how technology and our knowledge base is furthered. If we relied on past technology and accepted "perfectly understood" theories as being the final word, the world would still be flat and the Sun would be revolving around the Earth.

I'm done here. I hope you guys have fun. Sean
>

PS... Welcome to Audio Review take II
Sean said:
Pabelson: Most EE's know what their text books have taught them
And textbooks teach quite a lot about circuits & circuit design -- don't they...
Despite what we (consumers -- not EE's involved in audio circuits) know or don't know about them:)!
Because the most significant variable is the ear/brain processor and nothing that is inherent in the equipment we listen to; try getting that across to subjective audiophiles. Audiophilia is a faith-based activity these days... No it doesn't all sound the same, but most of the time the differences are so insignificant as to make the whole thing beside the point.
Text books, and the study they relate to, teach us how to learn, as well as some facts and techniques. Most of the electronics technology current when I went to school is obsolete today, but the open-minded but systematic approach to learning that I was taught is still valid, and, at last report, Ohm's law still applies. One cannot chase after every fool idea that comes down the pike, and science can help identify the ones that just might be valid for further study. Could science miss a good one? Sure. But some crazy guy will try it anyway, and become a hero.

By the way, how are we doing with cold fusion?