"Some people’s brains and ears are better at all of this than others. Those people can hear things other people can’t." Well, a lot of this Audiophile stuff is

"Some people’s brains and ears are better at all of this than others. Those people can hear things other people can’t." Well, a lot of this Audiophile stuff is voodoo but if it makes them happy, who cares. But I am skeptical about your statement. The easiest way is to always do a blind or double blind study. A German computer magazine did this once with CD vs. mp3: https://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Kreuzverhoertest-287592.html https://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Kreuzverhoertest-287592.html The guy who was best in spotting the difference and assign it correctly had an ear damage. Since mp3 was developed for "healthy" ears this is not too surprising. "People who have neither shouldn’t be telling people who do what they can and can’t perceive. " Let's agree on the scientific method. Anything that shows a significant difference in a double blind study, even for a specific individual I accept. By the way, I hear my music on my computer via mp3 and send it into my super old tube amplifier. :-)