Originally Posted by monolith
That statement itself is something that deserves to be tested. It's certainly counterintuitive, considering how short the human memory for sound is.
It's true that human aural memory is very short, but consider this: if you heard some stranger say one word, would you then, the next day, be able to pick them out in a crowded bar by their voice alone? Probably not. Yet, I don't think most would disagree that people can pick out the voices of people they're familiar with
in the same situation.
The distinction to be made is that things other than aural memory affect not only our perception but our interpretation
of sound. What we perceive is strongly dependent on our aural memory, but what we interpret, as in the case of learning the subtleties of and picking out the sound of someone's voice, is more complicated than just what's contained in our very short aural memory.
I know this personally for a fact because when doing ABXs, I initially found it hard to distinguish between a particular passage that I suspected sounded different. After a while (an hour or so), I learned the nuances of the sounds I was hearing and could distinguish the passages consistently. The p-value of the tests went from initially no significance (p > 0.05) to (an hour later) very significant (p << 0.001).
Although I don't have a position on cables, I have to agree wih vcoheda and sean3089 that if an audio-related DBT is going to have any weight behind it, it has to be carried out over a period of time long enough that the listener can get aquainted with the sound, ideally a few weeks or longer.