What credible industry would accept your test as sufficient? List.
What objective did it actually accomplish? Did it remove any potential for bias at all? How was it different from hooking up two amps amps at random out of box and plug between the two of them?
If it didn't accomplish any of these, how was it a "good" test. Explain.
There's no point in blind testing if it's identifiable due to lack of controls now is there? Equally a blind test isn't setup for quantifiable difference, just whether one can hear them.
So you admit that you didn't even pay attention to testing in your own test? Why should we take it seriously at all then? The idea of a test is there's some degree of control, which you admit you've gone out of your way to eliminate from the beginning.
1dB is seen as audible, so 2dB isn't going to be surprising to be audible at all. Equally your method of measuring loudness is too imprecise, the differences could have easily been larger based on the SPL meter and frequency used - assuming you used a test frequency.
I'm not even going to bother with this till the other flaws of your test are handled.
I have level matched, and DBT'd, a Beta22 (and a M3, a Benchmark, and a handful of others). I'm not the one claiming to hear a difference am I? I realize I could be biased against hearing a difference, and as such it's the responsibility of those claiming to hear a difference to provide evidence if they want to be taken seriously. Starting a thread saying "hey, I don't hear a difference" is only going to garner tin ear insults or others that say there shouldn't be a difference anyway.