Well, no, they're not. Rather, your ears are, but your brain isn't. This is why the AES performed 554 double-blind trials with a variety of listeners. Tested listeners correctly identified the SACD source 49.8% of the time. Short version: they guessed.
If you genuinely can tell the difference in double-blind trials then please contact the AES. They would love to study you.
As for me... I'm using a Sansa Clip Zip with Rockbox more than my DX50. The Clip simply works better.
Well, on my b&w 803 i have to say the 16/44.1 vs 24/96khz have a small but quite apreciable diference. More air between the instruments, more resolution, and also i can feel (for real) the music (like the vibration of strings or sax) this is dificult to hear on earphones due the lack of air being moved.
But on short, yep there is diference =)
Same here, I can get the instruments basic sound production like the cymbals that are slowly decaying in a decreasing swishing sound which is rather abrupt with the lower res, it is all those subtitle micro details that make the hi-res files a more enjoyable experience. Now I don't sense much past 96/24 so 192/24 and 96/24 no major differences if any.
Now I can vote that my ears and my brain for that matter does not give an a.. rat about the AES. They both will be very happy hearing the higher res files for their own enjoyment, entertainment and experience and not the AES's.