Well if differences are so difficult distinguish on a $2000 headphone, which is reference class, then I'm finding it difficult to believe that it will make a substantial difference on other gear. I can only think of the HD800 that should be able to pick apart more differences and perhaps some custom IEMs, but then again those were designed for that purpose! It remains the first and foremost conclusion I derived from this thread that value for money should be a careful consideration when it comes to DACs.
What I disagree with is that you're lumping "all reference quality headphones" together - and assuming that they are all "equal" in exposing the differences in other components - and then assuming that everyone using them will be able to hear, and will be listening for, the same things; and I disagree strongly with those assumptions. Different headphones (and different speakers) have different strengths; just as we all have different preferences. I just sold my HifiMan 500's because, even though I loved the midrange and they were very clean, to
ME they were too laid back; and I like my electrostatics better; the HiFiMans seem to be a much better match for the fellow I sold them to. (The HiFiMans were also much more comfortable, but I rarely listen to headphones for extended periods of time, so that was less of a priority for me.)
One time I compared several DACs using two different "speakers" I had hooked up at the time: my pair of Emo Stealth 8 speakers (which use AMT tweeters and are quite "analytical" sounding), and my pair of AKG 240 MKII's (which definitely aren't "reference quality", but I would still expect even a mid-fi headphone to let me hear specific differences better than a speaker). Well, not really. Differences that were obvious on the speakers were absolutely not there with the AKGs. Considering the type of differences I heard, it seemed obvious to me that they involved transients, which the Stealths handle very well (or even maybe emphasize a tiny bit), but apparently the AKG's don't do well with at all. Incidentally, I found the same differences rather obvious on my Koss Electrostatics, but barely noticeable on the HiFiMans (if I hadn't been listening specifically for them I probably wouldn't have noticed them.) I'm guessing that it would be difficult if not impossible to find any two models of "reference quality headphones" with identical frequency response graphs and waterfall plots; which means that some will indeed do a better job of pointing up certain types of differences, while others do better with other sorts of things (and, again, different of us will notice or not notice specific of those differences even if they are there).
Based on this, and lots of other similar experiences, I don't find it at all surprising that certain pieces of equipment emphasize (or entirely fail to differentiate) certain types of signal differences, and that certain of us either do or don't notice or place priority on certain of those differences as well. (Personally, for example, I place the highest
importance on vocals, usually female vocals, but if things like wire-brush cymbals, with transients, don't sound natural - and like real metal, it annoys me and so distracts me from the vocals. Likewise, I never liked vinyl because, no matter how good the music sounds, a single tick or pop would ruin the experience for me. Now, with saxophones and other horns, I know what they
should sound like, but I don't mind sacrificing a bit of that if everything else sounds very good. Someone else may not notice the cymbals at all, or not especially care if the voice is perfect but the cymbals are a little off, or really worry about the horns and not so much about the voices.)
Even further, I wonder if our individual "personality type" plays a significant part in how we
evaluate things like this.....
Do you prefer to use "super revealing" headphones that let you hear every detail - and every flaw - of the music, or do you prefer headphones that tend more to "sound good with everything"? Which would you say are "better" headphones?
Personally, I prefer to hear every detail - and, if the details force me to conclude that the recording sounds lousy, then I'll either stop listening to it, look for a better recording, or just accept that the warts are part of the experience. Other people obviously place greater emphasis on "the music" rather than on "the recording", and would much prefer a headphone (or speaker) that makes even poor recordings sound pretty good rather than put a spotlight on their shortcomings, even though technically it may be less accurate. Some people prefer really sharp photos, some prefer a soft focus filter, and quite a few prefer an impressionist painting.
