I would also agree with Malcyg more than Triode User but with some more caveats. I think whether you think Blu2 makes a huge difference depend heavily on your music material. I also think most audiophiles would notice the bigger difference whereas the casual listener would not. I think for simple vocals or piano music, there is definitely more realism, more dimensionality, more depth to the music. The musical flow is smoother but at the same time, true dynamics and transient timing is better. But because you're only listening to a couple of vocal lines or piano notes, the difference between Blu2 and DAVE feels small although the longer you listen to Blu2, the harder it is to go back to listening without.
Once you get to more complex musical materials, the easier it is to notice all the additional details Triode User is talking about. For symphonic works for instance, cymbals, xylophones, triangles, and mainly other percussion instruments and particularly instruments with more trebles sound more realistic with better timbral accuracy, better transient timing/dynamics but at the same time, there seems to be more details to the music (almost as if there are more notes that you didn't notice before). And as many have said, any instruments with bass just sound much more authoritative and once again with better transient timing, better dynamics and better timbral accuracy. The combination of these effects tend to bring a much more dramatic and obvious difference to most audiophiles.
However, for the casual listeners, I can still see people just mainly listening to the melodic lines. While most of us here would probably hear a lot more realism and detail from say Beethoven's Symphony No. 5, I can still see many people would still only hear the main melodic line of dun-dun-dun-DUNG.
) and, to them, this whole discussion would be laughable and redundant.
