I think you nailed it. We tend to get the burden of proof mixed up. We're going to ABX the tracks the OP sends us, we'll all report that we can't tell them apart, and he won't believe us. He'll claim that his ears or equipment are better than ours, and we'll be no further ahead. He's the one with the claim that goes against basic physics, so the burden of proof is his: he has to demonstrate that he can tell them apart in a blind test.