"Three points:

(1) I don't claim that all sighted discriminations are valid.

(2) Monadic listening---listening to decide what you think of
something---is not necessarily a discrimination task. It turns out you
can compare notes on two different listening sessions, so A & B can be
"compared" -- but in a very different context than asking oneself how A
& B are "different".

(3) IMO context affects the discrimination function. It's the
context--quick switching or the need to conceptualize sound qualities--
that I claim (or hypothesize) affects perception."

Bottom line, show it, all manner of going on and on about "could be" and
"possible that" etc. have no meaning in the real world until it can be
shown they exist in evidence that can be tied to the real world linking
and all of the above. Did I mention my cheese doodle subjective
factor...?