Oh man, I didnt want to cause such a wave....blush...I try to be as transparent around here as I can, hehe. I am not exactly a mic expert.
On the other hand, I did a thesis some years ago on cognitive difference in audio perception, with some fairly rigourous testing methods. This thread recalls much of that experiment to me, so I commented.
Now, those who have endured the folly of grad school (sorry, Zappa was one of my teachers--don't ask, lol) will know that all research papers end with a typical statement, which is really an inside joke---that statement is a call for MORE research, and a conclusion that nothing is really conclusive!! HAHAHAHA!!!
Bottom line, we are dealing with physics to a point here, but as our dear colleague K.K. Proffit so gently puts it, psychoacoustics is not really an exact science (she didnt say that exactly, but I am sifting some of her old posts-I will see if she can perhaps stop by and add her far more clear thoughts). We ain't able to say 1+1=2 and be solid on it. Even without subjective perception, we would have so many variables as to make any absolute answers impossible. I am fairly sure most of us realize that.
Nonetheless, that said, psychoacoustics indeed exists as a science, as does experimental psychology. And, despite the lack of ultimate and final equations, we can point to really useful and meaningful trends. That was my only suggestion here, and none other. I certainly do not mean to imply that anyone here does not fully realize this, because I see well that you all do.
BTW, Lynn, I was not defending you, hehe, I was defending your methodology as practical and useful:-) Sorry to burst any bubbles,--yer cute but not my type! yer far too....hmmm....male??? /grinz.
Anyway, the entire thing is about subjective preference, IMO. As I recall, Klaus began asking that if you saw no difference in cable, to disregard comment? If you did see difference, then there would be, as Bob kinda points to, no use in measurement, since how can we possibly ask any population to say X or Y is better or worse? Wouldn't that simply be a form of hmm..what do they call it on Madison Ave? "Focus Groups?" (hehe, Bob's pet peeve!).
Alas, I fear we wander so far from Klaus' intent on the thread. It is probably my fault, sigh. Still, I am not sure any meaningful conclusions other than anecdotal and very limited opinions could ever otherwise be shown.
Again, the whole topic was dangerous ground to begin with, as cable has been a mondo topic from time immemorial on all such forums as these.
I return to the topic then, if you DO see a difference in any such mic cables, which do you prefer and why? That seems to be the original question.
As far as testing if such a thing exists in hearing, I am glad to assist any who care to set up a genuinely rigourous test as best I can. However, I can't imagine such a thing has not already been subjected to some kind of research in the academic literature. Alas, being rather preoccupied with writing and recording music these days, I have to make do with my own subjective thoughts. I gave up shrinking heads some time back.
Klaus, I fear when you named this thread as you did, you invited folks like me to hijack it:P I return you to your regularly scheduled program.
My 2 cents. Yes, I tested some of the cables you mention. Yes, I heard a differnce. No, I have not done any extensive tests of high end LDC to high end cables across any significant gammut. So, I guess I have no useful comment
Regards,
Kurt