Not before, Dominic, I compliment you on your earlier (rather enlightened) post. Let's tackle the juiciest bits....
...which is why, in isolation, it's simply too 'blunt' a tool to use to conclusively disprove the existence of effects people hear with 'fancy mains leads'. Yet the naysayers stubbornly cling onto it, in order to protect themselves from a fatal attack of cognitive dissonance
Yup, and I've witnessed that blinkered behaviour from them time and time again, over the years, whenever these types of subjects come up. Why can't they be more open-minded to new possibilities and admit that their argument is flawed? Real scientists would never be so arrogant as to assume they know it all, so these wannabe ones/self-appointed 'experts' you see on forums, lecturing to all and sundry about how right they are on subjects such as this, should learn to take a few humility pills...!
Indeed, and that is exactly my stance on the matter. Of course I've been fooled a few times over the years, when assessing things like cables, and been a victim of expectation bias, but not EVERY time I hear something that doesn't fit with accepted wisdom, or the contents of 'Johnny's Bible of Scientific Facts, from 1940'. Like you say, objectivists use is as a convenient smokescreen to deflect attention away from the vulnerability of their (often flawed) arguments.
That's most interesting, and for me a credible explanation of what's happening. It certainly reflects my experience of the matter, particularly the bass overhang thing, which for me is almost always symptomatic of what you describe. Experience tells me that one of the first improvements heard when substituting a 'cheapo kettle lead' [let's just call it that for now, Andrew] with something better suited for use in hi-fi applications, is a tightening of the bass, which previously (in comparison) was a little bloated. There are other effects too, but that's almost always the main one.
Again, all very interesting stuff, and the kind of input I enjoy seeing in these discussions: people relating their genuine experiences and 'throwing out' some ideas for consideration, which possibly helps explain what they've heard, thus stimulating discussion of the subject, rather than it being shot down by arrogant, blinkered objectivists who are more keen on massaging their ego and protecting their belief system from scrutiny, than on entertaining the possibility of learning something new!
It's definitely a possibility, and not something I've noticed being suggested before. Moreover, it's certainly the type of helpful lateral thinking we like to encourage on AoS, as opposed to the unhelpful closed-mindedness and relentless rubbishing of ideas, put forward by people for consideration, when they don't fit with the objectivist dogma, which we so often see instead.
Anyway, do hang around and keep up the good work. You're one of the most interesting new members we've had join us in ages!
Marco.