Can someone explain what caps are?

Ok, enough of this, i'm going to single handedly put this perpetual internet feud to rest once and for all! (yeah right lol!) Since the beginning of this thread, it's veered steadily toward assessing the value of performing modifications to existing equipment, caps are part of the whole(so i believe i'm on topic??lol!),

So here's the comparison i'm trying to put together, i have "almost" 2 completely different chains that are exactly the same....? The things i'm working on acquiring are in RED, let me explain..

 CHAINS AS FOLLOWS:    
           A: stock Apex 460 condenser mic- stock Soundcraft delta 200 input strip(utilizing pre/eq)-stock aphex 651 compressor insert-stock digi 002 A/D conversion-protools/macbook-44.1 wave file

           B: JW's Apex 460 condenser mic- JW mod Scraft delta 200 input strip(utilizing pre/eq)- JW mod aphex 651 compress insert-BLA signature mod digi 002-protools/macpro-44.1 wave file

SINGLE ACOUSTIC GUITAR PERFORMANCE EXAMPLES, THEN SOME ACCOMPANY TRACKS EXAMPLES TO DENSE UP THE MIX A LITTLE, MIC CAPSULES WILL BE AS CLOSE TO EACH OTHER AS POSSIBLE, ALL KNOB/FADER SETTINGS IDENTICAL ON ALL SETS OF EXAMPLES, edit;AND THEN VOLUME MATCHED ON ANOTHER SET OF EXAMPLES, REASON BEING IS, THESE WILL SURELY HAVE DIFFERENT HEADROOM LEVELS DUE TO THE MODS(although i probably shouldn't level match, as the dynamic range will be improved with the mods, which does indeed makes them a better pieces, and will be a fair comparison). THE ONLY DIFFERENCES IN THE EXAMPLES WILL BE THE MIC CAPSULES BEING PLACED AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO EACH OTHER/BUT OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT, ALL OTHER CHAIN SETTINGS WILL BE IDENTICAL,

I'm confident Jim Williams will let me borrow his Apex 460 mic, so that's almost an assumption at this point, and my friend Dan is coming down from LA next weekend for the Chargers(Chokers!)/Eagles game, so he's gonna dig up his stock Digi 002.

I lol'd when i typed the A/B above, I know exactly what the result of this is gonna be, i've said this many times before, and i believe it whole heartedly. The end result of what we do, is the sum of all the "little things"...this will be an example of how a few "little things" in a chain can make a big difference, should be interesting and fun fella's!! My shit is all over the place right now, but I will make this happen if i can get these pieces, I'll keep ya posted.

No, I'm simply restating some of Ethan's great hits of expert opinions for context. I thought pretty cleverly in one sentence. 

Your right JK, i'm going to do that a/b comparison for the open minded folks(i think there are plenty here), others will see what they want to see, and negate the whole experiment, probably due to the carbon matter that forces the capsules to be 2" from one another lol!.

Well, that's the crux of the argument. Opinions are just simply things you like to believe. But facts are facts - and it's objectively true that an ABX is the standard scientific test method. 

The subjectivist nightmare of "Well I can hear the difference between oxygen free power cables and regular power cables" is the worst part of audio. It makes no sense to throw so much money at imaginary problems if you can prove they don't exist. It reduces our overheads, meaning we can be cheaper for the client and offer the same quality product. What's not to like?

The only similar scenario I can think of is certain crazy Post-Modern feminists declaring physics to be patriarchal by nature because people dismiss them for wildly inaccurate claims. "If you were me you wouldn't be saying that!". But no one else is them so it's there problem to prove what they say in a fair, repeatable manner.

I'm not saying microphone capsules don't matter, incidentally. I'm just saying I find the hostility to science in some parts of audio bizarre. Mozart was tuning pianos to compensate for room acoustics and temperament issues for the Concertos, Etudes and Symphonies he wrote - I think we can open up an ABX program and give it a go every now and again.

If you compare two completely different chains and find there's a real difference, how can you know which device(s) are responsible? The article by Tom Nousaine I linked to compared two "chains," but there were only two devices and neither was a microphone. So I'm not sure what your test will reveal.

--Ethan

For sure. I have a standing invitation for those who disagree with me to get together in person either here or at their place, because I'm sure one of us would be able to easily convince the other. But it's rare for people to agree to meet even when we're local.

Years ago Slipperman invited me to test his claim that he could hear when a hard 20 KHz low-pass filter was inserted into his mix bus. He insisted ultrasonic frequencies affect frequencies we can hear, and I offered to bring a filter and switch it while he didn't look. But then he backed out. Same for an "audiophile" that lives near me, who believes in all manner of stuff like magic isolation platforms for his power amps and CD player. As with Slipperman, I begged this guy a dozen times to let me visit and test him blind, but he never agreed. So I'm not optimistic, though this remains a standing offer.

--Ethan

Ethan, unless i'm really misunderstanding??, your argument is generally that mods are unnecessary, and make little, if any difference. I'm confident these blind examples will prove beyond subtly, they can make a huge difference! who cares what "piece" it is that makes the improvement, if the basis of an argument is "mods aren't worth it, and they don't make a difference" Any improvement at all is a win for modding! The 2 chains will be identical equipment, stock vs modded, plain and simple. Any convolution beyond this is suspect IMV

I reiterate, the knobs and faders on every single piece of gear will be identical, head room and noise floor changes are part of the advantage of modding, my prediction is, the results will be far from identical. I'm even going to plug the modded equipment into my balanced power suppy(power supply mod lol!), stockers get the wall treatment with the fridge and microwave upstream lol!

The 2 inches that Ethan is mentioning means that two different mics, comprised of the same parts, would sound different unless they inhabited exactly the same space at the same time. Anyone who's spent any time studying the nuances of moving mics around on a guitar cabinet would know that even 1/4 inch is enough to make a huge difference in the sound. 2 inches would be impossible to match, therefore nullifying the scientific portion of the test, leaving only the subjective portion, and only bringing the argument full circle. It's a hard thing to wrap the head around unless you've worked doing high level testing in some scientific discipline, and even then it can really be a bitch.

Svart, you are a genius, but respectfully, I think every one here is either a SERIOUS enthusiast on some level, or a music pro, we all should have some basic degree of active listening skills. I think, the idea that 2 mics/capsules being 2 inches apart center to center, will destroy objectivity in making a blind assessment of their quality, seems a bit silly. Yes they will sound a little different, but the assertion that it makes a comparison useless, is a reach. By this standard, i'm going to have to stop wasting my time A/B ing different mics on vocalists, because the takes will be different from one another, and they may move their head position a little, and i won't be able to discern the differences between them accurately  I'm not buying that one. 

The examples i'll put forth, will also have split, single performance DI tracks to alleviate these types of microphone placement concerns.

I want to make clear, that i have nothing but respect for Ethan and Svart, they are both quite impressive fell's, and quite accomplished IMV
This is fun and interesting stuff for me personally, I'm going to be as impartial and scientific as my tiny intellect will allow me to be with the samples i put forth lol! And hopefully everyone who's interested can learn something from it?

I'll report back when i'm set up for this blind.
T

Well, If you gave me two identical mics, and told me I could keep only one, I'd test them by doing something like play an acoustic guitar, and then play the same thing with the other mic, same settings, same mic placement. Then I might sing something with each mic, as equal as I could make it, and then I'd listen.

Now, compared to a test lab somewhere, there might be dozens of variable factors that might make my auditioning of the mics "invalid", but I bet I'd prefer one over the other, and that would be the one I'd choose. Of course, even manufacturing can make the same product slightly different, model to model, so there's no guarantee any two mics are enough the same to make a comparison "valid".
 
I'd be secure my choice was the right one, and I'd be done with it. Am I "wrong", maybe, but I also bet if I posted those same tracks everyone here would choose the same,"better " mic.

So, much of this is just spinning our wheels. I'd bet cash money I'd hear the same thing cowboy did when it comes to his cap mod.

Actually, I've seen a number of expensive houses around that number that came with sound control.

Sure, it's humorous. It's strange and seems time consuming and irrelevant, but Ethan is still 100% right in his theory. He's just looking at it from a scientist point of view rather than a user's point of view. His job is the details that nobody sees or really cares about. Sometimes those details are a lot more complicated than anyone would ever guess and communicating those ideas is hard, even without opinions and emotions flying.

I suspect there is a disconnect between the designer and the casual tinkerer and the way they think, that leads to back and forth threads like this.