I'm gonna come right out and say that after reading the first page of this thread, I skipped ahead to the last page so I don't know really where this thread has gone over the last 30 pages, but:
I couldn't tell the difference on a casual listen. Even if I spent all day carefully analyzing the tracks I probably wouldn't be able to tell, simply because there are too many variables to make any kind of definitive judgement call. If this test had been more scientific - pairs of tracks of just the two basses playing the same thing, with absolutely no EQ or compression or anything else coloring the tone, then I would consider it a fair test for those with skilled ears.
However, I certainly understand the value in what you instead proposed. In a real-world scenario, where you are playing with a full band and being professionally recorded with all sorts of tone-coloring doodads and gizmos, there are virtually no appreciable tonal differences in your $200 slightly-modified SX and your extremely-expensive pre-CBS Fender. Many people are complaining that the test is unfair with all of the variables and tone-coloring done by the studio, but that's exactly the point. I think it's an ingenious answer to all of the gear snobs here who in your words have been extremely insulting to anybody who would dare to say a cheapo bass could (could, but won't always) sound indistinguishable from a pre-CBS Fender.