Haven't had a chance to listen to your samples yet but look forward to doing so.
Yes, Healy isn't really much different from small A-B, especially when using tiny mics that are more or less truly omni all the way up.
Adding a baffle.. or not-
If you haven't messed around with it much, try playing around with putting something between the mics and comparing that to having empty space between the mics. Pretty much anything that blocks sound can act as a baffle- your bag, a drink special card, a menu, a floor monitor wedge, a chair back.. You might like it better, you might not. The main thing is to familiarize yourself with the difference in sound so you can make a decision about what may work best in later situations. At relatively narrow Healy-like A-B spacings, I hear the difference as being more open, diffuse, a bit brighter, and a bit phasier with no baffle, and a bit clearer, less bright, with wider and sharper imaging when there is a baffle between the mics. When the spacing is a bit wider you might use two baffles, one relatively close to each mic, rather than a single big one.
I think of baffles, APE balls, dummy-heads, and boundary mounting as all being closely related.. sort of various points along a continuum. They all alter the pickup pattern primarily, and frequency response secondarily, by placing a surface in close proximity to the microphone. The biggest variables are how large the surface is how close it is the microphone, and it's orientation.
Besides baffling between the two mics, you can also baffle behind them. A chair back, front row church pew, or a bag placed on-stage can often attenuate nearby audience behind the recording position just enough to make a big difference. And you can use both forms of baffling at once..
My preferred method for recording jazz and classical in good sounding rooms with attentive audiences from the best seat in the house, relies heavily on baffling. It's an arrangement of four 4060's boundary-mounted to the faces of a rectangular baffle, such that the microphones face directly Left, Right, Forward and Back. The baffle is longer in the L/R dimension, so the L/R mic pair is spaced a bit farther apart but baffled less, while the front/back pair are spaced less far apart yet separated by a larger and wider baffle. That L/R spacing + baffling is intentionally a bit too much for just the L/R pair alone in isolation without the forward-facing center mic, the presence of which fills and anchors the center, while it's wide baffle increases forward-clarity and focus and attenuates pickup of audience and reverberant room sound arriving from behind. Likewise the rear-facing mic is baffled from too much sound bleeding around from the front, making that channel far more useful than it would otherwise be. When mixing it, after balancing Left/Right levels, dialing in exactly the right amount of Center content to get a clear and solid image is always super rewarding, and the rear-facing channel gets added to taste to provide a bit more depth and room impression as long as the acoustics and audience allow for that.
Not the way most folk choose to record, but is a good example of how baffled omnis can work really well in the right situations.
