Humiliating nobles may not be the best word to describe the relation between Louis XIV and the aristocracy. Think of it as a " two-ways relationship " in which Louis XIV, for a good part of his reign had the upper hand and managed to control them. However he never had complete control other the aristocracy and it died with him in 1715.

I'll use the sentence you gave me : "Louis XIV’s Court was used as a tool to degrade and render impotent the nobles in attendance."

The relationship between the monarchy ( think the King and his closest councilors, often aristocrats themselves but not always ) and the aristocracy is a history of conflicts and tensions for many centuries. Over centuries, the kings slowly managed to diminish the power of the nobles, always prone to revolt against the monarchy. This is a long story ... One of the turning point in this relation was the reign of Louis XIII ( Louis XIV's father ) with his minister the cardinal De Richelieu. Both of them ( even Louis XIII, often overshadowed by the " man in red " but who was someone with a lot of personality !) aspired great things not only for the King's dynasty but also for the entire country. This why you can consider that the raison d'Etat ( reason of state or national interest ) really developed under Louis XIII. If all this seems out of the topic of your question think that it need a stronger State, with stronger powers given to the seat of power, thus during de Richelieu and Louis XIII's period of rule, the power of the aristocracy was greatly reduced. From Henri IV to Louis XIV the authority of the monarchy was constantly reinforced. Of course those who were weakened were the aristocrats. The turning point was soon after de Richelieu and Louis XIII died ( in December 1642 and May 1643 ) when Anne of Austria became the Queen Regent for the very young new King Louis XIV.

As said above, the 17th century is a period of reinforcement of the monarchies and a path toward what we call an absolutist power. This is not proper to France as similar events happened in Britain ( until the Glorious Revolution ) and in Spain with De Olivares. It took a radical turn in France with the Fronde when the Parliament of Paris proclaimed the Act of Union in May 1648 ( the French term is Arrêt d'Union ) in order to stop the monarchy's increase of power, put a limit to it and strengthen their own privileges. I will not go into the details but the Fronde from 1648 to 1653 can be divided into two phases, the Parliamentary revolt and the revolt of the Great ( the greatest aristocrat families ). It is really important to see how it affected the monarchy as a whole but also the personality of Louis XIV who had been traumatized by the events. It developed in him a suspicious mind as soon as the aristocracy and Paris was involved thus he continued the work of his predecessors in increasing and centralizing the powers, with more success.

This is where I start to be more directly answering your question

We make a jump in time and move to Versailles. Versailles is literally Louis XIV, it is his incarnation into a palace and the symbol absolutism. Many people only see in Versailles a wonderful, great palace but it is much more than that in the political world. Yes it was made to impress the world ( not only Europe ! ), to improve and spread the glory of Louis XIV but it also was nothing more than a golden prison.

After the nobles' defeat during the Fronde, they became more and more submitted to the will of the monarchy. They will never again revolt until after Louis XIV died. The Sun King ( the principal star around which all the other stars gravitate ) deeply changed the aristocracy by remodeling the court system. It began in the other seats of powers but can be perfectly illustrated in Versailles. First, at court not everyone was of the same rank, far from it. The elite were the ones close to the King ( in terms of relation ) and in the government ( the conseil d'en haut for example ) with the State Ministers. These people, by being close to the King were the highest of the highest. However, because a new system of meritocracy was born in the 17th century they were not necessarily of highest birth. Colbert was from a family of bankers and traders, the little aristocracy with a shady lineage. Louvois is another example, though his family were a good and quite old aristocratic background they were not from the highest nobility. Sébastien Vauban was granted the honour to be Marshal of France, probably the highest military distinction but he came from a more than obscure aristocratic family ( and a very young one ). So you can think of it as humiliation but under Louis XIV birth was not all. Yes it was an important point to reach the highest spheres of the State but merit and talent played the most important part since the King picked whomever he wanted in the government and he picked talented people. However, it's not at all close to be a perfect meritocracy or something egalitarian. It was still a blow in the " old ways ".

This is one of the many examples of the relation between Louis and the aristocracy. Let's jump to the court in its new golden prison.

The reign of Louis XIV was a constant show, a play in which Louis was the main character. During his entire life he staged himself in a environment where any of words or actions had repercussions not only in the entire Kingdom but beyond as well. " To rule and command others you have to be above them " is a good way to describe how he was. Being above them was shown in the extremely complicated and codified court etiquette. It was not new but reached its peak under Louis XIV. If you check some of the rules they might seem to you ridicule but they were a tool in comforting Louis' place as the Sun King, and for the courtiers they were a way to " level up " in Versailles. The courtiers were ready to do more or less anything to be granted the privilege to taste the King's food, to carry some of his clothes while he was dressing up ,...Etc Everyone, from the ducal families to the lesser nobles in Versailles tried to imitate the King ( hence for example the spread of the wig ). It was a competition where people kept an eye on the others, tried to be better than them. Jealousy was a key word in Versailles because of the nobles were proud and arrogant. Louis XIV was arrogant and full of himself as well but he knew that courtiers were too. That way, while the aristocracy was present at Versailles fighting and plotting against each other to see the King take a dump ( sorry for the use of this term but it was that ! ) they were not somewhere in the Kingdom preparing something against the state. Instead they were in Versailles, buying offices to get higher ( thus replenishing the Kingdom's treasury ) positions and under the King's eye who was very good at seeing who was here and who was not. Just to watch Louis on his close stool, one had to pay something like 60,000 pounds of the time to obtain the permission. It may not have been humiliation but it definitely was " *a tool to degrade and render impotent the nobles in attendance." to which the court ended up playing a part in this game, willingly after all. That is a part of the definition of absolutism, all the little stars turning around the big one, the sun.

It had its limits though. Louis XIV did not always managed to be master of the court and Versailles. For example, the Affair of the Poisons illustrates well the King's failures to control his aristocracy and court as he was shocked to learn that even inside his court the use of poisons happened. And over the years, after shining the Sun King slowly declining towards sunset. As he grew older and became more pious ( probably because of his relation to Madame de Maintenon ) he got tired of this game and the never ending show he had to play. He retired away from Versailles from time to time, at Marly or the Trianon for example where he could escape the court and the etiquette. Despite his iron will ( there's a lot, and a lot, of things you can throw in his face but he was truly a hard working man with an iron will when it concerned both his and France's image and prestige ) he was fading. Finally, after his death the Parliament of Paris and other nobles would win the game by breaking his will concerning the regency and re establishing, among other things, the droit de remontrance ( right to contest the King's decision ). This is why I said that Versailles was truly Louis XIV's incarnation, as it worked almost perfectly under him but it did not with his to successors Louis XV and Louis XVI.

If you're interested, I also made an answer concerning Louis and dancing as a tool of absolutism.

The TL;DR would be that humiliation is probably not the best word but he did diminish the aristocracy's power by creating a court firmly ( more or less ) controlled by his hands. The creation of a complicated, and by our own standards ridicule, etiquette at Versailles as a tool to control the courtiers was one of the tools he used to impose his authority inside his Kingdom. We could go on and on about each part of the etiquette to explain how it helped him achieve it, as well as how he continuously weakened the aristocracy ( and the Parliaments ) and shaped the relation it would have with Louis XV. I hope this gives you a good overview of what you were asking but the subject is very broad so there's room for a lot of discussions.

Sources :

under the Direction of J-C. Petitfils, le Siècle de Louis XIV

F. Lebrun, le XVIIe Siècle

M. Da Vinha, au service du roi

For this answer, I'm going to go with no.

However this is within the purview and interpretation of the Memoirs of Duc De Saint Simon, Louis De Rouvry a very

Though Duc De Saint Simon spends quite a great deal talking about the vanity of Louis XIV including his propensity to desire and try to attract praise. Also apparently the fact that Louis XIV being "delighted in all sorts of petty details such as the dress and drill of his soldiers.." From what I can gather, Saint Simon's opinion of Louis XIV was less that he enjoyed humiliating his nobles as much as he was a vain king who while well spoken was far too often occupied with minutiae despite not necessarily being a professional at it. That said, Louis XIV (again according to the Duc) was very much a man who continually wanted and very often sought to attend events and held a grudge. Though he wouldn't publicly humiliate them, he would note the absence of his courtiers and then refuse to acknowledge their presence.

With this in mind, it's also important to note that this is the diary of a Duke of France within the court of Louis XIV. A Duke who also had a propensity to describe fellow court members as petty and describe certain members as boorish or unrefined. Nevertheless there's no mention of Louis XIV enjoying humiliating nobles as much as he enjoyed the favor of his courtiers. At worst nobles would be out of favor of the King, but there's no record of Louis ever publicly humiliating nobles at court or showing any especial enjoyment at it.