Proportion of expenses

I am not going to argue w anyone who wants to spend thousands on cables, but IMO, start out w decent, neutral, used interconnects and speaker wires.  There is a huge mark-up/depreciation on them, and unless they are poorly made or poorly designed, they should not be as significant as a component upgrade.  If they are, then you are way out the price - performance curve anyways, so god bless.  Not likely to be where a first-timer is. My advice is to think of them as the final spice, not the main course. 

On a decent budget, (and assuming digital sources only) I'd do it thusly:

Dedicate about 80% of your available cash to finding speakers that sound good in your room.   Do the best you can to feed them (source/electronics) with the other 20%.  There are times this may not work - if you choose speakers with a crazy load, you may not find an amp that can drive them appropriately.  However, that case will be the outlier.

My logic is that transducers dominate a system's sound.  In a digital system, that means the speakers.  This isn't to dismiss the impact of the other components, but it's my view on how to prioritize.  System matching and room matching are important, so my caveats above about appropriate amplification and room matching.

If you want a vinyl source, it gets more complicated.  The cartridge is another transducer and it can be expensive to find the right one and a good home (arm/table) for it.  That skews the budget allocation significantly.  However, if you're going digital - I'd say speakers (subject to room matching) first and foremost.

This approach also anticipates the future.  You're a hobbyist and will spend more as time goes by.  Upgrade source and electronics from that future budget, as needed.  

BTW If you're lucky, the speakers you choose won't eat up the entire 80% you've allocated.  That will make the near term more fun, but - either way, I'd try to get the right speakers first.

Here's the (not so) secret to wide range capability sound…get a set of mains that sound good (to you) to at least 50hz, then get a used REL sub. Problem solved.

Agree 100% Wolf. In fact, very few (and very expensive) speakers don't benefit from a superior sub. A pair of modestly priced main speakers and sub(s) can outperform a "full"-range speaker (very few speakers actually provide low-distortion, sub-35-40Hz output of sufficient quantity) of the same, or more, total cost  Some great speakers have excellent built in subs (Vandersteen's upper models), and are an exception. And the right sub can make a bass and SPL-challenged planar a more appropriate speaker for many people. Further, a sub or (preferably) two allows the main speaker to be positioned for it's best sound, regardless of it's low bass performance in that location, the listener then free to position the subs(s) for best bass. No more having to compromise between best imaging/tonal balance/etc and best bass.