Cheap/expensive or expensive/cheap?


While I was listening to my modest little system recently, I began to ponder a question. What would sound better, an expensive system with the cheap/stock cables or a cheap system with high quality cables/power cords? For example, say you have a $3000 system (total) but have high quality cables/cords/conditioner etc. vs a $10000 system with just the stock cables and original power cords (no conditioners). 
I read many topics on AG and I am always amazed how much I don't know and how much I've learned on here. I've been updating my system over the past 2 years or so and appreciate all the experience and knowledge on these forums. Thanks---I look forward to your comments.
 
bluorion
Let's use the words "good" and "bad" instead of "expensive" and "cheap" because they aren't always linearly related.  A good system with a bad power cable will sound better than a bad system with a good power cable.  Same applies to all other cables.  Yes, cables make a difference but they aren't going to move the needle as much as fantastic primary components...not even close.
"Less Costly".

When young (Interior Designer, Corporate Offices), I came back from a client meeting, I told the head of the furniture and furnishings department "The client wants cheaper furniture".

Betty batts her eyes at me and says, "We don't sell cheap furniture, I will assemble some 'Less Costly' choices.

Point is, you don't buy/own cheap stuff do you?
I put a Nordost Odin2 power cable, IC's and speaker cables to my $250 1995 Harman Kardon Receiver, $150 CD player and $300 white van speakers.

Blows away all the systems here, in the forum. Will post pics soon.