I always have felt it was important for a reviewer to use and describe the component he/she was reviewing in its stock form; after all, that is the way it will be purchased by a consumer. After that, if they want to experiment with power cords, cables, footers, etc. they can do so and describe the changes (not necessarily improvements) that they hear. But I vaguely recall a reviewer years ago (not sure who or what he was reviewing, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was Jonathan Scull) once reviewing an expensive piece of equipment and not waxing ecstatic until he added some tweak that cost almost as much as the unit he was reviewing. That implied to me that the unit stunk and wasn't worth its asking price. And while modding a unit can provide good bang for the buck, then you're not describing the component that is being sold to the public.
I do agree with the OP that working to find synergistic components and cables is important and should be part of a review. That's why I find Herb Reichert's reviews in Stereophile to be so good, he uses different speaker/headphone/amp combinations and compares and describes them, thus warning his readers about possible mismatches as well as good combinations.
I do agree with the OP that working to find synergistic components and cables is important and should be part of a review. That's why I find Herb Reichert's reviews in Stereophile to be so good, he uses different speaker/headphone/amp combinations and compares and describes them, thus warning his readers about possible mismatches as well as good combinations.