Cable Costs Relative to System

My total cable investment (retail) is almost as much as yours. My total system is a bit over half yours. Yes there must be a point of diminishing returns, but I cann't say I've found it. I think a $3000 investment in a power cord vs. a $3000 additional investment in an amp for example would provide about a 5 to one return at your system level. Five times the improvement factor in cord over amp, just my opinion! It's also possible that a $100 cord fits your system perfectly, thus your the lucky one. (or a $5000 amp) Every month it seems some "new" cord or theory comes out, so yes there are always hidden gems, the trick will be finding them. The nice thing about cables and cords is once you've invested in a full set of used cables the investment remains, you can try other cords and if it's better sell your old one, chances are good you'll get 90% of your money back.
You have bought a Hydra already wich means you paid full retail, that might have been a good idea due to the reviews I've seen on this product. For the most part I would never buy new for cables and cords, you pay full price, must burn it in and then risk after a couple months it sounding bad once it fully opens up. I've found if your pactient and can wait for the product for a couple years your investment is safer, but then you lose the chance of two more years of perfection. I like you find the Hydra very tempting, I haven't bought one yet.......J.D.

Interesting question. For myself the cost for cable came to 3% of the system's total value of $35k. 0% went to power cables, but another 8% went into power line conditioners/filters. It's my opinion that too many audiophiles over spend on cables. Their systems are good enough to reveal the differences between cables, but that still begs the question whether they are a good value. I use Discovery +4 interconnects and Sumiko OCOS cable. Both are very good products, but I recognize that there are superior, and far more expensive, products out there. I'm not knocking expensive cable products, but I think the money can be better spent on music software, front end equipment or room treatments. BTW, I use an integrated amp (w/ phono). This contributes to keeping interconnect costs down.

Metaphysics- As for me, I think "it takes what it takes," regardless of the relative system percentage. Great cables are absolutely necessary, and rarely inexpensive. The same can be said about active devices as well. I'm sure that there are many who believe that money spent on an "active" component is a far wiser choice than "passive" cables. In terms of resale value, that may be true. However, I've found that without great cables, including powercords, (and their requisite expense) I don't have a full appreciation of the strengths and weaknesses (sonic) of the other components in my system. Your first dollar buys you the most sound. After that, everything could be viewed as diminishing returns. Your system is obviously at the level that cables and pc's can provide the subtle and not-so-subtle improvements necessary for you to more greatly enjoy reproduced audio. If you're doubting your expenditures in high-end cables, simply remove them from your system and determine for yourself if you still have the sound that pleases you. If you're after amazing cables for the money, I'd recommend Coincident Speaker Technology. If you want to spend more, I'd recommend FIM Gold series cables. How either of these compare to the prices of your current cables, I have no idea. However, the cost of your cables and their relative percentage of the system cost isn't the real issue. The real issue is whether you can be happy with the sound, and consequently the money spent (80% or roughly $27K) on the electronics in the system, without the high-end cables. My guess is NOT. Others may disagree, but your ears are the only tools you'll need to determine the answer. Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now. Just MHO.