Cable Costs Relative to System

I do agree somewhat with post above, in that a good front end will achieve a higher level of resolution in a system.

The benefit of good components is that they are designed with plenty of "headroom" in their circuits - i.e. they have a great power supply, parts that are conservatively rated and extremely tight tolerances.

However, a more moderately priced component is often capable of performing much better if supplied with the required power.

Every component is designed to a specific price point - and often the parts used in todays electronics perform exceptionally well. However, the part that often gets overlooked is the power transformer. A good transformer will react to transient voltage and current demands extremely fast. But if the mains cable is less than adequate the transformers ability to react is compromised.

When transient demands cannot be met the internal voltages fluctuate and cause slight variations in the signal.

In a two channel system the transients affect each channel differently, which can effect the phase of the signals - this causes a "smearing" of the image and affects the details heard and the stereo image.

A good power cable will allow the component to react to transients and affectively improve the stereo image - but the real benefit is that details never before heard will be quite noticeable.

I too was once a skeptic regarding the importance of cables, until I tried them after reading several articles. The results I attained were very noticeable.

The most recent upgrades have been my power cables. I did not have to shell out thousands. One power cord cost less than $100 with a couple of nice rhodium plated connectors and it has made a significant improvement.

Now, if I can get great results with my modest little system, I have to wonder what kind of results can be attained with high-end audio components.

Perhaps there is a point at which the effect of good cables is less evident due to a components ability to deal with transients as the quality level increases.

All I know is the my system has never sounded better and most of that is due to cables that I have purchased and an upgraded power supply for two of the components.

If interested take a look at my system - http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vdone&1327073984

Or for lots of details on my entire hi-fi journey visit my blog at http://www.image99.net/blog/index.html

I have a $100K system and bought $400 cables. Yes, not a typo. :) I bought and sold my Transparent Reference, FMS, NBS, Wireworld and NBS. I currently (after a trial period) bought all Frost Audio BlackFrost cables. In short, spectacular! Forward 6 months later, they close up shop. Go figure. Sucks for re-sale, but these cables are so good and for the price (even if they were $8k) I am keeping them for quite awhile and am happy. Moral of story, do your research, listen to as many cables in your own system, and pick what you like, not what the idiot magazine writers raves about (and gets paid to).

Talk2me makes a good point...follow your ears:O) I've come full circle myself and find myself having the best results overall with MIT cables. They seem to have improved their products and eliminated some of the problems I used to hear with their older designs. To each their own....Enjoy!!

Yes Sir. It was Harry Pearson who stated cables should be 10% of system cost as a general rule.
Try as many as you can and you will find ut for yourself.

Currently I'm at 14%. When I upgrade(have Superconductor +) my speaker cables to JPS Labs Superconductor V I'll be pushing 20%!