"Great RCA interconnects under $100?"

While I enjoy the sound of a a top notch audio system, I believe that high end cable prices have little to do with vastly improving the sound of a system relative to their prices. If it floats your boat and you want a $2,000 power cord, go for it. I will probably have a hard time agreeing that it was money well spent soundwise.
One of the reasons people fall out of this hobby is that prices get much higher year after year just to be current with equipment. I've been in this hobby for over 40 years, and most non-audio people are shocked when I tell them how much I have invested in my main system. It is refreshing to me that someone might be able to design a pair of interconnects for under $100 that sound great. I and many others in this hobby don't need the pinnacle of every component available out there. Remember the heyday of Stereophile and TAS, when each tried to outdo the other for most expensive equipment reviewed? Well, I don't even read those publications anymore and haven't for years. I think many people followed me. Why do you think you could buy a subscription to Stereophile recently for $10?
For me, and I suspect many others, getting about 90% of the sound we're after is going to float our boats. I don't have to have the last word in resolution in order to justify a purchase or enjoy the music. With so many things competing for what discretionary income left, the hobby needs pioneers who use their creative side to design products that greatly exceed customer expectations at that price point. My hat is off to those that accomplish that. Here are some more cables under $100 to consider (I have not heard any of these yet)... Raymond Cable Silver Analog, Aural Harmony Silver Sonnet, RS Audio, White Zombie La Cacanya & Aural Thrills Air Silver.

Hook, line and sinker

I've found the aural thrills gold cable to be okay. The 4 outlet box is a nice piece. But find the Audio Metallurgy ICs to have more of what pleases me, in the several places I've tried them. I still think that what I sell is better, listening comparisons only. :)
But would have to say this regarding the mid-topic points made,
"great" not likely; "really rather good" highly likely."
I wear a $200 Seiko, won't buy designer jeans.
-------------------------------------------Best Regards.

As a newcomer to this forum, but not hifi, it's unfortunate that some here think hifi gear is immune from marketing hype and artificial price inflation.

It would be very naive to think that some products - be they cd players, amplification, cables etc - are not sometimes sold at over-inflated prices to try to maintain their status or perceived quality. I'm NOT suggesting all expensive hifi is sold like this, and much of it is worth every penny.
But let's use another analogy (instead of jeans); a $2000 Rolex watch is not 10 times better than a $200 Seiko in terms of build quality, time accuracy and so on. But could Rolex keep their status if they started selling for $500? No way! Much of their retail price is about status and market perception, and high end hifi is not immune… A 1 meter Chord Indigo IC costs about $2500 (in Australia), compared to a 1 meter Merlin Chopin for about $220. Will you hear a 10-fold improvement in sound? I doubt it; many may hear no improvement at all.

To answer the cable question, here's an audio truth: The best cable is NO cable at all. Any extra signal path can only detract from the signal, not improve it. This is why the truly best, most transparent cables cost so much, as they are able to get the signal from A to B with as little interaction as possible, and this requires lots of R&D and low-scale production or hand-made products.

Now a reality check: unless you have the same components & speakers as the original recording studio, then your system will never sound exactly the same. This is where HiFi systems become subjective, since the aim is to put a system together that sounds perfect to YOU and YOUR ears (and remember no two people's hearing is identical).

Of course you can buy excellent interconnects for under $100, just as you can buy excellent CD players and amplifiers for less than $1000. A well made interconnect using high grade conductors and connections (eg some Chord Company and Van Den Hul IC's) can cost well under $100 and do a brilliant job, and maybe even sound better to an individual's ears than a cable costing 10 times that. You may even find a local tech who buys high grade cable and RCA connectors, and puts them together professionally and therefore bypasses all the packaging, marketing & hype that can blow an IC’s price out of the real world; that’s what I did and haven’t looked back.

Anyone who says you can’t either has too much money or sells cables.

I feel better now. I’m going to have a cup of tea to prepare for the spray I’ll receive for this post... :)

Now a reality check: unless you have the same components & speakers as the original recording studio, then your system will never sound exactly the same. This is where HiFi systems become subjective, since the aim is to put a system together that sounds perfect to YOU and YOUR ears (and remember no two people's hearing is identical).

Here, here, Carl! I raise my morning coffee to toast your excellent post. I might add to your accurate statement above, that even if you had the same gear, connections, etc. it would sound different in a different room. Further still, even if you in the actual recording studio at the time of recording listening to the very gear the engineer was basing their own decisions upon, it may not be your...well, cup of tea! I'm taking off on your caffeinated beverage theme--I trust you don't mind. You may actually much prefer your very own home stereo that you've assembled through years of trial and error, and that stereo may sound very little like the the monitors in the recording studio. So much for "fidelity". Or as Jack said, "...Truth?!..You can't handle the truth!!!"

Being a great fan of fine time pieces, though not at all a fan of status symbols, I can say that I've never seen a Rolex I found in the least bit attractive, nor will you ever find one on my wrist. There are many very expensive watches I find stunningly beautiful, weird as that may seem to anyone who doesn't give a toss, and I do appreciate the aesthetics of that art, as well as the craftsmanship that goes into designing and building the works of those hand-built timepieces (although you never really see them unless you remove them from your wrist and pop the back off). Similar arguments can be made with the gear we're talking about (hand-made in small batches by passionate people who've put tremendous R&D time and dollars into producing something that arguably does the same thing as items far less expensive), though the direction here seems to be aimed more towards function than form, probably because no one actually looks at IC's much once they're installed. As far as the function aspect of the watch; well, although they may say the same time at any given moment, we all know the Rolex gives mo'betta time than the Seiko, eh?;-) And just like those fat cables in the back of your system, you'll get those knowing nods of approval from all the right people. And the women will smile and make eye-contact, right after they steal a glance at your crotch fantasizing about fat wire, the original Rolex Milgaus (the rarest and ugliest of all Rolex's offerings), and all that discriminatin' good taste that only the privileged few can afford. BTW, the Chinese-made digital watch on my cell phone that's hooked up to a wireless satellite network keeps pretty good time too. I bet it cost about $2 to integrate into the phone.

My coffee is drained, and it's time to go to work. You're absolutely right, it's all subjective. No right. No wrong. As XTC put it, "...it's always been the same, it's just a complicated game."

Marco