One Super high end cable or mid level set?


Has anybody out of choice decided to allocate all of their cable budget on one super high end model (say for just as an example a Nordost Vallhalla or Odin interconnect) whilst keeping there other cables at a much cheaper range or evan stock.
As opposed to the presumable much more common practice of buying a more 'balanced' mid level but complete cable loom ( again just as an example Nordost Red Dawn)
I suppose the question is can an 'incredible' never to be upgraded single cable produce a more magical ( or even equal) sound ,( supposing of course that it is of suitable quality to reveal these qualities.) than the compromised but more balanced set?
128x128pcoombs
Pani - Your response makes no sense to me. Let me explain.

Assuming a CD player outputs a perfect signal via a perfect cable, that signal is going to be processed in a pre-amp and sent via an 80% "perfect" cable to the amplifier. I don't understand how the second cable would be any less important than the first as it would be the limiting factor. The only way to justify that a cable sound better, rather than different, is to assume that it somehow carries more or more detailed information that would be filtered out in the second cable. Obviously, the better the signal at any one stage the better the end result, but I don't see how one super cable could really make a significant difference beyond the bling knowledge.

I'm certainly not an expert, it just doesn't make sense to me.
Mceljo, you tried to be too analytical of the situation and hence used maths to evaluate the situation.

On the contrary audio is not just about science and maths, a large part of it is ART. There are many aspects of audio which is intangible and cannot be calculated, measured or justified by science because music touches your senses directly and how it is evaluated after that is totally ART.

I would answer your post in two parts, 1st will be scientific and 2nd would be non-scientific.

1. To answer your question using basic maths and science, the signal that travels between the CDP and the preamp is extremely low level, a slight contamination to this signal is actually big change in terms of % of change. Moreover it will go through two levels of amplification (preamp and power amp) so the change is also amplified and in turn magnified to make a huge impact to the final sound. It is a big challenge for the interconnect to carry such valuable low level signal maintaining all its integrity.
However the signal from preamp to power amp is already amplified and is a high level signal (relatively). The effect of contamination is much lower because the % change compared to the full signal is lower and also there is one less level of magnification i.e the power amp. So the overall impact is much much lower. Hence the compromise at this level will not be as drastic as the interconnect at the first level (cdp to preamp).

2. Coming to the non-scientific explanation. So, you said "assuming that the CDP gives out a perfect signal", my first question would be, how do you know what a perfect signal sounds like ? For example, one interconnect may sound extremely holographic with precise imaging of instruments with nice detailing and tones While another interconnect may bring in amazing body to the instruments, great tones, warm, open airy stage but little less detail and little less precise imaging. Tell me which one is right ? Meaning which is the sound that mimics the CDP's perfect signal more ? Very difficult to say right ? Basically we do not know.
All we know, is the signature sound that appeals to our senses more. When you hear that signature you call it MAGIC!! That is the magic I was talking about in my previous post. Even our equipments are bought with that very same magic in mind. Unfortunately cables play a big role in deciding the final sound (considering you have a revealing enough system). Hence one needs to extend his search for that magic even with cables. Now, the effect of the first interconnect in the chain is the most drastic. It decides the signature of the system by a large extent. So, if you know of a cable which brings in that magic to your system, buy it if you can. The second cable may reduce/change the effect by an extent but you still get a good part of that signature sound. Sometimes it so happens that it is a combination of two cables which brings that magic in but that is a different situation.
So, it is not really just detail, dynamics or staging, it is a complete presentation that one looks for and that if one cable is able to lock-in in your system, get it.
For me I opted for a "mid level" set of ICs all round for peace of mind and balance all around. If I had one REALLY good and expensive set of cables I'd always be wondering about the lesser quality ICs in my set-up and the impact to sound they may or may not be having.
Pani,

Your "scientific" explaination makes sense to me. I wasn't thinking about the reletive magnitudes of the signals at different points in the system. It would seem that if it does actually make as much difference as you suggest that having IC specifically designed for each application would make sense and would certainly sell to people that have more money than synergy.

I'll probably be a bit skeptical of the difference in sound simply from chaning IC's, but admittedly have not heard an A/B and might be surprised.

All cables have some level of loss in the signal so it's really about purchasing cables that eliminate the part of the signal that you prefer to have missing. Cables cannot add information so the only explaination for any change in sound is a loss. It's a necessary evil.
I know exactly what you mean and I will probably end up doing the same thing as you ( and like most others) if I ever decide to upgrade.
But conversely maybe as Pani's excellent posts to my initial question suggests the alternative might in fact , in certain situations work equally or even better for a similar outlay.