Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck


I recently chronicled in a review here, my experience with a very expensive interconnect. The cables cost nearly $7000 and are well beyond my reach. The issue is, the Pursit Dominus sound fantastic. Nothing in my stereo has ever sounded so good. I have been wondering during and since the review how much I would have to spend to get the same level of improvement. I'm sure I could double the value of my amp or switch to monoblocks of my own amps and not obtain this level of improvement.
So, in your opinion what is the better value, assuming the relative value of your componants being about equal? Is it cheaper to buy, great cables or great electronics? Then, which would provide the biggest improvement?
128x128nrchy
True that a cable can only detract, but that can be a useful tuning device.

As an example, I would choose to use silver cabling with a vandersteen/tube system. Why ? Because a system like that needs all the detail and upper frequencies it can get. On the opposing side I would tend to use copper for a midprice solid state system and a revealing speaker such as audio physic. Why ? Because they tune out the solid state nasties, and may tune out high frequency stridency. Part of that is my taste in sound too. I hate bright sounding systems. I like an emphasized midrange. This is why cable matching is so important.

I do feel that as you head up to expensive components and cables, the matching becomes a little less relevent. It seems that all equipment/cables in the top shelf realm are very revealing and very low noise. Once I chose my reference grade ic's I have changed components around them. Occasionally I'll tune with a rounded vs bright speaker cable.

The effectiveness of cables does depend on the way your system is voiced, and your preferences. As an example, my home system is voiced to have a very revealing midrange, tremendous imaging, fast high-definition bass, and a slightly rolled off top. If I remove one of my $700 (used) interconnects and put in a $75 cable, much of the system's magic go away. The ic's are an essential part of the system's performance.

By comparison, when I had a less expensive system I could indeed hear a performance improvement but it was not nearly so substantial. I've seen some excellent midprice cables come on the market - Audioquest Quartz, Cardas Neutral ref, harmonic tech truthlink. You can go a long way with $125/ea truthlinks.

Back to the original post, I have found that once you get to the 3-4K per component level (a 15K system), cables start to become very cost effective. You can buy a 2 cable set of midlin i/c's for $500, or top shelf ic's for ~2000. That 1500 cost difference should be seen as a component.
Thsalmon---Never a more appropriate truth spoken. Cables can only subtract from the sound because they can't deliver sound better than the original source. I have seen so many "Tune" with expensive cables that sometimes I wonder why they don't bring tone controls back. I have always wondered what a neutral cable might sound like, the no wire cable that all could be compared to.
The bottom line here is that if you like one cable better than another, you are simply saying that "IN YOUR OPINION" it does less harm that the other or colors the sound that masks something you didn't originally like in your systems sound. You must match cables with equipment---what sounds good with one may not sound so good with another piece. We have to tune out what we don't want or the "Synergy" issue.
My vote is buy better equipment. Of course, that has its own set of problems---as in what is "Better?" And as mentioned above, money doesn't dictate better sound.
I'm confident that Nrchy is well aware of the standard diatribe concerning cables. He's familiar with the rules of thumb such as spending 10% on cables, auditioning as much as possible, the effects of synergy, the impact of marketing hype, etc. He's been there. Please read his posts! You will see that he's well into the advanced stages of this addiction.

What he seems to be asking is:

Despite any preconceptions that you may have, what has been your actual experience in terms of the sonic improvements observed in your system by the introdcution of high priced cables relative to high priced components?

I think he's suggesting, based on his experience, that the conventional wisdom may be wrong.
Here is an interesting article on speaker cables from a great guy, Nelson Pass.

http://passlabs.com/pdf/spkrcabl.pdf
Let me clarify my response a bit.

Changing from Cable A to Cable B can IMPROVE the performance of a system, not necessarily take it "sideways" or "tune it" as per someone's personal preference. The cable change can achieve this by actually improving the loading conditions of the component that is feeding it. The improvement would come from increased signal transfer with lower amounts of reactance. The cable change could do this via presenting a load that was more suitable to what the source ( not necessarily the "front end" but the component actually feeding the signal into that specific cable ) wanted to see.

Just as a power amp loads into speakers, a cd player or dac loads into a preamp, a preamp loads into a power amp, etc... If you don't think that changing speaker cables will affect the load that the amplifier sees, try taking a look at the article that Nelson Pass wrote and WhoCares makes reference to. As Mr Pass demonstrates, the differences in loading characteristics that various cables present when using the same set of speakers as a point of reference is very measurable. The same thing occurs with line level components, etc.. i.e. cable changes can make measurable differences in signal transfer. Taking this to another level, i personally feel that those measurable results are also audible. So says the "subjective objectivist" in me : )

Since cables are a necessity, it only makes sense to find those that are best suited for both accurate and musical reproduction within the confines of your system. This does not mean that each cable will be the same from component to component ( digital to preamp, preamp to power amp, etc... ) or that the same cables will work in similar fashion in another system. Nor does it mean that the "best" cable in any given situation need be expensive, make use of fancy geometries and materials or be an "audiophile approved" brand name.

As far as introducing tone controls to the circuit, these will typically introduce a multitude of negatives in terms of our goal of "accurate reproduction". Having said that, it is sometimes nice to be able to "tweak" up the bottom end and turn down the top end ( or vice-versa ) on some of the less than perfect recordings that we have to deal with. As such, better components may not include tone controls but do allow the provisions for the installation of such devices by simply taking advantage of a specialty "processor loop" designed for such. What type of processing one chooses to use is obviously at the discretion of the end user. Sean
>