Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck

Greg: I agree with everything you've said. I got into this thread because some people who think wire is over-priced (yes, wire is over-priced, based upon your same reasoning regarding complexity of manufacture)but then, to perfect their argument, try to use their knowledge of science to say that, ergo, wire doesn't matter, or is not a "component"; a reductionism that the rules of science themselves don't allow. I don't like smart people picking on someone else with a body of knowledge (like lawyers do with their acquired vocabulary...)that is then used in such a way that is contrary to that very knowledge. Its obfuscation for the purpose of dominating someone else. The fact that they then call you "bullying" is somewhat ironic.

On the "Guru": yes, if you see the Buddha in the road, or the guru, kill him. Its strange: reality is suseptible to mathematical imposition, revealing truths about matter and energy and their forces, but to know "beauty" you yourself must make that journey, and the guru, ultimately, can not "tell" you, only point in the direction (hence, finally, to "see" you must "kill" your attachment to him seeing for you). We are all pointing for each other here, except when some try to use their scientific intellect to intimidate others who want to see more "beauty". But, different knowledge is state-specific, meaning that when you are attached to some type of knowledge that very attachment keeps you from seeing further possibilities, both in yourself and the world. This is where "science" is: claiming that there is no truth discernible outside scientific truth (materially/externally focused), effectively negating all future possibilities or capacities for truth, notwithstanding its own evolutionary evidence that says all knowledge evolves beyond its own parameters, always its core truths being integrated into the next, and even in the face of its own reductionist method turned back upon itself to reveal it own limitations (Popper, Kuhn etc; the seed for every next level contained in the power of the last). People who claim that only science (read: measurement/quantification externally applied) can tell us if wire has "truth" vis-a-vis a system of "components" are the same people, unknowingly, attached to the above scientism. And that is why scientism is just another ideology coersively attempting not to change towards seeing more - not coincidentally, just like medieval mythological theism attemted to do with the emergence of scientific method and its truth. The guru only points; people must have the courage to step beyond the illusory comfort of their self-limiting ideologies in order to see farther.

Yes, if the Dominus makes the system sing - you see more beauty than with a more "complex" component, thereby rendering it more "functional" experientially - then what do you do? A Van Gogh painting is only a mix of paint swirls - its molecular construction is less complex - but does that make it less able to translate "beauty"? Is "complexity" in matter, although a consideration, nonetheless secondary to the "functional" result in listening of that construction? Even in science, isn't the result of the experiment, observed by the comparing mind, determinitive of the technolgy used to achieve that result? If you contend the opposite, aren't you being, in fact, un-scientific? And if you are claiming to be the bearer of scientific sobriety, while at once violating the very rules you hoist upon others, aren't you being irrational, that irratioinality fueled by you desire to be secure in your set of ideas, however misplaced? And, doesn't the need for security, the desire to be safe from other ways of thinking beyond your own, manifest, behaviorily, in a subsequent attack on all those who might point towards something more?

Wire, amp, price, pragmatism, a balancing that sees what is true in the moment of experience of listening and does not deny that truth, or its possibility, in default to fear of that possibilty - the Middle Path.

Nrchy: "So, in your opinion what is the better value, assuming the relative value of your components being about equal. Is it cheaper to buy great cables or great electronics? Then, which would provide the biggest improvement?

To restate: I was confronted with an impending test of Nrchy's question. It was by no means a controlled scientific test. However, it does help illuminate the dilemma. Two of us were to listen to our two systems, both of which were comprised of, in the owner's eyes, components of comparable value. They are both similar in dollars value. I will label the two systems A and B.

A is a Wadia/Coda/Spendor/Nordost system. The owner, listening to an "art = science" guru chose to spend serious money replacing twenty feet of romex with 8awg silver cored teflon shielded cable. Obviously, he hoped for a bigger improvement in his system than he might get replacing a piece of electronics.

Fair enough?

B is my Jolida/Pass/Apogee/Kimber system. I differ with system A's contention. My thinking leads me to believe I could best improve system B with another amp arrangement, say biamping, since I perceive it's only weakness being lack of power feeding the bass panel. I would choose this rather than upgrading wire.

Wrong?

Remember, Nrchy never postulated a base level of overall system value that would perhaps magnify the relative value of super wire.

It is my belief that system A could have been vastly improved if the money put into wire had been instead put into a speaker upgrade. Furthermore, the money put into the Nordost was a waste too, given the state of his electronics.

Choices is what this thread is all about, not science versus art, component semantics, Jung, or Buddha. By evolving my speaker/amp/front end to ever increasing levels of excellence rather than gilding the wires, I know I have made the right choices. Owner of system B now joins the score of audiophiles that agree with me whole heartedly after listening to my system.

Nrchy, the answers to your questions are system specific. Shoot for the stars systems like yours may well indeed benefit from wire rolling. I am not in the position to disagree. For us groundlings with sub twenty grand systems speaker/front end/amps choices are far more reaching. IMOH of course!

Muralman has put the thread back in track! after I requested closing it--damn...

I have just talked to Dan Wright updating him on the details of my system. The Modded Swans are letting me hear things in a totally different way and since I have moved to a different appartment I have lost my reference point. That's not all bad, either. It will just take me a little bit longer to figure things out.

Muralman has a very valid point--like his system, mine would benefit most with another amp, an electronic crossover and a sub--simple as that. I am not placing a lot of emphasis on esoteric speaker wire when I just purchased spec'ed 12 ga. silver plated copper (Teflon insulated & sheathed)50 ft for $32.50. Some Bananas ($26), silver solder and vapor cryo treatment @ $10/ lb will give me more than decent performance and free my cash for other priorities.

Muralman, yes, wrong.

A Coda high current SS amp (what vintage, the one designed for the Legacy, as old as the Spendors, not that it makes much difference?), Nordost IC's (assumably the SPM's, some of the most denuded upper mid IC's around), and silver speaker cable into what you described as a badly constructed room, only digital, and you think that is fair point of departure for determining whether a cable such as a Dominus is good value for the money, or has a value at all? Are you crazy?!

Digital with silver through Nordost IC's and an arc welder SS amp hardly known for its harmonics and air into a crap room and you want us to value your opinion, reached conclusively from this one foray into what you assume is a fair and determitive test? This is a system that DOES NOT and WILL NEVER excell at the performance aspects that a Dominus is designed FOR.

And what do you use to compare? A Jolida CD straight into an SS amp with silver wire and ribbons? No pre, just the Jolida running the volume through what kind of volume control? Do you know why 'ol HP just did a survey of the best line stages around and they were all tubes, and, wonders of wonders, he found out that they made a large difference in performance in ADVANCED CD based systems, and even ADVANCED phono ones? (You remember, don't you, Stereophile mags failed attempt about five years ago via the now departed Steve Stone to get us all to go passive? So, other than price considerations, why isn't the world running passive? Hmmm...)

Yes, we can return to the original thread question (remember, I asked Nrchy to respond a little bit ago), but this thread has also been about much more (the bwhite and audieng dialogue for one). But my point is that the alleged objective experiment that you set up is flawed before you even started in the context of judging a piece of wire like Dominus, which IS the context of the question. And since, to support your argument, you are using this experiment and its results, that becomes, well, kinda important - you know what I mean? "By no means a scientific test". Ya, I'd say so.

So, if you want to stick to discussing whether Dominus is the right CHOICE for Nrchy, as I already said, obviously not. But as you said, THAT'S NOT HIS QUESTION. He asks: in a system where components are relatively EQUAL in value, what would I do, given the Dominus experience.

Muralman, let me repeat this so you understand and can respond, which you haven't as of yet: as the system becomes better, wire becomes more important. In other words, with Nrchy's Aragon 8008 he would probably do best with your Kimber, just as you do best with your Kimber, or that the Coda system can't hear harmonic and spatial performance beyond Romex (eeck!). But in Porter's SoundLab Ultimates/Aethetix/Dominus system one can hear a LARGE difference between cables BECAUSE his system excels at subtle harmonic and spatial nuances that a yours can NOT replicate. If your system keeps "increasing in excellence" as you say, yet you continue to regard wire as you did when you started, ignoring this CHANGING DYNAMIC regarding wire value to a system as a whole as the system improves, then that assumption will hold you back. If you've only got $20K, that's fine, OK, but to continue to deny this dynamic based upon your experience, or your system, or the one-time test-not-a-test you present to us here, is, well...

I don't like to comment on people's systems because its, well, crass, but since you seem to think that yours and the one you cite seem to give you some big experience on making conclusive statements, it seems appropriate, if not overdue.

As far as Jung & Buddha not being about choices, the lack of knowledge in that statement leaves me, finally, speechless.

Good Asa, you're cooking again...Muralman's getting the best of you? No, I'm not chiding ewe (I had to look up that word in the dictionary--it's *Saxon*).

As for me, I'm happy where I am---I'm starting to focus on a farmhouse, a horse and a boat--adiós audio gear!!!