Componets first, cables second?

Peter,

Here is a contrarian or minority view.

If cables (a piece of wire) makes a large difference then I would definitely be concerned about the equipment. From my perspective, good and well matched gear should have robust power supplies and high quality interfaces which do NOT change significantly (audibly) with a power conditioner, "better" interconnect or cable.

It is best to avoid finicky equipment that changes response due to the slightest changes in cabling or which has an inadequate built-in power supply. The same could be said for equipment that changes response with time (warm-up or extensive break-ins lasting monnths). I use a power conditioner but I know that it is actually only one item in my setup that seems to require it; since power conditioning could be built in to this component's power supply, I can only surmise that this item is slightly deficient in its power supply build/design.

I guess my criteria for what constitutes good audio gear includes a "robustness" or "consistency" factor. Gear that can sound excellent but which lacks consistency and requires inordinate fiddling (cables/interocnnetcs/warm-up/break-in etc.) to keep sounding excellent is definitely not my thing. I know I am a tiny minority here on these forums who think this way....just two cents as usual.

The arguments in favor of expensive cables here are the same ones my high end hi-fi dealer uses and even "Best Buy" applies this same argument, although at a much lower tier of cabling. This argument carries a lot of weight in the audiophile biz and there are hundreds of testimonials that reinforce this viewpoint. The argument also happens to be a marketing dream because the logic says that you simply don't hear as much cable differences with "unresolving" gear. Therefore if the cable does not work enough for you then it is says nothing about the expensive wire itself, instead it implies that an upgrade of gear is in order (either to more resolution or to better synergy or wait more time for break-in to occur), and vice-versa ad infinitum.

The absence of a well-accepted, plain, practical engineering-type explanation of the how and why a more expensive piece of wire should work much better in audio than an appropriate (but ordinary) piece of wire raises too many questions for my liking. However, to each his own - if cables make a difference for you then go for it! I am a minority and the majority is most often right - the Wisdom of Crowds, yes?

Bowbow,

I would hear no difference in cabling with those [Shadorne's] components either...

That has been my experience - no difference. My system reflects that. I figured some people would laugh but then again people tend to laugh at those who act differently. My broker was also quite amused in May/June when I requested a face to face meeting and then instructed him to sell virtually all my portfolio of stocks and go to cash, which he did grudgingly.

There are a myriad of perfectly rational and sound reasons why one particular cable will work better than another.

I would like to see this myriad of explanations and data to prove it. Perhaps I live in a hole and have missed it.

From down here in my hole, it appears that for analog audio applications (at audio frequencies), wire capacitance and inductance are generally regarded as being so small as to be unimportant and can be ignored. Resistance only barely begins to become a factor at greater lengths, such as extremely long runs of thin speaker cable. Simply put, the wire characteristics pale in comparison to active elements in the speaker crossover and acoustic transducers; furthermore, most electronics is designed to be insensitive to these small variations in typical wire parameters.

Ok, so let's assume for a moment it is true that "there are a myriad of perfectly rational and sound reasons why one particular cable will work better than another." Surely this would make wire so crucial that equipment manufacturers would publish formulas or guidelines for calculating the correct length and type cable necessary for each type of component being connected. (such as recommended precise amounts of capacitance, inductance, or reactance ...just like a cook book which recommends precise guidelines for each seasoning). The absence of strict well accepted guidelines suggests that either;

A) Manufacturers and equipment design engineers are irresponsible and just don't care about the final sound of their gear.

or

B) It is just not true that cables matter to any significant degree. By significant, meaning so as to make it actually worthwhile for the majority of high end manufacturers to issue more precise guidelines than the very basic broad guidelines that exist today (well shielded in some cases, appropriate AWG etc.)

Paul,

I respect your right to diagree and to add your own worthy opinions to this thread. I see no point in making this a pissing contest. If you re-read my comments I think it is possible we do agree, I just don't rate the cable differences as being significant; for example, a slight roll-off in highs can easily be achieved with a touch of the tone control too (yes, *sigh* K-mart systems come with tone controls, ack the horror of it!).

I have really nothing further to add to the discusssion because our differences may have as much to do with my poor hearing and my bad equipment compared to your's, as you have pointed out. I must remind myself to do a better job in future to stay away from this kind of thread and keep my thoughts/observations more private. If you feel much better for having denigrated my K-Mart system then I am glad for you. I am not at all offended.