All of the cables are vital 'cuz the system won't work without them :-) Out of curiosity, what is the rationale for the interconnect from preamp to amp being the more important than the interconnect from source component to preamp? When I upgrade interconnects, I do all the line level interconnects in one fell swoop (or is it swell foop? whatever...) I think that if one considers signal levels, driving source power involved, and susceptibibility of the receiving end to cable-induced signal degradations, the hierarchy of cables having most effect to least are: (1) low level analog interconnects such as from turntable to phono amp (2a) line level analog interconnects such as from CD player to preamp, DAC to preamp (2b) line level analog interconnects from preamp to amp, (3) speaker cables, and finally, at a very long distance behind the others, (4) AC power cables and (5) digital cables, the latter especially for having insignificant incremental effect once basic electrical performance specs are met. It also seems that (4) and (5) are subject of much more mystery and heated debate these days than (1), (2), and (3). This observation is consistent with the First Law of Audiophile Discussion: heat of the debate is inversely proportional to size of the effect :-)
what's the most vital cable in a system?
I was wondering what IS the most important cable in a system if one was to rank them (#1 being the most important and so on)...A local dealer said that to him, a digital cable is the most important cable if your system calls for it....Well, my set up is a Classe CAP80 integrated, Epos ES14 on dedicated stands, a Toshiba SD1200 DVD/CD player, an MSB Link III DAC, and a Monarchy DIP jitter box. I use 2 digital cables with this set up - Canare digiflex and a Monster Video 2. I am thinking of upgrading the Monster digital cable...As for the rest of my cables, I'm using a Synergistic Research Mark II interconnect and Audioquest Indigo + speaker cables?...comments???