Cable Costs Relative to System

Lots of great points here, it's a matter of budget and upgrading. If you are like me I have to do this in stages. Sure it would be nice to go and spend unlimited amounts. What I do is save and buy the things that I want. 1 piece at a time. This is a on going mission. Good Luck

I find cabling as important as any other part of the musical chain including ones mood at the time of listening. I beleive without a doubt that good cables make a huge positive difference when used in proper synch with the rest of the system and it's cables. Good cables do not have to be expensive to be really good and sometimes a lesser cable will soound better in a particular situation but I'll say it again cables can make or break a system regardless of how much they cost. Ubnfortunately when a good cable comes around it becomes way over inflated in it's price and that is because the people who make these cables can get away with it. Especially if it's a hard design to copy or just expensive materials when bought in small quantities. I know a cable manufacturer who says he can build an Electraglide Fatman from scratch but he says he can buy it cheaper on Audiogon than it would cost him to build from scratch.

This tread is incredible. It has continued for five years despite all of the sound empirical evidence available, most importantly double blind testing. If we’d only take a little time and do a little research, this thread wouldn’t exist, and the mudslinging would cease. We have so much information at our fingertips on the internet, but we persist with our subjectivism and wallow in silly pseudo-science. Ignorance is bliss.

If a cable makes a significant audible difference it must be altering the signal. The principal of Hi-fi means delivering the signal as purely and unaltered as possible—simple copper zip cord does this very well. If ordinary zip cord is "harsh" and some other special mega-buck cable "smooth," what’s the "smooth" cable doing to the original signal? Let’s not confuse what sounds pleasant to our ears from what is actually faithful to the original. We like junk food because it tastes pleasant; it looks and feels more ‘perfect,’ not because it’s more pure, natural, and faithful to the original. (Some people really do prefer chicken nuggets to a simple roasted chicken.)

Here are a few links to read that provide scientifically validated evidence both theoretical and practical. If you wish to remain in the fantasy world of cable geometry, ceramic elevators, and frivolous fairy dust wizardry, keep your bliss—don’t read them.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/interconnects/Audio-Cable-Vendor.html

http://www.ethanwiner.com/audiophoolery.html

http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/spkcbl_e.html

http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/apcable/apcrit.html

Well, that's maybe why the Anti-cables are winning out in so many systems.

Ojgalli,

There is a lot of science behind the claims made on the links you quoted. The problem is that science is not always trusted and fear of missing out on a potential performance improvement continues to drive people to try things.

Another thing not mentioned in these links is that some audio gear is very much more susceptible to cables than others. For example, the principle of a high input impedance and a low output impedance is desirable for audio components...this minimizes the effect of a coupling cable (often to a point of being audibly negligible when sufficiently high contrasts are employed)

However, not all audio components are designed according to these principles.