Which IC is more important?

Well I too am a believer that you start with the source but my cable experiences paint a much different picture. I have learned that there are two links in my system where cables make the biggest difference: line stage to amp and tonearm cable to phono stage.

I have tried so many cables (NBS, Transparent, Cardas, AQ, Straightwire, SilverAudio, Magnan) and I can move around different cables in the system to listen for differences. The link between the line and amp is always the biggest difference. This was more about preserving the ambience and bloom of the system (Linn TT, Pioneer PD65, ARC DAC3/PH2/LS5/VT130 and Maggie 3.3. Some cables in this link retained the magic and others completely lost it. I could swap cables between phono stage and line or DAC and line and here some changes in resolution or tonal balance, but it was subtle...the link from line to amp was not subtle at all.

I worked so hard to try to hear differences with speaker cables and yet, the changes were again so mininal. The only other area of significance was the tonearm cable. Here resolution was very apparent. The SilverAudio was miles ahead of the ARC or Straightwire in terms of information retrieval.

So for me it has not been a matter of the better cables at the front of the chain. And this surprised me. But I have learned that each link tends to be affected by cable changes differently than the other links. Sometimes resolution, or tonal balance or ambience, etc. For me, the NBS Statement works by far the best in the line to amp link. But the Cardas Golden Cross worked well too but perhaps a little too warm and rich in the midrange. But it took the NBS to bring on another level of resolution and retain the magical ambience of the system. Swapping source cables to the line stage had minimal effect on this.

Your experiences may end up totally different. Always try before you buy!

RGD makes a very short and sweet point. I bet you guys wish that i posted more in that style, huh ??? : )

On the other hand, Puubie ( gotta luv it) also hits the nail on the head. Regardless of make, model or price, what sounds and works best in a specific part of the system is what counts.

For some further thoughts on this, try taking a look at this post that i did over at the Asylum a while back. Whether you agree or disagree, it might offer some food for thought. Sean
>

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/15379.html

Rgd made a good point as well as Puubie and Sean sums it up. Let you're own ears be the final word.....

Both the interconnect between source and pre and the one between pre and power are equally important. But each serves a different purpose and the selection of each should reflect its different purpose. The one between pre and power should be as neutral as possible, have great dynamics, great bass and treble extension. In contrast, the one sitting between CD, for example, and pre can be less dynamic and can even exhibit some bass or treble roll-off. It should provide a very clean sound which can even be slightly lean, bright or balanced to give bloom to the upper mids or highs without negatively affecting the overall sound of the system. To demonstrate this, you can use Kimber PBJ, an excellent budget interconnect between CD and Pre. Trying it between pre and power would be tantamount to a disaster in my opinion. There would be no bass and lacking in dynamics. While I believe that there are interconnects that sound better in my system, I hesitate in saying that there are great interconnects and bad interconnects. I use them to fill in what the rest of the system lacks in synergy. Hopefully, for any problem in matching components, there is an interconnect (or a speaker cable) which will fill in what is missing, or cut what there is too much of. Therefore, there is no cable which fits all situations and doubling up on the same cable model or even manufacturer (different models) is almost always a bad idea. You will usually get too much of one thing and the system will tend to sound unbalanced. The only time I have noted where two interconnects from the same manufacturer complemented each other quite well was Acoustic Zen Silver Reference on CD to pre while running Acoustic Zen Matrix Reference on pre to power. But then, all interconnects are somewhat colored, none ever sound perfect, and each only has application to complement the existiing sound of a particular system rather than universally enhancing and matching every system.

While I appreciate the elegance of "short and sweet" pointers, I don't find them very useful as learning tools. I am relatively new to this hobby, but having perused through many posts here and elsewhere, I do feel I already have a grasp on basic concepts...I know not to equate "cost" with "better" and I know I ultimately need to listen with my own ears.

I LIKE long, windy posts. I enjoy reading them, esp if they are in reply to one of my questions. I can learn a lot from peoples' opinions and past experiences.

If you look at the text of my original question, I'm searching for your experiences and thoughts on the location of IC's you've used and experimented with, as well as general thoughts on theory.

I am NOT looking for pithy little statements that don't contribute to my understanding of the journey that led you to your current state of affairs. RGD, not to pick on you, and I hope you're not offended, but your statement above isn't all that useful. "what is lost at the beginning cannot be recovered" is true, but so is the fact that if you transmit a skewed or unfaithful signal to the preamp, you're just magnifying that unbalanced signal too, correct? Franklapdog, what did your statement contribute to this thread? You as well Leafs?

I appreciate the rest of you sharing your understanding of things with me. I hope to hear more from you all, and welcome others to dialogue here as well.

Cheers.