This is a response to the original question.
I have done the following with a friend a few times and afterward we both felt we had learned a great deal:
Using my system (at a retail cost of $30k it's probably at least adequate for this experiment) we inserted one pair of ICs of 'inferior' reputation and cost into the system and listened for several minutes with a small variety of variously instrumented music.
Then we replaced the first set of cables with another set of more costly type and listened to the same material all over again. We tried to identify the differences we perceived and took note of them. If one or both of us decided he preferred one set over the other, this too was duly noted.
Now the critical part of the experiment:
One of us left the room and the other inserted one set of ICs and the other auditioner auditioned, trying to identify which set of cables was in play. Then the same was repeated with the cables switched, the listener again leaving the room while the switch was made. (This only works if the test subject cannot eyeball the cables, which is cheating.) Again, listener tries to decide which cable is which.
We then repeated this whole rigamarole with the experimenter positions reversed. Now the second subject listens to both sets of ICs and tries to identify the 'better' cable or, at the least, what the differences are.
Last of all, one fellow either changes cables or not and the other one tries to decide if the cables in a pair of 'switches' are the same or different.
This, of course, is a classic 'single blind' test setup. If it seems a bit grueling, spread the tests out over a few sessions to avoid fatigue.
I think your results may be illuminating and have the potential to save you a lot of money over the years.
My friend and I, both experienced listeners and one, myself, a musician who has performed on both rock bass and classical clarinet with 50 years of 'hi-fi' listening experience, agreed that we COULD NOT, with any regularity AT ALL, be certain even that the cables had been switched in the last step, much less that differences between them were possible to detect no matter how often we tried the experiment.
Admittedly, the 'cheap' cables we have used are usually not that cheap (about $80/meter pair) so you could say maybe there is a baseline. True enough; but it seems, if that's the case, there may be nothing to gain from spending more than the baseline.
I know that many people (who refuse either to participate in blinded tests or refuse to accept the clear results of the tests of others) claim they can hear reliable and sometimes extremely subtle differences in cables and we know that some folks can, for instance, identify with dead accuracy the difference between, say, a 1948 Gibson Jumbo and the 1949 version; but such folks are very rare and as a rule have outstanding and well known musical skills. When Audie O. Phile claims his $10K gold plated ICs have, for instance, greater detail than the $100 copper ones, and you have to decide if his head is in the right place, how do you judge? If Ry Cooder says he wants that 1948 Jumbo and not the 1949 Jumbo, well, maybe he's kidding himself--but he's Ry Cooder so I tend to want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Even then, though, I'm not so sure I'd pay more for one than the other without trying out both of them myself. But what about Audiobill from Omaha? If you actually performed the experiment I described and, without cheating, actually found you could hear a difference and preferred one over the other, then I say you are not wrong to spend more money.
BUT--you have performed a different experiment already and have come up with useful results (after all, it is not bloody likely that you would be able to hear a difference in blind testing that you couldn't hear when you actually knew you had changed cables). If you ever hear something that makes you think you have detected a difference, try my experiment with the involved cables (or components, for that matter) and see what happens.
My favorite saying, with I believe much greater wisdom and usefulness than most other capsule guides to life, is, "Don't believe everything you think!"
It is not only a handy tool for self-correction but, in the long run, its judicious application could save you a lot of money.
One last note: Admittedly it is more fun, if you love audio, to believe in subtle meaningful differences so you can forever play the improvement game. And I don't want people not to have fun. But fun combined with knowledge is all the better.
