Interconnects and non-believers

OK after a few hours went back to the Pangea.Well hot damn, the Pangea sounds better.  Just more musical.  Solves that problem I really did not have. 
As for the Hurricane. I do not want to spend $11,000 to buy one 3 meter powercord, only to have it still be a meter short.  Maybe I could special order a 4 meter Hurricane. for like $15000? 
I think my powercords are gonna have to be good enough as is.  But I thought about it. and tried some. (though clearly the new PC had no break in time. so...... Who cares. yawn.

Devilboy
After any change to equipment or cabling I will spend the next few hours of listening being highly alert and critical of any changes in sq both good and bad and try to decide then which is the best direction to proceed.
But after that I am not tearing around changing it all out again.
Unless it was a large negative impact that I cannot take any longer!
Its time for some serious music time after all that. And may stay that way for days and weeks.

I would like to restate and elaborate on something I pointed out in the early part of the thread, which appears to have been overlooked in the ensuing discussion. What the OP replaced was not simply a cable. It was a cable that included a "network." Which its description makes clear includes an inductor, and presumably also other passive circuit elements since the cable’s description states that it has a "more complex network" than the manufacturer’s lesser cable.

And a stated goal of that network, among others, is to increase the efficiency with which low to mid frequencies are conducted, relative to the efficiency with which treble frequencies are conducted. (See the third paragraph on the first of the two linked pages, and also the link contained within that paragraph).

Is it any wonder that dramatic consequences would result from changing to a cable that is simply a cable from a cable which includes passive electronic circuit elements and whose expressly stated purposes include intentional introduction of effects on tonal balance?

Which is not to deny that the OP, whom I know from discussions in other threads here to be an accomplished classical musician as well as an astute listener and a sincere poster, would have perceived significant changes if what he had replaced had been simply a cable. But I would certainly expect that whatever differences he may have perceived in making such a substitution would have been significantly less dramatic.

On another note, to elaborate on one of Analogluvr’s comments I too find that the invariably cogent, thoughtful, well written, and IMO reasonably and appropriately open-minded nature of Prof’s posts makes them a pleasure to read.

Regards,
-- Al

@amg56, I never, ever said in any of my many posts about this subject, that a change in cabling does not affect sound. In fact, that was the basis of every single post I’ve written about this subject. A change in cable DOES affect sound. My argument is that cables do not get out of the way of the music as many audiophiles claim. In fact, they’re doing just the opposite. Cables add their own flavor to the Sonic signature of your system. They are in fact, tone controls. When one hears more air or more soundstage or whatever, it is because the cables whether it’s between your components or between your amplifier and speaker, are doing something to the sound to manipulate it to give you the perception of more this or more that. I just can’t stand to hear people say that cables do not make a difference. Of course they make a difference. No one however, has made an argument to support the idea that if you really want to hear what your components sound like, theoretically, your interconnects will be the same wire that’s inside of your components. Why hasn’t anyone giving me an explanation for this? Please, please enlighten me.

Also, no one has answered my question regarding percentage of critiquing versus percentage of enjoying.