Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck


I recently chronicled in a review here, my experience with a very expensive interconnect. The cables cost nearly $7000 and are well beyond my reach. The issue is, the Pursit Dominus sound fantastic. Nothing in my stereo has ever sounded so good. I have been wondering during and since the review how much I would have to spend to get the same level of improvement. I'm sure I could double the value of my amp or switch to monoblocks of my own amps and not obtain this level of improvement.
So, in your opinion what is the better value, assuming the relative value of your componants being about equal? Is it cheaper to buy, great cables or great electronics? Then, which would provide the biggest improvement?
128x128nrchy
Oh, I just can't help baiting Subararu sometimes. He can take it and dish it out, though; so, clueless, you don't need to ride to his aid, watching attentively from the bushes. Clueless, clueless, how-oh-how do you maintain your delusion of radical egalitarianism? Everyone hears equally, or thinks equally, etc., or is that just an idea you like to maintain, that you're the nice kind-of-guy that thinks so, even though its not true, even though, if you bothered to say what you mean, you would have to admit its not true? Everyone is equal in their potential to hear, not in how they actually exercise that potential. Your assumption of aristocracy - the politically correct foil for your references looking to rile in your aid others so offended - is, in that context, misplaced. But I guess you were too eager to jump out of those bushes to think about that one, eh?

I thought about "sophisticated", but thought that defining it would be sufficient to assuage those knee-jerk reactions to the word. Guess not. When I responded to Muralman and his tone and what I thought it represented, I was very clear on what basis I made those conclusions. This in turn allowed him the opportunity to respond to my observations. In other words, I respected him enough to offer him a response that could be responded to, if he so chose (which he did not). By making tangential references about me personally, you don't allow me to properly respond. But, then again, perhaps that was your intent. My observation of your postings, which I've always enjoyed even though we may not agree, is incongruent with the AUTHENTICITY of your last chosen response.

I remain, amused...and still mildly hopeful.

PS: Clueless, what do you think of the notion that wire becomes more important in a system as the system increases in "sophistication"? Don't react to the word, even though defined; answer the content.
I don't know what clueless thinks, but I would like to stick my 2 cents in here. I disagree with the statement that cables are less important with solid state. If the system has subtlety (which increases with sophistication) then cables matter. I have worked hard to build a VERY sweet sounding solid state system with detail,resolution and bloom. Cables matter in this system.
They were quite a bit less important in my $6K system.
Thank you Judit for your response. I too believe that cables make a difference with SS, and that some SS systems can be very satisfying. I thought twice about throwing that out, so let me rephrase and try to bring it back to the point I was mostly trying to say: Do you think that cables make an increasingly important contribution as a system "component" as that system gets better? If so, then that could go a long way towards explaining why some people with some systems claim that amps are determitively important - to the point of claiming that wire is irrelevant and fundamentally different than an amp, or is more "complex" or more "functional" to keep their point going - while others with more advanced systems, both SS and tubed, predominantly claim that wires become just as important. In this sense, a wire's "function" in the truest sense - to make a system more musically accurate - changes over a system's level of performance as a whole. It is an exponential performance/utility curve.

I shouldn't have mixed it in with the above (mostly did it to pull the accuracy crowd back out of Muralman's "amp section"), but since I brought it up, I'll follow up. At the highest reaches of the present art of system building, I believe that SS has several important limitations, and that these have been constant since its inception (which is why every few years we have to ask whether SS is yet as good as tubes, a discussion, by its existence, that confirms what is being asked). Namely, the realism of space on its own and its RELATION to sound as it projects therein. SS has made great strides in reducing mechanical artifacts in the source projection, resulting in greater "bloom" directly around the source boundaries, less distortive aspects of leading edge transients, etc., but in terms of continuousness and deep harmonic fabric, wetness in leading edge transients, and the deep existential quality of dimension (the terms that HP can't quite find, although he knows what he is experiencing), SS still falls short in the best SS systems v. the best tube systems (NOS tubed). It is my position that these are qualities of sound/music that wire tends to become nearly a necessity in translating. This is not to say - which I should have said better - that wire doesn't also follow the pattern of needing better wire as the SS system increases in performance, but that with the best systems - and Porter's system with Dominus was used as an example for this reason - namely, tube based systems, this phenomenon becomes even more critical because its performance parameters are higher and wire seems to become critical for that 3% performance envelope. Hence, when I said that cables were less important in SS systems, I meant it in a relative sense and in the context of advanced systems.

Actually, I think wire makes a difference in all systems, but can understand why it would be less of a priority in less expensive systems, a point I have agreed with. I also believe it is important in SS systems also, but qualified as stated above. The SS crowd who argues that "accuracy" is most important, have source-detailed systems at the expense of a unitary balance between source and space, believe that "scientific" measurements are primary to listening, are, not coincidentally, the same peoplem who claim that wire makes no difference, or makes less difference because its less "complex", or then say less "functional", etc. AND these people invariably, and again no coincidence, favor SS systems. This does not mean that some SS afficinados have not produced excellent results - musically and in terms of accuracy - in their systems, and that these people also know the importance of wire (which, and I can't remember if clueless has a tube, SS or hybrid system, is a group I believe he falls within - namely, music lover).

Hope that is more clear.
Damn it Gumby, or is it gumbydamnit, I think you may be right! How about a Teres TT, Shelter 501 cart and Origin Live arm mod'd out ($3K abouts) (uh, twl?), with a used NBS Pro series 1 IC ($500) and $3.5K of vinyl?!

I hear ya.