A few thoughts:
I have no clue what a power cable could do other than have too much voltage drop.
But on signal and speaker cables, I think I have an idea.
Let me first say that I don't know about improvements due to the cable, but changes, yes I have seen that.
So. A lot of the high end signal and speaker cables seem to have one of a few characteristics.
They may
1)Have a larger conductor size (speaker cables)
2)Have very low capacitance (signal cables)
3)Have larger than normal capacitance (the woven small-gauge speaker cables)
4)Have some magic box attached in the middle of the cable (either speaker or signal cables).
5)Claim some sort of improved conductor material, and usually sport a fancy jacket to "prove" it
I am leaving off the usual huge price.
#1 is usually no problem, might be better, same for #2 if the shielding is good.
#3 may lead to a warmer sound if there is a rolloff as a result of the capacitance, may also lead to an interaction with an output coil etc. Either way it may flunk the "no signal alteration" test.
#4 is probably always BS, anything that could be put in a small "lump" in the cable is probably/surely not going to help.
#5 is also probably always BS, since there are a limited number of elements that can be used for wires and only a few are practical or useful.
My question to the group is:
Suppose for the moment that you ignore the question of whether there is a large improvement in sound from a signal or power cable.
I have a tie-breaker question....
What is it about the cable in question justifies the huge cost?
In the case of the super-duper power cable, there is a picture of it back a dozen pages or so. Aside from it probably not being UL recognized, what is there about it that means it should cost $175?
Is there a material cost that justifies it?
Is there a lot of expensive testing that it must pass to be "qualified" as a "brand X" cable?
Or, is it a matter of "we have it, you want it, pay up or go away"?
Each amplifier brand has a cost of its products, and generally the costs are based on production cost plus cost of marketing etc, and a profit. But I don't think that those are out of line. Most cheap amps are cheap to buy too. There isn't generally a plan to sell for $1000 what costs only $10.
Cables seem different to me.
The cables, all of them, don't seem to pass the "smell test".
In fact, that might be really appropriate. I read where a perfume manufacturer was having trouble selling their stuff at $6 per bottle. They were told by consultants to put it in a nicer bottle and sell it for $30. They did, and sales shot up. So did profits, of course.
The idea was that it was no longer "cheap perfume", proven by the price.
For the cable, the price does the same thing, who would have the gall to sell $8 worth of cable and connectors for $175, or $400 per foot etc? Obviously there must be something special about it.
Then look at the implied slam in much of the cable advertising, it's subtly put forth as "of course if you are one of those who can't hear the difference, then go ahead and be happy with your old cable, our product is not for you".
Now, are you one of the "defective ones" or are you a true golden ear? Notice that the plan is to define you as a "defective" if you don't hear a difference.
Their house, their toys, their game.
Hmmmmmmmm.
