Source or Amp in audio link?

I'm wondering if you feel the digital source or the amplifier is more important in the chain of components? Yes, I know they're both important to the overall sound, but if you absolutely had to parcel out the dollars, how would you do it?

For example: Let's say I have $2000 and no more to spend on both components, to achieve the best sound within these parameters should the majority of my money go to the digital source? To the amplifiction? Or what?

I've always felt the better the digital source the better the overall sound.

I welcome any and all comments or thoughts.

Thank You
What you have failed to decode at the source,cannot be made up for by an amp,any amp.What is gone,is gone.
Which came first? The chicken or the egg? I would choose the amp, but then I prefer LP's.
Tpsonic is correct, but that doesn't lead me to conclude that one should spend more on digital than an amp.
IMHO, you'll get a more satisfying system short term, and better value for your money long term, by putting more $ into the amp. Digital depreciates too fast. If you're patient, and watch the auctions closely, you can sometimes get decent digital for $30-35% of MSRP. For a good amp, you'll always pay 50%, maybe 60% for a hot piece. If you buy last years' digital on the cheap, you can get a nice amp that will keep you happier longer.
Just another viewpoint...
Tpsonic is right. Nothing in the audio chain can be added later if it was not retrieved from the source. I would suggest getting the best source you can afford or justify and then go for the less important pieces later.

Every piece in the chain is important, but the source is the most important if one does not count the LP or CD from which the music is derived, but they are not technically part of the system.
The math is simple:

amp is tended to be much more sophisticated and more expencive device than digital source, hence the pocket CD player will sound much better with good amp than ultra-bull-tra expencive one with cheap amp or receiver.
The sonic differences between amps is typically far greater than the sonic differences between cdp's.

Not that money has anything directly to do with better performance, I'd recommend concentrating your focus first and forement on obtaining the right amp.

I think this question cannot be answered in aby theoretical sense or doctrinaire manner. If I look at the systems I have put together recently, the amp has always cost more. Yet the piece that usually had to be most carefully selected for long term musical enjoyment was the CDP. I think this situation has changed in recent years. Only a few years ago the piece that was harder to get right was the amp, but there are a lot more musical amplifiers available today than there were just five to ten years ago (given the lack of decent valve amps that made their way to my country back then).
$2K being the budget, I'd go for a 1:3 expenditure ratio (cd vs. amp) approximately.
I could go with that. Perhaps 700 for CD might be a challenge.