It's attention, not money, we should budget

The problem with cost is X dollars buys you different things in different product lines. It may be true that more $$$s typically buys you more within a particular product line, though often with diminishing returns, but all bets are off comparing different product lines based primarily on cost. Especially if components in the system are mismatched as can easily happen between amp and speakers and room quite commonly. Source components require careful matching as well, for example phono components in particular. A well executed integrated design end to end always wins regardless of cost.

I agree with the original ratio given the amp gives the speakers what they need. If not, the amp becomes a bigger value than being buried in the 35% total.

In my office system my $1000 speakers have $12K combined speaker cable and amp (all MSRP). The magic ratio is a bit off here.

More attention to the music, less to the equipment, is my suggestion.

Over the long haul (and it has been), the old 3-thirds (speakers, amplification (pre & power or integrated), sources) has more or less held true in my experience of 55ish years....

This is taking into account new, used, diy with very little 'room', since there's been a lot of them that I/we haven't owned.  And most were 'problematic' ( i.e., "One copes as best as....")... ;)

The later ones' (early 80's and beyond) have responded decently to analog eq and later digital correction.

Best 'splaination:

I am not afraid.

*L*