Cables that make no sense...

When I heard that the WAMM speaker system now sells for $350k then $12k is cheap for cables. Will the insanity ever end?

Almost all of the lower priced Monster interconnects and
speaker wires are just pure crap! And I rarely see any
positive remarks posted about their upper end offering,
either.

Any cable which costs more (or equivalent to) the cost of the main components. I have seen postings with people asking for details on cables which cost as much as their amps or speakers. Whilst cables do make a big difference I think that they should take a smaller share of the money, say no more than 10% of the entire system cost. This is just my opinion and I'd welcome any feedback from anyone who thinks I have got this balance seriously wrong.

Personally I make all of my own ICs. It's not difficult, and in my experience it has given substantially better sound, at substantial savings compared to going with the cable manufacturers. I haven't yet used this route for speaker cables, but I'm very tempted.

Then I must be a fool or deaf.
I am doing this little cable shoot-out here, as you all know and why is it, that I hear huge differences in sound.
And I do not say, that all expensive cables sound better than the cheap stuff.
But certainly there are differences in sound and yes, a few of the expensive cables have indeed performed better than their cheaper counterparts.
I really believe that people, who state that you can go to Radio Shack and get cables there, probably have never heard quality cables and do not have a system with enough resolution. If you have such a systen, then every cable will just sound the same. It is like trying to look at electrons with an ordinary microscope . You will see nothing and claim that electrons do not exist.
But wait, the guy with a raster-electronic microscope, he will see electrons. So who is right then? The guy with the better mikroscope of course. In order to take advantage of the resolution of some high-end cables, you will need a high end system. It is so obvious to see, that I can't understand how some people miss this line of reasoning.

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I would never state that cables do not make a difference when I have clearly heard that they make a major difference.

However I have found that their difference only justifies about 10% of the system cost being spent on cables. So if you have a 100k system then spend 10k on cables (I have no experience at this stratospheric price point), but if you have a $3k system (like mine) then spend about $300 on cables. Putting a $1k cable in a $3k system will not make a $1k difference, but putting a $100 cable in a $3k system could well make a $100 difference.

See what I'm saying ? What I really wanted to know was whether people think my 10% figure is about right, or too high or too low.