Do you really need ultra expensive cables?

It seems to me, not like I was at HE, the 3% cables was partially motivated by marketing. And I like what Brianmgrarcom posted. Anyone can use cheap cables and make it nice and musical (la-di-da), but why would anyone care to have their cables be the bottleneck of the system? I also think that 30-40% is usually much too much, but 3% or 40%, suit yourself.

The Valhalla as being the "reference standard" is fading, IMO. Many lower cost brands are besting it. Even Nordost is realizing this, see Nordost News:

"Nordost is pleased to announce the release of the newest member to the micro mono-filament cable family! The Valkyrja has a lavender mono-filament wrapped around each individual conductor yielding the nearly the same performance as its predecessor, the Valhalla at a fraction of the cost. Through extensive redesigning techniques, Nordost has been able at long last to create a series of cables quite comparable to the Valhalla, while keeping the costs at a minimum."

I feel sorry for anyone whose cost of cables is 30% to 40% of their total system. They could have had so much more music for their money had they spent it more wisely.

No. None of us really NEED any of this stuff. It's a hobby and it's supposed to be fun. If spending the big bucks on cables makes you freak, then don't so it. If you think that's where the payoff is, then why not? Opinions differ as do the ears that hold them.

It's pretty clear that most of you (including myself) believe that cables do not improve sounds. But why there are so many people still paying big bucks for them. I just don't get it :(

For those of you who are courious, Mcintosh's set up was all Tributaries Cables. It was a brand that I never pay attention before. Is it a cable company that is recommended by Mcintosh? Obviously, there is no Yes/No anwser from them. Have you guys heard or audition these cables? I believe Mcintosh just don't easily pick-up any cable company to demo their products.

Rodney,