Can the need for novelty and change be mitigated by rotation?

I believe that "audio nervosa" is real and plagues hobbyists to the extent that it robs them of the ability to enjoy what the machinery they own can reproduce.
I’m not following your peregrinations- every one of us who devotes time to consider, evaluate and address perceived shortcomings in their system has followed some path that, hopefully, has not left them at a dead end.
There is certainly a need for incremental improvements, large and small. But, the constant need to exchange equipment (whether for novelty value or some other reason) tells me that there is something wrong in the combination of components, their set up or a budget vs expectation premise that involves too many variables to mention. (identify one system among any who have posted thus far that is identical, let alone set up the same way, leaving to the side subjective preference, room, etc.).
There is certainly an analytical type of listening-for shortcomings or improvements in a system, or simply to compare two different pressings of the same record, but that’s work. Listening for enjoyment is something I equate with satisfaction, even if that is only a temporary state. But, despite however many decades I have been doing this, I haven’t been much of an equipment swapper on anything like a constant basis.
I have a vintage system that includes components currently running that I was running as early as 1973-75 and my main system, which has benefitted from some modest tweaking (more in power supply, set up, augmentation of bass, positioning in a new to me room, etc.- in other words, the normal sort of set up and maintenance any hobbyist would perform) has otherwise been stable for more than a decade and a half. I use tube equipment entirely in both audio only systems, with the exception of some woofers and subs in the main system.
If the question is how to get off the lab treadmill of churning equipment, I decided to explore my record collection.
I had accumulated about 17,000 LPs over the course of decades of shopping in the States, Western Europe, and by mail and eventually the internet, worldwide. I supplemented where I had gaps, and eventually learned about whole new genres of music which now bring me great joy-- this is far different than listening to "reference" records to make sure everything is OK. And my focus is on what’s happening in the music; the tension that develops in a composition, the empathy or power a performer brings to the moment (and sometimes, particularly with live recordings, those are otherwise lost) and appreciating what all this "stuff" ought to be about. I’m not arguing against gear-head ism, to the contrary I love the artifacts (mechanical especially, though a clean circuit can be a thing of beauty, as can some old tubes), but that we ought to appreciate at least some portion of what these devices are capable of reproducing--if you have moments where you are transported, or otherwise go beyond the machinations of your brain on the "thinking" side, the music can satisfy on a more emotional, primal level. (I never really understood "intellectual" music--I have to be moved). Enough words.
Bill Hart

@tomic601 - you are always kind. Thank you. 
@douglas_schroeder - I love words. Using them in the right place is the challenge. You and I differ in so many ways based on what I've read of yours, but at bottom, we share the same passion and that is something that endures (I find myself more emotional in some ways as I age, and less emotional about life itself). Music is such a wonderful avenue of experience, technique, art + soul. It is great to share this. 

I think as room size varies, so do the possibilities of equipment variation while achieving "full" optimization in the room. The possibilities are potentially endless and we then can argue the merits of particular boxes, wires and source type and material. There are people that doing this for a living.
I certainly have some equipment that has proved enduring but also have plenty of "classic" hi-fi that is dormant. (An ARC 75a that I bought new with a full complement of parts to update it), a pair of Decca Ribbon Tweeters that need attention, and plenty of tubes of differing eras. A few years ago, I put back into the vintage system a 1961 pair of Quad IIs (sympathetically restored/updated by Bill Thalmann with NIB GEC KT66 glass) that outperform what it ran in the seventies-- mainly ARC amps and preamps up to the Sp-10mkii. We all have our favorites, past and present.
Used equipment used to represent a bargain. Viewed from my vantage point, the market today is high for enduring pieces--unless it is something like a Craigslist thing, not through larger "audiophile" market channels. Bitching about price is something that seems common among audiophiles but it is a reality. Budget often imposes limitations in more than one area.
I think as long as a listener is informed-- and sometimes this can come from reactions of other experienced listeners to your room (that made you reflect and perhaps changed something largely by effort, not money), the balance---between the time spent mucking about the system and actually enjoying it- is a very personal one. There have certainly been times when I lived and breathed it, but like not seeing a forest for the trees, that can be a problem and can also create a level of anxiety/frustration which takes us back to the starting premise.

@mahgister said: "[Y] ou forgot that acoustic and psycho-acoustics laws or principles and methods apply to any room and any system, these laws and methods are one of the main sources of optimization for a system/room/ears...
I probably should have expressly called out "the room" but assumed that whoever is doing the rearranging and set up had the necessary tools and knowledge to do so. But, even assuming a level of competence, there will be no consensus on the choice of equipment among different people. I think we then come back to expectations v reality, and the extent that is dictated by budget, access and exposure. 
If someone is unsure that they have assembled and set up the best possible system available at the time of purchase, the perceived need for change of gear, if not set up, is likely to be greater. But, since I'm not a constant gear swapper, I'll defer to others on that subject.  

@mahgister: one of the difficulties of discussing system attributes, including identifying problems, trouble shooting and the like is that we aren’t in the room to hear it for ourselves and use our own intuition--we are at a remove, and as I think Mapman’s comment about words evidences ("words, words, words"). all we can do at best in this medium is talk in terms of practices, specific areas where a problem may exist or ask questions that better direct the inquiry. In this respect, the Internet is cumbersome.
To me, the process often starts when a listener complains about shortcomings in their system and often, the discussion focuses on gear as well as set up practices. But, that means that the listener has expectations-based on hearing other systems, or simply based on what they want to hear in their mind vs. what is being reproduced by the system they are using that seems deficient. In short, for one reason or another, the user is saying "is this all there is here? I expected more!"
I know many happy users of systems that are world’s apart in concept, design and execution. And in that, I mean that there are many ways to achieve an optimal sound from a given set up in a room; moreover, if the room size is larger, there is more flexibility.
I grew up with The Absolute Sound and Stereophile when J.G. Holt was writing and publishing it-- and there, I think we Americans were shortchanged by not learning about developments in the Far East using high efficiency horns (which were all but dismissed until, in my estimation, Avantgarde put them on the map in modern mainstream high end audio in the U.S., the KLIPSCHORN being treated as a relic from the past), until the US audio press (through people like Art Dudley) gave attention to high efficiency/low power SETs which reached mainstream readers in the U.S. at least. (I acknowledge that there was knowledge in this area on the "fringe" but it was not part of the mainstream mantra- ask about an A7 VOTT and you’d typically be dismissed as a deadhead or worse. I remember an old Kondo review of something that delivered 20 or so watts a channel at a cost of $80,000 and it was subject to ridicule in some circles rather than saying, "hey, what is this about?).
To me, there are so many ways to reach sonic nirvana, which depends in part on the individual’s preferences, taking into account room, budget and sorting through the myriad alternatives in hardware and content delivery method, that it is almost impossible to describe an acceptable basis for "True Sound" (I treat this as an undefined, and meaningless term since it varies from listener to listener). Somebody who wants to listen at a metal at 100db is a different buyer than someone who wants to listen to chamber music.
I’m hardly a purist in the sense that I just want it to sound good. My choice of cartridge these days makes no claim to "neutrality" but I like the vivid aliveness of the horn experience, underpinned by controlled deep bass, with transparent midrange. I play LPs as my main source, and a lot rests on the phono front end. Even cheap-ish digital sounds good on the main system, and I can imagine how much more I could improve in that area.
There are so many branches to this hobby, and different sub-strata that is almost impossible to catalog the equipment that would meet a listener’s criteria in a given room. But we can make an approximation based on the known character of commonly available components, and typical combinations (X brand amp with Y brand speaker with Z brand wire). Beyond that, the variables become immense and almost unworkable.
I’ll give you an example and then close. I made a lateral change in phono preamp some years ago that dramatically improved the imaging and overall body of the instruments in their presentation. The dollar cost was incremental compared to what I had been using.
Likewise, by adding a fresh pair of subwoofers, and changing cartridges from one high end line that is very well regarded as neutral (Airtight) to another which, while famed, has always had this technicolor reputation (Koetsu stone bodies) gave real gravitas to the bass (which the new woofer set up helped deliver). I am now in happy land. And this, with a system that has otherwise remained largely unchanged for, as I mentioned, better than a decade.
I did change rooms when I moved, and paid a lot of attention to the power system, starting at the service entrance. I played with positioning. I took advantage of DSP for the new woofer system. But, most of the "improvement" was not the result of any one tweak; instead, taking advantage of the dimensions of the "new to me" room, I set up the system accordingly and, over time dialed it in.
I assume, as I said earlier, that the competent audiophile can do this themselves (I’m neither engineer nor acoustician), but there are people to help. And at worst, rather than spend X thousand dollars on an equipment upgrade, having the right person consult on equipment set up and layout in a given room is often well worth the cost.
I really have no agenda to promote- I don’t make money from consumer audio but, like quite a few readers here, have been "around the block" a few times. I think I have realistic expectations for what a good system can deliver, and my personal taste may or not reflect what others prefer, given their listening habits and preferences. That’s why I’m pretty agnostic on brand promotion, though I respect known synergies among certain components. I do think that high end audio costs more in real dollars than it used to, and part of that has to do with the commercialization of everything. That’s just the nature of the world we live in; to replace certain tubes in my main system, I paid more for the same thing than 5 years ago. For someone first venturing into these waters, there’s a lot to learn, a need to get solid information and the ability to compare with their own ears (very difficult, but not impossible) and access to information and support. Hell, despite my years at this, I need access to info and support. Nobody knows everything.
But, it’s fun learning, isn’t it?