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


There is a not too serious term audiophilia nervosa; it may be a joke, but it builds on a valid observation: there are people who are never content with their equipment in medium term.It is not the initial period, when one does know much about gear and learns; or the question of disposable income, when one gets the best they can afford, and upgrades untill he (or, probably less often, she) buys the dream system. Audiophilia nervosa is a state later on, a plateau, when a desired piece initially gives much satisfaction, yet it wears off, and the person gets uneasy and looks for smth. else.
To give a personal example, I was on a quest for my ultimate power amp. Had to be Pass Aleph; happened to find Aleph 4. Did not suit the speakers (Lowther Fidelio) too well; got other speakers (MBL 101b or c) ; still not there; got ML no. 23. Much better; but still uneasy about Aleph and speakers for it; got Gradient 1.5; fine with ML, Ok with Pass; exploring options, got Parasound 2200 mk2 (and a couple of PA amps). And I needed a preamp. Seller insisted on only trading ML no. 28 together with no. 27, — another power amp.
Now the ML 28 is there to stay; Gradient 1.5 are keepers too; but I’d keep old MBL101 even if they stopped working (I’d probably use them as garden sculptures), so they stay, too. But I have way too many power amps (the listed, and a few more), I would need to sell some.
The trouble is, I cannot decide. So, in order to decide, I rotate them. ML 23 is very good with MBLs, fine with the Gradients. ML 27 is very good with the Gradients. Parasound 2200 2 is very good with the Graients, - but in a different way. So I swap every few weeks, and I still cannot decide.
And after each break I [re-]discover things I like about the particular amp / amp-speaker combination.
Again and again...
Which made me think:
— What if this ‘rotation’ takes good care of my need for change and novelty?
After a while I will decide which one(s) to sell, and later on I will probably want smth. new. But for the time being, keeping and rotating them slows down my pace - and I see it as a good thing, as in the aftermath I do not think my decisions have been sufficiently well informed (for instance, I am getting used to the fact that I actually do not like sound of Pass Alephs as much as I thought I do, and my Aleph 4 may be the first to go).
inefficient
After someone ask me to be shorter in my words count i think a lot...

The result:

Variation is great and pleasurable but not at all cost and especially not at the cost of optimization of the chosen system...

Finally he was right i wrote too much...

😊😊😊😊😉😊😊😊



There is always a different sound to any amplifier or speaker and finding that magic combination can be difficult , but having kept all the amps helps in that regard, and like i say if you get rid of a good amp, you will not get back what you liked about it because they are all so different. As for preamplifiers, more of the same, and finding a magic preamp is even more difficult than a magic amp.
@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.