To constantly strive for better sound is an endless quest, not necessarily based on the quality of our set but on our personality.
This is another thread about when a certain quantity of quality sound is "enough."
Having heard this question umpteen times, I have lost respect for it. After a certain point, sound really doesn’t get much better -- at least not as much as it gets different.
Compare an expensive Audio Note system with an expensive system built around, say, Wilson. Or Magico. Or Magnepan. Or whatever. Is it really reasonable to say one is better -- in terms of quantity of quality -- over another? This is an absurd question. It’s asking whether Picasso is better than Rembrandt.
These are children’s questions because they are absurd. They’re absurd because the act of asking already presupposes that criteria can be settled in advance, with examples marching in afterwards to be judged like contestants in a beauty contest. It is a Sisyphusean question.
To my mind, the question redounds why some think it can be asked and answered. The question becomes, Why are you (we) Sisyphus? when it comes to asking such impossible questions?
