I don't think I missed your point at all, as far as your further clarification of it has illuminated. What I am missing, and perhaps you can help me here, is your motivation for asking the question of a bunch of folks who most likely have entirely different perceptions. I'm just speculating there, because, as far as I know, no one else here has heard both your own system in your own room, and those in your dealer's room. I'd still hazard a guess that the majority of others hear may disagree, certainly on only a verbal description of the components involved (and certainly psychology has everything to do with that since we're all humans). My point is that this stuff is all entirely subjective (psychological, if you want to call it that) and it really is only you that should matter to you in the end. You have nailed the mechanism at play. Bravo. What is so difficult to grasp there? You do seem to be argumentative to me, or at least looking for an argument, because you seem to belabor the same point (beating a dead horse, if you will). You'll get no argument from me that psychology is strongly at play here, and I'd ad that it is far more complex than we can begin to say and as different as our fingerprints in each of us. I can't tell you what your opinions should be, nor can anyone else here; you form them on your own, and for infinitely complex reasons.
So I do try to be consistent and objective, definitely impartial, to say the least.
Where you will get an argument from me is applying the term "objective" to any of your personal observations, no matter how hard you "try". It is not possible. If it is filtered through you, IMO, it becomes a subjective observation. You can use the term "objective" when you start talking about numbers and curves and graphs spit out by machines. As far as I'm concerned, those "objective observations" (by machines) of this gear are only a point of departure, and I would choose to depart and move a vast distance away from them as they've never proven to mean much where real-world (subjective) listening comes into play. In fact, some of the components I like best, SET amps for instance, don't look that great on paper in "objective" terms, but they sure sound great to me when set up well with synergistic components.
For what little it may be worth, I've never been really wowed by impressions at a dealer showroom, either. I've been to some pretty high-end showrooms too. I have been very impressed by other's systems in their homes, most of which were thoughtfully and carefully assembled over many years from some of the very same components I've heard in some of those showrooms. But again, that's all subjective. Your "good, bad, better, best" is entirely different from my "good, bad, better, best." Neither are right or wrong, they're just opinions. Of course psychology is involved, we are humans and not machines. Really, what is your point?
Marco