the process is more challenging than the result

I don't think a person who changes things regularly will ever reach their goal and be satisfied. It's not like a test where you can get 100% and can't go higher. There is no ultimate score in audio upgrading. It's Shadorne's point about a moving target. There are always new developments and improvements to be investigated for those with the inclination to do so. I don't think that the psychology of those who constantly change things is such that they would stop if they learn or hear about new things. It hasn't stopped them before, why would they stop now?

The real danger is reaching the goal of a perfect system. Then there is nothing to do - existential angst - either accept Camus' absurdity of life and wait for death, or, find a new challenge. But no need to go seeking, grasshopper - countless changes of equipment will not only keep the fire burning but will fuel the economy - uh,oh - with all this reference to fuel, burning and fire, the Al Gore police will be coming for me soon.

the quest is not to achieve a perfect stsereo system, as there is no perfect stereo system. the goal would be to achieve a particular voicing or tuning of the stereo system to suit one's taste. such a stereo system would be deliberately colored, in a way to please the listener.

there would be no reason to change any component, because the desired flavor would have been achieved.

it is like adding white to the color red, until the desired shade is achieved. there would be no need to change at that point.

the target is not moving. it is a fixed target, such as a particular frequency response.

This thread spans the entire gamut from anal to banal.

the quest is not to achieve a perfect stsereo system, as there is no perfect stereo system. the goal would be to achieve a particular voicing or tuning of the stereo system to suit one's taste. such a stereo system would be deliberately colored, in a way to please the listener.

I've never come across anything that would fit this description of an ideal for me either. My tastes vary widely and no one system presents diverse program materials in a way that universally sounds best to my ears for all of it. A very obvious illustration of this is that I'd rather listen to intimate vocals with sparse accompaniment on a SET amp or OTL, whereas that ideal solution for that program material can be bettered for more dense material I also enjoy like orchestral or rock. The latter is better suited to different amplification and speaker combinations IMO. I've heard quite a few varied systems over 25 years in this hobby and I do not believe any one does all things perfectly. There is always some compromise to be made - you just have to figure out where to make those compromises so that it suits your preferences most of the time. Also, those preferences may change over time. Then there is the greener grass beckoning from the other side...the yearning for something new and different. All of that can come into play to some degree in various individuals, as well as all kinds of other human foibles. The quest, as you've described it, does not end unless you accept that there is compromise. If you modified your statement to be "...to suit one's tastes MOST OF THE TIME" I would concede this was a a more practical goal to aim for, at least for me. I suppose if I only listened to one specific type of music the goal as you've stated it might be more practical. I certainly agree in broad terms to what you're getting at here though.