The myth of "best" in audio needs to be addressed by all of us

It's a journey not a destination, it's a pursuit of perfection that's never quite within our reach, the designers and manufacturers keep things in a constant state of evolution that continues to move the goal line - thank goodness

Cars, computers, etc best of breed today has a top of the line shelf life of 3-5 years

The evolution of product development will always have a smaller, more powerful or higher capacity, bigger bang for the buck model to excite and entice us

Contrary to popular belief, most of us on this forum have more brains than money and are genuinely concerned about long term price performance ROI than chasing the new shiny object that is described to us by world class word salad spin masters as sexy beyond what our mere mortal ears can comprehend

That said, we typically know our weakest link(s) and turn over every stone looking at all the options at our disposal to move to the next level

It's a lot less ready, fire, aim and we tend to operate more in a trust but verify fashion before investing in the next purchase

Enjoy the journey guys and happy listening

Redwood, it depends on how you define best. Best sounding? There surely is a subjective element to that. But there is also an objective one. Can a system missing the bottom four octaves be "best?" Can a system that is two dimensional be "best."
Then there is best as in built and best as in designed. There can certainly be more than one way to skin a cat but there is an obvious difference in quality between components.
Then what are we comparing "best" to? How many of us really know what "best" sounds like? How many of us have lived with a truly brilliant system long enough to get the hang of what best really does. 
My own definition of best is, when I am happy enough that I do not feel like buying any more equipment.

@mahgister - you certainly seem to be one of the posters with the highest reported satisfaction from their system on the forum... not taken in by the industry hype of “best” gear.

It is simple why this is so...

With the same gear system i go from frustration to ecstasy, in a set of hundreds incremental steps each day for the last 2 years, improving my controls methods in mechanical, electrical and especially acoustical working embedding dimensions...I created a thread where i documented all my "silly" or wise experiments during 24 pages....

Then i know why and how my system transformed itself from night to day in clarity, imaging, soundstage, timbre perception. listener envelopment and source width and all other acoustical factors...

All that at almost NO cost....Then NO SYSTEM at any price can impress me even if it is a better one....Because my ratio S.Q./price is over the roof...And anyway the orchestra filled my room with each instruments distinctively perceived... Then .... There is  many systems better than my 500 bucks system for sure but the price is very high compared to it....

Then my satisfaction is not a resignation nor a relative satisfaction....But truly an ecstasy because i create it myself....

My most powerful device is my "mechanical equalizer" inspired by Helmholtz workd and modern acoustical research... Cost: peanuts....

And i dont boast about the piece of gear i bought like many here, any piece of my gear is replaceable by another one of the same quality anyway, i dont sell costly "tweaks" and branded name electronic design, speakers,or dac or amplifier...All that is half deceptive and illusory, hiding the essential: acoustic....

I sell the idea of listening experiments and homemade devices ONLY and i want to motivate creativity, self confidence, and hearing learning and experiments....

Audiophile experience is more related to acoustic control than to dac, speakers or amplifiers, whatever their price or name...

Most people here dont know that and save for me nobody claim that simple truth clearly nowhere on any thread i know of...

Then people chase their tail or worst they chase the moon....And they par the price in money and deception...

The only two things that are asked for is a dedicated room and time for experimenting....

My best to you....

@mijostyn - my point is that "best" in audio is impossible, given the subjectivity involved. There is no "best." Even with all the optimal measurements involved, my "best" will differ from yours. It's a flawed concept, a myth, that serves only to keep up insecure in our pursuit. 

@mijostyn - my point is that "best" in audio is impossible, given the subjectivity involved. There is no "best." Even with all the optimal measurements involved, my "best" will differ from yours. It’s a flawed concept, a myth, that serves only to keep up insecure in our pursuit.

You are right...

The best cannot be established by measures in electronic design ONLY like some pretend nor mainly by  pricing....It is an illusion at best and blinders at worst....

The best in audio is determined by a ratio: S.Q./price...

I own one of the best system if i use this infaillible criterion....

The S.Q. is defined by the qualitative presence of the main acoustical factors: imaging, timbre perception, soundstage, listener envelopment and source width mainly...If they are there in a relatively satisfying way at low cost the goal is reached....

And it is my sole criterion....