If you were serious about sound you would...

Spending $170k on equipment is not worth it, if the listening room is not treated also.

My quest is to enjoy music 

I do.

@dabel So good to hear the CR-1 is very unique, I'm not sure even with digital switching and processing you can get the same outcome. Thanks for mentioning.

@onhwy61 SSL is used in top studios, Pro Tools MTRX is standard, the Meyer Bullhorns are just making there way in now but they are way ahead of everyone else. The point is this small list is what many top recording studios use and everyone knows you can't make the recording any better than the original (until AI becomes common in a few years). Playback quality has nothing to do with microphones, the signal is going to be what it is microphone placement is done before the recording so changing microphones has nothing to do with playback sorry but you are confused even as you are impugning my 40 years of experience in studios, production sound, Emmys, Oscars, Golden Reels, and millions of dollars of recording equipment purchases. 

@mahgister Perfection in sound has nothing to do with this, I'm saying that the signal can't be better (more accurate) than the original. There is a limit to the accuracy of the playback the limit is the quality of the equipment doing the original recording and mix. Audiophiles often spend several hundred thousand easily on equipment but if you look at it in terms of using top recording studio equipment anything above a few hundred K is wast. I'm not talking about looks or room acoustics of course that has nothing to do with playback I'm talking about 170K$ audiophile preamps that are probably much better than any preamp that was used in the recording originally therefore wasted money. Hope that makes sense.