Well I'm glad that this thread has made a positive impact. I am a big fan of the Golden Mean, so I think the most severe deficiencies are typically at either end of the spectrum. I believe Aristotle pointed out that you should pick the extreme that is less objectionable and go from there. To me, this is the listening end, because I'm a consumer not an engineer of audio equipment.
The great thing about audiophilia is that you are free to take it as far as you like. My initial upgrades were because the sound would sometimes really bother me: a resonation at some frequency, a lack of volume, etc. My crappy DVD player sounded really edgy to me, especially in the treble, so I started to suspect it being a weak point. I upgraded to a Yamaha and was quite amazed. And believe when I say that DVD player did not have a flat frequency response!
If you feel no urge to upgrade, then you are going to be one of the happier audiophiles. Tying back to the frequency response of amps, I don't believe it's substantial, but what's more important is the resolution of the amp. Every component puts a limit on the resolution and soundstaging: my CD player & speakers are two big examples. I don't know how much benefit I'll get from upgrading my amp, and I may never know unless I hear something really sweet. For a while, I thought my Paradigm Mini Monitors were all the speaker I'd ever need, but just an occasional listen to my headphones / headphone amp showed me what potential lay untapped in the rest of my system.
Oh and Mikey, I find that sun-dried pebbles can sound a bit brittle, while submerged pebbles give me some satsifying whooompf in the bass without getting to sloppy.
Scientists get their fix by proving and measuring, while audiophiles get their fix by hearing the earth-shattering differences between components. As long as we spend more time listening to music, then we're all ahead of the game.. that is, unless your job involves hearing differences or measuring them.
-Cooper
