Are audiophile products designed to initially impress then fatigue to make you upgrade?

@bipod72 

We have something in common. I raced bikes as a Cat 2-3 for twenty plus years. For racing, I rode bikes that my local bike shop sponsor supplied that I liked but did not love. They were carbon fiber and lighter than my other bikes, but basically junk. They had all the latest fake innovations-nobody loves a squeaky press-fit bottom bracket in a carbon frame. The bikes I love are custom steel. They will never go out of style to my mind. A Landshark, JP Weigle, Doug Fattic, Rob English, and Vanilla/Speedvagen. All with Campy. I don't ride with manufactured wheelsets, all of mine were handbuilt from scratch, mostly with ENVE rims, Sapim spokes, and either DT or Chris King hubs.

This dovetails into approaches to audio. My two sets of loudspeakers feature enclosures that were built in-house with attention to detail and to my taste, sound  signatures that are subtle and suit the long haul. Spendor 7.1's and DeVore O/93's. After going through multiple turntables, I ended up with two enduring classics that will last virtually forever-a Thorens TD124 and Garrard 301 on huge artisanally built custom plinths and with Reed 3P arms. My phono stage is a Manley Steelhead-the Brooks Brothers suit of phono stages. I am fairly certain I will never tire of my DAC, an SW1X DAC III Balanced.

If you buy compromised gear, you are doomed to own it for a relative short time.

Back to the OP topic, c'mon! The larger manufacturers are not calculating in THAT fashion. Like car makers, they calculate for curb appeal and profitability. They have to or they can not survive. The artisan producers struggle. The exact same applies to mass produced bike manufacturers vs. custom builders.

Let's take PrimaLuna owned by Kevin Deal. The guy is brilliant and rich. You come up with a design that is fairly solid and you send it out for mass production in a highly efficient factory overseas. To use one of over a dozen easy bicycle examples, there is Specialized who draws up a supposedly cutting edge frame design and then sends it out to the "Red Zone" of Taiwan where 98% of the world's better carbon fiber frames are cranked out. They are very high quality in terms of sheer performance. But the failure rate with extended use is very high in relative terms and they are designed with flavor-of-the-month esthetics and features that will not endure.

@fsonicsmith1 

I have friends who ride Doug Fattic frames.  Ti for road and gravel here.

Back to audio, I believe many of the products from manufacturers that frequently release new stuff (i.e., the opposite of Lamm) are “designed to initially impress” but not necessarily “then fatigue.”  I believe their primary focus is on new sales by one-upping whatever came before, whether by actual performance or by advertising hype.

@fsonicsmith1

The bicycle analogy is pretty good. I am an avid bike rider… with a long distance / touring slant. I have four custom made bikes of my stable of eight. Each is carefully crafted, with every detail thought out to the highest level.

There is a real difference with true top end bike frames and equipment and great high fi gear and true audiophile gear. For those of use really dedicated: that ride thousands of miles a year and listen hundreds of hours… there is no substitute for uncompromising designs, meticulously purpose built equipment. It outperforms in every way just very well done stuff… and sets it apart.

As you learned and improved your listening skills, and your finance improved? You will more likely do upgrade. 

@jayctoy +1 also as your hearing changes you will try to compensate (with equipment) for diminished hearing ability across the hearing range.