Audio hardware is not convenient at all. It is expensive, heavy, takes up space, and the more there is of it, the more likely something breaks or is not working correctly and damages the playback quality in some way that may be difficult to notice. It is also virtually impossible to guarantee that any change you make to the system will actually improve it, as that requires understanding where your most important problem point is and fixing that, rather than randomly changing some piece of equipment for another and hoping that it improves anything.

I find the inconveniences associated with equipment to be considerable, and so my tendency is to minimize it and stick to some known-good configuration that is vouched for by a reputable manufacturer, such as any active speaker that is a singular integrated box. For added peace of mind, you can just go ahead and measure the performance to observe that it delivers what is promised, so you know that not only did manufacturer promise a certain level of performance, what is actually delivered in your room by your total system is pretty much exactly what they said it would be.

This does not 100% eliminate the desire to “upgrade” your stuff, but a measurement/data-minded approach should focus your attention more towards where there might be actual problems. For instance, based on measurement, you may realize that your listening room is severely damaging the flatness of the audio spectrum in your listening seat, and that your room’s reverb time is excessive, and so you start to look into ways to add diffusion and absorption in the room, which are then genuine upgrades to your playback experience that don’t even involve changing anything in your audio hardware. You can also tell, in the end, if your realized in-room response is not appropriate, and you can fix it by simply equalizing it where there are problems, fix bass boominess issues, and even impart deliberate tonality changes such as some 5 dB extra bass below 100 Hz to make it sound warmer and nicer.