It seems to me that an important driver of audio tech is the development of defined purpose chips. We start a new branch of tech with a bunch of chips and discrete devices on a PC board wrapped in a large box. Next wave, we have fewer chips performing the same task, not quite as well, but at half the cost. Meanwhile, the industry also provides miniature (portable) dongles and small boxes that do the same thing poorly with one or two special purpose chips designed just for this task. Steadily, the chips get larger and better, rivaling the old multi-chip and discrete performance. Before long, the single, multi-purpose chips get as good or better than the original, first-issue boxes.
That's the knee of the curve in cost versus performance. We have seen this in DACS and class D amps in the last ten years. The first decently performing items using newer tech sell for (like) $3500. Then, $2000. Then, $750. Then, $250 and even $100.
Along the way, opportunists will attempt to sell you the new chip tech at last gen prices, ie, $150 worth of tech for $2500. This might be such an example.
As another example, the function of a WiiM streamer, four years ago, might cost $3000. Then, $850. Now, $89. Meanwhile, the braggarts who bought in at $3000 will make assertive efforts to discredit the new devices: 'can't recommend it to others because it doesn't do Roon...' or such.
For the economical audiophile wanting to employ new tech, unless you are wonderfully wealthy, it's better NOT to be an early adopter, eh?
(Brag rights notwithstanding.)
-Just one man's view