Is it possible for something to be the best?

Yes, it is possible for a component to be the "best".The problem is that "best" is a subjective term. In terms of absolute audio quality, the "best" is generally related to the "best" that the listener has previously heard. A person that has only heard boom boxes, might think that a low cost separates system is the "best". One of the best ways to enjoy your system, once you have purchased it, is to just listen to it, and stop going around auditioning other equipment. When you decide you want a change or you need something new because of equipment failure, then go audition some new products. It is a rule that if you go looking around long enough, you will find something that sounds better than what you've got. If you are not prepared to buy this new stuff, then you will only be constantly reminding yourself that there is something better that you don't have. This leads to unhappiness with your present equipment. Just enjoy what you have, and when you are ready to make a purchase, then go out and listen to the stuff that you can buy, and get the "best" you can afford. Some people, like myself, can buy a very good product, knowing it is not the "best", and be happy with it. This is where "value" comes into play. My system is not the "best" at anything except being the "best I could afford". Since I could not afford anything higher, I am satisfied that I have got the "best" for my buck.

Very good explanation TWL!

Twl is right -- but there is at least one other dimension of subjectivity. Two people listening to two systems might have different opionions of "best". Since every component makes some sort of compromise (e.g., a bit tighter bass vs. a bit wider soundstage) and every listener has her/his own priorities of what is most important, there will be a wide variety of "best" at any price point. The trick is to understand your own priorities, explicitly make the trade-off decisions and then be happy with the best available for your tastes. I have found that people are often unhappy later because they did not acknowledge what they are giving up when they purchased their gear (this is not a price issue, it arises from no component doing everything perfectly). Of course, people also become less happy with their gear as musical tastes change, listening experience increases or priorities change. Good question. I'm looking forward to reading other's responses.

"Best" is a very questionable term, because it invites uncertainty, a probably very unfortunate competitiveness, unfortunate for the pocketbook and one's peace of mind and last not least the futile and time consuming attempt to rationalise in objective terms, what we purely subjectively percieve to be "best". It also probably leads to the misconception, that, if we try hard enough, we can REALLY simulate the live event sooner or later in our listening rooms, if we take live music as our benchmark.
Since we all seem to agree, that "best" can only be subjective, why not settle on a term, which though subjective, will give us more comfort for the soul, lets us enjoy the music more and approach other "best" systems with a more relaxed and friendly fashion. What I have in mind, could perhaps best be described with the term " musical ". Of course it is just as subjective and as a descriptive form similarly lacking in precision as the word "best". It however describes a quality in a system, which will satisfy the soul of a true musiclover. "Best" certainly doesn't, because "better" is always just around the corner, at least that is what our dealers or the journals and all the advertising hype tell us. So lets nor fall into that trap. It is a sure way to fall prey to an addictive syndrome, we are all familiar with. Once we find our system musical, it is of course not BEST, but good enough for us, because it helps to induce a state of mind of relaxed and yet attentive and grateful happyness. After all, what more would you need from a hobby. Cheers,
Detlof