Back in the day (Groan as I think about that) my group played a version of ADnD but merged things we liked from BECMI. Even then making our own DnD game of sorts. As for simple if you should stay with 2e. Otherwise as was recommended Old School Essentials is a great rewritten version of the Original rules which should be even simpler. Lastly, I have read Knave by Ben at Questing Beast. In my opinion, he has done a great job making it very simple. He is working on a Knave 2, which I eagerly await reading. 

I like simple but I also like crunch. But if I get a system with Crunch I want it to make sense. To me now playing 5e for so long I see the flaws in the system. I don't hate it but now I want to change it. So like AEDorsay has mentioned I have been writing rules out either clearly or completely changing them. I want the old-school feel but trying to keep what is good about 5e. We shall see how that goes.

I have played some of Pathfinder 2e and have to say I really like the system. My group will not completely commit to it sadly. I think it is a more complete game for the rules. But again this all comes back to preference. 

I miss the days of ADnD and would like to go back but my group has invested a lot of money into the current addition and I can't discount that either. Thus the hybrid/Compromise.

Got it.  I have played in isolation for years so I am both anachronistic and behind the times on lingo.  

I think would fall somewhere in the middle regarding additional rules and supplements.  I certainly am a tinkerer!  I never found a rule in any game I didn't want to modify!  (Except chess....the most perfect board game in existence)

Quote from OSR4Ever >>

Quote from Velstitzen>>

Not sure what you mean by chrome.  I have paper and electronic copies of all the 2E books.  I have read through most of them and use pieces of ideas from many of them.  There is a lot of fluff in the supplemental books but there are some gems as well.  I have read three or four of the 5E books. 

I do use kits.  Many of these are homebrew but I have borrowed heavily from the supplemental books and the Baldur's gate rulebook, ending up with something that fits our table.  I offer a handful or so; again my players don't even read the basic rules so I don't want to get to far off the beaten path. T he kits I have made provide flavor to the game and I have written several for a particular player(s), to fit who they want to play.  

Is this what you were getting at?

 
Yeah, chrome is sort of gaming slang for rules detail.  For example you can describe an attack as 1e did as a 1d20 roll vs. AC, or you can have something like 4e where you have various unique attack types that you execute, some can be done once per encounter, once per day or others at will, each with its own unique effects and advantages.  The latter is chrome, lots more detail to define something.

Kits fall into the arena of chrome... A Fighter can be described as a Barbarian, A Knight a Samurai narratively and you're done.. but kits chrome that out by making each of those unique fighter sub-classes with their own sub-systems and rules.

I think what it boils down to is that some DM's like to tinker, fine-tune a system to their preferences, by cutting rules they don't like, adjusting rules, adding new rules, mixing things in from other systems and ultimately coming up with their own unique take on the game.  This style of DMing was extremely common practice in the 1e and 2e days, in fact, I'm not sure it was actually physically possible to play 1e AD&D rules as written.  Modern design however has evolved quite a bit, these days you can find systems like Pathfinder 2e for example that cover every conceivable thing you could ever imagine doing, so there really is not much need to tinker, its a very complete game system that can be run rules as written and you will never find anything missing.

The question is wether you want to continue to tinker or are you looking for a robust, ready to go out of the box system that you can simply learn to play and then play as written.