Any body remember the old days when magazines did not accept advertising from equipment manufacturers and they went out of their way to give the consumer the benefit of their experience and expertise in order guide them into the hobby with an eye toward keeping the end user between the ditches on almost every conceivable technical and practical matter? My how things have changed, of course. But, if you think about it, that may really not be all that surprising, I suppose. There was a much more finite number of makers in those days, for one...and a limited number of mags. But, I think more than just the increasing pressure to accept advertising as the number of makers began to steadily grow, was perhaps the underlying technical complexity of the hobby -the nature of the beast - (that could only be counted on to grow) that began to make it clear to industry editors that there might not be any real way to continue to truthfully fulfill that promise since, there was for them I suspect, increasingly the argument that not every piece of gear could be counted on to sound the same in every system. Sure, they could go out on a limb and state categorically what they felt the sonic positives and pitfalls were, but could they say that assessment would always hold true?...for every system?...in every country? Of course, we've seen that previous standard conveniently slip into the practice now of just mentioning the sonic positives and glossing over, or not mentioning at all, the sonic negatives (heh, heh). And we've seen the number of those technical and practical issues mushroom since those days.
These days the number of internet publishers is all but uncountable and there is still far more gear out there than ever gets reviewed. From the publishers there is an inexhaustible supply of information, but not so much understanding, experience or crucial explanation. Add to that, that most contemporary makers apparently must walk the line between giving potential buyers the gist of how they can claim their products work, but without letting the cat out of the bag for their competition and, for prospective buyers looking to gain reliable insight, this is just about a perfect mess. About the only place you can try to find info based on actual experience is in the forums...and even then it takes time for having to proceed cautiously. I've even heard of makers that confide that they will have to raise the expected price of their new, "breakthrough" product in order for it to be "taken seriously" in the market. For all of this there doesn't seem to be any end in sight. But, overall, maybe the question isn't whether high-end audio is dead, but whether or not it is now a victim of its own hype.
Also, I don't think there is any shortage of stoopid-rich people (I'm NOT saying stoopid, rich people!!) and makers can try to sell to hobbyists or to professionals who will not really have the time or inclination to do anything else but go through a dealer (or both groups, of course...hopefully...). But, I don't think high-end audio is dead by any stretch, not yet anyway. About the only thing I see dying is mp3, and it's about time. It's slated to be replaced by hi-rez portables which with any luck will eventually become affordable enough for most of the music-buying public to feel good enough about to ditch mp3 for good. Maybe then we can look toward a reversal of the current industry insanity of recording music to sound good through cheap-as-$#*! earbuds.
But, I agree with the post that Almarg pointed out above in regards to the fact that you can spend more money and get better sound quality and you can spend less money and get better sound quality. I think as long as you can continue to say that there is a ray of hope. But, these days maybe the high-end is trying to kick its own @$$.
