The term "High End" needs to die. Long live Hi-Fidelity!

jsautter...I don't think you got the gist of my post...obviously a good system can be obtained by paying for a new Boulder or D'Agostino "Relentless" amp, $40,000 cables, or any number of things in the range of precious hifi stuff...but a simple example of how not to is maybe my $1,200 Dennis Had Firebottle amp...is a Kondo Audio Note at maybe 30 grand a "better" sounding amp? Maybe to somebody it is, but based on my enjoyment of the Had amp I seriously doubt anything comparable is worth 30 times the cost, or is even "better" sounding in any way. My system does sound "sublime," and hey...I saved 400 grand!

Why does anyone care about what anyone else spends on anything? I suggest considering the following guidelines: (1) Spend your own money how ever you want; (2) Resist the temptation to sit in judgment on others who spend differently than you do--either more than you or less than you; and (3) Call the hobby whatever you want so that it reflects how you view the hobby. I understand OP's reasoning, I just don't think it accurately reflects cause and effect.
IMO audio equipment enthusiasm isn't shrinking because of terminology. And it isn't shrinking because potential new adherents are becoming convinced they can't afford it. It is shrinking because we are making less communal investments in music appreciation and education. Thus, fewer people believe music is a worthwhile "investment" of their time or their money or both. The music is what matters and because fewer people value music, fewer people are attracted to pursuing "quality" audio equipment to faithfully reproduce the sound of music. That includes the DIY segment. I would argue that the Asian audio market has traction because that part of the world still values music education and invests in it.   

Excellent post, thank you.

**** It is shrinking because we are making less communal investments in music appreciation and education. Thus, fewer people believe music is a worthwhile "investment" of their time or their money or both. The music is what matters and because fewer people value music, fewer people are attracted to pursuing "quality" audio equipment to faithfully reproduce the sound of music. ****

I have come to believe that the term “high end” is an accommodation to those who would spend extra money, time and effort to attain a sound that is appealing to them, where as the term “high fidelity” existed for the purists for whom the quest to accurately replay what’s encoded in the recording.

”Fidelity” narrows the potential market.

My username says it all!

HiFi is the aim of all Audiophiles I’ve always felt that we all want High Fidelity sound and that High End was a term we used to describe the equipment we needed to attain that sound. I don’t think high end equipment needs to break the bank, be esoteric or unobtainable; high end describes to me that it was designed with purpose and care to recreate music the best way the designer choose to.

A person can be passionate about high fidelity and not necessarily have the money to buy high end components. I was that person for many years with a buy it once, but it right attitude. I did not settle on one component in my set up and wouldn’t trade a piece for anything at this moment even though there is equipment and components at 10 times the cost. We should encourage anyone who is interested in better sound reproduction. . . 

HiFi all the way!

- Steve