Why aren't the older members still active ?

I'm still here (to a greatly reduced degree -- credit burn-out), and I still listen to plenty of 60's "garage" rock (including the more obscure, largely local type -- not what the respondents to your thread thought was garage-band music). Something which, to address your intermediate implied question, not many audiophiles seem to do (probably because it's often the essence of low-fi -- their loss).

Bongofury on the new music info also, and the best chow in various cities!!

Albert I have just spoken and traded emails with Sean in the last few weeks. Sometimes life gets in the way of audio. Sean was very helpful in my trying to set up a vintage Ohm F system. He has a great knowledge base and has been generous with his time.

I don't get on very often. I guess I have no opinions or my interest lies elsewhere.
Shubertmaniac

People come and people go. But I think the answer lies in your situation.
Repetitive threads, inane debates over unanswerable questions, heavy handed moderation and just plain stupid questions get tiresome after the newness wears off.
Interesting to see some resurfacing.

Has it really been twelve years? Amazing. I joined in Feb of 2000, and have been making myself obnoxious, and gotten heat for my posts about the importance of "the live music standard" ever since. I bring this up not to be self-serving, but because it may go to the OP's question.

I have enjoyed this site and this community immensely, and continue to do so. The level of intelligence, knowledge, wit, and generosity of many here is truly amazing and inspiring. I agree that for many of the previously active members the rehashing of the same questions and comments time and time again is tiresome. What I find to be even more important is how
many of the newer (younger?) audiophiles express opinions, and make
observations about audio matters as if they were making an observation
never before made by anyone. They have very little knowledge nor
respect for the history of the hobby. Before there was Audiogon, there was the work of folks like JGH, HP, JN, PHD, JM, and others. I know it is
in vogue to bash audio critics, but these folks were instrumental in creating
a vocabulary for discussing what we do on this site. Perhaps even more
importantly, there was always a very strong sense that it was the music
that mattered. Observations about sound was, more times than not, tied to
intelligent observations about the music; and with actual examples of recordings to boot. Imagine that!

I think this relates to the OP's question because there is only so much we
can say about the "audio" portion of this hobby that hasn't been said a
thousand times before. Music? That's a different matter. It is an endless
font of new discovery. The emphasis should always be the music. That is
what excites many audiophiles the most.

Remember the surveys of great concert halls, and pipe organs of the world in TAS? The very comprehensive articles on the range of the instruments of the orchestra? The interviews with folks like Bill Porter?
Man, I'm showing my age.