Why is there so much separation between the professional audio and audiophile worlds?

The overlooked question from this article is why don't both disciplines - pro vs public, jointly find advancements in sound reproduction that would benefit everyone? At one time, among other studios, Atlantic Records had a NYC studio full of Mark Levinson's Cello gear according to him. Obviously, given the at the time $25k minimum a Cello system cost, it wasn't meant for the casual listener, but as in other industries, advances at the top end should trickle down the food chain but often in our hobby, they don't.

Over in another thread there is a ton of people complaining about low distortion highly revealing speakers like B&W 800's, Wilsons, Magico.   They claim they are too bright. I know that is a factor of room acoustics and would take one of these over most other "gentle" but lacking speakers any day. 


Most audiophiles and certainly at the age of most here are not looking for accurate they are looking for a particular flavor.

Every step of the way to the home listener’s ear the sound loses some fidelity to the original event, no matter the quality of the gear (yes, even with “perfect” digital). As we all know there are many steps in this process.

Well that is pretty much wrong. The sound may change, but it is not lost w.r.t. inherent detail and resolution unless intentional ... And yes that is because the processing is digital.

Change = loss of fidelity.  Good try, ‘though.

There is no "loss of fidelity" in digital processing. There may be intentional changing, i.e. fequency response , fade left or right essentially, but these are not losses of fidelity.  Short of two miles recording without any change with are almost non existent by your definition everything has a loss of fidelity. That is ridiculous and wrong.