The Absurdity of it All

I think the OP has a point.
I work in a highish end retail store and am constantly asked by colleagues and customers what I think about how one item compares to another, whatever it may be.  I have to be honest...at 69 y/o, with many live rock concerts behing me, I am suffering from both age-related hearing loss and tinitus.  I still hear the sound of music through my diminished auditory instrument, and can compare reproduced sound to live sound as I hear it now, but I simply cannot discern what I once did.
Add to that the fact that my prime audiophile years were spent frequently under the influence of cannabis products, which I no longer do, and there is another factor distinguishing my "degree of certainty" about how things sound, relative to one another.  

It never ceases to puzzle me how combative so many who post to this site are. The OP, it seems to me, was making a simple point: the "improvements" supposedly attributable to different cables, cable risers, etc. etc., are extremely subtle if they exist at all; in general, they are not even measurable by devices far more sensitive that our ears. And "our" ears, for the most part, are no longer young; even if you've been careful, it's very unlikely you can hear anything above about 12 KHz if you're over 50. 

When I was in college, I made a practice of visiting the campus health center once a semester to have my ears properly cleaned. I'd spend the rest of that day listening to music: the improvement was startling, and thrilling. But it didn't last long. And now, of course, I could not restore my youthful hearing just by having my ears cleaned (I've tried). 

Yes, the ear/brain connection that delivers sounds to consciousness, where they become music, is complex, not very well understood, and arguably improves with age and experience. That's a truism, too. But it wasn't the OP's original point.

To perceive differences due to the electronic reproduction of frequencies that are too subtle even to be measured is problematic at any age, much less with age-compromised ears (and brains). So, sure: it all depends on what makes you happy, and no one, therefore, should make "objective" claims for tweaks or high-end products of almost any kind. BUT...this forum is all about offering advice to others about what to spend our money on. So things get out of hand easily; there's a strong confirmation bias involved in advocating for something one has decided is "worth" the investment.

I want to just say: Get over it! But that's beside the point, too, as it would seem to be advice incompatible with this entire forum.

So, at the end of this ramble, it seems I've answered my own original question. Why are audiophiles so defensive (and aggressive)? Because they've chosen, for whatever reasons, to spend a lot of money on things that cannot be shown to really make any objective difference, instead of on things their families need, or giving their "disposable income" to charities rather than to well-heeled audio hucksters. 

But, hey. Life's not fair. And "pleasure" is subjective and, as often as not, produced by webs of belief rather than objective facts.

@crustycoot  

I would sooner trust someone who has a lot of experience at listening than someone who has pristine hearing but doesn't know what to listen for.

Suspect your colleagues are asking because they trust your listening skills.

So, keep on keeping on!

................what?

@perkri  I really enjoyed reading your list of tweaks and the rationales for each of them! I'm still learning, so can you tell me how you listen to each tweak to determine what difference it's made and whether that tweak is working or not? Serious question because the only thing that will keep me from going down a rabbit hole is a process by which I can know (a) whether a tweak has done something and (b) the degree and character of it. Thank you.