Is anyone willing to entertain the idea

Regulate the 'High-End"? How about regulating the "Low End" first! More snake oil salespersons there than in all of our hobby combined. Cables: I don't see Roger Penske connecting his Mercedes to the driver via coat hanger, do you? So good cables are paramount, though still only fine tuning.
I hear better late at night whilst I'm alone and not distracted. Yeah, auto-suggestion is a powerful tool! Critical listening...as opposed to just 'hearing'...is to be highly valued. Many 'philes work from the wrong perspective...they have the amp. they 'like' but the speakers they 'cannot wait to unload'.
FIND the speakers that suit your room and your ears and your music, then FEED them with a SUITABLE amplifier, DELIVER the amp. a great signal via a properly matched Pre-amp. and GENERATE or RE-CREATE the information from your source: the best one you can afford.
Connect all and enjoy! Remember, we are only playing back recorder music! (Exception: live broadcasts, a rarity these days).
SO, why bother listening for 'differences'?

i'm joking sean about regulation....but if you notice, no public companies in any business make statements 'implied or otherwise' that can't be proven, even in audio.

Nsgarch said what I was thinking.Thats really my final litmus everything else is secondary by a wide margin.JMHO.

im a firm believer that 50% of the things we hear aren't real but the other 50% is real,as for dbt tests i wouldnt trust any published test results ive ever read (for amplifiers) & ive read many,ive yet to read a published dbt where the volume levels were high enough to be able to discern any differences in amplifiers,also the testing methods in all the published dbt's that ive read are flawed & suspect in method & form.

jaybo did make a good point though,way too many manufacturers & reviewers make bold statements claiming out of this world differences in all kinds of stuff than cant possibly make a fart in the wind of diference in any system.

Reality is only one person's opinion and/or perception, those who claim to know objective reality are perceptually delusional. You absolutely cannot know what another person hears while listening to their system. I just find it kind of curious that even amongst those who claim they are in posession of an objective reality regarding perception of sound there is such a variety of equipment owned. It seems to me that if I were of the belief there was an objective 'reality' of sound perception, and I knew that one person who posessed that knowledge I would purchase the exact same equipment for my system. I would be perfectly content knowing that I had an objectively 'real' system.
While I understand the claim is for only a 50% delusional reality rate, the above argument is still valid. Which 50% (or is it some greater or lesser percentage) of perception is reality and which is delusional?
I guess in the final analysis I could care less what another person hears or doesn't hear. Good for those who can happily listen with Bose/Rat Shack, etc. and good for those who need to spend hundreds of thousands. It seems to me the contended listener is simply enjoying the sound of his/her version of reality.
On the other hand, perhaps we subjectivists are truly delusional. The path that you take to the peak of audio enjoyment is truly a dead end since it is only the delusion of faulty perception, you must realize that your enjoyment is a false reality. Now you can get really get sad knowing that your system is not really as good as you think it is. At this point you decide to just chuck it all, you simply can't be happy living in a delusional world :-)