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

Everything that I listen to was not recorded well to various degree.
We just have to do our best.

The more I researched the further i drifted from "audiophile " equipment. I now use Genelec speakers and a streamer and am enjoying some of the best sound I have ever heard in my life. Even though I can hear the distortion of a sax reed in some old Jazz recordings I even enjoy knowing that's the way they heard it when it was recorded. 

Wow i did not know that.

What I'd like to know is: Why is pro gear better at putting sound onto media than home gear is at taking it off? Steve Guttenberg had a YouTube video yesterday titled " The LAW of DIMINISHING RETURNS is BS".
The video was about how uber expensive gear is ACTUALLY BETTER than "pretty good" gear. Steve's criteria for greatness is information retrieval and how much better big $$$ gear is at giving it to you.
So why does it take 100K speakers and amps to get info that was recorded by equipment that cost 1/10th of that?
Are equipment makers "dumbing down" their products so they can sell us the Mark-II versions?

???
I immediately think of the ultimate roady's concoction, the 'wall' of Mcintosh amps for pro sound.
And the review where the guy preferred Genelecs to powered Buchardts.
Or Paul McGowan rebuilding A/D in Neil Young's old mixer.
The only seperation is mostly functional.