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

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.

Must be me I prefer Genelec to Buchardt 

Most people, even pro, overestimate the price necessary to be invested to reach a very good audio quality level...

Most people, even pro, underestimate the power of controlling the working dimensions of ANY audio system, what i called their embeddings, mechanical and electrical and the powerful acoustical dimension....

The result is that most peple,even pro, are obsessed by high cost component and think that it is all there is about High end audio experience...

I listened to many high cost system that are worst than my 500 bucks very well embed system.... I try to make people think before throwing money.... Thats all.... It seems i am the only one who say that.... Incredible!

Gullible consumerism upgrading is not the way..... Controlling the working dimensions of what you already own is.....

Audio cost is creativity+ peanuts..,..