??? Where Does "High End" Start ???

@superblueapm ”No one should care (much) about such a label.”

superblueapm…. You are the super supreme Ghostbuster.

You have blown this debate wide open for what it is. There appears to be a lot of “gatekeepers and insecure” inhabitants on here. You have captured the myth of it all…. And put it all into a box, just like in Ghostbusters. 
 

Are those with high-end leanings, supernatural beings?

Who you gonna call? ….at 200 mph…  Superblue apm Mythbuster Debunker!

I don't think its useful to define high end by cost because "high end" "midfi" "lofi," etc., are relative terms, not absolute. Measuring where high end starts by price will always be relative to our own view of what constitutes a lot of money and by our own circumstances. You and I might agree that a $25k speaker is high end, but to the guy who just bought a $250k set of speakers, its likely midfi.  

Harry Pearson claimed to have coined the term "high end" in audio back in the day; I don’t know if that’s true, but to trace what is  considered "high end" I think you have to look at the history of audio reproduction devices. First, those of us in the States were not necessarily clued into what the Japanese or French were doing and were largely limited to the audio press in the US circa the ’70s- Stereophile, TAS, Audio and a few other journals, including J. Peter Moncrieff’s newsletter and a few other resources. The Internet did not exist at this time for normals. 

In that era, which I lived through, it was probably easier to distinguish: it was not a receiver, plastic-y turntable and a set of bookshelf speakers (although some acquitted themselves well). Instead, it was separates- preamp/basic amp, table with the ability to mount a separate arm (not an essential defining characteristic but still) and some form of speaker system that purported to do something beyond the norm: Stats plus woofers and super tweets, the Infinity series, various combinations (that included using Maggie bass panels), bi or tri-amping with active crossovers, the use of more rarified cartridges, etc. 

There were also DIY’ers that I knew back in this era who cobbled together pretty good systems based on older components from the "golden age," including tubed Marantz, McI, Rek-o-Kut, Bozak, KLH 9 (double sets), ad nauseam. 

Integrated amps were not part of this, though today, with the lines to differentiate equipment blurred by low cost equipment, that is no longer true. The "quest" was to spare no effort, which often, but not always, meant expense, to achieve something that represented the cutting edge of home music reproduction. 

We have become inured to unrestrained hype, expense and hyperbolic reviews to the point where it is difficult to separate the true, enduring milestone components from the chaff. I don’t pretend to have superior knowledge, I just lived it since around 1970 and built systems for myself that represented the best that I could accomplish-- I went from a mini-HQD system running ARC tubes and an SP-10 in the ’70s-early 80’s to horns and Lamm SETs with a substantial vinyl front end in the early aughts. I spent more than the average citizen and have a very good system but I don’t claim to have an ultimate system, only one that works for me. (In fact, I have a vintage system that represents a good approximation of what I was running in 1975 and it is very enjoyable, also all tube, Quad Loudspeaker and the same SP-10 I had in 1973). 

Today, the lines are blurred. You can buy separates at low cost, and high quality integrated amps that didn’t exist back in the day. Speakers run the gamut- there is no "one way" and a lot, as all of you know, is getting the system to work in the room, not just hardware. Plus, we have credible digital sources today which did not exist for consumers back in the early days of the "high end." 

I do agree that it is more a state of intention than one of price, although given the cost of gear today, a lot of the top tier stuff costs. I’m glad I got into this 50 plus years ago, and while not complacent, I’m no longer on the "quest."

I’d be hard-pressed to give you a better perspective; much is context. 

@whart  “….hard-pressed to give you a better perspective….”

l know my take on all this was well and truly tongue-in-cheek, but after reading your input…. Well, what else is there to say?

Next question…….?

High End Audio was invented by specific people. Mark Levinson, Bill Z. Johnson, and David Wilson are key names. The former makers of luxury audio, Gordon Gow and Saul Marantz, Bud Fried, Jim Lansing as examples…all practiced economy to an extent…not as much as Dave Hafler or Henry Kloss, but they didn’t go to extremes where the tangible results didn’t make sense. The High End guys lavished military/aerospace/instrument grade parts, extremely expensive metal chassis and transformers, often with a complete disregard for functional utility, in pursuit of vanishing performance benefits. 
The 80s brought us the “Greed is Good” sensibility and the industry took off with fancy parts, exotic materials and questionable engineering choices. The counter argument is also rampant…the ASR crowd, Chi-Fi chip amps and DACs that measure perfectly for a song.