Surely, the concept is a little to 'cut-and-dried' and oversimplified. There are plenty of records out there, digital, analog, synthesized or handplayed on acoustics, that sound lush and are sonically striking.

But I dig what you are saying, and agree to a point. Its obvious alot of people are aware of the factors that contribute to poor quality recordings (quality applied to many factors, not just the sonic engineering).

People used to listen to an entire album, with other people, as an experience. We still do this, but our entertainment dollar and time are competing with incredible videogames, flashy movies and super high budget sporting events. Many people just see entertainment as entertainment, and music is often something to jog, dance, or drive to. Or watch wrestlers manhandle each other to. When you look at it that way, do you really think people care much about content or sonic quality? They are concerned with the emotion the particular song produces within their mind, not about the integrity of it's sonic components. Nothing wrong with that, that is what people want, right? Well, maybe. Or maybe we just tell them what they want and shove it down their throat. Either way, the outcome is the same for those who are not discerning about music, but rather just take it as it's given. To each his own. Or is it?

Value of so-called art and music (which is entertainment) is determined by how popular it is. Ironically, it works the same in politics. Why ever would you expect quality control in popularity contest like entertainment?