You get the upvote just for "shiny carbon"!

My take on this is that classical music has always been consumed by the rich, as back in the renaissance (got to start somewhere) only the very wealthy could afford to hire musicians to perform. It was all about patronage, for artists, musicians, scientists, all those who had a talent that couldn't easily be bartered for 3 meals a day.
The music for the poor was sung, or played on cheap and portable instruments. Folk music.
Religious music is a special case - once a week the family would go to the local place or worship and hear a choir, or maybe even an organ. That's music for worship - it must be special because it is your god's music.
Flash forward to the 19th century and in America, the same descendants of slaves who sang gospel on Sunday sang the blues every other day of the week.
Always a separation between music of the people and music that's 'special'.
One of my musical heroes, Frank Zappa, started off writing long-form/classical music but turned to rock'n'roll to earn a living. He smudged the boundaries though by having his bands play rock, classical, reggae, folk, jazz, or wwhatever during a concert - he just heard music.

It'd be nice to have a new name for the music - 'classical' is an elitist label evoking the 'better' eras of the past. In the same way that Ancient Greece and Rome are revered by many for having the finest architecture, sculpture, theatre etc.

And for all I love a good heavy metal concert (and folk, and punk, and...), there's nothing like hearing a well rehearsed symphony orchestra in the flesh. Even from the cheap seats.