I am new to this arena and for all the reading and homework it seems like there is a lot of circumstance out there. It seems that the comment that I see the most is, “…see how it works with your system.” And while this is true about a great many things in life it seems that we are all trying to find a sense for balance for our budget. The other thing that I learned is the spending a lot will not always yield the desired result.
So…regardless of price, here is my question. In your opinion, if your were to put together a system (say something to do it all, as I don’t know about everyone else but I couldn’t afford one for music and one for movies and other activities) in the following three categories: as high medium and low; what would it look like?
Say maybe with the following categories:
1) Processor, Preamp & Amp OR Receiver 2) Sources (CD, Phono or whatever) 3) Cables (Speak, Interconnect and whatever) 4) Power and related products 5) Other tweaks
Did I miss anything? Please feel free to add. :D
There are no motives hear but to learn, I have just bought a bunch of stuff that make me happy and I am just curious or maybe trying to prove that I am not on crack. ;-)
So,I think by Jax2 and Mapmans reply that it takes a very large investment to achieve high end performance and some either just cant afford the cost or are not into the music that much.
Did I say that? I'm not even sure where you got that inference from my response?! I think there is a threshold where your investment in "improvement" can skyrocket in terms of $ spent VS improvements gained. If I had the money I don't think my priorities would be to spend huge amounts on small improvements. I like my system as it is. I have heard plenty of all-out systems that have impressed me, but the degree of improvement does not occur to me, personally, as worth the investment. This is all speculation, mind you. I don't have that kind of money, and I have no idea what that experience may be like or how it might change me. For me, right now, the greatest improvements I could think of for my system would be in tweaks to my speakers and in changing my room to a dedicated custom designed room for listening. The later would probably render the largest improvement in my case. That is definitely something I'd be willing to invest in if I had lots of money.
Why do some still say they have high end systems if you need something better to make it truly high end.Or is this like having a faster car gets confused with having a better car ?
I said I considered mine to be a modest system. I don't try to improve it for the sake of bringing it to someone's arbitrary definition of what is "better". I improve it because the investments usually bring me closer to the music, and thus bring me enjoyment. I've reached my own threshold where the investments required to make things significantly better are not worth it to me, short of perhaps the room (which actually would be a very significant investment).
The car thing doesn't connect. I hate cars. I ride a motorcycle, and avoid 4 wheeled vehicles like so many piles of dog poop on the sidewalk. I drive one only if I have no choice. Even taking your statement about cars and applying it to bikes I don't connect. "Faster" makes absolutely no difference to me. I'm much more interested in how well the bike fits my riding style and my preferences of terrain. Fast has very little to do with it. I've ridden the same model bike for 12 years now (two versions of it) simply because it fits me and my riding style best. There are a great abundance of much faster and sportier alternatives to what I ride, yet I have absolutely no desire to go there...not even a curiosity. Been there, done that, it doesn't fit me. If I had money up the wazzoo, I am quite sure I'd still ride the same bike and would still avoid driving a car. There's a thread somewhere on here about what kind of cars we all drive if you want to bore yourself to tears, in case you aren't already.
This all may occur to you as defensive, but I have to say your response just doesn't fit me at all. If I implied what you seemed to take from my post, I didn't mean to. Perhaps it was my poking fun at my buddy, Albert, but that was all tongue-in-cheek. I do respect his passion, and the man is a gentlemen in every respect. Hope that clarifies my perspective a bit.
Gogirl, if one is willing to give up full range and go with a 2-way mini-monitor, then high-end can be achieved for four-figures, subject to that limitation. Many people do make that compromise and are quite happy with it for many years. I did that for decades and only moved up to full range in the last year or so. (My investment escalated several fold, partly because I can now afford the best components, but a doubling occured simply to get another octave or so without giving up the all-important midrange and imaging.
I think the definition of high end is defined in sound and not money. The key is that timbre be accurate and that the sound be transparent and stress free. Compromises must be skillfully implemented such that they really don't stick out (for instance, the roll off must be natural and graceful).
It's not so much that it take a large investment of money for equipment. Most serious music lovers have more money in software than gear I'd hazard to guess. Take a 1000 lps or cds and compare that to the cost of a system that most members have. It's the time invested in learning about room and equipment interactions and what works with what. FWIW if I became wealthy I'd have a pro design a room made for audio. And if possible involve the equipment manufacturer in the process. Otherwise I might be just be another rich guy with an expensive but crappy sounding system. There are too many to mention but on this thread there are several members with vast experience in audio that it pays to listen too. If I was starting out and had the money I'd find out what they're drinking and hand deliver to their house on serious listening night. Definitely at least worth reading threads some of the more astute members threads to learn before buying anything. You can skip mine!
So,I think by Jax2 and Mapmans reply that it takes a very large investment to achieve high end performance and some either just cant afford the cost or are not into the music that much.If this is true then why cant you boys just say that.Why do some still say they have high end systems if you need something better to make it truly high end.Or is this like having a faster car gets confused with having a better car ?
If I had the budget, I'd probably end up spending more.
But my system fits my current dwelling pretty well. The differences, if any, would be marginal or subjective, IMHO.
If I had a larger house with larger rooms, I would probably be inclined to scale my system up somewhat accordingly, which would likely cost more.
I might go with a fancier CD player, though I'm not sure I would gain much, which is why I am where I am there.
If I weren't turned onto the Ohms, I might have to spend more to match them otherwise, though I think I could find something second hand in the price range that might be in the same league at least.
So guys,if you had the dollars to put into a higher end system,would you.And would you then say its all good ?? Honest answers only.Please set the ego's aside.
I'd probably improve a few things here and there, but I don't think I'd be inclined to invest huge amounts of money into my system. I like it pretty well as it is. I don't know where it would fall on the spectrum of what is being discussed here, but I'd say it is quite modest in comparison. I'd be most inclined to put significant money into improving my listening room or building a new one.
Albert has been in and around the industry his entire life and I'd venture to guess worked his butt off to build the system he has. I don't think he paid retail for it..but I think he traded his first born for the turntable. He still has the one son left though so don't feel bad. Keep in mind that represents the evolution of a lifetime's passion...and Albert, as we all know is a very tired old man with only one kidney (he traded the other for those speakers) :-)
Hello All,Dcstep I took your suggestion and looked at Mr. Porters system.I also looked at his professional background. This confuses my even more. Some of you have stated that there are no low or mid-fi these days all equipment is good.Some say have fun with it. It seems that the price of Mr.Porters system can support a third world country.I dont think Mr.Porter intentionally wants to spend his hard earned dollars on what I checked to be a very expensive system not to mention the cost of power to fire all this up.So there must be more to it. So guys,if you had the dollars to put into a higher end system,would you.And would you then say its all good ?? Honest answers only.Please set the ego's aside. I'm trying to learn Thank you
I'd only add that the underpinnings of audio is science and engineering, but 98% of the end user experience results from the artistic aspect, which includes the recording process.
IMHO, hi-fi has become so good and cheap since 50's that there is almost no such thing as low or mid fi around anymore (at least not in your average middle class home). Digital has been the great democratizer - simplifying things with high quality sound with great channel separation, S/N and a dynamic range exceeding previous technologies by about 30 db+.
This has resulted in a battle for differentiation in the high end that is largely one of marketing specs and aesthetics (precious metals/heavy build etc) and plumbing the extremes such as extreme bass performance or SPL capability or odd distinctive colorations. It has pitted tubes against SS (although depending on the topology they can sound similar). It has pitted Analog against Digital - and again depending on the recording quality they can sound similar too.
If this seems a lot like Yves St. Laurent vs Hugo Boss vs Armani, Versace etc. that is because great functional clothing was invented a long time ago and so differentiation moves to aesthetics and type of material ( man made fabrics vs natural etc)
Like the girls discussing clothing - the guys discuss gear but in the end it is just harmless fun - and todays "cock of the wall" product is tomorrows "feather duster". So enjoy the banter but don't for one moment be fooled into thinking there is some raw ground truths or science to it. It is just fun.
You can achieve fairly high end sound for medium or low end cost if you match any decent speakers properly to a decent amp and focus on good speaker placement within the room
Most systems sound "high end" when speakers can be placed at least a few feet away from walls to avoid early reflections. In general, most speakers sound better when given some "room to breathe" in this manner. Avoid speakers that are too big in a room that is too small. Most decent, smaller "monitor speakers" work well in a variety of room sizes when paired with a decent quality matching amp, like a NAD (warmer sound) or Rotel (more detailed/transparent).
Then add some decent interconnects (anything other than stock cables that come with units, DNM, audioquest or MIT among others are safe bets) and any decent Monster power conditioner and you should be 90% there. Everything from here is a tweak to your particular tastes. If you are using a phono, make sure the cartridge is properly aligned and matched to the phono input properly.
Glory, yes, that makes me feel better. I thank you for that. I just get fed up with SS being classified as inferior. The best system I ever heard had huge solid state Classe monoblocks with CJ tube preamplification, if my memory serves me correctly. I'll never forget that day. The best of both worlds.
06-05-08: Gogirl Said: "Hello,I just joined this boy's club.My boyfriend has what he calls a high-end system.My dad says his system is only mid-fi (I think I know what that means)When we are all together they always discuss their systems.I am tired of being left out so I joined Audiogon to learn.Actually I didnt understand the question but I understand Albertporters answer perfectly. I'll keep looking and learning and will have some questions for you guys in the future."
Welcome Gogirl. Please excuse these klutz audiophiles for noticing a lady in the room. Since you have both an audiophile father and b'friend you understand I'm sure.
You picked right up on Albertporter's correctness. If you haven't already, link over to his system and you'll see not low, medium or high end, but "ultimate end."
There is a difference between Low Fi, Mid Fi or Hi Fi but it is not only in terms of price range ......at least not in my book. I believe it should reflect the differences in quality of the material that is reproduced and its honest, accurate image of the original music material. I do understand that it is not always possible to get that last slice of detail and transparency on the low budget but there are exeptions. And that is where this hobby becomes interesting and fun.
P.S Bose and one box systems shouldn't have the "Fi" in, on or near their box, section or the store that sells it.
I think the definition changes as you enter and travel along the hifi path. When I first started I thought my humble, low cost system was bloody great and truly hi-end! Of course, as I travelled down the hifi path, and ultimately, the upgrade path, things became clearer. You never have the best system. There is always a better one, and when you hear it, it is apparant. Then your perceptions alter again re mid-fi/hi-fi/etc. Just enjoy the ride, listen to as many systems as possible, and never close your mind to the fact that some ultra piced items deliver truly astonishing performance. Even if they are beyond reach, they are well worth listening to, as they improve/hone your perspective. To suggest that the high end is reserved for crazy wealthy people is ridiculous. By defintition this is unlikely. It is also grossly incorrect. I know a few guys who have megabuck systems, highly modified, and forgo lots of things in life to attain their hifi asperations. They are niether wealthy, nor crazy. But they are very happy! As am I. Just enjoy your new hobby, it can, and should, last a lifetime.
Some cute answers. Yet, both the serious and fun answers are using the terms hi/mid/low-END, and hi/mid/low-FI, as if they were the same. Are these terms synonymous?
Gogirl: You'll certainly get a mouthful of stuff to talk about here, but if you really want to impress them, you need to dig in deeper, otherwise your father and boyfriend will trample you with jargon and specious science. You go girl!
Glory with another put-down? Just "decent", eh? Just can't come to terms with the possibity that there are excellent SS amps out there? I find alot of people posting troubles with the tube amps they have, mostly with the tubes themselves. Should I then state that tube amps are more trouble, or that they are inferior to SS, or just "decent"? I wouldn't even think of it
Thanks all, I appeciate everyone taking the time to chime in. Like I said, I am not trying to short cut through anything, but it can be daunting as excited as one can get in this arena it is also very confusing wihtout the history and knowing what to look for.
By your first paragraph, I'd say you're paying attention and certainly grasp what's going on here. I am not quite sure what, exactly, you are asking though. Is this an audio hierarchy question? Or are you asking what low-mid-high means to others? In the case of a latter, I'd imagine that was a sliding scale according to what you can afford, and to some extent what you've been exposed to, personal tastes, predispositions, yadda yadda yadda.
Albert's response is spot-on, as usual, and his last statement speaks volumes:
Sorry if this sounds like a cop out, but audio is like cooking. Better ingredients can make a great recipe better but is no guarantee a bad cook will serve a perfect meal.
If you take anything from this thread, that is a pearl, and it is anything but a cop-out. Well put, Albert.
If you can discriminate from those speaking from experience and those blowing smoke out their arse you can certainly learn a lot here...definitely keep asking questions. Most of your 'learning', though, will be done by doing (ain't that always the way), and not necessarily following anyone else's formulas or suggestions. Take the most sage advice as a point of departure and create your own 'perfect meal'. Look for folks who might share similar tastes in music, and or have experience with components you may be interested in, or those you already have and want to build upon. No better way to test the waters than to jump in, as you have. The chlorine's not too bad...just watch out for those warm spots.
I hope your smart enough to ignore Glory, that has to be one of the dumbest suggestions ever.
Low Fi, IMO is mainly stuff you get at a large chain store, its cheap easy to purchase and looks like its all you need, and it somewhat is unless you actually really care about performance....like Mcdonalds.
Mid-fi, a bit harder to spot in the stores but some companies that make crap have "Elite", "ES", "Master", "Select" gear that is the top of their respective lines......a bit less afordable but pretty justifiable to many folks. It also is companies that have always produced well recieved and priced gear, maybe "NAD, Rotel, Rega, Music Hall" fall into this section among many others and its usually somewhat mass produced and many have a long track record of value. These might be considered like "Outback Steakhouse". HiFi, boy this can be a large well established company with huge factory they own, could be another large firm that ships out fome parts from overseas and some is in our back yard, could be one guy that makes just a few extreme priced and performing items a year and many times its drop dead sexy. Its almost always very high priced and some is the sort of stuff that most folks simply shake their head at failing to understand why anyone would pay so much for items they feel fall into the earlier price ranges. This stuff is a reservation required suit and tie joint with valet parking, 5 star media reviews, and a palce most will never see or appreciate. man I am bored!
I hate when narrow minded people put down solid state gear. Just because it's not your cup of tea doesn't make it low end. There are plenty of hi end SS pieces to choose from.
Hello,I just joined this boy's club.My boyfriend has what he calls a high-end system.My dad says his system is only mid-fi (I think I know what that means)When we are all together they always discuss their systems.I am tired of being left out so I joined Audiogon to learn.Actually I didnt understand the question but I understand Albertporters answer perfectly. I'll keep looking and learning and will have some questions for you guys in the future.
In my opinion, high end, medium and low end are determined by performance and quality, not price. Of course many of the best sounding components are expensive but there are exceptions and the exceptions are brought about by matching the right pieces.
Some of the worst sounding systems are the VERY expensive ones that are severely mismatched. With the power and resolution to show every detail, a mismatch only serves to make the listener unhappy and even uncomfortable.
So answering your question by filling out components that "fit" the list, is difficult. An inexpensive DAC might sound really good with a computer based system, creating a super value sound, placing it low end in cost and mid to high end in sound.
Same with speakers. A used pair of Vandersteen 2Ce might be found for $650.00 or less, making them mid line cost but delivering reasonably high end performance.
Power related products are all over the place. Some very expensive conditioning equipment damages the sound on my system and some inexpensive ones improve sound.
Cable is a little bit easier. Low end would be door bell wire or zip cord. Works and sounds OK, with everything being "lossy" as opposed to showing much in the way of flaws.
As you move up the cable chain, all of the premium brands contribute their personality but the price does not always assure an equal amount of performance increase.
When you get to source, the best value is probably a $99.00 CD player. It works, sounds OK and no money spent. You can spend 30K on a CD but unless EVERYTHING else in the system is top notch, you'll wonder why it costs so much.
Same true for analog sources (turntable, arm and cartridge) and preamps and phono amps.
Sorry if this sounds like a cop out, but audio is like cooking. Better ingredients can make a great recipe better but is no guarantee a bad cook will serve a perfect meal.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
