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


 There are terms we in this hobby use to describe certain characteristics of the components or sound evoked...Without fail,the terms entry level,mid-fi & high end will show up in component reviews or conversations regarding equipment components...
 So exactly how do we define these terms in absolutes?I understand there are components that,in this day & age,outperform their asking price in orders of magnitude but even if they do,they will invariably be tagged as entry level,mid-fi or high end simply based on their asking price..
 Assuming entry level starts at say $500.00 per component,where does that end & mid-fi start,$2500.00 per component,$3500.00,$4500.00,$5000.00?
 How far does that pricing structure go until you consider a component to be "high end"?
What are YOUR PERSONAL thoughts on this subject?

freediver

Showing 1 response by phusis

@whart wrote:

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. 

That’s just it: speaker systems that purported to do something beyond the norm. This was about large, subs- and tweeter augmented true full-range (often panel) speaker systems when outboard active configuration was actually thought of as an approach to expand on the passive speaker potential, and not as a subject inviting endless debate over passive vs. active. I don’t see how this has been carried over into the present day mentality and realm of "high-end" speakers in any way effective, except for a select range of over-luxuriated statement systems that tend to come off as oddities at ludicrous, out-of-reach price levels. Now high-end has its share of being a faux, pretentious endeavor more about pricing, identity, status and entitlement than an open-minded exploration in pursuit of raw performance; a regurgitation of what’s basically the same low efficiency concept in different clothing, "cultivated" ad nauseum (at progressively higher prices) and from a physical package that’s always less than it could be. 

Price can be a factor, yes, but as I like to quip: until it isn’t. What I mean by that is that at some point one needs realize how a given package and design approach can only be improved so much with expenditure alone. Maybe it’s time to change the perspective and take a different approach: what’re the true bottlenecks of this system, and how can I lessen their influence in a broader, more explorative sense? True high-end mentality, from my chair, is taking that into consideration and seeing the bigger picture, the forest the trees, and then further improve from that, or these coming outsets. Price alone has become too much of factor as a validation means, indeed speaking of progressive pricing as that which defines "high-end" carries nothing of importance to actually elucidate what it’s about.