• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Do I have a “MidFi” system or not?

34dean

34dean

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
Have gotten back into audio gear again over the past 6 months or so and put together the following system. Is this considered “MidFi” or no?

AptHolman Preamp
Adcom GFS-545II Power Amp
Onkyo C-7030 CD player
Musical Fidelity V90-DAC
Pioneer PL-510S Turntable w/ AT155LC cartridge
JBL Studio 530 speakers
Polk Audio PSW505 Subwoofer

Wondering where the line is between Lo/MidHi Fi?
 
Register to hide this ad
Well you have a nice collection of gear that would be sold in hi-fi stores back then even the lowest being hi-fi gear, you know HK 330, Bose 301 speakers and some lowly turntable. But if one puts everything except the high end into the mid-fi group, leaving lo-fi for the department store all in ones, sure you have a nice stack of mid-fi. Just depends on what you want to use as your criteria for the Lo-mid-hi categories, leaving high end for the expensive gear.

If you like it and we haven't heard yet about the table, then its all good and it does not matter what others call it. It is your rig, call it what you want.
 
There isn't a line, there's a perception and to some, a dollar value.

It's a world of diminishing returns too, so if you enjoy what you have then whether you decide to chase that dragon is up to you really.

Folks here on AK are pretty much unbiased when it comes to conversations about whether someone's gear is low mid hi or what ever - it's all audio so it's all good :)
 
'HiFi' as a term means less than it once did. There is a lot of good gear out there, and at low prices too. There are entire segments of the hobby that focus on HiFi deals, including what is sometimes called ChiFi.

Once upon a time the consumer was forced into buying 'HiFi' at particular brick and mortar stores. Those days are gone. I agree with previous posters who say acquire what sounds great to you and meets your overall needs. AK is a great place in part because there are few around here who sneer about others' equipment.
 
As confusing as it seems, the distinction isn't between lo-fi, mid-fi and hi-fi. The distinction is (was?) between mid-fi and high end.

All of the OPs stuff is hi-fi by any criteria I'm aware of.
None of it is high end by any criteria that I'm aware of.

I wouldn't concern myself too much with these arbitrary classifications. If you are happy with it, just listen to it.
 
P.S. - In the early '80s, a then-nascent high-end magazine called the Apt-Holman the best preamp in the world, according to its inclusion in their reference system, a methodology which pretty much ignores and dismisses the idea of "synergy", but has its own merits. Of course, a few months later, there was a new "best in the world" preamp.

Anyway, the Apt-Holman is no slouch, and neither is the Adcom. For many people, separates instead of a receiver is the dividing line between mid-fi and hi-fi. But that shows a lot of prejudice towards receivers and their proud owners. For sure, all-in-ones and "transistor radios" are properly mid-fi and lo-fi in such a scheme. Modern products blur those dividing lines away, of course.

We just went through this in another thread, didn't we? :dunno:
 
Uuuugh I hate this question.

Who cares what someone classifies what you have, as long as YOU like it, that's all that matters period.

It's not a competition.

I'm envious of a lot of the systems people have on AK, but there is no jealously and due to funds I'll probably never have what they do, but I don't discount what I have or think any less of it because it's not the best of the best.

If you're hung up on what others think of your things you're not doing it correctly or you're doing it for all the wrong reasons.

sqlsavior said:
We just went through this in another thread, didn't we? :dunno:
Click to expand...

It feels like it comes up constantly.
 
Imo one should look at it this way.

ALLOT of people will go their whole lives with nothing more than a phone / mp3 player of kind and ear buds / tiny bt speaker. And those folks can be every bit a music lover as you or me. And they could easily know all sorts of music/artist trivia. What gear they listen with is completely irrelevant to their love of music.

Naturally that scenario could swing the other way.

As others have pointed out the whole grading system is kinda silly.

There will always be better or worse gear comparatively speaking and the only judge who can weigh in on that is the person who ears and mind set the parameters.

Yes your stereo is something any music lover should be proud of imo.
 
Not a fan of "labels" like that (mid-fi) but they can serve a meaningful purpose.
And that purpose is usually to give everyone a simplified frame of reference on any given aspect of a topic of discussion.

Now that said,it is entirely possible to get "hi-fi" sound quality from low-fi -or- mid-fi gear.
So if I had to,I might be inclined to say that is a mid-fi system that should easily be capable of hi-fi SQ.
In that instance the term "mid-fi" is soley being used in reference to the approximate value of the gear.
And not the level of sound quality it should be capable of delivering.

JM2¢ ~ FWIW ~ YMMV

Bret P.
 
Personally I tend to pick up gear that has a potential upgrade path without the need to replace the actual unit to gain improvements. This appeals to my skin flint nature - extracting max benefits with minimum outlay :-)

I currently have an Arcam Alpha 5 CD player which has many possible documented upgrades, same with my Mission Cyrus One amp. I guess ive been following this practice ever since I got into over clocking 486 cpu''s back in the day :-)
 
I simply call it a budget stereo system and I have one of these, and then I have a couple that cost several times more and call these my upscale systems.
 
Many an audio rag writer has stated the AR XA was their first taste of the high end, going by that criteria I've had the whole enchilada.
 
I have never cared for the "Mid Fi" description, as it is somewhat vague and meaningless.

I have seen it used by audio snobs to designate anything below their price threshold of what is "Good enough"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom