• 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

Mid Fi to Hi Fi threshold

There is no such thing as "mid-fi". The whole concept, like "Black Friday", is an advertising gimmick designed to get people to spend more. In addition, it is also an enticement for equipment manufacturers to raise prices as now you are getting "hi-fi" and not the pedestrian "mid-fi". :oops: YET, like the unique Coke bottle design and the Budweiser frogs... it worked. In fact, it is more like "self-checkout lines" at Walmart and elsewhere. YOU are paying for the honor to save the company money as they don't have to hire cashiers anymore. As a result of allowing you to do this (as well as labor cost savings) PRICES WENT UP 10-20%. :)
 
jrtrent said:
Mid-fi is a subset of hi-fi, but cod is not a subset of halibut. However, both cod and halibut can be used for delicious fish and chips.
Click to expand...
I disagree...MidFi is not a subset of HiFi...theoretically...they exist on a spectrum or continuum...at least in the context of "quality", which is at the core of our exchange. ..I think...;)
 
DeadRock said:
giphy.gif
I disagree...MidFi is not a subset of HiFi...theoretically...they exist on a spectrum or continuum...at least in the context of "quality", which is at the core of our exchange. ..I think...;)
Click to expand...
We’ve re-litigated this ad nauseam: it’s an epithet against affordable gear, no more, no less.
 
I'm going to stick my neck out and get trampled for it by audiophile purists here and say two things define hi fi in my opinion.

FACTOR 1: Audio Equipment Design and Build Quality including speakers, wire etc.
FACTOR 2: Faithful Reproduction of All Valid Sound signals generated by a given source without compromises like artifact addition, artifact subtraction or artifact substitution.

Price might factor into my Hi Fi definition above but price alone does not define outcome. Clean sound faithfully reproduced as experienced by a discerning listener defines the essence of what constitutes Hi Fi. In truth the determination of fidelity is strictly a subjective experience unique to the brain, senses and frames of reference of the listener. An audiophile with a broader sensory experience and varied \ refined audio palate will likely evaluate sound using a more vast and varied database of stored audio sensory experiences as reference markers. Someone with fewer audiophile quality sensory experiences will draw from a smaller pool of possible points of evaluation resulting in different ideas on what qualifies to them as a "HI FI" experience.

Based on all the possible variables 100 audiophiles could be in a room and what qualifies as HI FI could be different for each. If one employed a bell shaped curve defining what audiophiles define as Hi Fi, Mid Fi and Low Fi it would be much easier to determine what qualifies as Low Fi and Mid Fi because that is a simple artifact hunt. Artifacts that pollute the sound define a lesser quality experience. Hi Fi is defined by the production of different soundscapes each without notable polluting artifacts. In Hi Fi audiophiles often make cases on what is an polluting artifact and what is a musical feature.

Because of all these variables it is functionally impossible to rate HI FI equipment into strict categlories but a bell shaped curve of product specific HI FI rankings can be produced. There will always be variability in what constitutes Hi Fi to some degree because of the variability of our individual brains, senses and experiences. That's my Werewolf's 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Why is this an issue? The terms have nothing to do with sound quality. These terms are simply short versions of what the units cost.

High-priced gear vs. Mid-priced gear are both hi-fi products. The point of the price change is in the wallet of the observer.

MID-priced hi-FI is shortened to Mid-Fi
HIGH-priced hi-FI is shortened to Hi-Fi

And folks get upset if for some reason spending money raising a family was not poured into the expensive audio gear available and popular, high volume audio gear was purchased to enjoy Hi-Fi. It is time to get over it as the monikers will not die.

Audio Research has 6 new products coming out this summer that are mid-fi as they are priced at $10,000 +/- $5000 each. Mid-fi because their more expensive gear is significantly more expensive and for the level of gear ARC makes these are very consumer friendly no matter what all the old folks on ak who don’t understand prices today feel about these price ranges.
 
Last edited:
Blue Shadow said:
Why is this an issue? The terms have nothing to do with sound quality. These terms are simply short versions of what the units cost.

High-priced gear vs. Mid-priced gear are both hi-fi products. The point of the price change is in the wallet of the observer.

Audio Research has 6 new products coming out this summer that are mid-fi as they are priced at $10,000 +/- $5000 each. Mid-fi because their more expensive gear is significantly more expensive and for the level of gear ARC makes these are very consumer friendly no matter what all the old folks on ak who don’t understand prices today feel about these price ranges.
Click to expand...
It probably was and is used that way internally at all of the top audio component companies. And some geniuses eventually morphed it into the subjective, marketing derived terms that they are now. I'm pretty sure that the mutated terms originated in the audio press.
 
DeadRock said:
I disagree...MidFi is not a subset of HiFi...theoretically...they exist on a spectrum or continuum...at least in the context of "quality", which is at the core of our exchange. ..I think...;)
Click to expand...
It depends on how you define the terms, and when I got started in the hobby in the mid-'70's, mid-fi was hi-fi, it just wasn't high end. Below is a copy-and-paste from my earlier response on page 3 of this thread:

My use of terms is based on my age and how I heard them used when I entered the hobby a little over 40 [now about 50] years ago. Mid-fi referred to mass market brands like Pioneer, Kenwood, Akai, EPI, Technics, Toshiba, Philips, BIC, Advent, and so on. This was most definitely hi-fi gear because it met the DIN 45 500 standards for gear to be called hi-fi. The standards were generally mentioned in sales brochures and some companies put "hi-fi" on their gear to proudly display that it met the standard. Mid-fi was contrasted with "high end," which was also hi-fi, but might have even higher levels of performance, cost quite a bit, and might stress "audiophile" performance criteria like detail, air, soundstage, and transparency. Back then you could assemble a hi-fi system out of mid-fi components for about $600; a high end system might start at 10 times that amount in order for most hobbyists to agree that it was actually a high end system.
 
jrtrent said:
It depends on how you define the terms, and when I got started in the hobby in the mid-'70's, mid-fi was hi-fi, it just wasn't high end. Below is a copy-and-paste from my earlier response on page 3 of this thread:

My use of terms is based on my age and how I heard them used when I entered the hobby a little over 40 [now about 50] years ago. Mid-fi referred to mass market brands like Pioneer, Kenwood, Akai, EPI, Technics, Toshiba, Philips, BIC, Advent, and so on. This was most definitely hi-fi gear because it met the DIN 45 500 standards for gear to be called hi-fi. The standards were generally mentioned in sales brochures and some companies put "hi-fi" on their gear to proudly display that it met the standard. Mid-fi was contrasted with "high end," which was also hi-fi, but might have even higher levels of performance, cost quite a bit, and might stress "audiophile" performance criteria like detail, air, soundstage, and transparency. Back then you could assemble a hi-fi system out of mid-fi components for about $600; a high end system might start at 10 times that amount in order for most hobbyists to agree that it was actually a high end system.
Click to expand...
I started in this hobby in 1975. I’m trying to remember when, exactly, I first heard of the term/distinction “high end.”
 
Bushikan said:
I started in this hobby in 1975. I’m trying to remember when, exactly, I first heard of the term/distinction “high end.”
Click to expand...
Thats around the same time I had my first real system. My pops was and still is deep into the hobby. I seem to remember the term being floated around his audio club get togethers when I was a wee lab in the early 70's. Could be wrong, it was a long time ago.
 
GChief said:
Thats around the same time I had my first real system. My pops was and still is deep into the hobby. I seem to remember the term being floated around his audio club get togethers when I was a wee lab in the early 70's. Could be wrong, it was a long time ago.
Click to expand...
The stereo “salons” I frequented didn’t offer “high-end” components. (I auditioned McIntosh, but I bought Marantz, PL, Technics, ADC, Bose 901s.) I’m guessing the people who made the distinction between hi-fi and hi-end wouldn’t probably have seen McIntosh as making the cut(?). But I don’t know.

A wealthy snob-friend of mine, in 1983, laughed and rolled his eyes at my Marantz separates/Bose system—as well as all things McIntosh. Although he didn’t even own a hi-fi (and he didn’t use the term “high end”), he said he would only buy Mark Levinson, Conrad Johnson, and Audio Research.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom