• 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

Poultrygeist said:
There's a level I call "Higher-Fi" which few experience. It doesn't come from commercial companies where

bean counters rule supreme but from cottage industry artisans who are unencumbered by price points.
Click to expand...

So are you saying 99% of the audio world doesn't know jack, can't hear and basically don't own anything Hi Fi?
 
Blue Shadow said:
Interesting. My Audio Research SP-3A preamp, one of the first high end preamps for this company has both loudness and tone controls, switchable to remove them from the circuit. I'm gonna think you are talking about more modern gear as many ARC preamps of old have tone controls. They even offered similar units with and without so those that don't want tone controls can save a few bucks to put somewhere else in the system.

The dividing line is something that moves depending on who you are discussing it with. Some see high end and the true top units out there. Others might think there is a price point where the change happens. Since this is a topic that has so many different opinions you can see the reason AK does not want to use the term in the name of a forum.

But since the question is hi-fi or mid-fi, most of the crap we like is hi-fi, just not high end gear. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

I traded in an SP3AIII when I bought my SP-9.

I'm in agreement with your last sentence.

As for receivers, with one or two exceptions none of them are high end. The only receiver I've ever seen that is aimed at the high end market is the Magnum Dynalab.
 
Ranking by the amount of money spent, is futile, as it doesn't qualify design integrity and sound quality; only potential build quality. So, I never liked the terms 'low-fi', 'mid-fi', 'high-end', or 'low-end'. I don't really think they can be defined, as each listener has a preconceived set of listening values and expectations. The definitions themselves, will vary with every listener. As such, is a component musically satisfying or not? If so, stop, if not, continue to experiment, until you find a musical synergy that makes you happy. Simple enough. :D
 
I really dislike the term mid-fi and it is used a lot of the time. It seems like a term many audio snobs use to justify expensive equipment or put down those with smaller budgets. I saw on a comment on face book the other day sombody put down a rega P3 with a comment about mid-fi. Guy said something like "its less than a $1000 so its really a mid-fi TT". Bleh, i say

To me the cross over to hi-fi is more in the actions of the hobbyiest, than the quality of equipment. If you care enough to experiment with positioning of speakers, listening position, critical listening, etc you are into hi-fi....regardless or what you spent. We have all seen systems with expensive gear where the owner doesn't really care. Ever seen a set of $5000 speakers not even set up on the same wall !?
 
aschen said:
Ever seen a set of $5000 speakers not even set up on the same wall !?
Click to expand...
I've seen and heard $5000 and higher priced speakers not set up on any wall and the results were spectacular, so what's your point? For the record, they were properly set up in the room they were located in and both speakers and room were optimized for high performance.
 
Last edited:
My point was I consider Hi-fi more an attribute of the enthusiast than the equipment. Sorry if I was unclear.

By same wall, I meant loosely same plane facing the same direction. "Set up poorly" by context
 
aschen said:
My point was I consider Hi-fi more an attribute of the enthusiast than the equipment. Sorry if I was unclear.

By same wall, I meant loosely same plane facing the same direction. "Set up poorly" by context
Click to expand...
I have seen some real kooky set ups before, folks were completely clueless. I remember on guy had some decent speakers playing directly into the back of a couch and another where the guy had speakers about 15 feet apart in the corners behind the listening position facing inward towards each other. One of my high school buddies had a pair of Panasonic Thrusters hung from the ceiling in macrame hangers.o_O
 
M1chael said:
At what point do we leave the realm of mid-fi and enter the realm of hi-fi? And what are the determining factors that make it so? Price? Real discernable differences in sound quality?
Click to expand...

My use of terms is based on my age and how I heard them used when I entered the hobby a little over 40 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.
 
Poultrygeist said:
There's a level I call "Higher-Fi" which few experience. It doesn't come from commercial companies where

bean counters rule supreme but from cottage industry artisans who are unencumbered by price points.

You never see them at audio shows as their advertisement is primarily word of mouth. They do one off's

and custom designs for select customers.
Click to expand...

juno said:
I think all he said was that they do not own "Higher Fi" equipment.
Click to expand...

No that's not what was said....
 
4-2-7 said:
No that's not what was said....
Click to expand...

You're right, that's not what he said but nor did he say what you imply.

He simply said there is some really, really nice stuff around that few people know about because it's basically custom, made to order, maybe even one-off. That does not mean just becauuse you don't know about it you don't know Hi-Fi, or wouldn't know Higher-Fi if you had the opportunity to encounter such gear.

I don't know the names of high end, custom suit makers/tailors but I still know a nice suit when I see one.
 
whoaru99 said:
You're right, that's not what he said but nor did he say what you imply.

He simply said there is some really, really nice stuff around that few people know about because it's basically custom, made to order, maybe even one-off. That does not mean just becauuse you don't know about it you don't know Hi-Fi, or wouldn't know Higher-Fi if you had the opportunity to encounter such gear.

I don't know the names of high end, custom suit makers/tailors but I still know a nice suit when I see one.
Click to expand...
Dennis Had:rolleyes:

But no he's saying, DIY is better or paying someone to build a custom component is better. Now I like some of the cool looking tube gear like Dennis Has, or awesome top end from Acoustic Research, or Krell. However I can't say it's better or you'v never heard Hi Fi unless you'v heard a AKers build.

To tell the truth I didn't know anyone was still using this term Hi Fi.....:rolleyes:

Really on this site there is tons of really nice stuff around that few people know about because out of reach for a given economic class. Hell we cant even start threads about nice gear without all the snake oil claims from members who have never tried the equipment.
 
JoeESP9 said:
I would say tone controls are a reasonable indicator. None of the high end gear I have any experience with has tone controls or a loudness switch. With speakers it's all about the sound.
Click to expand...

This is not exactly correct. Brands like McIntosh or Accuphase include tone controls, and no one can say that they are NOT high end.
 
darkblue94 said:
This line in the sand would exclude the First Watt J2 amplifier from Nelson Pass simply because it's rated at 25 watts per channel pure Class A operation and being a separate amplifier only having the customary one input ( usually occupied by a pre-amp. ) No way in hell does that relegate it to a mid-fi or 'sound system' designation ( not sure that has any real world meaning. ) Basically what I'm suggesting is that your definition doesn't hold water.
Click to expand...
Actually First Watt models are mostly mid-fi - they are very dependent on speakers parameters, and in many cases sound poorly. See example in latest issue of Stereophile.
 
jrtrent said:
My use of terms is based on my age and how I heard them used when I entered the hobby a little over 40 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...

Pioneer, Technics and Kenwood used to make real high-end gear. Pioneer still does (via TAD division).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom