darkblue94
The Devil made me do it.
I guess it would depend on who you talked to and when you talked to them.
Mid Fi to Hi Fi threshold
- Thread starter M1chael
- Start date
So tell us about this gazillion dollar system you had installed in your home?
Never mind your just talking about something you've never had, owned, or listen to. carry on like most of this site talking about things they never had.
it's the size...O it is true size matters.
Best-
Boozehound
Best-
Boozehound
Pauln
Well-Known Member
The Mid-Fi to Hi-Hi threshold as a concept implies and entails that the threshold is some magnitude or range of some measurable parameter standing in as a proxy for the illusive "sound quality". The first thing must be to identify the most likely candidates for this proxy parameter... it is also clear that the object in question must be the whole system, since it is possible to deliberately assemble a system which will sound awful despite the "Hi-Finess" of any one part.
Likely candidates might be:
- cost (correlation is positive but too small, too many exceptions to establish a sensible dollar threshold)
- design principles (correlation is positive but too many overlaps to strictly rank them)
- manufacturer(s) (correlation is generally positive but too many overlaps to strictly rank them)
- specifications (correlation is generally positive but the popular specs exclude the more important ones)
- gross mass (correlation is positive, especially at the extreme)
I don't like admitting it, but the best measure is looking like the gross mass of the whole system. On reflection, this actually might make sense. Cost increases with more massive parts, design principles often call for massive parts, the manufacturers' best and highest specified offerings are typically the biggest, etc.
I have seen pictures of turntables that weigh more than 300 lbs, much of that contributed by just the platter, and amps that easily weigh more than 300 lbs, and speakers for which just the delivery crates would exceed 300 lbs... perhaps at least approaching the extreme end the raw mass becomes the dominant arbiter of it all. If so, how far down does the gross mass continue to be the dominant parameter?
For reference, my entire system weighs about 300 lbs.
Likely candidates might be:
- cost (correlation is positive but too small, too many exceptions to establish a sensible dollar threshold)
- design principles (correlation is positive but too many overlaps to strictly rank them)
- manufacturer(s) (correlation is generally positive but too many overlaps to strictly rank them)
- specifications (correlation is generally positive but the popular specs exclude the more important ones)
- gross mass (correlation is positive, especially at the extreme)
I don't like admitting it, but the best measure is looking like the gross mass of the whole system. On reflection, this actually might make sense. Cost increases with more massive parts, design principles often call for massive parts, the manufacturers' best and highest specified offerings are typically the biggest, etc.
I have seen pictures of turntables that weigh more than 300 lbs, much of that contributed by just the platter, and amps that easily weigh more than 300 lbs, and speakers for which just the delivery crates would exceed 300 lbs... perhaps at least approaching the extreme end the raw mass becomes the dominant arbiter of it all. If so, how far down does the gross mass continue to be the dominant parameter?
For reference, my entire system weighs about 300 lbs.
lizard84
Abider
So tell us about this gazillion dollar system you had installed in your home?
Never mind your just talking about something you've never had, owned, or listen to. carry on like most of this site talking about things they never had.
Compressed music sounds like compressed music, I'm fairly certain that the poster you quoted has heard music with both good dynamic range as well as compressed content, as we all have. Your tone is inappropriate, as far as carrying on like most on this site, you can include yourself because I've witnessed it first hand and when called out you conveniently disappeared. I don't know what your deal is but someone needs take a good look in the mirror because the pot just called the kettle black.
Good post Pauln and some very valid points, in our audio world weight does push up as quality of parts do to have great sound. This is still true over many many year and not just in the current time trying to make everything smaller and lighter.
For reference, The three turntables I have set on top of my system are over 200 lb with their related components, arms and staging, Power amps alone in my system weigh 429lb
So is not ALL music compress in order to record and put it on a medium?
And as far as not responding back to you in another thread, it wasn't worth it, clearly it was just to be argumentative, and we see your trolling and trying to bring it here.
lizard84
Abider
Lesterbest
Super Member
Not all music is compressed to the degree pop & rock is. Reason being, they feel forced to compete against the cut played before & after their's on FM.
I couldn't disagree more. Improper matching does NOT reduce the inherent linearity of a hand built amplifier using the highest quality parts and sensible topography.
Last edited:
sqlsavior
Lunatic Member
Despite its potential for rudeness, "mid-fi" is better used as a perjorative appellation, than as a classification bucket. Humans attempt to understand their world by grouping similar things together and by distinguishing between small differences. These strategies are extremely useful ones in general, but become impediments to understanding when carried to extremes.
Science eventually abandoned the notion that there were over 60 species of brown bears, and settled on one species instead.
Weight might possibly be the best proxy measure of the fidelity of a component, but it is still a crappy substitute for listening.
Science eventually abandoned the notion that there were over 60 species of brown bears, and settled on one species instead.
Weight might possibly be the best proxy measure of the fidelity of a component, but it is still a crappy substitute for listening.
Condorsat
Audio Enthusiast
IMHO ... To me the term Mid Fi only has meaning on audio blogs. In my experience ... back in the day ... 2 Speakers, Receiver, TT, Tape Deck, CD ... yada yada ... it was a HIgh Fi. I don't recall anybody even using the term Mid Fi.
Fast forward to today ... nobody I know (personally, Joe Public) even has a traditional 2 channel stereo rig prominently displayed in their front room ... so it's really a moot point.
I've never had a problem calling my audio rig ... Mid Fi (on blogs)... but on the "street" ... I've always called it a High Fi ... and don't even use the term Mid Fi in public.
Fast forward to today ... nobody I know (personally, Joe Public) even has a traditional 2 channel stereo rig prominently displayed in their front room ... so it's really a moot point.
I've never had a problem calling my audio rig ... Mid Fi (on blogs)... but on the "street" ... I've always called it a High Fi ... and don't even use the term Mid Fi in public.
lizard84
Abider
True, Mid-Fi is an audio forum term, usually expressed at a keyboard with pinky finger extended and nose slightly elevated.
Actually it is a descriptive term that can also apply to printed images or visual content. The 720x480 DVD medium offers middle fidelity visual quality from my perspective.
I use both mid-fi and hi-fi systems in my home. Quite frankly, I don't understand the emotional response such elicits from some folks. Go figure.
edwyun
Super Member
To me, hi-fi is when the listening is so enjoyable (irrespective of price, specs, equipment, manufacturer names, etc) that I want to spend all of my valuable free time listening or continuing to listen far more than other things, like commenting on a stimularing but theoretical thread.
[pass the remote]
[pass the remote]
lizard84
Abider
True, I really look forward to my alone time which can involve many hours of listening to music, the system just disappears.
The JC-1's were designed by John Curl and have a pedigree that qualifies as hi fi in my opinion.
John Curl has been designing high-end gear since the early 1970s, including the classic Mark Levinson JC-2 and Dennesen JC-80 preamplifiers, the much-revered Vendetta phono preamplifier, and lots of electronic gear for the Grateful Dead. Curl has designed Parasound products since 1989, most to specific price points and aimed at the very competitive middle of the high-end market.
Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/774/index.html#U1kedHC5DBZGOPwt.99
I have his JC-3+ phono stage and it is outstanding.
hifitommy
Super Member
when the sound is refined and can be integrated into an already high end system without fear of sticking out like a sore thumb. the NAD 3020/1020/7020 was such a beast.
the new ELAC speakers by andrew jones is another good choice and even his pioneer BS22 series can be considered.. i had a B&K pre/pro that was extremely transparent. the magneplanars right from the bottom of their line (MMGs) fit here also. all a component has to do is keep up with the crowd. all of the products mentioned by me were in the very affodable range except perhaps the B&K have low list prices and that was purchased usell
the new ELAC speakers by andrew jones is another good choice and even his pioneer BS22 series can be considered.. i had a B&K pre/pro that was extremely transparent. the magneplanars right from the bottom of their line (MMGs) fit here also. all a component has to do is keep up with the crowd. all of the products mentioned by me were in the very affodable range except perhaps the B&K have low list prices and that was purchased usell
2channel*
Well-Known Member
It really is all relative...to the best one has heard. I think my ears get educated, but it takes time. It doesn't happen in a showroom. In 1992 my 55W Nakamichi was considered hi-fi and I was sure it was. In 2016 I bought a used 100w Rotel and compared them side by side. The Rotel was more revealing and more enjoyable by a small margin. Over time the differences were more apparent. Then I upgraded my speakers and the difference is like night and day. I'll probably be happy with my system for a while. Then my ears, or my ability to hear ALL the music, will be ready for a graduate level course. For me, the Rotel is hi-fi right now. I am sure there are many who disagree. Some may become my instructors.
LOL