The difference between mainstream HIFI, budget seperates, midrange and high end?

That's not what I'm saying.
But yes, "the ear is the final arbiter". How can it be otherwise.
 
If you say so. But if a reviewer says that the upgraded Technics can't handle very low bass, then isn't life too short to bother with it?
 
That's great. I don't have a problem with them either.
 
What do you call cheap separates?

Ive just bought pair of diamond 9.1's (£90 from t-audio) and a cambridge audio a5 (£50 2yo second hand of ebay) which im running from a PC with a midspec onboard soundcard.

If i add a preowned marantz cd player (£20) and audiosolitions dab (£50) for smidge over £200 ive got what i would call a fairly budget compaired to what we have at home but i would say its a little better than "very bright, they give of a lot of detail and give the impression they are brilliant and compared to cheap HIFI they are"

Open to thoughts?

Daniel
 
cooky1257 said:
Back to the OT;

Mainstream hifi= for background and wallpaper listening, does the job and makes a lot of sense for not much money.

Budget Separates= for people who take listening/enjoying music seriously, makes sense for those who wish they had more money.

Midrange= were the true enthusiast resides, enjoying the benefit of good reproduction with an eye to using common sense when spending their money.

Hi-end= haunted by the pretentious and gullible, poisoned by foo, too often the domain of people with more money than sense.
Click to expand...


Probably generally about right but I think there is way too much talk of "foo" what ever that may mean.

Every other sentence seems to turn towards it which I think is a shame.

If you have the dosh I think there is nothing wrong with spending a bit extra if it increases your listening enjoyment. I think there is nothing wrong with the thing being a hobby.
 
Hype, snobbery and price.

Oh, and a teensy, weeny increase in performance, but usually just a difference in presentation, blown out of all proportion and relevance to sane music lovers, by obsessive compulsive audiophiles.

End of
 
cooky1257 said:
Back to the OT;

Mainstream hifi= for background and wallpaper listening, does the job and makes a lot of sense for not much money.

Budget Separates= for people who take listening/enjoying music seriously, makes sense for those who wish they had more money.

Midrange= were the true enthusiast resides, enjoying the benefit of good reproduction with an eye to using common sense when spending their money.

Hi-end= haunted by the pretentious and gullible, poisoned by foo, too often the domain of people with more money than sense.
Click to expand...

I've slowly moved from midrange to high end and haven't more money than sense. Agreed that I'm well into the law of diminishing returns but I'm enjoying my music way more than before.
 
I THINK? or do i ever, the joy of hi-fidelity is not to be classed as either end as category but very much a very personal love and satisfaction of their mechanicals both looks and the sound that the indevidual likes, i agree to a point that some products are somehow well high priced so are cars and etc, but what you want and what you are happy with has no price except the joy it gives you regardless of cost, HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL,
nando.
 
All a matter of opinion....

Having just got back into Hifi in a major way after years in the MP3 doldrums I read this post with interest. Actually I think Amazingtrade is on to something. I went mad on ebay and started buying cheapo stuff..Quad 405/34/Mission PCM7000 and a pair of £50 Castle Durhams. Outcome...actually surprisingly good and really made me realise what I was missing with the bog standard iPod. Then I moved up, bought a Yaqin MS-300b Valve amp and a pair of Magneplanar SMGas and fell upon serious quality playback. Finally after another week I finally bought an amazing Krell KSA100 mkII, Audio Research SP7, Marantz CD10, Elite Townshend and ATC SCM40s (all second hand apart from the ATCs) and you know what, all you get for your money is a bigger soundstage, more depth and greater transparency.....so I concluded that the law of diminishing returns applies. We could all be easily satisfied by the £500 seperates but equally we all get seduced by the upgrade bug that gives you small but noticeable improvements for ever increasing amounts of hard earned cash. Me, personally I listen to the expensive stuff all day long....it sounds fantastic and is amazing value for money. I hear things I never noticed on my music before and really enjoy the music...you know, in that makes you chuckle hair on the back of your neck kind of way. Secondhand is the way forward.....but I still occasionally drag out the Quad and Castles for a bit fo fun..
 
Quote, ' all you get for your money is a bigger soundstage, more depth and greater transparency' that doesn't sound too bad!
Happy new Year everyone.
Keith.
 
Johns Naim said:
Hype, snobbery and price.

Oh, and a teensy, weeny increase in performance, but usually just a difference in presentation, blown out of all proportion and relevance to sane music lovers, by obsessive compulsive audiophiles.

End of
Click to expand...

Get off the cross John.

You'd be alot more convincing if you weren't fretting over getting rid of a pair of perfectly good hifi speakers for another pair. Hell, your current hifi probably costs more than 60 percent of the world's homes.

Happy New Year;-)

dave
 
Of course dave, but people perceive things for all sorts of reasons.
 
That's why it is so important to get it right, and unfortunately some of the antics and misinformation that goes hand-in-in hand with the high end make this process difficult and sometimes impossible.

The generally used processes for assessing audio performance are often slapdash and far from conducive to allowing our powers of perception to function correctly.
 
As I've said before, all of the blind tests, labcoats and textbooks in the world arguing about what can and can't be heard are meaningless when you connect your hifi up in a normal fashion, play some music, compare two devices and the differences are still there.

No matter how much I try, I am unable to convince myself I'm imagining what I hear in exactly the same way, each and every time, year after year, sighted or blind.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
blackdog said:
As I've said before, all of the blind tests, labcoats and textbooks in the world arguing about what can and can't be heard are meaningless when you connect your hifi up in a normal fashion, play some music, compare two devices and the differences are still there.

No matter how much I try, I am unable to convince myself I'm imagining what I hear in exactly the same way, each and every time, year after year, sighted or blind.
Click to expand...

Dave, unfortunately when you gather a few people together in a room and remove all clues other than hearing, well the result is usually most interesting and often completely at odds with a sighted test.

Now you might be different and posses the unique ability to filter out all other influences but that does rather set you aside from most other humans :)
Trouble is we all think we are different to the norm and we couldn't possibly be influenced by many of these things - it is only natural.

This is old ground though and we've been over this many times.
 
I've been in that room many times over the years with sales reps in shops and with few exceptions I've still heard the differences when there. The few times I couldn't identify them we traced the problem to the test setup and they returned without fail when the fault was corrected or the gear was returned to its conventional wiring.

I agree, no need to go over the same old ground. Tonight is Coltrane's here at dave's place..enjoy the rest of weekend and have a cold one for me;-)

best,

dave
 

Latest posts

Back
Top