Redefining Hi-End vs. Hi-Fi

[b_panther_g]

Does anyone else think we need a clear distinction between Hi-End components vs. Hi-Fi components. Wondering what I mean? Let me explain…

The terms Hi-End and Hi-Fi seem to be used interchangeably. I don’t think they should. After all, with a good $1000 DIY speaker kit, you could make speakers that are just as accurate (if not more accurate) than $2000 to $3000 commercial speakers. Please note…I said accurate NOT better. Why does that matter?

Hi-Fi or Hi-Fidelity stands for accuracy. The signal that goes in needs to be the signal that comes out. The difference(s) between the input and output signals can be measured. The closer the 2 match, the more fidelity or the more Hi-Fi there is. Alright, but I want my system to sound better. Don't you?

Yes, but there is no scientific definition for “better sound”. Better sound is as individual as you are. I like more bass than my girlfriend. Your wife may like a more recessed sound than you or vise-versa. The only way to tell is to listen for yourself and determine what you like. But what about Hi-End?

Hi-End is more subjective than Hi-Fi. It could be a combination of price and looks. If a speaker has an exotic wood furniture grade finish, for example, it could be considered Hi-End. The same goes for exotic materials or automotive grade paint jobs. Ok, but what do the distinctions get us?

A greater understanding of the component. For example, a mass market component can now be considered Hi-Fi but not Hi-End. You’d know that the component is sonically accurate but doesn’t have that “Hi-End look”. Now components can also be considered Hi-End but not Hi-Fi. So you’d know that the component looks really good and may fit into your décor perfectly, but there are more accurate components out there. You'll have to decide if you can live with the sonic compromises. We’d just have to…

Come up with rating systems for Hi-Fi and Hi-End.

So what do you guys think? Would you like to see components rated this way? Would it cause confusion or give you a better idea about what you’re buying?

FWIW, I'd like it if components were rated this way.

Later,
B

 

[toquemon]

Well, i think all the high-end equipment that i have seen is extremely expensive (Krell, Parasound, Margules Audio), the salesmen are really snobby (that "you can't buy this" kind of looking) and the common thing among those is the excelent bass definition.
The sound is pretty much the same to me like higher end receivers with a big subwoofer of other brands (Yamaha, Denon) and good speakers (specially a good pair of speakers). High-end doesn't worth the money. I don't know, if you want BIG SOUND maybe it's better to buy 5 pro amps (like QSC or Crown) and you will spend 10 times less.

 

[b_panther_g]

Toquemon, you have some good points.

I agree with you that the price/performance difference between the Hi-End (Big $$$ and stylish) gear usually isn’t worth the price. In the purposed rating system they would be considered Hi-End and maybe Hi-Fi, depending on the measured performance.

But like you mentioned, some receivers can sound just as good. If by good you mean accurate, I agree with you. IMO some high quality receivers with external pro amps can compete with most of the Hi-End, mega $, components I’ve heard. They also cost a lot less. These components would be considered Hi-Fi but not Hi-End because they don’t have that “Hi-End look”.

That way anyone who likes to save money, or isn’t interested in expensive looking components, but still wants the best sound can have an easier time looking for the gear they like.

Plus I don’t like to spend my hard earned money in any store that makes me put up with their attitude. Customer care is about the seller making their customer feel comfortable. It’s not about the customer stroking the seller’s ego. But that’s another topic.

Later,
B

 

[mtrycrafts]

Does anyone else think we need a clear distinction between Hi-End components vs. Hi-Fi components. Wondering what I mean? Let me explain…

The terms Hi-End and Hi-Fi seem to be used interchangeably. I don’t think they should. After all, with a good $1000 DIY speaker kit, you could make speakers that are just as accurate (if not more accurate) than $2000 to $3000 commercial speakers. Please note…I said accurate NOT better. Why does that matter?

Hi-Fi or Hi-Fidelity stands for accuracy. The signal that goes in needs to be the signal that comes out. The difference(s) between the input and output signals can be measured. The closer the 2 match, the more fidelity or the more Hi-Fi there is. Alright, but I want my system to sound better. Don't you?

Yes, but there is no scientific definition for “better sound”. Better sound is as individual as you are. I like more bass than my girlfriend. Your wife may like a more recessed sound than you or vise-versa. The only way to tell is to listen for yourself and determine what you like. But what about Hi-End?

Hi-End is more subjective than Hi-Fi. It could be a combination of price and looks. If a speaker has an exotic wood furniture grade finish, for example, it could be considered Hi-End. The same goes for exotic materials or automotive grade paint jobs. Ok, but what do the distinctions get us?

A greater understanding of the component. For example, a mass market component can now be considered Hi-Fi but not Hi-End. You’d know that the component is sonically accurate but doesn’t have that “Hi-End look”. Now components can also be considered Hi-End but not Hi-Fi. So you’d know that the component looks really good and may fit into your décor perfectly, but there are more accurate components out there. You'll have to decide if you can live with the sonic compromises. We’d just have to…

Come up with rating systems for Hi-Fi and Hi-End.

So what do you guys think? Would you like to see components rated this way? Would it cause confusion or give you a better idea about what you’re buying?

FWIW, I'd like it if components were rated this way.

Later,
B

Yep, unfortunately many audiophiles equate hi end with hi fidelity

Accuracy is what one should be striving for. After all, research indicates this. An example of speaker research from the famous NRC in Canada:

http://miragespeakers.com/nrc_story.shtml

Based on the results of the NRC’s research, Mirage engineers determined that there were three characteristics common to the speakers that consistently achieved high scores in the listening trials. It was determined that listeners preferred speakers that could produce the whole range of frequencies (Wide Bandwidth), equally efficiently (Flat Response), both on and off axis (Wide Dispersion), clearly (No Distortion).



While the link is to a specific speaker company you may not agree with(I have no bias to them one way or the other;They have this on line ), they have a history at NRC and that is what is interesting reading, not their speaker line.

 

[Mudcat]

Tread Lightly People

Mr. b_panther_* has a habit of starting threads that turn into large scale food fights.

I agree with toquemon, which is why I have a boat load of Alesis pro amps driving everything. It's definitely fi, it's not high end, but is it hi-fi?

Hey Mtrycrafts, when you quote someone, you do not need to copy their entire recitation of war and peace. Just delete the bits you do not want. It would be better if you can do this and make what they wrote sound totally different. If you do it correctly you can make someone say they absolutely love Barry Manilo or Lionel Ritchie.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

A Brief History of High Fidelity and the "High End" (According to Rip):

"High Fidelity", aka High-Fi or Hi-Fi, is a term that goes way back to the '50s at least. It arose after WWII when it became technically possible to reproduce (nearly) the full audio spectrum, in both recording and playback, with relatively low distortion. "High-Fi" consumer audio systems were so designated to distinguish them from the run-of-the-mill consumer audio which was definately low-fi. Until about the late 60s true hi-fi at the consumer level was largely the province of hobbyists and the affluent, who eventually became known as "audiophiles". Nearly all true high fidelity was "high end". Of course, "high fidelity" and its variants also quickly became a marketing buzzword applied to many mass-market systems like those big all-in-one console jobs you may dimly remember your parents or grandparents owning that were anything but hi-fi!

Once true high-fidelity audio became available to the masses, the "high end" subgroup arose. Alas, it is here that one finds a lot of the beliefs that cause so much contention. If "high end" merely meant the cutting edge, no-compromise, budget-be-damned pursuit of the last iota of accuracy (with the added touches of style and such that are expected in luxury goods for the wealthy) the arguments we are all too familiar with would not exist. But of course marketing, snobbery, and general human folly made it otherwise; thus, many high-enders today explicitly eschew accuracy and embrace ill-informed and irrational beliefs about electronics and sound. And spend buckets of money in the pursuit of chimeras like "musicality" and "synergy".

And that, boys and girls, is why we have flame wars about tubes and cables on audio forums!

 

[Rob Babcock]

Mr. b_panther_* has a habit of starting threads that turn into large scale food fights.

Don't tell Mtrycrafts- the thinks that's his job!

 

[mtrycrafts]

Hey Mtrycrafts, when you quote someone, you do not need to copy their entire recitation of war and peace. Just delete the bits you do not want. It would be better if you can do this and make what they wrote sound totally different. If you do it correctly you can make someone say they absolutely love Barry Manilo or Lionel Ritchie.

Thanks for the hint

I need to practice and see what happens

 

[mtrycrafts]

Don't tell Mtrycrafts- the thinks that's his job!

I like a team approach, spread the food around a bit, less gets on me

 

[b_panther_g]

OK. It looks like we agree; there really is a difference between Hi-Fi and Hi-End.

by Rip Van Woofer:
“Once true high-fidelity audio became available to the masses, the "high end" subgroup arose…But of course marketing, snobbery, and general human folly made it otherwise; thus, many high-enders today explicitly eschew accuracy and embrace ill-informed and irrational beliefs about electronics and sound. And spend buckets of money in the pursuit of chimeras like "musicality” and "synergy"…”

Hmmm. It sounds like all we need to do is erase years of false marketing that has been pushed onto the public by multi-million dollar companies trying to make a name for themselves (regardless of how much or little fidelity their products actually represent). That sounds a little challenging to me.

I guess all we (the ones who recognize there is a difference between Hi-Fi and Hi-End) can do is tell each other which products are good (sonically accurate) and which ones to avoid.

I guess that puts us...where we are now. LOL.
Later,
B



I took a long journey and ended up where I began.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Hmmm. It sounds like all we need to do is erase years of false marketing that has been pushed onto the public by multi-million dollar companies trying to make a name for themselves (regardless of how much or little fidelity their products actually represent). That sounds a little challenging to me.

Little challenging? Impossible. You are also fighting human psychology

Try to convert the alternative medicine folks

I guess all we (the ones who recognize there is a difference between Hi-Fi and Hi-End) can do is tell each other which products are good (sonically accurate) and which ones to avoid.

I guess that puts us...where we are now. LOL.
Later,
B


Exactely
That is all we can do.

 

[djoxygen]

At this point "Hi-Fi" is pretty meaningless since hardly any piece of audio gear besides maybe a Bose cube or a clock radio would qualify as lo-fi anyway. And since at the start of the thread "High-End" was "defined" as being subjective, there's no way to specify what criteria "High-End" gear would have to meet in order to qualify.

My personal goal in audio and video is accuracy, but accurate can be had for a relatively reasonable price, so it may not qualify as "High-End".

 

[cornelius]

Accurate cannot be had for a reasonable price. But I guess that depends on what you think a reasonable price is.

 

[Rob Babcock]

In my experience you can get accurate or inaccurate gear at almost every price level, save the lowest. While there may be a vague correlation between price & performance, one is a very poor predictor of the other. There's no shortage of expensive yet dreadful sounding gear.

 

[djoxygen]

Accurate cannot be had for a reasonable price. But I guess that depends on what you think a reasonable price is.

Key word was "relatively".

 

[mtrycrafts]

There's no shortage of expensive yet dreadful sounding gear.

Or, expensive and woefully inaccurate even though some may think that it sounds wonderful

 

[av_phile]

Or, expensive and woefully inaccurate even though some may think that it sounds wonderful

Knowing how much you love statistics, I hope you wouldn't mind me asking what are the odds that there are more dreadful sounding gears in the pricey category than there are in the el cheapo category?

 

[Yamahaluver]

High Price+audio snob brand=sucker, thats all in this field, snake oil at high cost. This industry is almost like the Viagra industry, taking full advantage of male potency pill for persons suffering from various inadequacies and maladies.

Price has nothing to do with performance, as I have said earlier, it is easy for a big corporation to offer their products at a low price due to their sheer size and volume, manufacturing base, organized R&D etc, for a basement outfit, all he or she has is egotistical fools who are willing to pay and arm and a length for their vanities, I would though definitely give notice when a big manufacturer comes out with a real high cost limited edition item, that would be something of a serious nature for sure.

 

[b_panther_g]

By Yamahaluver
“Price has nothing to do with performance, as I have said earlier, it is easy for a big corporation to offer their products at a low price due to their sheer size and volume, manufacturing base, organized R&D etc, for a basement outfit, all he or she has is egotistical fools who are willing to pay and arm and a length for their vanities, I would though definitely give notice when a big manufacturer comes out with a real high cost limited edition item, that would be something of a serious nature for sure.”


I agree with you. The pricing structure just doesn't make sense.

On one hand, I do think that some Hi-End audio companies represent a true step forward…

For example, I think Meridian has a system with full range active speakers that except a digital input from their pre/pro. They also took the time to develop a way to send DVD-A signals from their transport to their pre/pro. It was proprietary but they did the research and had a product out there before almost everyone else. So if you have the $$$ to afford the whole system, you’d have loss-less surround sound music and movies from the disk to the speakers. It’s not cheap but you are getting something that others can only wish for. So I can imagine why they charge the prices they do.

Also I think the Anthem Statement D1 might be a fair price. I’ve yet to hear one, but, according to the consumers and reviewers, it sounds very good. Also it’s the first component that I know of that up-samples everything, and it supposedly does a very good job. I suspect that it makes for a one-of-a-kind movie experience.

But then there are products like that Halcro amp. Over $12,000 for a 200W monoblock??? All blind tests show that amps, when not under stress, sound the same. Does this Halcro thing come with it’s own generator so that, in the event of a power outage, I can enjoy my music or listen to the news? Is it designed to with stand the harsh environment of space? If so, does it come with space shuttle tickets? I just don’t get it.

And why do Ascend Acoustics and Axiom Audio speakers measure flatter than speakers that retail for over 10 times as much. But the speaker with the inferior measurements are said to "…be considered state-of-the-art equipment…", and “can outperform and outfight almost any current or projected competitor…”. I can only guess that accurate speakers are not its competitors. BTW - I know that Ascend and Axiom have a direct-to-consumer business model, but I can’t imagine the “middle men” adding over 10 times to the cost.

But that’s Hi-End audio for you… I can’t make sense of it. Can anyone?

Later,
B

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

...But that’s Hi-End audio for you… I can’t make sense of it. Can anyone?

Easy. It's called "marketing"!