General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Return to General Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

midfi versus hifi

64.134.150.132
Posted on July 8, 2015 at 18:51:02
rockanroller
Audiophile

Posts: 84
Location: ohio
Joined: March 29, 2015
 Hello.
I have been reading quite a lot of opinions and ideas on hifi, then came across a couple of articles on midfi, which made me very curious about it .So i decided to ask the Inmates at the Asylum!
My questions are : what would you call midfi, what brand would fit in that category, what prices range would midfi be at?
And, since I am at it, is the price difference really worth it between midfi and hifi, to the average "ear"?
Looking forward to some opinions and clarifications.
Regards.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 8, 2015 at 19:22:51
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 I can't say there's an exact line that one crosses over to go beyond 'midfi' and much of it is perception. Not counting the mass market consumer electronics brands, my idea of 'midfi' regardless of price, value, or performance includes the following:

My perception of midfi:

- Adcom
- NAD
- Rotel
- Cambridge
- Musical Fidelity
- Arcam
- Vincent
- Creek
- Pro-ject
- Jolida
- Outlaw
- Music Hall
- Peachtree

And several others that I'm forgetting.


 

that's a very good list, posted on July 8, 2015 at 19:46:19
mbnx01
Audiophile

Posts: 7956
Location: Eagle, Idaho
Joined: October 22, 2004
 Hi fi:

Audio Research
Magnepan
Aerial Acoustics
Vandersteen
Rogue
Ayre
Naim
Spendor
Harbeth

'A lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on'. -Mark Twain

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 8, 2015 at 20:03:19
Green Lantern
Audiophile

Posts: 16952
Location: San Diego, Ca
Joined: November 12, 2002
Contributor
  Since: June 17, 2003
 my idea of 'mid-fi' has always been the following:

-Onkyo, Pioneer, Marantz (post 1980s),Sherwood, Carver, Sansui, Cerwin Vega, etc.,

'low-fi' being the K-mart, JC Penny, Radio Shack, Sears brands, etc., you received at Christmas; which to most, got us all into this mess!

Then there's 'Hi-end' and 'Ultra Hi-end', which is too numerous to list right now











 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 8, 2015 at 20:21:25
srl1
Audiophile

Posts: 1339
Location: Florida Panhandle
Joined: September 2, 2003
 Hifi is what you own. Midfi is what your friends own.

 

more a perspective and state of mind than specific gear....., posted on July 8, 2015 at 20:34:24
mikel
Audiophile

Posts: 2773
Joined: July 4, 2000
 I own a few pieces of gear (Rotel Reciever ($1100 approx. price new 10 years ago) and entry level bookshelf Dynaudio speakers ($700-$800 new 10 years ago)) that might be labeled mid-fi if one had to label them.....but when fed higher level sources they don't suck. I compare them to my 'big rig' and nothing to apologize for.

sure; there are plenty of nasty sounding examples of low cost gear, but nice ones here and there too if you look closely.

mid-fi (or low-fi) is more owning a system to play the music and being neutral about how it sounds. as opposed to really caring a lot how it makes the music sound, and then working to optimize it according to one's tastes.

one can have a sense of high fidelity with any sort of gear. proper speaker set-up, sensible attention to noise control, maybe some DIY resonance control and first reflection attention, an upgraded duplex outlet for each piece of gear. lots of inexpensive kit can come alive with some intelligent attention to details. it's hard to progress to higher performance without finding ways to get the most from what you already have. it's never just the gear.

I think labels get in the way of things.

mikel

 

Or as George Carlin would say, posted on July 8, 2015 at 21:09:51
mbnx01
Audiophile

Posts: 7956
Location: Eagle, Idaho
Joined: October 22, 2004
 'Keep your crap off my stuff'.








'A lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on'. -Mark Twain

 

mid fi is reasonably priced consumer gear..., posted on July 9, 2015 at 02:48:30
Tom Schuman
Audiophile

Posts: 2632
Location: Bremen
Joined: October 22, 2003
real high fidelity equipment is the stuff that's made in smaller volumes, carries a higher price tag, drives you crazy, and empties your wallet and trust fund faster. I wouldn't go there.
but you're already here! So maybe you've already got the disease.

 

ever miss CD?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 03:04:38
Tom Schuman
Audiophile

Posts: 2632
Location: Bremen
Joined: October 22, 2003
 It looks like the MPS5 samples everything to DSD. Do you keep a Redbook source source on hand just for comparison, or did you come to the conclusion that stuff sampled to DSD always sounds better, even rock and jazz?
Cheers.

 

Midfi is a loaded term, posted on July 9, 2015 at 03:25:52
Dave_K
 Most of the time I see 'midfi', it's being used as a derogatory term to slag off some brand the poster doesn't like or to put down another poster's system or preference in gear. It seems to have lost it's original meaning.

I assume the original use was to refer to gear that falls in between the mass market stuff that non-audiophiles are exposed to at Best Buy and the low volume niche audiophile gear that you make an appointment to audition at a hi-fi dealer. The former is stuff that your average audiophile doesn't pay any attention to and the latter is stuff that most non-audiophiles don't even know exists.

It's hard to call out mid-fi by brand, because most brands span at least a couple price & performance categories. For example, Cambridge Audio makes mass market and mid-fi equipment, Martin Logan makes mid-fi and high end equipment, and Sony covers the range from Walmart up to the $27k SS-AR1.

Going by price, I would say that a mid-fi stereo system is something in the $2-5k price range at full retail, but that is debatable. I think it's possible to put together a minimalist hi-fi system for under $5k new. And I imagine somebody could spend more than $2k on mass market level gear, especially if you include multiple sources and subwoofers. Also, when building a home theater system, it takes a lot more than $5k to get out of mid-fi territory.

To answer your final question, I think the difference in performance between mid-fi and hi-fi gear can be appreciated by anybody who really enjoys listening to music at home. And since it is so easy to find good hi-fi gear available used, I don't really understand why mid-fi sells so well.

 

RE: more a perspective and state of mind than specific gear....., posted on July 9, 2015 at 05:06:11
Tubegroover
Audiophile

Posts: 246
Joined: May 18, 2000
 A very reasoned response to the question. I fully agree with all you said. Then there are some that refer to "hi-fi" in a demeaning manner. "It sounds like good "hi-fi", not music." Not too sure what that means other than I get the point, good sound not necessarily musical to a particular listener.

 

RE: Or as George Carlin would say, posted on July 9, 2015 at 05:07:00
Awe-d-o-file
Dealer

Posts: 21037
Location: 50 miles west of DC
Joined: January 10, 2004
 He also said my shit is stuff, your stuff is shit or something like that...

E
T
ET

"If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do suck seed" - Curly Howard 1936

 

Well said ..., posted on July 9, 2015 at 05:36:49
reelsmith.
Audiophile

Posts: 13129
Location: CT
Joined: June 7, 2005
Contributor
  Since: January 19, 2010
 I think labels get in the way of things.

I think labels cloud things more than clear them.

Dean.


reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.


 

RE: Can't a major be mid-fi?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 05:37:51
BigguyinATL
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 What about Sony, Pioneer, etc.

And where does pro-audio fall in the mix?


"The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat" - Confucius

 

Coming from the owner of a dream system., posted on July 9, 2015 at 06:02:42
genungo
 What a refreshingly humble attitude. Maintaining such a perspective while continuing to push your system to the limits is an admirable feat. Congrats!

 

RE: midfi versus hifi what about vintage?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 06:25:03
tesla
Audiophile

Posts: 3180
Location: San Diego County, California
Joined: October 25, 2000
 Would the group consider vintage gear made by companies such as Marantz, McIntosh, Conrad Johnson, etc, formerly High-End to now be "midfi"?



Proudly serving content-free posts since 1984.

 

RE: Can't a major be mid-fi?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 06:42:46
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 Again, midfi is just how I perceive the equipment that I listed. Some could very well be high-end or complete junk to another. Manufacturers often want to convey an image for their product and a lot of times we form our own image regardless of the manufacturer's efforts.

One example that comes to mind is my perception of Musical Fidelity. I have always viewed them as a value midfi brand. I had to laugh when they started coming out with their mega expensive integrateds and a couple high-end power amps.... and advertised them in catalogs like Audio Advisor.... and watched the price drop 50% or more a year later when the product doesn't succeed. Blow out sale!

I'm not a marketing expert but it seems to me that once you establish yourself as high value midfi brand, it's hard to claw your way up market.

re: Sony, Pioneer, etc. I did say, "Not counting the mass market consumer electronics brands,..." There are some 'high-end' products within these brands but overall mostly mass marketed stuff. I was pretty impressed with my Sony XA-7ES CDP back in the day.

I suppose there can be pro-audio 'midfi' but in general it doesn't cross over into the audiophile hobby. Sure, some do but not that common. Besides these are just my preconceived notions of 'midfi' and since I have almost zero experience with pro-audio gear, I couldn't come up with an opinion on what is junk, consumer, prosumer, or truly high-end pro-audio.



 

What's in a name?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 07:14:10
slapshot
Audiophile

Posts: 2248
Joined: January 9, 2006
 If you tell your non-audiophile friend you have a component made by brand X, and said friend has never heard of that brand, then it's hi-fi. :)

 

99.9% of all gear is "midfi"..., posted on July 9, 2015 at 07:35:18
genungo
 ... when there is always room for improvement. "Hifi" will always be a goal rather than a stopping point if your reference is the sound of live music.

There is only midfi. Shades of midfi.

Once a system has been conceived the real work has only just begun, because I have not one but two major goals in mind. These two goals are necessarily intertwined, otherwise there could be no "hifi".

There's the optimization of the system itself to consider. Because we are dealing with man-made recordings transmitted via man-made gear, our systems end up having a sound of their own. This "sonic signature" must be a *listenable* one. The removal or reduction of extraneous noises (low "noise floor"), the careful electrical matching of components, and the creation of a tonal/harmonic balance that makes sense to my ears can help me meet this goal. All parts of a system must harmonize.

My second primary goal (if it can be thought of as a distinct or separate goal) is the making of a system that sounds like real music, as much as possible. It might be possible to create a system that transmits electrical signals almost too cleanly. The recording process omits, alters, or destroys some sonic information and there are some things I might try to do to help restore or simulate some of that lost information. Realizing this goal could require the creative use of room treatments, loudspeakers with certain types of radiation patterns, loudspeakers or other gear that seems to emphasize dynamics in certain ways, etc...

When I consider these goals and all that needs to be done in their service, it becomes clear to me that I will never "arrive" or completely meet these goals. "The art of record playback" abides for a reason.


 

RE: Can't a major be mid-fi?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 07:42:07
rockanroller
Audiophile

Posts: 84
Location: ohio
Joined: March 29, 2015
 Well, the responses are great and enlightening! my system is mostly vintage gear: Sony, SAE, Klipsch and was build in the early 80`s. It has been serviced and upgraded as needed . Would that be considered midfi today, versus hifi when they first were sold?
Thoughts?
Regards.

 

MiFi is anything un-anointed by the high priest of audio -nt, posted on July 9, 2015 at 07:45:53
jedrider
Audiophile

Posts: 15166
Location: No. California
Joined: December 26, 2003

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 07:47:36
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
 Music fidelity and music hall mid-Fi , you must be kidding ..... Lol

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 07:58:44
Condorsat
Audiophile

Posts: 1909
Location: NE Ohio
Joined: January 13, 2003
 Watched one of those YouTube video's about the Pono music player. One of the slides showed their view on "Consumer audio" (low fi), Mid Fi & HI Fi in as far as Headphones.

Stock Apple Ear buds (low fi)
Beyerdynamic DT 990 studio headphones (Mid Fi)
Audeze LCD-2 planar magnetic headphone (Hi Fi or Audiophile)

Made sense to me.





 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 08:40:02
chocolate_lover9999@yahoo.com
Audiophile

Posts: 1627
Location: South Central Coast, California
Joined: October 12, 2003
 "In the 1950s, audio manufacturers employed the phrase high fidelity as a marketing term to describe records and equipment intended to provide faithful sound reproduction. While some consumers simply interpreted high fidelity as fancy and expensive equipment, many found the difference in quality between "hi-fi" and the then standard AM radios and 78 rpm records readily apparent and bought 33⅓ LPs such as RCA's New Orthophonics and London's ffrr (Full Frequency Range Recording, a UK Decca system); and high-fidelity phonographs. Audiophiles paid attention to technical characteristics and bought individual components, such as separate turntables, radio tuners, preamplifiers, power amplifiers and loudspeakers. Some enthusiasts assembled their own loudspeaker systems. In the 1950s, hi-fi became a generic term, to some extent displacing phonograph and record player.

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the development of the Westrex single-groove stereophonic record cutterhead led to the next wave of home-audio improvement, and in common parlance, stereo displaced hi-fi. Records were now played on a stereo. In the world of the audiophile, however, high fidelity continued and continues to refer to the goal of highly accurate sound reproduction and to the technological resources available for approaching that goal. This period is most widely regarded as "The Golden Age of Hi-Fi", when tube equipment manufacturers of the time produced many models considered endearing by modern audiophiles, and just before solid state equipment was introduced to the market, subsequently replacing tube equipment as mainstream."

 

I thought the term "mid-fi" was reserved for one particular brand [nt] ;-), posted on July 9, 2015 at 09:32:20
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26428
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

RE: Coming from the owner of a dream system., posted on July 9, 2015 at 09:59:26
mikel
Audiophile

Posts: 2773
Joined: July 4, 2000
 thank you for the kind words.

mikel

 

RE: ever miss CD?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 10:15:44
mikel
Audiophile

Posts: 2773
Joined: July 4, 2000
 my Playback Designs MPS-5 is now 9 years old and on it's 25th release of software upgrades. so it's performance has improved over time, and still seems to be right up there with the best digital.....if not quite at the tip top any more. remarkable for a digital product to be so future proof.

I've always used my analog sources (vinyl and tape) as the reference for digital performance and the MPS-5 continues to deliver.

and then at audio shows I would go around trying to find the best digital and the rooms with the Playback Designs always sounded the best to me, until maybe the last year or two when others got my interest.

there was a time when I was convinced that up-sampled to dsd PCM 'Playback style' was the best way to hear PCM played back. recently a few pure PCM products might be a little better, although I've not heard them head to head with the MPS-5 in my system.

since I have 8+ terabytes of dsd and 2xdsd on my server now I mostly listen to that when i'm not doing analog. so unlikely I would invest heavily to get that last little bit of PCM goodness.

I do still spend plenty of time with PCM on my server, both redbook and hirez. and still have over 3000 CD's sitting on my shelves that I do play. they sound great to my ears and so no, I don't have any pure PCM in my system.

mikel

 

RE: midfi versus hifi "regardless of price,value, or performance"...., posted on July 9, 2015 at 10:17:38
wangmr
Audiophile

Posts: 2410
Location: Downtown
Joined: November 29, 2012
 so what is your measurement?

i'm guessing reputation, the only criterion missing from your list.

thanks for interest.

roger wang

 

RE: midfi versus hifi / so name a music hall model..., posted on July 9, 2015 at 10:18:52
wangmr
Audiophile

Posts: 2410
Location: Downtown
Joined: November 29, 2012
 that rises to the big time?

roger wang

 

Very Nice System, posted on July 9, 2015 at 12:52:27
G Squared
Audiophile

Posts: 8474
Location: Washington, DC Metro Area
Joined: November 16, 2004
Contributor
  Since: May 23, 2023
 I enjoy just looking at it in the pictures.
Gsquared

 

They're Merely Labels......., posted on July 9, 2015 at 14:45:57
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 And subjective ones......

If you think it doesn't sound so hot, it's "mid-fi"... If you think it sounds great, it's "hi-fi".

It's also convenient to discount something as "mid-fi".... But no two people would agree what constitutes one or the other.

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 15:13:08
Chazro
Audiophile

Posts: 178
Location: W. Palm Bch, FL
Joined: March 14, 2008
 My system consists of items from both (Hi & mid-fi) lists! Add to it a few items from the low-end (as in, cheaper!)units available from a hi end manufacturer (Audio Research). So do I have a midfi high end system or a high end mid fi!? I'd be confused if I cared!;)

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 15:46:49
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
So what is YOUR perception of Music Hall and Musical Fidelity? There is no right or wrong here. It is after all opinion and perception and I find Music Hall and Musical Fidelity to be midfi along with Adcom, NAD, and the others I listed. What say you?



 

RE: midfi versus hifi "regardless of price,value, or performance"...., posted on July 9, 2015 at 16:16:06
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 There is no specific measurement, just opinion and perception.

Have you never formed an opinion on something based on 'gut feeling', how it's marketed, how it's priced, who sells it, how it looks, who buys it, what you hear or read about it, etc?

gut feeling (plural gut feelings) (idiomatic) an instinct or intuition; an immediate or basic feeling or reaction without a logical rationale. Don't think too hard about the answers to a personality test; just go with your gut feeling.

If you know of or have your own measures for what constitutes midfi please let us know.


 

RE: Can't a major be mid-fi?, posted on July 9, 2015 at 16:19:12
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
I wouldn't have the answer to your question and I doubt that anyone here will. Sorry.


 

Exactly... Label as YOU see fit. ;-), posted on July 9, 2015 at 16:20:51
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 My "labels" may not be in agreement with yours.


 

I agree with this 100%. (nt), posted on July 9, 2015 at 16:46:56
briggs
Audiophile

Posts: 1674
Location: Connecticut
Joined: April 16, 2002
 nt

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 17:28:11
briggs
Audiophile

Posts: 1674
Location: Connecticut
Joined: April 16, 2002
 A knowledgeable audiophile can assemble a musically satisfying system from "mid-fi" components. It depends upon your goals.

In the "golden age" of tube gear I sold high end- and what we now call mid-fi systems. My own system was McIntosh, Bozak, Thorens, etc, and that is the class of gear I recommended to those who could afford and appreciate it. I was also pleased, however, to put together -- with some skilled mixing and matching -- nice sounding, musical systems, with Sherwood, Pilot, KLH, Wharfedale, EMI, Weathers, Lenco and other "mid-fi" components (that many vintage enthusiasts would happily own today), and found a great deal of satisfaction doing it. It was more difficult to get right than a high end system, and I often worked with a customer longer to do it. It was a time when you could love being in the business.

I have been out of the business for fifty years. The system I have today has no "high end" gear, but I am very satisfied with way the music sounds.

.

 

Not just very nice, but Wow... so very neat and clean ;-), posted on July 9, 2015 at 20:18:04
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 .

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 9, 2015 at 20:51:10
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
 Abe ,

MH have hi end tables and MF have very high end audio amplifiers , what you are doing is akin to saying Lexus is entry level because Toyota have entry level cars ..


So no I cannot agree to painting MF or MH with a broad mid-fi Brush ...

Regards

 

My system is similar..., posted on July 9, 2015 at 21:50:09
musetap
Audiophile

Posts: 31871
Location: San Francisco
Joined: July 8, 2003
Contributor
  Since: January 28, 2004
 and like you I couldn't care less how anyone might bother to "classify" it.

Howz the Latin Music treating you? Still enjoying those CDRs, thank you.

Now THAT'S an interesting and important topic!

"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination"-Michael McClure



 

LMAO So true! /t, posted on July 10, 2015 at 06:16:07
reuben
Audiophile

Posts: 1639
Joined: September 28, 2004
 .
Dark energy? Ridiculous!
We live in an electric universe.

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 10, 2015 at 06:48:04
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46280
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
Like I said, perception.

I've always thought of Music Hall as making entry turntables over seas, but they do appear to have some nice ones that are rather pricey.

Same thoughts for Musical Fidelity. Their foundation has been in value midfi electronics while trying to move up market.

Again, this is just how I see these companies which doesn't have to be in agreement with reality or how others view them.

And midfi to me isn't a bad thing. I've owned many midfi brands and like others, some are good and others not so great. Heck, a couple of my least favorite products came from Mark Levinson and Bryston.... which I consider to be 'high end'.





 

RE: I agree with this 100%. (nt) / yes, it makes sense [n.t.a.], posted on July 10, 2015 at 06:48:58
wangmr
Audiophile

Posts: 2410
Location: Downtown
Joined: November 29, 2012
 .

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 10, 2015 at 07:00:42
rkeman
Audiophile

Posts: 597
Location: Florida
Joined: July 26, 2003
 High fidelity is sound reproduction that is faithful to the source material. Requirements include smooth frequency response, low distortion, low noise and adequate dynamic range. Much of what passes for "hifi" equipment is not high fidelity. If a loudspeaker system cannot reproduce the lowest organ pedals cleanly, it is not "hifi" regardless of its other attributes. That is why my system uses four dedicated custom subwoofers in an acoustically treated room and sophisticated electronic room correction. Similarly, amplifiers and preamplifiers producing audible electrical or mechanical noise don't cut it even with beautiful faceplates and $100,000 price tags. The proof is in the performance!

 

RE: My system is similar..., posted on July 10, 2015 at 16:41:13
Chazro
Audiophile

Posts: 178
Location: W. Palm Bch, FL
Joined: March 14, 2008
 Wazzup Mtap! 'sfunny, you never acknowledged the music I sent you 'til now. I just assumed you didn't care for it, so glad I was wrong!;) I'm still very much deeply into the Latin Jazz scene. I believe it's in the midst of what will be considered a historic time, there's so many genius, virtuoso musicians releasing incredible recordings! Unfortunately, it also feels like the world's best kept secret! Here's a quick recommendation for ANY music lover - Dafnis Prieto - Triangles & Circles - Just do yourself a favor and buy it, you won't regret it!

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 10, 2015 at 21:43:14
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
 Perception , Well Fremer would agree ,


"Michaelson would like Musical Fidelity to be all things to all audiophiles. While building and marketing high-performance products that range in price from $200 to $30,000 is a worthy, even magnanimous goal, it's a process fraught with difficulties."

Musical Fidelity is very much the high end and yes , selling entry level products...

Regards

 

Midfi is most of the recording most of us listen to. , posted on July 11, 2015 at 02:06:32
Timbo in Oz
Audiophile

Posts: 23221
Location: Canberra - in the ACT - SE Australia
Joined: January 30, 2002
 Guess what hi-fi might be?


Warmest

Tim Bailey

Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger


 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 11, 2015 at 12:38:38
risabet
Audiophile

Posts: 3197
Location: SoCal
Joined: January 10, 2005
 Hi-Fi gets one to connect with the music on an emotional level, mid-fi doesn't. For me it isn't about 20Hz to 20kHz and beyond; thunderous bass; or pinpoint imaging; though I strive to have each of those things, it is that emotional connection, e.g. in Bach's Magnificat the aria Humilitatem the soprano sings the line "quia respexit humilitatem. . ." along a descending musical line. In a hi-fi system this comes across as a lament (performance determined), a plaintive cry. Mid-fi doesn't get that connection. If this aspect is missing it can't be hi-fi no matter the amount of money spent. YMMV



Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition.

Adam Smith

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 11, 2015 at 13:38:29
lord addleford
Audiophile

Posts: 1095
Location: new england
Joined: July 5, 2005
 Could you explain how it was possible for "one to make an emotional connection" to non live music prior to the advent of Hi-Fi?

 

RE: my 97 yr old uncle told me Can Music , posted on July 11, 2015 at 15:25:26
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
 Destroyed everything, before , most if not all homes would hire a 3-4-5 piece band for live unamplfied music in their homes when having a "function" , plenty of good players around and plenty learn t or tried to learn how to play an instrument.


Can Music changed everything and people bought horrible sounding playback systems to replace live music, same as it is today .. :)

Regards

 

Nope! nt, posted on July 11, 2015 at 16:06:07
risabet
Audiophile

Posts: 3197
Location: SoCal
Joined: January 10, 2005
 nt


Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition.

Adam Smith

 

RIGHT: never mind equipment, most recordings are mid-fi, posted on July 12, 2015 at 07:59:13
Feanor
Audiophile

Posts: 9849
Location: London, Ontario
Joined: June 17, 2003
Contributor
  Since: March 12, 2004
 What is so sad is the many folks will spend tens of thousands of $$ on equipment to make crappy recordings sound good.


Dmitri Shostakovich

 

RE: "Making crappy recordings sound good", posted on July 12, 2015 at 08:38:52
genungo
 "Making crappy recordings sound better than they otherwise might" is more like it.

"Making crappy recordings sound better while making good recordings sound worse" would be even more like it. Adding enough sugar to make shit taste good can only make proper food taste much too sweet. We should be careful when making things. Is making a thing that works for us *most of the time* the best that we can do?

To a certain extent at least, there are some things you can do to "make ALL recordings sound better" to YOU than they otherwise would. In other words, we can personalize our system in various ways. "Make your system sound good to you while making it sound worse to almost everyone else"?

 

RE: "Making crappy recordings sound good", posted on July 12, 2015 at 08:46:34
A.Wayne
Audiophile

Posts: 2527
Location: Front row center
Joined: November 30, 2011
 Actually a bad system make most recordings sound like crap, the better system resolves more from the avg recording rendering less as crap.


 

RE: "Making crappy recordings sound good", posted on July 12, 2015 at 08:58:19
genungo
 What you are saying might work out to be true in some cases. But, I still think that if a system is "resolving" enough to pull the beautiful details from a pile of shit whenever you want it to, it must also be a system that is resolving enough pull out the gory details whenever you DON'T want it to. In reality, we *customize* the sound of our systems to a degree in order to make the majority of our favorite recordings sound as good as possible to our ears, and sometimes a more resolving system might help us achieve that, sometimes not.

In any case, if there is a magic something that can make all crappy recordings sound better, I don't think that something should be called "resolution".

 

You know "sounding too hi fi", posted on July 16, 2015 at 09:30:30
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 ... is a bit of a put down, too, these days.

Without "midfi" and "hifi" or "lofi" or whatever ...

Really the goal you are after with music reproduction, and how well you are getting to it is all you need.

If you can listen to your library of music, and close your eyes and can feel on the gut level that you might just be at the venue, then you have it.

If you are emotionally transported, and don't weave the illusion, and don't care, then you have it, too.

FOr me? I try for natural sound, with a hint of (but not too much) warmth. I think I have it now.
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 22, 2015 at 16:05:46
Satxhifi
Audiophile

Posts: 185
Joined: July 4, 2010
 briggs,
so far, coming to your post in this thread, in my opinion, what you have said "I am very satisfied with way the music sounds" is the bottom line.
Best,
Dave

 

RE: midfi versus hifi, posted on July 24, 2015 at 10:02:00
slippers...
Audiophile

Posts: 340
Location: UNITED STATES
Joined: June 20, 2011
 A $10k Musical Fidelity amp is midfi?

 

RE: that's a very good list, posted on July 24, 2015 at 10:03:06
slippers...
Audiophile

Posts: 340
Location: UNITED STATES
Joined: June 20, 2011
 A $2100 Rogue is hifi?

 

Page processed in 0.079 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]