|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.16.7.82
In Reply to: RE: midfi versus hifi posted by rockanroller on July 08, 2015 at 18:51:02
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
Edits: 07/08/15 07/08/15 07/08/15 07/08/15 07/08/15Follow Ups:
What a refreshingly humble attitude. Maintaining such a perspective while continuing to push your system to the limits is an admirable feat. Congrats!
thank you for the kind words.
mikel
.
I enjoy just looking at it in the pictures.
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.
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.
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.
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
Edits: 07/09/15
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: