PERFORMANCE BETWEEN HIGH END & BUDGET HIFI

[Anonymous]

Thats an idiotic response - because what does high fidelity mean? I think it would be easy to ascribe a definition in terms of transparency, control, soundstaging, tonality etc which would discount most mid-range and mid-priced equipment...

By what measure?

That was completely my point. You said it's either high fidelity or it's not, which simply isn't correct, as it depends on the qualifying criteria to be so assessed ie a lack of transparency through the midband (where many cheap stuff struggles) or a maunfactured restricted top-end (often used to disguise all manner of problems in frequency repsponse) could preclude it for some people as being classed as high fidelity...

 

[lindsayt]

OK, I can put together a system with an £800 analogue source, £500 worth of amplification and £500 speakers, £50 in cables, £0 in supports and stands.

How easy do you think it would be to tell the difference between my £1850 system and say a £30,000 Linn high end LP12SE, Klimax Kontrol, fully Aktive 4200 power amps, Majik Isobarik system?

 

[Overdose]

Thats an idiotic response - because what does high fidelity mean? I think it would be easy to ascribe a definition in terms of transparency, control, soundstaging, tonality etc which would discount most mid-range and mid-priced equipment...

By what measure?

That was completely my point. You said it's either high fidelity or it's not, which simply isn't correct, as it depends on the qualifying criteria to be so assessed ie a lack of transparency through the midband (where many cheap stuff struggles) or a maunfactured restricted top-end (often used to disguise all manner of problems in frequency repsponse) could preclude it for some people as being classed as high fidelity...

There you go again.

Given the cost of electronic components these days (which I'm sure you'll know all about) hifi, is very much achievable at relatively low prices.

 

[Anonymous]

so who said mid priced HIFI cannot do sound staging & all the rest... even when you spend twice as much to improve sound quality, does not always mean better sound it could just mean sounding different..? My piont is budget hifi is giving high end a run for thier money. Yes u will get better sound of course if u spend more, but to to get any real improvement I think you need to spent even 3x more than the original price piont.

An arbitary figure plucked out of thin air and meaning nothing... If I could get the quality of sound I was looking for at £10000, I would have, rather than spending £20,000. The expectations I have of my second system are not so great, so I'm willing to accept certain and considerable compromises, hence why I spent £17,000 less on it! People who spend £30,000 might argue my system doesnt meet their expectations and requirements, that's perfectly reasonable. But to argue I need to spend £60,000 to get real improvement is absolute pure unadulterated nonsense...I know damn well, if I spent an extra £2000 on the speakers (half the price of mine) it would sound signifcantly better but I purchased mine based upon a number of requirements including size, positioning, etc etc not just exploiting the capabilites of the amps and cd player...

 

[Overdose]

OK, I can put together a system with an £800 analogue source, £500 worth of amplification and £500 speakers, £50 in cables, £0 in supports and stands.

How easy do you think it would be to tell the difference between my £1850 system and say a £30,000 Linn high end LP12SE, Klimax Kontrol, fully Aktive 4200 power amps, Majik Isobarik system?

Answers on a postcard?

 

[chebby]

During the 1980s I heard a couple of 'high end' systems including Absolute Sound's Oracle/Koetsu/Audio Research/Krell/Etude system at a hi-fi show in Brighton.

It was highly entertaining and extremely impressive. Thing is, back at home, after both occasions, I played my own system and it didn't sound any less good than it had the day before.

I recall that the Absolute Sounds system cost about £30K (in early 1980s money) but the system I really wanted to buy after the show was the little pre-production QED A230/T231/R232/L234 system (all housed in it's own bespoke stand with concealed cabling.)

My wife and I spent about an hour in the QED room with the guy making us coffee and playing loads of 12" singles and chatting (no-one else came in because - I assumed - they all thought it would just be QED switches and 79 strand cables).

Anyway, it sounded great and a little while later later I bought the QED A230 amp and T231 tuner. (And later bought the QED A240SA).

At no time did I ever want to save up for an Oracle or a Krell.

Even now, even if I won a lottery jackpot, I would feel ridiculous with crazy gear like that. (Despite knowing that it would sound out of this world.)

It would be as daft as me buying a Ferrari. (Middle aged bloke in a supercar, driving in traffic that barely gets above 20mph in town and would just make people think I am a rich twonk with something to prove!)

 

[Overdose]

so who said mid priced HIFI cannot do sound staging & all the rest... even when you spend twice as much to improve sound quality, does not always mean better sound it could just mean sounding different..? My piont is budget hifi is giving high end a run for thier money. Yes u will get better sound of course if u spend more, but to to get any real improvement I think you need to spent even 3x more than the original price piont.

An arbitary figure plucked out of thin air and meaning nothing... If I could get the quality of sound I was looking for at £10000, I would have, rather than spending £20,000. The expectations I have of my second system are not so great, so I'm willing to accept certain and considerable compromises, hence why I spent £17,000 less on it! People who spend £30,000 might argue my system doesnt meet their expectations and requirements, that's perfectly reasonable. But to argue I need to spend £60,000 to get real improvement is absolute pure unadulterated nonsense...I know damn well, if I spent an extra £2000 on the speakers (half the price of mine) it would sound signifcantly better but I purchased mine based upon a number of requirements including size, positioning, etc etc not just exploiting the capabilites of the amps and cd player...

That would seem like £2000 well spent then given the price of your system as it stands. 10% more for a significant improvement?

 

[Anonymous]

OK, I can put together a system with an £800 analogue source, £500 worth of amplification and £500 speakers, £50 in cables, £0 in supports and stands.

How easy do you think it would be to tell the difference between my £1850 system and say a £30,000 Linn high end LP12SE, Klimax Kontrol, fully Aktive 4200 power amps, Majik Isobarik system?

I reckon your system would probably be at least as good.

 

[Anonymous]

Thats an idiotic response - because what does high fidelity mean? I think it would be easy to ascribe a definition in terms of transparency, control, soundstaging, tonality etc which would discount most mid-range and mid-priced equipment...

By what measure?

That was completely my point. You said it's either high fidelity or it's not, which simply isn't correct, as it depends on the qualifying criteria to be so assessed ie a lack of transparency through the midband (where many cheap stuff struggles) or a maunfactured restricted top-end (often used to disguise all manner of problems in frequency repsponse) could preclude it for some people as being classed as high fidelity...

There you go again.

Given the cost of electronic components these days (which I'm sure you'll know all about) hifi, is very much achievable at relatively low prices.

I didn't say you couldn't but it's based upon one's requirements, willingness to accept particular compromises and definitions. My point was that unlike you I don't seen it as a question of being as balck and white as it's hi fidelity or it isn't (which is patently ludicrous)...

 

[matthewpiano]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

 

[Anonymous]

so who said mid priced HIFI cannot do sound staging & all the rest... even when you spend twice as much to improve sound quality, does not always mean better sound it could just mean sounding different..? My piont is budget hifi is giving high end a run for thier money. Yes u will get better sound of course if u spend more, but to to get any real improvement I think you need to spent even 3x more than the original price piont.

An arbitary figure plucked out of thin air and meaning nothing... If I could get the quality of sound I was looking for at £10000, I would have, rather than spending £20,000. The expectations I have of my second system are not so great, so I'm willing to accept certain and considerable compromises, hence why I spent £17,000 less on it! People who spend £30,000 might argue my system doesnt meet their expectations and requirements, that's perfectly reasonable. But to argue I need to spend £60,000 to get real improvement is absolute pure unadulterated nonsense...I know damn well, if I spent an extra £2000 on the speakers (half the price of mine) it would sound signifcantly better but I purchased mine based upon a number of requirements including size, positioning, etc etc not just exploiting the capabilites of the amps and cd player...

That would seem like £2000 well spent then given the price of your system as it stands. 10% more for a significant improvement?

But again, you're missing the point. I had lots of requirements when I bought my speakers; yes, I can easily improve the sound, but I don't want bigger speakers, don't want rectangualr wooden coffins in my living room etc etc. I think my speakers are the best available for the size, styling, positioning flexibility ie based upon my non-performance criteria. Price wasn't the issue at all. Is my system high fidelity? Well, I could quite understand if someone argued it didnt meet their definition but I guarantee that it sounds a hell of a lot better than any an £2000 system - and yes I can easily tell, otherwise I'd have bought the chepaer one wouldn't i? Can I tell my £20k system from my £3k one, yes, within 5 seconds of a track starting...

 

[SteveR750]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

Matthew, do you find though that no system really gets close to the real experience? No system I have heard at any price sounds like a real drum kit being played in the same room as you are, I haven't listened to anything more than about £12ks worth but like Chebby I doubt I would spend that much on a hi fi system even if money were no object, I'd rather buy a room full of guitars and amps.

As for phones, it's not "hi fi" by an enthusiasts measure, but to many non audiophiles (ie the majority) it's a pretty damn good compromise. It's certainly a whole universe better than my 80s Walkman and Amstrad Tower System that my parents owned. Has top end equipemnt moved forward as much as the bottom end? That's the question that the OP was asking perhaps. Nothing I have heard since has been better than an LP12/Ittok/Asak/Naim/Isobarik system I heard playing in Peters Hi Fi in Chester in 1986 when I bought my first system as a student.

 

[Anonymous]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

Yes, it tells me that you are perfectly happy with the sound quality, and that's great. It doesn't mean you wouldn't get better sound quality if you spent more money. My girlfriend studied at the Royal Academy of Music, she plays music for a living - how much did she spend on her hifi? About £2000, does she think my second system (let alone my primary one) is significantly better than hers - yes. Does she care? No. Is she going to spend more money? No. It suits what she needs at home...and ultimately that's what is important. One's expectations, requirements and priorities may result in feeling it unnecessarily to spend more on a hifi, but it absolutely does not mean you have to spend three times as much for significantly better sound quality...

 

[Overdose]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

Yes, it tells me that you are perfectly happy with the sound quality, and that's great. It doesn't mean you wouldn't get better sound quality if you spent more money. My girlfriend studied at the Royal Academy of Music, she plays music for a living - how much did she spend on her hifi? About £2000, does she think my second system (let alone my primary one) is significantly better than hers - yes. Does she care? No. Is she going to spend more money? No. It suits what she needs at home...and ultimately that's what is important. One's expectations, requirements and priorities may result in feeling it unnecessarily to spend more on a hifi, but it absolutely does not mean you have to spend three times as much for significantly better sound quality...

Despite protestations to the contrary, you do seem rather fixated on price.

 

[Overdose]

I didn't say you couldn't but it's based upon one's requirements, willingness to accept particular compromises and definitions. My point was that unlike you I don't seen it as a question of being as balck and white as it's hi fidelity or it isn't (which is patently ludicrous)...

Well you clearly believe that a phone cannot be hifi, I'd say that this viewpoint is quite definitely black/white.

My point being, that from the entry level of anything that could be considered high fidelity, right up to the most expensive equipment, there exists a sliding scale that has differently priced equiment intermingling on the ladder of sound quality (however you wish to measure it). 'High-end' is assumed to inhabit the upper rungs and 'budget' the lower, but price is in no way an indicator of any certainty.

 

[matthewpiano]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

Matthew, do you find though that no system really gets close to the real experience? No system I have heard at any price sounds like a real drum kit being played in the same room as you are, I haven't listened to anything more than about £12ks worth but like Chebby I doubt I would spend that much on a hi fi system even if money were no object, I'd rather buy a room full of guitars and amps.

As for phones, it's not "hi fi" by an enthusiasts measure, but to many non audiophiles (ie the majority) it's a pretty damn good compromise. It's certainly a whole universe better than my 80s Walkman and Amstrad Tower System that my parents owned. Has top end equipemnt moved forward as much as the bottom end? That's the question that the OP was asking perhaps. Nothing I have heard since has been better than an LP12/Ittok/Asak/Naim/Isobarik system I heard playing in Peters Hi Fi in Chester in 1986 when I bought my first system as a student.

Completely agree. If I had £20k spare it wouldn't go anywhere near hi-fi gear. Instead I'd buy myself a really beautiful piano. I've heard lots of hi-fi at all sorts of prices and, like you say, none of it really comes close to being in the same room as the live instruments being played. It is nice to go as far as possible in trying to get something reasonably realistic sounding but for me there are limits.

I also agree with your second point. I remember the majority of people listening on all sorts of rubbish Alba, Amstrad, and Bush systems when I was growing up (though never in the house I grew up in). An iphone with a good pair of earphones would trounce any of those and it would leave most of the tape personal stereos people were using in the 80s and 90s for dead too.

 

[Anonymous]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

[/quote

Yes, it tells me that you are perfectly happy with the sound quality, and that's great. It doesn't mean you wouldn't get better sound quality if you spent more money. My girlfriend studied at the Royal Academy of Music, she plays music for a living - how much did she spend on her hifi? About £2000, does she think my second system (let alone my primary one) is significantly better than hers - yes. Does she care? No. Is she going to spend more money? No. It suits what she needs at home...and ultimately that's what is important. One's expectations, requirements and priorities may result in feeling it unnecessarily to spend more on a hifi, but it absolutely does not mean you have to spend three times as much for significantly better sound quality...

Despite protestations to the contrary, you do seem rather fixated on price.

The whole point about this debate is price and sound relativity....

 

[Anonymous]

Overdose, yet again, you've completetly missed the point.

By the way, you have now changed your poisition - your last paragraph is completely at odds with your previous points. You previously stated it's either high fidelity or it isn't, now you're building subjectivity into the equation...which is exactly my point.

 

[chebby]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

Yes, it tells me that you are perfectly happy with the sound quality, and that's great. It doesn't mean you wouldn't get better sound quality if you spent more money. My girlfriend studied at the Royal Academy of Music, she plays music for a living - how much did she spend on her hifi? About £2000, does she think my second system (let alone my primary one) is significantly better than hers - yes. Does she care? No. Is she going to spend more money? No. It suits what she needs at home...and ultimately that's what is important. One's expectations, requirements and priorities may result in feeling it unnecessarily to spend more on a hifi, but it absolutely does not mean you have to spend three times as much for significantly better sound quality...

Despite protestations to the contrary, you do seem rather fixated on price.

Yeah but I want to hear about the house. How much did that cost? Where do you go on holiday? What wrist watch do you prefer? How much did that cost? Are you into expensive wine or do you collect art?

I love this stuff. Drop as many names as you like.

Whats the most expensive thing you own?

You can even make it up. I don't care

 

[Anonymous]

A piano would be no use to me as I can't play one! And I have little interest in piano playing...But, as I said, my girlfriend is a classically trained musician - she has a Steinway Model B. But you're comparing two completely different things...

 

[bigmoose]

If I had £20k to spare AND know how to play instruments, I would also buy a nice piano... Unfortunately, like most of us, I just know how to press "play" on my stereo.

I agree with S.Scoates though... If I won the lottery, I would not hesitate twice in spending it on a high-end hifi. I believe high-end hifi is like cars or computers: Once you reach a certain point, the more money you spend, the smaller the gain... I would doubt anyone will be able to tell the difference between a £18k system than a £20K one. However, you have to be deaf not to hear the difference between a £1500 and a £3000 one (And I'm not talking about individual preference... It is just better!).

Give me a Porsche or a Lamborghini, I would not be able to tell the difference. However, I'm sure most of you can. I have never listened to a £20k system but have no doubt I will be able to hear the difference (And unfortunately,it will sound way better than mine )

 

[Anonymous]

I spend all day in a musical environment at work, listening to and playing a large variety of pianos as well as frequently hearing other colleagues playing beautiful guitars and other instruments. I still come home, play a CD or LP and feel completely satisfied with the reproduction capabilities of my hi-fi. That tells me an awful lot to be honest.

Yes, it tells me that you are perfectly happy with the sound quality, and that's great. It doesn't mean you wouldn't get better sound quality if you spent more money. My girlfriend studied at the Royal Academy of Music, she plays music for a living - how much did she spend on her hifi? About £2000, does she think my second system (let alone my primary one) is significantly better than hers - yes. Does she care? No. Is she going to spend more money? No. It suits what she needs at home...and ultimately that's what is important. One's expectations, requirements and priorities may result in feeling it unnecessarily to spend more on a hifi, but it absolutely does not mean you have to spend three times as much for significantly better sound quality...

Despite protestations to the contrary, you do seem rather fixated on price.

Yeah but I want to hear about the house. How much did that cost? Where do you go on holiday? What wrist watch do you prefer? How much did that cost? Are you into expensive wine or do you collect art?

I love this stuff. Drop as many names as you like.

Whats the most expensive thing you own?

You can even make it up. I don't care

Futile, fatuous and juvenile. Get a life.

 

[moon]

so who said mid priced HIFI cannot do sound staging & all the rest... even when you spend twice as much to improve sound quality, does not always mean better sound it could just mean sounding different..? My piont is budget hifi is giving high end a run for thier money. Yes u will get better sound of course if u spend more, but to to get any real improvement I think you need to spent even 3x more than the original price piont.

An arbitary figure plucked out of thin air and meaning nothing... If I could get the quality of sound I was looking for at £10000, I would have, rather than spending £20,000. The expectations I have of my second system are not so great, so I'm willing to accept certain and considerable compromises, hence why I spent £17,000 less on it! People who spend £30,000 might argue my system doesnt meet their expectations and requirements, that's perfectly reasonable. But to argue I need to spend £60,000 to get real improvement is absolute pure unadulterated nonsense...I know damn well, if I spent an extra £2000 on the speakers (half the price of mine) it would sound signifcantly better but I purchased mine based upon a number of requirements including size, positioning, etc etc not just exploiting the capabilites of the amps and cd player...

That would seem like £2000 well spent then given the price of your system as it stands. 10% more for a significant improvement?

Can I tell my £20k system from my £3k one, yes, within 5 seconds of a track starting...

Isn't that because they are in different rooms?

 

[Anonymous]

so who said mid priced HIFI cannot do sound staging & all the rest... even when you spend twice as much to improve sound quality, does not always mean better sound it could just mean sounding different..? My piont is budget hifi is giving high end a run for thier money. Yes u will get better sound of course if u spend more, but to to get any real improvement I think you need to spent even 3x more than the original price piont.

An arbitary figure plucked out of thin air and meaning nothing... If I could get the quality of sound I was looking for at £10000, I would have, rather than spending £20,000. The expectations I have of my second system are not so great, so I'm willing to accept certain and considerable compromises, hence why I spent £17,000 less on it! People who spend £30,000 might argue my system doesnt meet their expectations and requirements, that's perfectly reasonable. But to argue I need to spend £60,000 to get real improvement is absolute pure unadulterated nonsense...I know damn well, if I spent an extra £2000 on the speakers (half the price of mine) it would sound signifcantly better but I purchased mine based upon a number of requirements including size, positioning, etc etc not just exploiting the capabilites of the amps and cd player...

That would seem like £2000 well spent then given the price of your system as it stands. 10% more for a significant improvement?

Can I tell my £20k system from my £3k one, yes, within 5 seconds of a track starting...

Isn't that because they are in different rooms?

Nope, because they've swapped rooms! As I said before I've also tried my Kefs with the Chords, have tried my M&D speakers with my Leema Elements second system, using my Chord power amp and Leema amp as a pair etc.

 

[SteveR750]

I don't think HI Fi stands any comparison with cars - there isn't much down to subjective assessment in the difference between the performance of a Ferrari and a Datsun 120Y. The auto industry is so much more competitive that value is much more easy to measure, and compare between the different choices. Hi Fi is a pretty esoteric low volume business in comparison that can tolerate much more variable pricing.