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

amazingtrade

amazingtrade

Mad Madchestoh fan
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
5,139
Reaction score
0
Location
Manchester
As my own system is now progressing to the lower end of mid range I have also noticed the tonal balance is also shifting. I have also listened to some very expensive systems in customers houses and feel like I have now experienced a wide mix.

Cheap HIFI - Nothing really to comment on, assuming we are talking about a £100 mini system I find they sound bland muffeled and rather boring but also not offensive like a £10 boombox is.

Budget seperates - I now find these very bright, they give of a lot of detail and give the impression they are brilliant and compared to cheap HIFI they are. I think it may be the treble which tend to be unrurly on these systems.

Mid range - A lot more subtle and also a more powerful sound at the same time. Bass becomes a lot more solid and quicker and the the entire sound is more musical but it can seem that detail is missing but in reality it is the distortion which is missing.

High end - Has the same musical tonality as mid range but offers much greater depth and detail.

This is my experience do you think its right?

Just bought a pair of Wharfedale 9.1s so my system is now:-

Marantz CD6000 OSE LE
Cambridge Audio 640 MK1
M Audio audiphile sound card
Project Debut MKII
Wharfedale Diamond 9.1s
Grado SR60s

I have now found that what once my best sounding HIFI kit the Project now sounds rather lacking but it might just need a good service.
 
If your happy with what you've got stick with it, and buy more music. Spending more on equipment might not make the music any more satisfying.

I don't believe in High end, magazines describe it some type of holy grail, its just hype. If a component is well made, well engineered and provides lasting value, thats high end to me, they are just tools for listening to music, nothing more.

Components like amps and Dacs are so good now you don't need to spend a fortune, to get something that's satisfying.

Get the best speakers you can afford to match your room and work backwards. Active ATC 50s are a good compromise, for a normal size room. (you don't have to worry about the amps either)

Just my 2 pence :MILD:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And then there is bespoke hi-fi. Getting a really talented audio design engineer to build or modify something for you that will see off much of the so-called high end.

This is the route I went down last year and have not looked back since.

For example, the grounded grid valve preamplifier I use is more transparent and dynamic than the £5k Spectral pre I had before.

Such fine fettlers include Dave Cawley www.SoundHiFi.com for modifying Technics turntables with better arms and off-board PSUs turning them into giant slayers and Anthony Matthews www.tubedistinctions.co.uk for designing, building and modifying high performance valve amplifiers, amongst others.

Very good hi-fi indeed need not cost the earth and what you'll have is something unique to you and your requirements.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Steven Toy said:
And then there is bespoke hi-fi. Getting a really talented audio design engineer to build or modify something for you that will see off much of the so-called high end.

This is the route I went down last year and have not looked back since.

For example, the grounded grid valve preamplifier I use is more transparent and dynamic than the £5k Spectral pre I had before.

Such fine fettlers include Dave Cawley www.SoundHiFi.com for modifying Technics turntables with better arms and off-board PSUs turning them into giant slayers and Anthony Matthews www.tubedistinctions.co.uk for designing, building and modifying high performance valve amplifiers, amongst others.

Very good hi-fi indeed need not cost the earth and what you'll have is something unique to you and your requirements.
Click to expand...

Hi Steven,

How much is the ground grid preamp that you use? Has has been built by Anthony Matthews? What's he done to it?

SCIDB
 
Mine is a prototype built by him from scratch and is hand-wired point-to-point. He later rewired some of the signal path with pure silver wiring and replaced the ALPS Blue Velvet volume pot with a DACT stepped attenuator.

It cost me £1700. There is a line of production grounded preamps coming out probably next year by Anthony but they are likely to be rather pricey.

I wasn't trying to hi-jack the thread btw but bespoke hi-fi needs its place in the hierarchy, up there with high end in terms of performance but perhaps mid-fi in terms of cost. The essential is that all your money is used on the components and workmanship not on brand, marketing and distribution costs.

It is for those who are no good at DIY, like me, but who want the very best without lining too many pockets.
 
Is it a coincidence that the alleged "giant slayer" Technics, having been ignored for decades, has risen to prominence at a time of "economic uncertainty"?

I think we should be told. ;)
 
Steven Toy said:
.........but bespoke hi-fi needs its place in the hierarchy, up there with high end in terms of performance but perhaps mid-fi in terms of cost..
Click to expand...

There's your answer right there, in that it depends on where you're already at and how much money you have to spend!! A £1700 component can be considered mid-fi by Steven, so presumably a £500 preamp would be a budget option? If a £1700 component is still mid-fi, at what price does high end kick in?

One man's mid-fi in another man's high end!

Technics gear might be aspirational for someone with a Matsui :)
 
I think 'high-end' only really exists for equipment that requires mechanical engineering. Basically that means speakers, turntables and room acoustics. You have to spend quite a lot of money to get the very best where these things are concerned.

On the other hand when it comes to primarily electronic equipment. Basically CD players and amps, you can get the best current technology available for 'mid-range' prices. The Cambridge Azure stuff is a good example of this. Spending more only gets you a fancy box and a brand name.

You really shouldn't forget the room acoustics though. I don't really consider a system 'high-end' unless the room has been taken care of, or is just naturally good sounding. I've heard VERY expensive systems where care has been taken to setup and they still sound mediocre if the room is not good.

AT, if you are ever down near London or Kent you are welcome to visit for a listen.
 
Tension I will make a note of that if my plan to go to London actually happens keep saying I will go down but then get busy etc.

My room is not that good in terms of accoustics but I am in investing in some proper speaker stands and my speakers are positioned correctly. The main reason I like to use headphones a lot is to get round this problem.

As for the Azure my 640A seems to be a brilliant design most the money has been spent on the audio circuits not fancy build quality.
 
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.
 
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 agree with that. I think my system is slowly getting into the mid range domain it certainly has that less is more sound, e.g the details are not thrown at you its all very subtle yet can sing along in a musical way.

Since I bought my Diamond 9.1s my interest in HIFI has sparked all over again and fear it will only be a couple of years before I go and do something stupid like blow £500 notes on a new amp.

I think the impressive thing about my system is how I have achieved that mid end sound but not spend that much money.

e.g

Marantz CD 6000 OSE LE (by modern standards still a high spec CD player, not to be confused with the 6000 or even OSE). Paid £150 for it ex demo, cheapest new eqv is about £350.

Cambridge Azure 640 again paid £150 for it and well again its a good amp at any price, it has its limitations but its anything but budget, they retailed at £300 when they were new.

Warfedale Diamond 9.1s in 2004 they regarded as sounding a lot more expensive than the £180 retail price as they are now an old model I got them for £100 new.

I have built proper furniture for all my HIFI gear for a fraction of the costs in the shops too.
 
After forty years of bying selling and trading in i now can see the holy grail .I could have a good kit at a fraction of what i have spent if only i had not read so many Mags. They say it is no good getting old unless you get cunning well i got old.
I still have a reasonable HIFI system and i love the hobby.
Noel W.
 
Hi,

Nowadays High End is expensive equipment. There has never been so much expensive equipment for sale as there is now.


SCIDB
 
The Devil said:
Is it a coincidence that the alleged "giant slayer" Technics, having been ignored for decades
Click to expand...
Only by so-called audiophiles. The 1200 series is probably the best-selling TT of all time, and the deck that single-handedly kept the vinyl pressing plants alive during the 80s and 90s.
The truth is that there isn't a great difference between the sound of a Technics and an LP12, or a Rega (or a Garrard or EMT). They're all pretty close sonically.
OTOH, the difference in "brand love" is huge.
 
blackdog said:
I wouldn't call that truth--more opinion. Sort of like mine that asparagus tastes foul.
Click to expand...
And just like the asparagus, this is easy enough to test unsighted (and level matched in the case of audio components), that is assuming you really want to know.
 
Define "great difference".

DP's recent review of the SL 1200 concludes that it's not really good enough for an SME V / Koetsu. There are some limitations in the dynamic range, apparently, and the imaging isn't too hot. If you want a deck that is actually good enough for that combination, then the Technics is no good to you at all. It fails. If you were to compare it with a deck which will do justice to the SME/Koetsu, that might well constitute a "great difference".

IOW, it's a matter of opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great difference = a difference I hear with my ears, as opposed to one I think I can hear with my eyes, wallet, ego.
Did DP conduct a series of level-matched, double-blind tests to reach his conclusion?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dunno, read the review and ask him. He posts here. I don't have your ears, so I don't know what you hear. I did say it's a matter of opinion.

If you are saying "there is a law of diminishing returns", then I agree. It's like cars, or anything. How fast do you really want to go? How much are you prepared to spend to shave another half second off the 0-60?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top