Mid-Hi End

[west]

I realize that this may be a difficult question to answer since the answer
is so subjective, but here goes anyway. When in your opinion does mid-fi end
and hi-end start, with the various audio building blocks (amp, speakers,
etc.). Thank you.

Cordially,
west

[MiNe 109]

In article <Momhh.4166$od6.3023@trnddc04>,
"west" > wrote:

> I realize that this may be a difficult question to answer since the answer
> is so subjective, but here goes anyway. When in your opinion does mid-fi end
> and hi-end start, with the various audio building blocks (amp, speakers,
> etc.). Thank you.

At the dealer.

Stephen

[Harry Lavo]

"west" > wrote in message
news:Momhh.4166$od6.3023@trnddc04...
>I realize that this may be a difficult question to answer since the answer
> is so subjective, but here goes anyway. When in your opinion does mid-fi
> end
> and hi-end start, with the various audio building blocks (amp, speakers,
> etc.). Thank you.

I'll take a stab, based on criteria I've evolved over the years.

When you start finding that you stop listening to the "electronics" and
start suspending disbelief and listening to the music as if the musicians
are playing "right there". This can happen at different price points
depending on the manufacturer's committment and savvy, and the power demands
of the speakers/room combination, and the type of music you listen to. For
sources, natural "timbre" and transient response/transparency for all voices
and instruments at all volume levels. For electronics, I find it requires
the ability to pass 'body" as well as frequency response, and not to strain
at the maximum dynamics required for realism. In speakers, "continuity and
transparency", so that the music detaches from the speakers and images with
depth and a natural soundstage, and these don't change with volume up to the
maximum demands of the music. In cables, utter transparency that doesn't
muck with either of the above. If all conditions are met, it is truly a
hi-end system for whatever type of music you listen to. Short of that, at
least some elements are mid-fi and can be bettered significantly.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message


> When you start finding that you stop listening to the
> "electronics" and start suspending disbelief and
> listening to the music as if the musicians are playing
> "right there".

IOW, try to be as delusional as Harry is.

Anybody with meaningful real world experience recording live music knows
better.

The total illusion of liveness evaporates as soon as the music hits the
mics.

Reason why is that there is no such thing as just one live sound. Move your
ears around the room. There are as many distinct live sounds as there are
distinct places to put your ears. No two performances are the same. There
are as many sounds of a piece of music as there are performances.

How dogmatic posturers like Lavo know that a certain sound is *the* live
sound must escape the comprehension of anybody who actually listens to live
music and has the opportunity to compare a live performance to any
particular recording of it.

So, what is the SOTA of recording today? One steps back and trys to imagine
what a favorable gestalt of a given live performance would be, and seeks to
deliver it through the audio systems to the listeners who are your primary
market.

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
>
>
>> When you start finding that you stop listening to the
>> "electronics" and start suspending disbelief and
>> listening to the music as if the musicians are playing
>> "right there".
>
> IOW, try to be as delusional as Harry is.
>
> Anybody with meaningful real world experience recording live music knows
> better.
>
> The total illusion of liveness evaporates as soon as the music hits the
> mics.
>
> Reason why is that there is no such thing as just one live sound. Move
> your ears around the room. There are as many distinct live sounds as there
> are distinct places to put your ears. No two performances are the same.
> There are as many sounds of a piece of music as there are performances.
>
> How dogmatic posturers like Lavo know that a certain sound is *the* live
> sound must escape the comprehension of anybody who actually listens to
> live music and has the opportunity to compare a live performance to any
> particular recording of it.
>
> So, what is the SOTA of recording today? One steps back and trys to
> imagine what a favorable gestalt of a given live performance would be, and
> seeks to deliver it through the audio systems to the listeners who are
> your primary market.

Arny, of course, ignores the fact that for a decade I recorded dozens of
live concerts per year. And that as an audiophile, I have been listening to
high-end systems since the early '50's (my dad's JBL corner horn/Newcomb
amp/preamp system and Cook "Sounds of Our Times" and "Audiophile Records"
recordings). So I don't think I need lectures on what can/cannot be
captured through the recording process. Take Arny's advice for what it is
worth -- a screed.

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> When you start finding that you stop listening to the
>>> "electronics" and start suspending disbelief and
>>> listening to the music as if the musicians are playing
>>> "right there".
>>
>> IOW, try to be as delusional as Harry is.
>>
>> Anybody with meaningful real world experience recording
>> live music knows better.
>>
>> The total illusion of liveness evaporates as soon as the
>> music hits the mics.
>>
>> Reason why is that there is no such thing as just one
>> live sound. Move your ears around the room. There are as
>> many distinct live sounds as there are distinct places
>> to put your ears. No two performances are the same.
>> There are as many sounds of a piece of music as there
>> are performances. How dogmatic posturers like Lavo know that a certain
>> sound is *the* live sound must escape the comprehension
>> of anybody who actually listens to live music and has
>> the opportunity to compare a live performance to any
>> particular recording of it. So, what is the SOTA of recording today? One
>> steps back
>> and trys to imagine what a favorable gestalt of a given
>> live performance would be, and seeks to deliver it
>> through the audio systems to the listeners who are your
>> primary market.
>
> Arny, of course, ignores the fact that for a decade I
> recorded dozens of live concerts per year.

Not ignoring that at all. It sort of creates a mystery - how you could have
done so much recording and remained so mislead. My resolution of that
mystery is that a lot of time has elapsed since then. You managed to
re-delude yourself despite some reality checks in the distant past.

> And that as
> an audiophile, I have been listening to high-end systems
> since the early '50's (my dad's JBL corner horn/Newcomb
> amp/preamp system and Cook "Sounds of Our Times" and
> "Audiophile Records" recordings). So I don't think I
> need lectures on what can/cannot be captured through the
> recording process.

Of course not Harry. You think you know it all.

> Take Arny's advice for what it is worth -- a screed.

Nahh Harry, its one of those reality checks that you so badly need. One of
these days you'll wake up and realize why one of us gets all-expenses paid
trips to Manhahattan, and the other can't even get subway tokens for the
same trip.

[Kalman Rubinson]

Just a silly exercise. The criteria are entirely arbitrary and
personal. Sorta like "entry-level luxury mid-size car." That
definition is only for polling and statistical efforts and has no
real-world meaning. Same for Mid-Hi End. It only distinguishes what
a dealer puts in one demo room from what he puts in another.

Kal

[George M. Middius]

Kalman Rubinson said:

> Just a silly exercise. The criteria are entirely arbitrary and
> personal. Sorta like "entry-level luxury mid-size car." That
> definition is only for polling and statistical efforts and has no
> real-world meaning. Same for Mid-Hi End. It only distinguishes what
> a dealer puts in one demo room from what he puts in another.

I thought it was more of an anti-marketing gimmick. You know, to keep the
'borgs out of your hair.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Clyde Slick]

Arny Krueger a scris:
>
> The total illusion of liveness evaporates as soon as the music hits the
> mics.
>

Based on your own recording experience, I
can see why you would say that.

[MiNe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net>
wrote:

> Kalman Rubinson said:
>
> > Just a silly exercise. The criteria are entirely arbitrary and
> > personal. Sorta like "entry-level luxury mid-size car." That
> > definition is only for polling and statistical efforts and has no
> > real-world meaning. Same for Mid-Hi End. It only distinguishes what
> > a dealer puts in one demo room from what he puts in another.
>
> I thought it was more of an anti-marketing gimmick. You know, to keep the
> 'borgs out of your hair.

I'm feeling okay about the terseness of my original reply.

Stephen

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> When you start finding that you stop listening to the
>>>> "electronics" and start suspending disbelief and
>>>> listening to the music as if the musicians are playing
>>>> "right there".
>>>
>>> IOW, try to be as delusional as Harry is.
>>>
>>> Anybody with meaningful real world experience recording
>>> live music knows better.
>>>
>>> The total illusion of liveness evaporates as soon as the
>>> music hits the mics.
>>>
>>> Reason why is that there is no such thing as just one
>>> live sound. Move your ears around the room. There are as
>>> many distinct live sounds as there are distinct places
>>> to put your ears. No two performances are the same.
>>> There are as many sounds of a piece of music as there
>>> are performances. How dogmatic posturers like Lavo know that a certain
>>> sound is *the* live sound must escape the comprehension
>>> of anybody who actually listens to live music and has
>>> the opportunity to compare a live performance to any
>>> particular recording of it. So, what is the SOTA of recording today? One
>>> steps back
>>> and trys to imagine what a favorable gestalt of a given
>>> live performance would be, and seeks to deliver it
>>> through the audio systems to the listeners who are your
>>> primary market.
>>
>> Arny, of course, ignores the fact that for a decade I
>> recorded dozens of live concerts per year.
>
> Not ignoring that at all. It sort of creates a mystery - how you could
> have done so much recording and remained so mislead. My resolution of that
> mystery is that a lot of time has elapsed since then. You managed to
> re-delude yourself despite some reality checks in the distant past.
>
>> And that as
>> an audiophile, I have been listening to high-end systems
>> since the early '50's (my dad's JBL corner horn/Newcomb
>> amp/preamp system and Cook "Sounds of Our Times" and
>> "Audiophile Records" recordings). So I don't think I
>> need lectures on what can/cannot be captured through the
>> recording process.
>
> Of course not Harry. You think you know it all.
>
>> Take Arny's advice for what it is worth -- a screed.
>
> Nahh Harry, its one of those reality checks that you so badly need. One
> of these days you'll wake up and realize why one of us gets all-expenses
> paid trips to Manhahattan, and the other can't even get subway tokens for
> the same trip.


When I go to Manhattan, it is with friends to the Met or to Carnegie Hall or
to Merkin. And I can afford to pay my own way, thanks.

[George M. Middius]

Harry Lavo said:

> > Nahh Harry, its one of those reality checks that you so badly need. One
> > of these days you'll wake up and realize why one of us gets all-expenses
> > paid trips[sic] to Manhahattan,

> When I go to Manhattan, it is with friends to the Met or to Carnegie Hall or
> to Merkin. And I can afford to pay my own way, thanks.

I'd rather be seated at the dining table than be the main course.





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[ScottW]

Harry Lavo wrote:
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
> >
> >> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >> . ..
> >>> "Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> When you start finding that you stop listening to the
> >>>> "electronics" and start suspending disbelief and
> >>>> listening to the music as if the musicians are playing
> >>>> "right there".
> >>>
> >>> IOW, try to be as delusional as Harry is.
> >>>
> >>> Anybody with meaningful real world experience recording
> >>> live music knows better.
> >>>
> >>> The total illusion of liveness evaporates as soon as the
> >>> music hits the mics.
> >>>
> >>> Reason why is that there is no such thing as just one
> >>> live sound. Move your ears around the room. There are as
> >>> many distinct live sounds as there are distinct places
> >>> to put your ears. No two performances are the same.
> >>> There are as many sounds of a piece of music as there
> >>> are performances. How dogmatic posturers like Lavo know that a certain
> >>> sound is *the* live sound must escape the comprehension
> >>> of anybody who actually listens to live music and has
> >>> the opportunity to compare a live performance to any
> >>> particular recording of it. So, what is the SOTA of recording today? One
> >>> steps back
> >>> and trys to imagine what a favorable gestalt of a given
> >>> live performance would be, and seeks to deliver it
> >>> through the audio systems to the listeners who are your
> >>> primary market.
> >>
> >> Arny, of course, ignores the fact that for a decade I
> >> recorded dozens of live concerts per year.
> >
> > Not ignoring that at all. It sort of creates a mystery - how you could
> > have done so much recording and remained so mislead. My resolution of that
> > mystery is that a lot of time has elapsed since then. You managed to
> > re-delude yourself despite some reality checks in the distant past.
> >
> >> And that as
> >> an audiophile, I have been listening to high-end systems
> >> since the early '50's (my dad's JBL corner horn/Newcomb
> >> amp/preamp system and Cook "Sounds of Our Times" and
> >> "Audiophile Records" recordings). So I don't think I
> >> need lectures on what can/cannot be captured through the
> >> recording process.
> >
> > Of course not Harry. You think you know it all.
> >
> >> Take Arny's advice for what it is worth -- a screed.
> >
> > Nahh Harry, its one of those reality checks that you so badly need. One
> > of these days you'll wake up and realize why one of us gets all-expenses
> > paid trips to Manhahattan, and the other can't even get subway tokens for
> > the same trip.
>
>
> When I go to Manhattan, it is with friends to the Met or to Carnegie Hall or
> to Merkin. And I can afford to pay my own way, thanks.

Then I must ask...have you got insurance yet?

ScottW

[bassett]

"MiNe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article <Momhh.4166$od6.3023@trnddc04>,
> "west" > wrote:
>
>> I realize that this may be a difficult question to answer since the
>> answer
>> is so subjective, but here goes anyway. When in your opinion does mid-fi
>> end
>> and hi-end start, with the various audio building blocks (amp, speakers,
>> etc.). Thank you.
>
> At the dealer.
>
> Stephen

if you can't afford it , it's hi-end.
But at the end of the day, it's mostly hype. Find an obscure brand,
that you need to import, get some unknown to write a
"flowery" test report, double or triple the sale price, and you have
the perfect hi-end product, And you can also tell people that it was a
sensation, at the last Moscow Audio Fair, in good old downtown Gorki
or somewhere equally unknown. And before you know it, some
"all-knowing" will want one.
It's a licence to print money.

What's the differance between the super expensive, high impact DVD player,
with the travelling blue light, that gets brighter , as the action
intensifies, and the audio levels increase, and the $28 Good Guys
Chinese special, there is no differance, If you don't know which one's
playing, or can't see which one connected up.
bassett

[west]

"bassett" > wrote in message
...
>
> "MiNe 109" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article <Momhh.4166$od6.3023@trnddc04>,
> > "west" > wrote:
> >
> >> I realize that this may be a difficult question to answer since the
> >> answer
> >> is so subjective, but here goes anyway. When in your opinion does
mid-fi
> >> end
> >> and hi-end start, with the various audio building blocks (amp,
speakers,
> >> etc.). Thank you.
> >
> > At the dealer.
> >
> > Stephen
>
> if you can't afford it , it's hi-end.
> But at the end of the day, it's mostly hype. Find an obscure brand,
> that you need to import, get some unknown to write a
> "flowery" test report, double or triple the sale price, and you have
> the perfect hi-end product, And you can also tell people that it was a
> sensation, at the last Moscow Audio Fair, in good old downtown
Gorki
> or somewhere equally unknown. And before you know it, some
> "all-knowing" will want one.
> It's a licence to print money.
>
> What's the differance between the super expensive, high impact DVD
player,
> with the travelling blue light, that gets brighter , as the action
> intensifies, and the audio levels increase, and the $28 Good Guys
> Chinese special, there is no differance, If you don't know which
one's
> playing, or can't see which one connected up.
> bassett

You should of posted this first so it wouldn't be necessary to say anything
else. Sad but true. Although it would be interesting to know what a
pragmatist like you has for audio equipment. Thanks all.

Cordially,
west
>
>