Is it purely price related? or components used?
What is it?
What is it?
Basing on price makes sense if the Fi is for financial hit.Many people seem to base their classification on price, but that doesn't make sense as we've been shown here many times.
Basing the terms on performance does make sense, but there is no consensus about where to draw the lines for each category.
That sure is one way to look at itBasing on price makes sense if the Fi is for financial hit.
It depends. At one point darlings of High End Audio such as Krell and Martin Logan were available at Best Buy.Audio components available in a big box store.
It's the type of equipment that ASR aficionados buy. In other words, it's technically excellent but doesn't cost enough for "audiophiles" to regard as "hi-fi."Is it purely price related? or components used?
What is it?
We need the laugh emoji sometimes. LOL.it's like Mud-Fi but with less distortion
What does it actually have to do with high fidelity, tho? These are the same guys with idiotic cables, power conditioners, power cords and interconnects and speaker cables commenting with such a dig usually.I've never actually seen a satisfying answer. While audiophiles insist that it's not a demeaning term, they always leave the impression that you didn't spend enough and that you might rise above that level with their help, a boatload of of money and some 'system matching.'
IMO it may be the single biggest obstacle to the acceptance of high fidelity by the masses.
Pejorative term form something that is not expensive oder exclusive enough to be a real Hi-Fi.
A condescending concept from the High End section for many products which at the end perform better objectively than several, if not most so-called "High End" similar in function, audio products...
... is just a [little bit] above throwaway cost.