Hi-Fi vs. Audio

[MaxBuck]

I've come to realize that there's a fundamental difference between high-fidelity reproduction and the audio equipment that many "audiophiles" like to acquire and experience. And that there's no reason to depreciate either approach.

Vinyl is fundamentally not a high fidelity reproduction method, especially compared to other available media. Tube gear likewise, and speakers like Devore makes. But many people love all these. And that's OK.

Thoughts?

 

[GXAlan]

This is true. It’s no different than taking coffee black or with embellishment.

Perfectly transparent gear benefits from perfect recordings.
Euphonically colored gear masks great music that is otherwise compromised somehow.

The problem is the in between. Bad engineering resulting in low SINAD is different than intentional engineering resulting in bad SINAD.

 

[Ricardus]

The problem is people buying overpriced junk thinking it allows them to hear better than everyone else because it "resolves" more and them going on the internet making fools of themselves.

 

[fpitas]

I also believe that there's no reason to deprecate either one, just as there's no reason to deprecate the choice of a log home with wood-burning stove. The problem arises when advocates promote one as "better" or "more accurate" when it is not, or as having a set of special, intangible qualities that don't exist.

I grew up in a home that was partially built with logs. It used not one, but two wood-burning stoves. I also grew up using tube gear, as did some of the oldest people on this forum. Those things might seem romantic to some, but they're sure as heck not romantic to me.

Jim Taylor

But that warm glow! They are fun to design with, but hard to take them seriously for audio. Another memo I missed as I got old, I guess.

 

[Hipper]

It's only words:

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

Audio is clearly defined. That is what we hear, anything we hear or could hear...
Hi-Fi is less clear. There isn't an universally accepted set of measurements that defines "Audio" High Fidelity. It is a bit like "pornography".. people kind of know what it is.
It is however quite possible to define a threshold for what should be hi-fidelity, i-e high fidelity, likeness to the signal on the medium. There sre some standards mainly from the European Union and its North American counterparts. One of these is the EN 61305-3:1995. I don't know the particular of this standard but it does exist and any equipment that passes it is deemed "Hi-Fi".

And we are at a point where for the purpose of reproducing what is in the medium a $9.95 DAC is all that one needs.
For amplifers able to push 25 watts in each channel with a SINAD of 75 dB (a somewhat arbitrary threshold for audibility) a 20 to 20 KHz + or - 0.5 dB) is below $100.oo,AIYIMA A07 TPA3255
Then comes the transducers. There, what is "Hi-Fi", is kind of complicated.... There are a few studies, mainly from Harman that try to define what makes those "Hi-Fi", for speakers and in earphones... but it remains a difficult search. For now we have these as models. If transducers approach those models they are likely good for more than %60.oo of the world population ( I am shooting in he dark.. I need help, numbers ), would deem those transducers , at least, "good".
Interestingly enough the monetary threshold for such is surprisingly low IMHO: $50.oo the TRUTHEAR Crinnacle Zero @ $50.oo is that kind of transducer.

my $0.02.

Peace.

 

[Joe Smith]

High fidelity is a general term arising in the 1950s to distinguish the new equipment from what had come before - eclipsed by "stereo" when that became the dominant vinyl format over mono... Today, most equipment available would eclipse what was available during that "HiFi era"...

For me, good sound reproduction is achieved when I'm able to focus on the music and not thinking about the way it's coming to me...so sure, some vinyl does not make the cut, but a lot of it does, same with cassette tape well-recorded. I like having choices and using different formats, and listen to music in a lot of different ways (working, very focused, background while doing other things). So having the absolutely highest possible available fidelity is not my key driver. It's not having noise or something bad in the signal chain per se.

 

[MattHooper]

I've come to realize that there's a fundamental difference between high-fidelity reproduction and the audio equipment that many "audiophiles" like to acquire and experience. And that there's no reason to depreciate either approach.

Vinyl is fundamentally not a high fidelity reproduction method, especially compared to other available media. Tube gear likewise, and speakers like Devore makes. But many people love all these. And that's OK.

Thoughts?

Agreed.

That's why I've often argued for why it makes the most sense to think of an Audiophile as "someone who is enthusiastic about sound quality and audio gear."
Sound quality is separable from High Fidelity: somethings that are high fidelity can "sound bad" while some things that are lower fidelity can "sound great/sound better." Audiophiles who buy the gear you mention may not be seeking "high fidelity" strictly speaking, but they are still very much seeking "great sound" as they conceive it.

Given the general inclination on this forum towards having objective criteria by which to judge speakers (correlated to the subjective), there is a natural tendency on ASR to winnow out many types of gear and converge towards a smaller set of gear deemed "Well Engineered." So there is a certain narrowing of focus (which is why certain brands appear over and over here, like Topping, Benchmark, Genelec, KEF etc).

Again, this is understandable, nothing wrong at all.

But there is of course a far wider variety of speaker brands and designs that interest many audiophiles. And ideally, a site like this provides information that an audiophile can leverage outside the particular interests of many ASR members. To make purchases advisedly.

In other words: I think the Big Umbrella approach to a site like ASR is not that ASR tells you what you should buy, but rather it informs you about how gear works, and about the plausibility or not of various claims, so that you can go out and make more informed decisions. Maybe you want to buy the more expensive "high end" amplifier that looks more blingy. But at least with places like ASR you can do so with the knowledge of the trade-offs - that it likely doesn't sound any different from the cheaper one, and if you are ok with that...God speed to you.

 

[Waxx]

Agreed.

That's why I've often argued for why it makes the most sense to think of an Audiophile as "someone who is enthusiastic about sound quality and audio gear."
Sound quality is separable from High Fidelity: somethings that are high fidelity can "sound bad" while some things that are lower fidelity can "sound great/sound better." Audiophiles who buy the gear you mention may not be seeking "high fidelity" strictly speaking, but they are still very much seeking "great sound" as they conceive it.

Given the general inclination on this forum towards having objective criteria by which to judge speakers (correlated to the subjective), there is a natural tendency on ASR to winnow out many types of gear and converge towards a smaller set of gear deemed "Well Engineered." So there is a certain narrowing of focus (which is why certain brands appear over and over here, like Topping, Benchmark, Genelec, KEF etc).

Again, this is understandable, nothing wrong at all.

But there is of course a far wider variety of speaker brands and designs that interest many audiophiles. And ideally, a site like this provides information that an audiophile can leverage outside the particular interests of many ASR members. To make purchases advisedly.

In other words: I think the Big Umbrella approach to a site like ASR is not that ASR tells you what you should buy, but rather it informs you about how gear works, and about the plausibility or not of various claims, so that you can go out and make more informed decisions. Maybe you want to buy the more expensive "high end" amplifier that looks more blingy. But at least with places like ASR you can do so with the knowledge of the trade-offs - that it likely doesn't sound any different from the cheaper one, and if you are ok with that...God speed to you.

cosign. That is why i hang arround here, even if i listen a lot to vinyl, own tube and class A (pre)amps, and mainly listen to single driver fullrange system for entertainment. They are not hifi in the sense of true to the source, but they are hifi in the sense that they make me appreciate music more. And i like to know (and know now more or less) why that is. And even that can be measured and explained scientificly.

And i don't think ranking gear on technical specs is necesairly bad. I like objective scientific info, not poetry advertisments and those rankings, measurements and the discussions about it here learned me a lot, and makes it very easy now to find gear that does something i (or someone else) is searching. For some that is true to the source, for others that is very coloured sounding gear. And there are many colours between that black and white that also are valid. So even with my taste, i find ASR an enlightment in a mist of snake oil and it should not change much.

 

[Waxx]

This is true. It’s no different than taking coffee black or with embellishment.

Perfectly transparent gear benefits from perfect recordings.
Euphonically colored gear masks great music that is otherwise compromised somehow.

The problem is the in between. Bad engineering resulting in low SINAD is different than intentional engineering resulting in bad SINAD.

the difference is the type and the ammount of distortion often. Especially with electroncis. Low harmonics distortion can hit 10% and still sound good in certain circumstances. disharmonic distortion already is annoying at 0.01%. That is why class D amps had such a bad reputation the first decades it existed. The distortoin was lower than class A or AB amps of that time, but it was (and still is) disharmonic. Now even a lot of cheap class D amps have a low enough distortion that it does not matter anymore if it's disharmonic. I think the border is about 90dB to 100dB sinad for me. Class A can go to sinad <40dB, like the the Pass ACA kit, and still sound very good to my ears. I hear the colouring, but i like it. I even search for it in my tube amp and preamp and that ACA... And they all are relative cheap. I never paid more than 1K for an electronic audio device that i kept for a while. I only did buy stuff like that to sell for even more money...

 

[Vacceo]

I may be in the minority who actually likes poor records because I still enjoy not-great productions. I have a healthy amount of early Black and Death Metal records with a very questionable recording quality (when not directly terrible) that I enjoy well over their re-recorded and re-mastered versions.

I prefeer a transparent system and let the music sound as it was made; good, bad or whatever.

 

[Waxx]

I may be in the minority who actually likes poor records because I still enjoy not-great productions. I have a healthy amount of early Black and Death Metal records with a very questionable recording quality (when not directly terrible) that I enjoy well over their re-recorded and re-mastered versions.

I prefeer a transparent system and let the music sound as it was made; good, bad or whatever.

Good lofi is also good sounding. I'm a reggae lover, and got a lot of technical very bad recorded but great songs that i absolutly love. Some of the best reggae is done in a shack in a ghetto in kingston, on an stolen 16ch prototype of a Soundcraft series one console mixer, with a Teac 3340 1/4 inch 4-track recorder and an Teac 1/4" 2-track recorder for mix down. That studio was called the "Black Ark" and was operated by the legendaric reggaeproducer (and much more) Rainford "Lee Scratch" Perry between 1973 and 1980. His monitoring were a pair of beaten up Altec 612C cabinets with a 604E driver amped with Marantz 8C tube amps. He also had a Mutron biphaser, a Grantham spring reverb, a Roland Space Echo and some old beaten up microphones, Mainly akg and senheiser dynamic microphones. That was it. The building was partly wood, partly concrete but he made it sound very good with basicly no budget.

But still that was the location of the creation some of the greatest reggae records ever, including most of Bob Marley's work in that time (all between 1973 and 1975, from 1976 only partly)... Even the Rolling Stones, Paul McCartney and the Clash recorded and or mixed parts of some albums there. But Lee Perry is really the godfather of the lofi hi impact reggae and dub and a key figure (even before his own studio at Sudio One and Joe Gibbs) in the development of reggae and dub.

And one of my favorite tracks from that studio and time:

 

[restorer-john]

Vinyl is fundamentally not a high fidelity reproduction method, especially compared to other available media.

Vinyl is THE home high fidelity reproduction format, the one that started the entire "high fidelity" industry. Sure, we have evolution and much better delivery systems now, but don't dismiss the game changer that was stereo microgroove, diamond styli and high quality pre/amplification as came into being in the 1960s and 70s.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Vinyl is THE home high fidelity reproduction format, the one that started the entire "high fidelity" industry. Sure, we have evolution and much better delivery systems now, but don't dismiss the game changer that was stereo microgroove, diamond styli and high quality pre/amplification as came into being in the 1960s and 70s.

Vinyl is THE WAS home high fidelity reproduction format............
No one need forget that.

 

[MattHooper]

Vinyl is THE WAS home high fidelity reproduction format............
No one need forget that.

Yeah, but...have we really come that far?

1,600 × 1,200

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Yeah, but...have we really come that far?

1,600 × 1,200

Depends on where you sit.

 

[posvibes]

And we are at a point where for the purpose of reproducing what is in the medium a $9.95 DAC is all that one needs.
For amplifers able to push 25 watts in each channel with a SINAD of 75 dB (a somewhat arbitrary threshold for audibility) a 20 to 20 KHz + or - 0.5 dB) is below $100.oo,AIYIMA A07 TPA3255
Then comes the transducers. There, what is "Hi-Fi", is kind of complicated.... There are a few studies, mainly from Harman that try to define what makes those "Hi-Fi", for speakers and in earphones... but it remains a difficult search.

I would also add Peace APO PEQ gratis or for a nominal voluntary donation can even mitigate the problems of transducers.

 

[restorer-john]

Vinyl is THE WAS home high fidelity reproduction format............
No one need forget that.

If it was, what is the single pre-eminent high fidelity format of today? What is the most ubiquitous and easily recognized format by practically everyone?

You guessed it- vinyl!

Otherwise, what have you got to offer? Not much it would seem. A bunch of disparate digital files, streaming formats and types- no standards and no intrinsic retained secondary market value. What are the kids of today buying when they want a physical, durable, rendition of their music? LPs! Go into a music/big box store and look at the kids, milling around and buying vinyl. Crazy, but true.

Vinyl surpassed CD sales in Australia in March this year. All that shows is how far physical digital sales have fallen, not how 'amazing' LPs sales are. But it does show that there still is a $30 Million dollar retail business in LPs in 2021/22.

The next renaissance of course will be CDs. And we will be hearing all the moaning from people who recount dumping their thousands of CDs at the Good Will or local landfill when they should have kept them all. Yawn.

 

[levimax]

Good quality vinyl, tubes, and speakers can certainly be Hi-Fi. Modern technology has made Hi-Fi much cheaper and smaller and easier but not nessisarily better.

 

[birdog1960]

This is true. It’s no different than taking coffee black or with embellishment.

Perfectly transparent gear benefits from perfect recordings.
Euphonically colored gear masks great music that is otherwise compromised somehow.

The problem is the in between. Bad engineering resulting in low SINAD is different than intentional engineering resulting in bad SINAD.

What's SINAD? And damn dude I had some potent kush tonight but what did you? Your prose is cool. Not sure what it means but cool...i get the second sentence and agree