What do you think is the standard price for HI-FI, HI-END?

[terryforsythe]

Rolex is the Wiim of mechanical watches.

But if WiiM made tube amplifiers.

 

[terryforsythe]

Anyway, I don't really like TuneTot speakers.

I just referred to the TuneTot because it was the only Wilson for which I found a review with a complete set of measurements, which happened to be in a review by Amir.

 

[terryforsythe]

I set up Sonus Faber's EX3MA of an acquaintance I respect. Do you know how good it sounds?

I have not heard it. I love the look of Sonus Fabre speakers, and the pricier ones look to have good build quality. Some people really love them.

In the end, what really matters more than anything else is what in your budget sounds good to you. If you find something you really like, it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.

 

[DSJR]

Out of curiosity: do you know if your friend thinks you’re humble system blows away his own system?

The reason I ask, is that it’s very common for us to like our own systems more than other systems. Because of course we we carefully put together a system based on satisfying our own criteria.

Almost no matter what system I may have just heard, when I come home and fire up my own system I like it better.

And perhaps your friend feels his money was well spent because even after hearing your system, he would never choose it over his own system.

So in other words your system may be better in terms of how it measures and fulfils your criteria, but his system may be better in terms of what he’s looking for.

I had my end of road system thirty years ago. I fully appreciate that the speakers especially have moved on, but every time I get to hear the current versions of my old monitors, I well-up as I feel I've 'come home' and just want to own them again and never bother with it all, frankly... That's not going to happen any time soon, so I accept my half century old stereo and marvel that it's as capable to me as it is...

 

[ahofer]

OK so you’re not of the opinion it’s a BOT then?

I don't have an 'axed' opinion, other than there's an awul lot of nonsense and an endless appetite to defend or deflect when challenged.

 

[Thomas Savage]

Rolex is the Wiim of mechanical watches.

I will look forward to my WiiM going up in value in the next few years then .

My Rolex bought for £2k in 2003 was worth around £7k when I gave it to a rather inspiring Ukrainian refugee who was working as a bar tender in Poland. I'm sure they realised it true value, hopefully put it to better use than I.

 

[TimF]

Out of curiosity, because I am not clear from your post: can you enjoy or get a kick out of visiting a place with all that type of equipment? I mean since you’re not buying anything, but get to inspect a bunch of it or maybe even listen to some?

Or do you find such encounters just a reason for cynicism about high end audio?

(I myself think plenty of the prices and high-end audio are looney, but I also love seeing the equipment and all the different takes on gear)

Great question regarding if I enjoyed seeing the equipment. I had a number of reactions. I like seeing the equipment. Some of the design styles are pleasing. The mid priced equipment all pretty much looks the same, with too many black boxes. Too bad the shop didn't carry Accuphase. I am happy I got out of turntables and vinyl. The high end stuff---it's like going to a Porsche dealership--I'm careful not to touch. The room with packed with used equipment didn't interest me. It brought to mind my own foolishness over the decades. Audio is a good hobby and it's safe and I like the people I meet. Also, it truly delivers access to a universe of music.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Great question regarding if I enjoyed seeing the equipment. I had a number of reactions. I like seeing the equipment. Some of the design styles are pleasing. The mid priced equipment all pretty much looks the same, with too many black boxes. Too bad the shop didn't carry Accuphase. I am happy I got out of turntables and vinyl. The high end stuff---it's like going to a Porsche dealership--I'm careful not to touch. The room with packed with used equipment didn't interest me. It brought to mind my own foolishness over the decades. Audio is a good hobby and it's safe and I like the people I meet. Also, it truly delivers access to a universe of music.

The used equipment bin was the only part I frequented. The people working at the high end place didn't like it. I don't know if they didn't get commission on it or what. One told me once when enquiring about some gear it felt like going thru someone's dirty underwear at a yard sale. My friend told her, "well you can wash your hands and the underwear afterwards". The owner had a different attitude. So when he was there he would loan it to me or sell it to me. I could buy some exotic gear live with it a year or two and sell it recovering my money. So my actual cost was pretty much zero to try some unusual stuff.

Not all high end gear is bad. Some of it costs more because of the way it is made and the cost of components. Sometimes those components are more than needed, but they are there. Back before everything was digital a lot of it had better feel because it used better quality controls, switches and such.

 

[gfinlays]

Out of curiosity: do you know if your friend thinks you’re humble system blows away his own system?

The reason I ask, is that it’s very common for us to like our own systems more than other systems. Because of course we we carefully put together a system based on satisfying our own criteria.

Almost no matter what system I may have just heard, when I come home and fire up my own system I like it better.

And perhaps your friend feels his money was well spent because even after hearing your system, he would never choose it over his own system.

So in other words your system may be better in terms of how it measures and fulfils your criteria, but his system may be better in terms of what he’s looking for.

He hasn't heard my system since I got it up and running in fully active mode. When it was running passively, he was quite impressed. To my ears, the active vs passive is night and day. The measurements concur.

He has a nice pair of ~£30k Sonus Fabers with some very fancy front end components. Sure, his system can play loud and has scale, but there's no real sense of placement of performers/instruments within the soundstage between the speakers.

My favourite tracks didn't give me goosebumps on his system.

Not my usual genre, but his system didn't do this track justice at all:

There's a lot of created sound localisation on this track which a well setup system can reproduce.

On my active 3-way wide-baffle speakers it sounds really good. On my desktop NF system, it's positively mind-blowing.

 

[gfinlays]

There are wonderful-sounding conventional systems that use passive speakers in regular rooms without all that time alignment and wall treatments and DSP. Not all rooms are minimalist echo chambers.

True, but I've never heard one that sounds as good as a properly ZDP time-aligned linear phase active setup.

This is my desktop system's measured step response:

You can't achieve this with a passive system, and it's audible in ways that I struggle to put into words.

 

[BDWoody]

We really need to bring back the blanket ban on car analogies , or at the very least for every one used you need to send the mod team a case of beer .

I can almost feel @Frank Dernie twitch whenever I see one, so he gets a case too.

...and have never bought a car which cost as much as my stereo.

I have to chuckle at that Frank.

 

[MattHooper]

He hasn't heard my system since I got it up and running in fully active mode. When it was running passively, he was quite impressed. To my ears, the active vs passive is night and day. The measurements concur.

Sounds cool. Seems like you have put together a system very intelligently and reap the benefits. I have no doubt it sounds great.

He has a nice pair of ~£30k Sonus Fabers with some very fancy front end components. Sure, his system can play loud and has scale, but there's no real sense of placement of performers/instruments within the soundstage between the speakers.

That’s interesting. to my mind, you’d have to try pretty hard to screw up a system enough so there’s no sense of decent imaging within the soundstage. You’re basic stereo speakers with a listener in an equilateral triangle tend to achieve that with little effort.

But clearly, you’re saying it’s not to the degree that you are used to.

My favourite tracks didn't give me goosebumps on his system.

I have that experience all the time. My friend reviews very expensive audio gear, including top or near flagship speakers. I can always appreciate what fascinating qualities these have. But I very rarely get emotionally sucked in. In fact the last time I felt that way listening at his place was when he was reviewing a 300B tube amp. Since they couldn’t properly drive his big Estelon speakers (which I’d listened to numerous times powered by beefy solid state amplification) he swapped in some tiny older Totem speakers, and that system “sang” like almost nothing I’d heard at his place. Reminded me a lot more of the type of sound I get it home.

Not my usual genre, but his system didn't do this track justice at all:

View attachment 435325
There's a lot of created sound localisation on this track which a well setup system can reproduce.

On my active 3-way wide-baffle speakers it sounds really good. On my desktop NF system, it's positively mind-blowing.

Great! I love electronic music and I just checked it out. That’s a nice track. I believe some of that music has become more popular for audio demos at shows etc.

 

[gfinlays]

(like Wilson Audio), wouldn't ultra-expensive products generally show better performance?

In a word, no.

Wilson Audio TuneTot Review (high-end bookshelf speaker)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Wilson Audio TuneTot stand-mount/bookshelf speaker. It is on kind loan from a member and costs around US $10,000 (varies due to color). I am not a fan of the way the front looks without the grill. The sides though sport probably the best...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[gfinlays]

Great! I love electronic music and I just checked it out. That’s a nice track. I believe some of that music has become more popular for audio demos at shows etc.

A real mix of stuff here, but this playlist really tests a system's capability to "image" well

Listen to the playlist HiFi Imaging from Gabster by Tweaker on Qobuz https://open.qobuz.com/playlist/24250399

 

[diddley]

He hasn't heard my system since I got it up and running in fully active mode. When it was running passively, he was quite impressed. To my ears, the active vs passive is night and day. The measurements concur.

He has a nice pair of ~£30k Sonus Fabers with some very fancy front end components. Sure, his system can play loud and has scale, but there's no real sense of placement of performers/instruments within the soundstage between the speakers.

My favourite tracks didn't give me goosebumps on his system.

Not my usual genre, but his system didn't do this track justice at all:

View attachment 435325
There's a lot of created sound localisation on this track which a well setup system can reproduce.

On my active 3-way wide-baffle speakers it sounds really good. On my desktop NF system, it's positively mind-blowing.

Great test track my R3 performing well on loud volume. thanks.

 

[Holmz]

Car analogies never work very well, of course. But this one caught my eye because it furthers the idea that more money equals greater performance, whether or not that performance is realized.

…

Rick "but that F40 sure does look slick" Denney

The car analogies totally work.
There are two things guys know that they do well.

1. Drive a car
2. Work the wedding tackle

So for other fields they just reference one of the 1st two to show credibility.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Anyone remember the Wilson audio demo at the CES show in 2004. The demo had a Wilson Sophia system and a B&W 800 Nautilus system. The other system had a Nagra PLL preamp, Krell CD player and Krell amps. The Wilson had the same preamp, amp and CD player. Speakers were level matched and people were allowed to hear both and vote. The Wilson got more votes.

Afterwards it was shown that the Wilson system was something of a fake. A hidden 16 bit iPod was the music source, the Nagra was used, but it was feeding a hidden Parasound $1000 amplifier. Obviously Wilson had a vested interest in showing speakers are the overwhelming component of importance. They couldn't force people to hear it that way of course.

Speakers and the room are where it counts. Everything else is a solved problem.

Here is a quote from Mr. Wilson about that demo:

The demonstration was meant to explore
some prejudices in the way people look at system hierarchy.
to me, that means determining which element of the system is the
most critical in determining the quality and the character of the
sound the listener will experience.

And in thinking about that, I came down to the three most
important factors. First is the microphone used in the recordings.
Another is room acoustics, and then the third is loudspeakers. . . .
The loudspeaker is, to me, the most critical element in the
playback chain. The purpose of that experiment was to show that
the quality of the loudspeaker overrules the quality of the amplifier,
the quality of the cables, and even the quality of the signal source.


Loudspeakers are the least perfect devices in the system and
yet they have the hardest job. . . .

Because there is such a range between the poorest to the best
loudspeaker, it behooves the customer to anchor the system with
the best loudspeakers that he can, and then to build the rest of the
system around that.

 

[jooc]

Hello everyone!

I posted an ASR article for the first time yesterday.
I'm so happy that members are actively participating and discussing my questions together. I love conversations.

I have an additional question.
What price range do you consider as the threshold between HI-FI and HI-END in a 2CH speaker system?

In my opinion, for DACs, I consider over $30,000+ to be HI-END. For speakers, I think $50,000+ is HI-END. Because many brands have increased their prices by over 100% since the COVID-19 period, I think we should also raise the price standard for HI-END significantly.

For a 2CH speaker system to be considered HI-END, I think the price should be:
Speakers $50,000
DAC $30,000
Amplifier $50,000
Cables $20,000
= $150,000
Based on MSRP, shouldn't it exceed this amount to be called a HI-END system now?

I know it's an incredibly large amount. But surprisingly, many people use systems that cost more than this. In fact, people who own audio systems at this price point tend not to skimp on investing in what they buy. They're often people of high social status.

As society is becoming increasingly polarized, this is how I think about it, but I'm curious about what others think.


P.S.
Is it appropriate to post this kind of content here?
My nickname doesn't have a strange meaning! It's Uranus, a god from the generation before Zeus and Cronos! I chose it with good intentions, but everyone seems to think negatively about it! .... Should I change my nickname?

This reminds me of fake posts I'd see on photography websites sometimes, like: "gee guys, I found this lens that says f/1.2 on it for $20, should I buy it?"

It's designed to draw attention and most likely completely faked by someone who's bored who wants people to argue about stupidly-expensive stereo systems. (at least I hope so.)

 

[jooc]

DAC $1000
AMP $10,000
Speakers $20,000
Cables $100.

You probably could cut all of these in half so being generous:
$31,100.

There are some speakers that are active worth considering and those and a superior woofer would run about $16,000 without the need for an amp.

DAC: $100 - $300 (with state of art sinad)
AMP: $200 - $1200 (with state of art sinad)
Cables: $10 - $100
Speakers: Really variable but yes up to $20K depending on space

Anyone can pay any amount they want for good looking equipment but you can also look really stupid, fast.

 

[Blumlein 88]

This reminds me of fake posts I'd see on photography websites sometimes, like: "gee guys, I found this lens that says f/1.2 on it for $20, should I buy it?"

It's designed to draw attention and most likely completely faked by someone who's bored who wants people to argue about stupidly-expensive stereo systems. (at least I hope so.)

Well English is not his native language. He was using AI translation so it came across as stilted. The poster has switched to simple Google translation and the result sounds much more personal.