• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

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

"..The owner of a Patek-Philippe Nautilus or an Audemars-Piguet Royal Oak or a Vacheron Constantin Overseas (steel sport watches all) isn't going to swoon in admiration of a Rolex Submariner on the arm of a person with whom they are interacting. But neither will they disrespect it--those owners may well wear a Rolex for working in the garden, if they are landed gentry, or to the beach if they are an enthusiast."

Right? Whenever I encounter new money trying to flaunt a (chortle) Submariner outside of their garden it's always hard to take them seriously.
 
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.

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

OMG!! :oops:
 
On the whats the best forum a bit before Amir started this one, someone asked for the least expensive path to high end sound. I answered the then new JBL LSR 305 speakers and a DAC preamp. That might still be my answer. $300/pr for the speakers, and various DACs might fit the bill. I know of a couple DACs for $250 which could not be audibly bettered at any price. So for $600 with cables you'd have some rather high quality sound in a small to moderate listening space. All that is left for more money is going for larger somewhat better speakers (though the LSR 305 mk II speakers will sound very good), or to something with more convenience, nicer appearance or other capabilities like streaming or room EQ.

I always say find speakers you like or love and build your system backwards from there. Everything prior to the speaker is a solved problem on the playback end.

If you haven't experienced such a thing my claim will seem somewhere between unbelievable to naive by someone who doesn't know good sound. My claims are true however and I have heard some good systems. Some expensive systems. Wilsons, Soundlabs, and a few other expensive bits of gear. And I don't mean I heard them a couple minutes at some showroom or show. I've known people with them or owned them and spent hours listening to them.

So speakers are the only hard choice left anymore and the only one that might need to be expensive.

I agree with you. I've been talking to you guys a lot, but I now know that if you're building a hi-fi system, the biggest investment you should make is speakers, and you can save money on the rest.

Just thought I would mention that Google translate is much, much better than when you were using the AI for translation.

Thank you! I'm using Google Translate. I'm pretty good at reading English, but I'm not confident in writing it.

You've made a real effort to communicate and that's appreciated. I hope you are finding value in your postings and are enjoying yourself here .

The Google translate minus AI is much more effective

That's what everyone says! Google Translate is the best!

Since you are looking to upgrade/replace your amplifier…Do you mind sharing what equipments (source/DAC/preamp/amplifier/speakers) are in your current audio/HiFi setup?

I currently only have the dCS Scalati full set and cables and am looking to build a new setup for the rest. I have decided on the speakers. So I am configuring the remaining elements. For testing, I will use Topping or SMSL products for the DAC, and I will choose among the Class D amplifiers for the AMP.

First, I ordered the SMSL DAC!

You can get good sound in sub $100 product!

Comparing the 'sound' of DACs is just a waste of your time. Buy a DAC that has the features you want, disregard the rest. I use the DAC built into a 35 year old Sony pre-amp. You will not distinguish it from the $100K DAC.

I use the Sony because I like the look of it and it has PEQ. These are the things that matter, not fantasies about the sound quality.

I use a £2K CD transport because I like the look of it. It's no different in sound from the £400 one it replace.

Power amp was bought used cost of £1200

Loudspeakers £5K

I've been doing this 40 years so you can imagine how many six figure price tag systems I've heard in that time. I can tell you that set up in a good acoustic that system will take the Pepsi challenge with any 2 channel system at any price. Plus it looks how I want it to look in my living room. And you could do it for less money than I've spent - if you wanted to.

I agree with you! I know very well that expensive doesn't necessarily mean good sound.

I've been listening to hi-fi and high-end systems for over 15 years. That's why I like listening to music and am sensitive to sound. I also like studying and learning on my own and setting them up. I don't set up my friends' systems for no reason. I really do it well.

Luckily, a really wealthy person I know bought the new Wilson Audio WAMM. So I was able to listen to it and set it up. Originally, a Wilson Audio US headquarters employee would come and set up the WAMM. However, because of the coronavirus, the buyer had to come in temporarily, and I went there and set it up frequently. That's why I said that the difference in tweeters by 1 inch is quite big. It really makes a difference.

I was just being unreasonably high-minded and kept worrying about making good sound, but now that I know that DACs and AMPs perform well for their price range, I'm going to test the DAC first and sell my dCS!

I need to buy better speakers!

It goes down to preferences and needs too.
Say you want a multichannel DAC to enjoy your MCH DSD's.

People can get away with some work and minimal cost, under $1k and do it.
And then there's people as our "own" Kal who prefer a much nicer Merging interface for 10 times this (and do it right) .

There's no blanket we can put over everything.

I agree with you. It's case by case. Each person's desires, assets, thoughts, and ability to hear are all different. The choice is yours, and it's whether you feel satisfied or not!

When you're really thirsty, drinking water is so sweet and pleasant, but when you drink 3L of water and want to go to the bathroom, drinking water feels completely different? Because people's minds are fickle, and as time passes, you'll feel different in the same situation, so it's really hard. Making a choice.

@Uranus a quick question for you, which of the following describes your audio philosophy?

A. You use your audio equipment to listen to music.

B. You use music to listen to your audio equipment.

.

A. I will choose. The purpose and the process should not be confused. I should focus on listening to music, which is the purpose. I will pursue that.

It's a big improvement!

Thank you! It's all thanks to you!
Well, they are all wrong. And so will you be if you 'go with the flow'.

It’s an unfortunate mis-use of the term “high end”, which genuinely originates from a marketing term and genuinely means “high priced”, as an abbreviation of “the high end of the price range”.
View attachment 435228

The reason I harp on a bit about it, is because high end (high end of the price range) audio is snobbish and elitist. And a huge amount of mischief has been done by hifi writers conflating high price with high performance and throwing the term “high end” in there as a beautiful confluence of the two. Whereas we on ASR are largely aware of the lie and the mischief in that, as we know that a lot of staggeringly expensive hifi gear performs abysmally, and a lot of remarkably cheap hifi gear performs to a level that cannot be audibly surpassed, ie complete audible transparency.

So I will always encourage us to say “high performance” when that is what we mean. And when we mean very expensive, let’s say “very expensive” rather than “high end” in order to avoid the confusion about price and performance.

cheers

Clear answer!
Your answer is what I thought "extremely expensive products" were, and I think it's true that I thought it was just the word.

However, as you've summarized, high-end in audio doesn't necessarily mean that the sound is good just because the price is high, so ASR users talk about high-end in terms of sound rather than money, and let's clearly state that expensive means "very expensive."

Got it! I understand!

Following on from my post above, it seems that you actually want to discuss the price for HI-PERFORMANCE. Or even HIGHEST CATEGORY HIGH PERFORMANCE. (HCHP)

If so, you have to remove the words "in a 2CH speaker system" from your enquiry. Because the two things are incompatible.

There are two major ways they are incompatible:-
  • a 2CH speaker system is taken to mean 2.0, meaning there are only 2 units involved. In that case, it is a natural conflict between the best room placement for the lowest frequencies and the best room placement for the midrange and high range frequencies. A two-unit speaker system cannot achieve HCHP.
  • Two channel playback cannot achieve HCHP. You can achieve significantly higher levels of perceptual preference by simply adding more channels of discrete multichannel information.
cheers

You're right. It's not an easy problem.

But the place where we usually install speakers in our living spaces is the living room. It's often too small to install in a room. Unless you have a large private house, it's not easy. Installing it in a large space.

But multi-channel configuration in the living room is a system that wives really hate. Usually, women really hate thick speaker cables or various cables in the living room.

But multi-channel requires cables to be placed around the perimeter. Of course, you can use in-wall speakers or put cables inside the wall, but it's not easy to put cables in unless you're doing interior construction.

Even if you use wireless speakers, you have to connect the power at least. But there are more cases where the power socket is not around the appropriate speaker location.

In other words, for the various reasons mentioned above, we install a 2CH stereo system in the living room. And at this time, in order to solve the frequency interference problem you mentioned, you have to physically modularize the units of 3WAY or more speakers, or connect them individually to each unit using a perfect crossover instead of using a speaker network, and set them while providing time delay, but this is difficult.

Considering all these problems, we use 2 channels.

As is so often the case, opinions differ because there is no precise definition of high-end to which everyone refers.

Everyone has its own idea, which is also very clear in this thread.

In some areas of science and research, there are very narrow specifications for the material to be used. This is high-end per se, but is not referred to as such because the material is subject to the highest standards of production, modernity and reliability, such as technology that is installed in satellites, technology that is used to produce computer chips, technology for clean rooms and medical technology that is required in intensive care units and operating theaters.

It's all high-end, but it's very rarely referred to as high-end, it's technology that meets the desired or required specifications of the very highest standards. I assume @amirm uses such technology to measure at a high level, so his equipment probably also meets high-end standards.

In the audio sector, for me personally and based on my experience, high-end simply means a lot of fancy advertising and beautiful packaging, whereby the content often does not meet what would generally be considered the highest technical standards.

However, this cannot be generalized either, because there are often sinfully expensive and beautiful devices that also fully meet the highest technical standards.

I think this is precisely the difficulty for the consumer: to distinguish between what is just for show (and hopelessly overpriced) and what really meets the very highest technical standards (and where the price is somewhat justified).

In the audio sector, there is no industry standard for what is high-end and no official seal of approval from an authority that classifies it into the high-end category according to comprehensible test samples.

In this respect, it will generally be important for inexperienced people to have a competent advisor at their side who is different from the salesperson in order to perhaps not necessarily get high-end audio, according to whatever criteria, but a component or combination that is good for their own ears.

I think this is a perfect answer.

Many people gave similar answers, but anyway, in the audio field, there is no one, company, or brand that has properly set the standard for high-end, so this discussion has come up. And people are confused because "expensive" products do not necessarily "sound the best."

If you have someone around you who is really interested in music and can hear sound, you will have a greater advantage in choosing a good product regardless of the price, and if you know such a person as a friend, you will be able to be more relaxed about financial loss.

Let me brag. In the previous article, I mentioned that I set up a B&W system. It was my friend's system. He said that he recently went to an audio show and an audio store and listened to music with the same speakers, and he was happy that the sound he heard at home was better.

This is why I help people set up their audio.

Rolex is the Wiim of mechanical watches.

What do you mean by Wiim? The all-in-one player with built-in DAC, called Ultra and Pro Plus models? This is a Chinese product, and it is very cheap, but it shows excellent performance for the price.

Shouldn't it be compared to watches like Casio or G-Shock? Rolex is still a luxury.

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.

Simply put, it's not so. It's like buying that F40 and then discovering it drives like a 1976 Toyota Corolla in bad need of a tune-up, but with an F40 body. With much high-end audio, you'll only wish you could do better after having already gotten the most out of it.

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.

Rick "but that F40 sure does look slick" Denney

That's right. Just because a car is expensive doesn't mean it's fast. Just like just because an audio system is expensive doesn't mean it sounds good. In this sense, if you compare it to cars, the average person will quickly understand.

No it isn't

If each brand has no distinctive features, it must mean that they all sound the same. But that's not true. There are differences. Regardless of whether they sound accurate or correct.

 
I agree with you. I've been talking to you guys a lot, but I now know that if you're building a hi-fi system, the biggest investment you should make is speakers, and you can save money on the rest.

Any time someone comes into the thread with a budget of US$ 100,000 or more for speakers, I recommend the Meyer Sound Bluehorn. They are ugly functional in appearance but since the “circle of confusion” is a problem, you might as well get the speakers that modern movies (and therefore associated soundtracks) are mixed with.
 
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.

Yeah, I think the important thing is to create a system that produces accurate sound with the money I can afford.

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...

I also think that the most important thing is to be able to get continuous satisfaction from the system I own. It doesn't matter if it gets old. As long as I'm still satisfied and can use it, that's the best!

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.

Since it is an online space, it would be good to share knowledge and experiences by having conversations and discussions. There is no need to respond to rude comments. It is just a waste of emotions.


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.

Good words. It's a really good hobby. It doesn't harm others. You can enjoy your own world. It's fun to share experiences with people who share the same world.

I especially enjoy discovering new music that I don't know. These days, it's easy to find music with a phone app. I really enjoy listening to music on my audio system.


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.

High-end audio salespeople hate people who look for used products.

Because users who prefer to use used products go to high-end audio shops, look at the products, listen to them, and do everything. Then, they choose the products they are interested in and buy them used.

In other words, their efforts should be compensated by the sales of the products, but they end up buying other products from the wrong places. That's why they hate them.

However, this is an inevitable phenomenon due to market logic. Salespeople who hate this won't be around for long anyway. Users have the right to choose!

As digital development is accelerating, more and more products with good performance for the price will be released, so music quality will be enjoyed at a lower price. This is an inevitable social phenomenon.
 
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.

Did Dave Wilson demonstrate at the CES show? Space and speakers. They are really important.

I went to Wilson Audio headquarters and toured the factory. I also met Daryl Wilson at that time. But I couldn't meet Dave Wilson. He had already passed away. Was it really sad?

I felt it when I was receiving training at Wilson Audio, but speakers are the most important. Thanks to the training I received for speaker system setup, I'm good at setting them up now.

There are places where speakers should be placed in a space, and it's really important whether you can place speakers there. That's why it's important to be able to decorate a room dedicated to audio, but you can't usually put them in these places in the living room.

No matter how expensive the speaker system is, if the space is a mess, it's meaningless.

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.)

If it was fake, there would be no reason for me to write down the answers one by one.

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.

I now know that the price you quoted is a reasonable price for a system that produces accurate sound.
I also know that high-end audio products do not necessarily produce good sound.

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.

Yes! Thanks for explaining before I wrote down my answer, Blumlein. You are very thoughtful.
 
"..The owner of a Patek-Philippe Nautilus or an Audemars-Piguet Royal Oak or a Vacheron Constantin Overseas (steel sport watches all) isn't going to swoon in admiration of a Rolex Submariner on the arm of a person with whom they are interacting. But neither will they disrespect it--those owners may well wear a Rolex for working in the garden, if they are landed gentry, or to the beach if they are an enthusiast."

Right? Whenever I encounter new money trying to flaunt a (chortle) Submariner outside of their garden it's always hard to take them seriously.

I don't know much about watches, so I just think, 'Oh, it's just a complicated and expensive-looking watch,' and move on. But I'm more interested in watches that look ordinary but are expensive.

Any time someone comes into the thread with a budget of US$ 100,000 or more for speakers, I recommend the Meyer Sound Bluehorn. They are ugly functional in appearance but since the “circle of confusion” is a problem, you might as well get the speakers that modern movies (and therefore associated soundtracks) are mixed with.

It's like a studio monitor speaker? Genelec also recommends a lot of monitor speakers. I wonder what kind of sound they'll produce.
 

I currently only have the dCS Scalati full set and cables and am looking to build a new setup for the rest. I have decided on the speakers. So I am configuring the remaining elements. For testing, I will use Topping or SMSL products for the DAC, and I will choose among the Class D amplifiers for the AMP.

First, I ordered the SMSL DAC!
Why?
It is not a bad idea to make a plan first.
Rather than just buy stuff willy-nilly

Probably better to consider a TDAI 3400 with room correction for passive speaker, or some Genelecs for actives.

If you really want hi-end what about Kyron speakers?
 
I currently only have the dCS Scalati full set and cables and am looking to build a new setup for the rest. I have decided on the speakers.

Which brand/model speakers have you decided on?

.
 
High-end audio salespeople hate people who look for used products.

Because users who prefer to use used products go to high-end audio shops, look at the products, listen to them, and do everything. Then, they choose the products they are interested in and buy them used.

In other words, their efforts should be compensated by the sales of the products, but they end up buying other products from the wrong places. That's why they hate them.

However, this is an inevitable phenomenon due to market logic. Salespeople who hate this won't be around for long anyway. Users have the right to choose!

As digital development is accelerating, more and more products with good performance for the price will be released, so music quality will be enjoyed at a lower price. This is an inevitable social phenomenon.
These are typical stupid sellers who can't think outside the box.
- The value of new products also depends on how well they can be sold used later.
- Today's used goods buyer is often tomorrow's buyer of new goods.
- Treating every customer equally always pays off.

I know enough retailers who treat every customer equally, even if they actually want to buy used. In the long run, these retailers have profited enormously from this, whether through new sales or new customers.
And every customer who sells something used will then buy something new.
Stupid traders don't understand this cycle and don't deserve anything else.
 
...
That's right. Just because a car is expensive doesn't mean it's fast. Just like just because an audio system is expensive doesn't mean it sounds good. In this sense, if you compare it to cars, the average person will quickly understand.
...
All models are false, even though some are useful. Car analogies are models that are often false and their usefulness is limited. The limitation arises from the strong tendency of threads to switch over to an argument about cars when someone uses a car analogy. Everybody has opinions about cars; some informed by analysis and data, some educated or grounded in real high-performance experience, and (most) others not so much. (I can't imagine what Frank must think when we idiot amateurs express some opinion about high performance.) And the use of cars, particularly at their limits, has moral implications that don't transfer to most other topics.

Rick "who preserves his sanity by not participating in forums related to his professional expertise" Denney
 
Yeah, I think the important thing is to create a system that produces accurate sound with the money I can afford.
For speakers, I recommend you do the following:

1. Decide whether you want passive or active.

2. Pick your budget,.

3A. If you want passive speakers, go here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-recommendations-for-usa-by-sweetchaos.28296/

3B. If you want active speakers, go here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-recommendations-for-usa-by-sweetchaos.28269/

In the above links speakers are ranked based on their objective measurements in different price categories.

4. If there are speakers in which you are interested not listed in the above links, go here: https://www.spinorama.org/

That is the easiest way to find speakers that produce accurate sound for your budget.

For amplifiers, DACs, etc., go through Amir's reviews.
 
The OP isn't in the USA and his first language is not English.
The OP can use Google translate for text, and the graphs are self explanatory.

A lot of the speakers also are sold in other countries. The OP can find speakers of interest and check his/her region for their pricing and availability.

If you know of information similar to the links I provided for the OP's country/region, please provide it. That may be even better.
 
The OP can use Google translate for text, and the graphs are self explanatory.

A lot of the speakers also are sold in other countries. The OP can find speakers of interest and check his/her region for their pricing and availability.

If you know of information similar to the links I provided for the OP's country/region, please provide it. That may be even better.
I don't know where he is but I do know the price and availability of US kit like JBL and Revel is poor here and the reverse is also true.

I am in England and lots of good US kit is either unavailable or, in the cases of bulky heavy stuff like speakers, very much more expensive than in the domestic market so uncompetitive with European alternatives like KEF, Genelec, Neumann, etc..
 
European alternatives like KEF, Genelec, Neumann, etc.
Those are listed in the links, as well as speakers from numerous other European companies such as Wharfedale, Buchardt, Arendal, Elac, etc.

Again, the OP will need to find price/availability in his/her region. Nonetheless, the links by sweetchaos at least provide rankings based on objective measurements that the OP can reference, and take that into consideration along with price and availability where the OP is shopping.
 
Back
Top Bottom