Discussion Of What Is "High End"

[monolith]

Originally Posted by fordgtlover

Principle 1
The primary purpose of the gear is to reproduce quality audio.
This immediately would exclude gaming headphones, and playstations (their primary purpose is to play games).

Principle 2
Portable gear is not High-end.
This might be contentious, but I'll throw it in anyway.

Principle 3
Value for money is not the primary purchasing or evaluation consideration.
High-end audio is not all about the best bang-for-buck. It is about the purist pursuit of the best audio reproduction - to your ears, and to your budget.

Principle 4
There are no small improvements that are not worth chasing.
High-end audio is about chasing those final improvements. Cable discussions, DBT and proving that a tweak is scientifically valid is NOT part of high-end audio.

Principle 5
Skeptics need not apply.
If you are skeptical of the worth, value or benefit of any equipment, tweak or improvement - you are probably too focussed on the value for money equation; that is not high-end audio.

Principle 6
High-end audio does not need to subject itself to DBT.
This would be akin to arguing that the owner of a Ferrari should prove that his car is better than your VW beetle.

Principle 7
High-end audio is about what you want rather than what you need.
If you can't understand why anyone would buy a $1 Million dollar car or a $25,000 watch, then you probably won't understand high-end audio either.

Principle 8
High-end audio can include DIY.
Whether it be cables, DACs or Amps (even headphones), there are many DIYers whose primary goal is the pursuit of the best quality audio. Just because a product has a brand name doesn't make it any better - remember, the focus is on the ability to reproduce the best quality audio not how fancy it looks.

Principle 9
High-end audio can include older and used equipment.
Just because something is old doesn't exclude it from being high end. Older equipment offers terrific opportunities for high-end audio at decent prices. Used high-end equipment is still high end equipment - think classic cars.

This my 2 cents worth. These are not rules to be applied strictly- but more to shape thinking.

This group should not be elitist, but it should allow free discussion about the pursuit of the best quality audio - including questions from newbies (but please, not the 'High end amp for $300 questions').

Newbies should only come armed with sensible questions or views, that have actually been researched.

Principles 6 and 4 contradict one another. In most cases, small improvements are only detectable through DBT or something similar. Remember, this is about ultimate, no compromise sound reproduction. If something may not be pulling its weight, it has to go. If you can find through DBT that a certain component renders no audible improvement over another, why bother with whichever is more expensive or uglier or whatever. Without DBT, this becomes a matter of who has the prettiest or most expensive gear, not whose gear reproduces the best sound. That's technophilia, not audiophilia.

Principle 5 also seems like nonsense to me. Why shouldn't one be skeptical of the benefit of a piece of equipment? If it doesn't matter what something actually does, excuse me while I go start a cable company. There's money I should be printing!

In regards to Principle 1, that would only exclude gaming headphones and other things that didn't produce the best possible sound. What if Icemat accidently made the greatest headphones ever? Unlikely but possible. Same sort of reasoning applies to principle 2, though it's less necessary. UE11s at the end of a high end home headphone chain would certainly qualify as high end, no? Aren't these IEMs designed for professionals whose accuracy and reproduction demands are far more stringent, and whose perceptions are far more refined than the couch-audiophile with money to throw at his problem?

I should think Principles 8 and 9 would be obvious enough. Boutique commercial equipment is DIY as far as I'm concerned, just in a fancier case (or fancier garden hose).

Oh, and excuse me for the long quote, but it seemed worthwhile in this case.

[PiccoloNamek]

In my opinion, "high-end" is fairly easy to define. Lets look at amplifiers for example. Does the amplifier have a flat frequency response, a low noise floor, low distortion, high input impedance, and low output impedance and is not clipping? Then it is high end. A $10,000 amplifier that fulfills these requirements will sound no better or different than a $100 amp that does the same. If there is a difference it is certain to be substantially below the threshold of audibility.

How about headphones and speakers? Is the frequency response flat (or in the case of headphones, perceived flat)? Does it have low THD and IMD? Accurate transient response? Excellent extension at both frequency extremes? If it is a dynamic transducer, does it have low magnetic hysteresis distortion and minimal cone break-up? If yes, it is high-end.

There is a limit to how well audio components can be made, and it does not take a whole lot of money to reach that limit.

[883dave]

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek

In my opinion, "high-end" is fairly easy to define. Lets look at amplifiers for example. Does the amplifier have a flat frequency response, a low noise floor, low distortion, high input impedance, and low output impedance and is not clipping? Then it is high end. A $10,000 amplifier that fulfills these requirements will sound no better or different than a $100 amp that does the same. If there is a difference it is certain to be substantially below the threshold of audibility.

Could you advise how long you listened to both the $10,000 and $100 amps in your system. Also advise the make and model of each amp.

[PiccoloNamek]

I think you missed entirely the point I was trying to make. Listening is irrelevant, if both amplifiers meet the criteria I listed, they will sound the same, even if they are from different manufacturers and have different circuit topologies. They would also both be "high-end" at least as far as sound quality is concerned. Build quality is another issue entirely. I'd pay a little extra to get a well-built amp with a sleek appearance.

[883dave]

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek

I think you missed entirely the point I was trying to make. Listening is irrelevant, if both amplifiers meet the criteria I listed, they will sound the same, even if they are from different manufacturers and have different circuit topologies. They would also both be "high-end" at least as far as sound quality is concerned. Build quality is another issue entirely. I'd pay a little extra to get a well-built amp with a sleek appearance.

I think you miss the point of this forum...

Listening is irrelevant?????

Hi-end is about the sound coming out of the components.

Have you ever put a $100 amp against a $10,000 amp???

If two speakers use the same drivers, have the same volume and measurements and also the same frequency response, do you assume they will sound the same?

[PiccoloNamek]

Hi-end is about the sound coming out of the components.

Good, at least we can agree on something.

If two speakers use the same drivers, have the same volume and measurements and also the same frequency response, do you assume they will sound the same?

They would, by definition, sound the same if they had the same drivers, volume, frequency response, and measurements (I assume you mean distortion and other measurements.) I'm assuming these speakers are all in the same room, as well, correct?

[883dave]

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek

Good, at least we can agree on something.

No we do not agree...

I have listened two several amps less than $2000 (I do not have any $100 amps) and a + $10,000 amp in my system.

With this experience I would never make this statement

"A $10,000 amplifier that fulfills these requirements will sound no better or different than a $100 amp that does the same. If there is a difference it is certain to be substantially below the threshold of audibility"

I listen to components, and determine what sounds best to me, numbers are a way to market a product to people who do not care to listen

[PiccoloNamek]

Well, I guess we have a fundamental difference in audio philosophy, then, because the way I see it, with certain components, numbers are the only logical way to judge its performance. If I'm getting ready to buy a high-end piece of equipment, (in this case, the amplifier) I want hard evidence that it actually is better than a so-called low or mid-end device. The human auditory system is neither sensitive nor reliable enough to make these kinds of judgments with any real accuracy. And when you're thinking of dropping large amounts of money on equipment, real knowledge is essential. And even if it does measure better, would the differences actually be audible? Why spend more money on an amplifier that has lower THD/noise floor if the cheaper amplifier's THD and noise floor is already far below the threshold of audibility?

[883dave]

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek

Well, I guess we have a fundamental difference in audio philosophy, then, because the way I see it, with certain components, numbers are the only logical way to judge its performance. If I'm getting ready to buy a high-end piece of equipment, (in this case, the amplifier) I want hard evidence that it actually is better than a so-called low or mid-end device. The human auditory system is neither sensitive nor reliable enough to make these kinds of judgments with any real accuracy. And when you're thinking of dropping large amounts of money on equipment, real knowledge is essential. And even if it does measure better, would the differences actually be audible? Why spend more money on an amplifier that has lower THD/noise floor if the cheaper amplifier's THD and noise floor is already far below the threshold of audibility?

I would take the amplifier home, set it up in my system, listen to it, determine if I enjoy the sound.

This is my last comment as this type of discussion does not belong in the Hi-end forum

[monolith]

Originally Posted by 883dave

I have listened two several amps less than $2000 (I do not have any $100 amps) and a + $10,000 amp in my system.

With this experience I would never make this statement

Have you listened to different amps of substantially different prices that measure exactly the same? Because if you haven't I don't see what you're commenting on.

Amps and speakers are different. A lot more affects how a speaker sounds than how it measures. Amps aren't like that as much. If two amps have the same frequency response, same distortion characteristics, they'll sound the same by definition in the same system.

Originally Posted by 883dave

I would take the amplifier home, set it up in my system, listen to it, determine if I enjoy the sound.

This is my last comment as this type of discussion does not belong in the Hi-end forum

If anything, I'd say this is the most important kind of discussion to have in the high end forum. If some cheap amp sounds exactly the same as a multi thousand dollar amp that's well accepted as high end, we need to discover it and spread the word!

[dgbiker1]

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek

I think you missed entirely the point I was trying to make. Listening is irrelevant, if both amplifiers meet the criteria I listed, they will sound the same, even if they are from different manufacturers and have different circuit topologies.

I generally agree that they *should* sound the same, and probably do, though I wouldn't put it in certain terms, there are always exceptions it seems. My only reservation with your argument is that they should be flat responses from the equipment and headphones/speakers. This obviously opens the door for subjectivity, but I don't think a flat response equates to better sound. Prime example: Grado. Furthermore, there are points down the range that we have no control over where the frequency response of the recording has already been tweaked (by the recording engineers, room acoustics, microphones, etc.). Even with a flat response, I doubt you will ever hear exactly what actually happened in that studio.

Originally Posted by monolith

If anything, I'd say this is the most important kind of discussion to have in the high end forum. If some cheap amp sounds exactly the same as a multi thousand dollar amp that's well accepted as high end, we need to discover it and spread the word!

Amen! I can understand wanting to justify a $5000 purchase, but if someone hears something that can compete for much cheaper I want to know about it. Obviously, the discussion should encourage some constructive argumentation to prevent everybody from comparing their cmoy to an Orpheus (claims HAVE to be validated somehow, otherwise summit-fi will turn into a general forum), but bullying members suggesting relatively inexpensive, great sounding options strikes me as very destructive behavior.

Maybe some kind of approved and rejected equipment list is in order. Being a team player, I will sacrifice my time if necessary to test equipment

Alas, this is a new forum, maybe I just don't understand the rules and should head back to the general population

[kipman725]

to me high end is hi-fi... but high end of hi-fi is where you have a system where most parts are the best available or very very close to the best available. For example I would say some of monitor audio's speakers from 25 years ago are very high end even though they are probobly worth a tiny fraction of what some speakers cost. I would also say headphones like the HD650 even when costing not that much compared to say top end grados are high end by mearly been the best available with a particular characteristic frequency response.

[XXII]

Originally Posted by fordgtlover

Principle 1
The primary purpose of the gear is to reproduce quality audio.
This immediately would exclude gaming headphones, and playstations (their primary purpose is to play games).

Principle 2
Portable gear is not High-end.
This might be contentious, but I'll throw it in anyway.

Principle 3
Value for money is not the primary purchasing or evaluation consideration.
High-end audio is not all about the best bang-for-buck. It is about the purist pursuit of the best audio reproduction - to your ears, and to your budget.

Principle 4
There are no small improvements that are not worth chasing.
High-end audio is about chasing those final improvements. Cable discussions, DBT and proving that a tweak is scientifically valid is NOT part of high-end audio.

Principle 5
Skeptics need not apply.
If you are skeptical of the worth, value or benefit of any equipment, tweak or improvement - you are probably too focussed on the value for money equation; that is not high-end audio.

Principle 6
High-end audio does not need to subject itself to DBT.
This would be akin to arguing that the owner of a Ferrari should prove that his car is better than your VW beetle.

Principle 7
High-end audio is about what you want rather than what you need.
If you can't understand why anyone would buy a $1 Million dollar car or a $25,000 watch, then you probably won't understand high-end audio either.

Principle 8
High-end audio can include DIY.
Whether it be cables, DACs or Amps (even headphones), there are many DIYers whose primary goal is the pursuit of the best quality audio. Just because a product has a brand name doesn't make it any better - remember, the focus is on the ability to reproduce the best quality audio not how fancy it looks.

Principle 9
High-end audio can include older and used equipment.
Just because something is old doesn't exclude it from being high end. Older equipment offers terrific opportunities for high-end audio at decent prices. Used high-end equipment is still high end equipment - think classic cars.

I think these 9 principles are a great definition of high-end except I have to agree with Monolith that principle 5 does not make sense: surely you should approach everything with a critical mind rather than believing that everything is good? Basically the aim of principle 5 is to avoid what goes on in the Cable forums right?

[Kees]

Originally Posted by XXII

I think these 9 principles are a great definition of high-end except I have to agree with Monolith that principle 5 does not make sense: surely you should approach everything with a critical mind rather than believing that everything is good? Basically the aim of principle 5 is to avoid what goes on in the Cable forums right?

I think what he meant is that the "law of deminishing returns" is NOT valid here, because the cost are no factor in the valuation of the sound quality.

[stereoguy]

Originally Posted by Happy Camper

Once determined, can we get a sticky?

Another forum for us newbs to drool over. AAAAaaaaaaaaggggggghhhhhhh! Make it stop.

WHAT IS HIGH END?
-anything aimed at higher income sectors
-inexpensive parts in fancy styled boxes
-really expensive stuff based on old technology ("high end" tube amps and turntables)
-new technology delivering better performance at lower prices
-electronics not made in Cina
-electronics made in China
-a bonfide concept
-a farse
-something of genuine quality
-what you read and see in "Stereophile"
-the object of compulsive behavior
-Ideally, audio components that sound akin to real instrumnets and voices

guess it depends who you ask.