Discussion Of What Is "High End"

[krmathis]

Originally Posted by martini1

Price should be a by-product in what is High end IMHO.

High end should be:
- top sound quality (better than 95% of what's out there)
- top build quality
- great design on achieving the sound quality
- durable
- nice looking, different from most stuff out there

... and most importantly

high end equipment got SOUL~!

Fresh Head-Fi'er and already got to know some of the basics...

[martini1]

Originally Posted by Duggeh

Theres a whole load of high end gear that's ugly. No matter which way you cut your aesthetic preferences, not everything thats not pretty can be called "industrial chic" or some other kind of bs.












Appearence has got nothing to do with something qualifying as high end. Only with whether it looks nice. I also find your definition of "durable" to be indefinate and I've no idea how one quantifies soul.

Let's try this. Ever read a restaurant guide? A 3 star Michelin restaurant is mostly rated base upon food, service, and deco. Somebody don't care if the service or deco are great as long as the food is good. I can understand that. If taste is everything then that's your hi-end right there. A local mom and pop cafe and be "hi-end".

...And there are some people who grade great food as great restaurant, but if the service and deco is 5th class it is not exactly true hi-end. It's not quite there...yet.

You don't have to agree with me. This is why we have a tread on this topic. Everybody's got their idea of what hi-end stand for. For me, it's not just great sound nor just being expensive, although great sound is a core element to it.

As for soul... it is kind of like how a similar class Mercedes vs Lexus. Nothing bad about a Lexus but a lot of people would agree a Mercedes got more soul. It's a very subjective thing.

[martini1]

Originally Posted by krmathis

Fresh Head-Fi'er and already got to know some of the basics...

[gregorio]

Originally Posted by Happy Camper

Joking aside, it would be nice to read what professionals and skilled hobbyists discuss as reference and technically competent components. I would also like to read what musicians and recording technicians think of the musical accuracy of these pieces.

I would be happy to have a go at answering but I doubt many here would agree and some are likely to become quite histerical.

I'm sorry to say but most professionals usually see the audiophile world as comprising mainly of fanatics with some form of OCD. It seems to us that many audiophiles spend huge sums of money on certain inconsequential areas of audio reproduction, while almost ignoring basic and incredibly important areas.

To use an analogy earlier in this thread when someone mentioned having to prove that a Ferrari could out perform a VW Beatle. The question here is how is the Ferrari being used. If it's just sitting in the driveway and occasionally being driven around a car park, then apart from appearance, there is not going to be an performance improvement over a VW Beatle. You need a curvy, empty stretch of road to really appreciate the performance difference. Likewise with speakers, DAC and Amps. I've seen tens of thousands spent on audiophile equipment, which has then been placed in a sitting room. Professionals know that all the replay equipment in the world (at any price) is only as good as the acoustic environment in which it's placed. If you have treated your room and it has a flat frequency response with any room modes dealt with, a controlled RT60 and well managed randomised reflections then you will really hear the quality of that expensive gear. I have yet to hear an audiophile system that could compete with the quality experienced in a good commercial recording studio, even though the audiophile has often spent more (sometimes considerably more) on the individual components. Unless you've spent considerable time and money on your acoustic environment, all you've got is a Ferrari in the driveway.

There are some areas in the audiophile world which we just smile and scratch our heads at. The ridiculous prices that some seem willing to pay for cables, particularly digital cables and power cables. Some of the cables (mic cables) we use are as much as 1,000 times more important to SQ than speaker cables and are infinitely more important than digital ICs or power cables and even with our monitoring environments we cannot hear a difference between $30 mic cable and an audiophile equivalent costing ten or a hundred times more. From our perspective audiophiles are being ripped off.

My intention is not to start a flame war, just to answer accurately. Just use the word audiophile and the initial reaction of most professionals is their eyes rolling.

G

[Kees]

Originally Posted by gregorio

I would be happy to have a go at answering but I doubt many here would agree and some are likely to become quite histerical.

I'm sorry to say but most professionals usually see the audiophile world as comprising mainly of fanatics with some form of OCD. It seems to us that many audiophiles spend huge sums of money on certain inconsequential areas of audio reproduction, while almost ignoring basic and incredibly important areas.

To use an analogy earlier in this thread when someone mentioned having to prove that a Ferrari could out perform a VW Beatle. The question here is how is the Ferrari being used. If it's just sitting in the driveway and occasionally being driven around a car park, then apart from appearance, there is not going to be an performance improvement over a VW Beatle. You need a curvy, empty stretch of road to really appreciate the performance difference. Likewise with speakers, DAC and Amps. I've seen tens of thousands spent on audiophile equipment, which has then been placed in a sitting room. Professionals know that all the replay equipment in the world (at any price) is only as good as the acoustic environment in which it's placed. If you have treated your room and it has a flat frequency response with any room modes dealt with, a controlled RT60 and well managed randomised reflections then you will really hear the quality of that expensive gear. I have yet to hear an audiophile system that could compete with the quality experienced in a good commercial recording studio, even though the audiophile has often spent more (sometimes considerably more) on the individual components. Unless you've spent considerable time and money on your acoustic environment, all you've got is a Ferrari in the driveway.

There are some areas in the audiophile world which we just smile and scratch our heads at. The ridiculous prices that some seem willing to pay for cables, particularly digital cables and power cables. Some of the cables (mic cables) we use are as much as 1,000 times more important to SQ than speaker cables and are infinitely more important than digital ICs or power cables and even with our monitoring environments we cannot hear a difference between $30 mic cable and an audiophile equivalent costing ten or a hundred times more. From our perspective audiophiles are being ripped off.

My intention is not to start a flame war, just to answer accurately. Just use the word audiophile and the initial reaction of most professionals is their eyes rolling.

G

You are invited to tell about your own preferences and what you consider good equipment.
Instead you rant about why you think "audiophiles" are idiots.
Why do you do that? Does it make you feel better?

[883dave]

The original question you quoted...

Joking aside, it would be nice to read what professionals and skilled hobbyists discuss as reference and technically competent components. I would also like to read what musicians and recording technicians think of the musical accuracy of these pieces.

And your response...

Originally Posted by gregorio

I would be happy to have a go at answering but I doubt many here would agree and some are likely to become quite histerical.

I'm sorry to say but most professionals usually see the audiophile world as comprising mainly of fanatics with some form of OCD. It seems to us that many audiophiles spend huge sums of money on certain inconsequential areas of audio reproduction, while almost ignoring basic and incredibly important areas.

To use an analogy earlier in this thread when someone mentioned having to prove that a Ferrari could out perform a VW Beatle. The question here is how is the Ferrari being used. If it's just sitting in the driveway and occasionally being driven around a car park, then apart from appearance, there is not going to be an performance improvement over a VW Beatle. You need a curvy, empty stretch of road to really appreciate the performance difference. Likewise with speakers, DAC and Amps. I've seen tens of thousands spent on audiophile equipment, which has then been placed in a sitting room. Professionals know that all the replay equipment in the world (at any price) is only as good as the acoustic environment in which it's placed. If you have treated your room and it has a flat frequency response with any room modes dealt with, a controlled RT60 and well managed randomised reflections then you will really hear the quality of that expensive gear. I have yet to hear an audiophile system that could compete with the quality experienced in a good commercial recording studio, even though the audiophile has often spent more (sometimes considerably more) on the individual components. Unless you've spent considerable time and money on your acoustic environment, all you've got is a Ferrari in the driveway.

There are some areas in the audiophile world which we just smile and scratch our heads at. The ridiculous prices that some seem willing to pay for cables, particularly digital cables and power cables. Some of the cables (mic cables) we use are as much as 1,000 times more important to SQ than speaker cables and are infinitely more important than digital ICs or power cables and even with our monitoring environments we cannot hear a difference between $30 mic cable and an audiophile equivalent costing ten or a hundred times more. From our perspective audiophiles are being ripped off.

My intention is not to start a flame war, just to answer accurately. Just use the word audiophile and the initial reaction of most professionals is their eyes rolling.

G

Why did you use a quote about "what professionals and skilled hobbyists discuss as reference and technically competent components" to debase audiophiles?

Have you a phobia? Have you OCD when it comes to audiophiles? Does the thought of an Audiophile threaten you?

With this type of attitude I wonder why you waste your time on an audiophile site.

Have your peers ostracized you, and the only place let to play is amoungst us lowly audiophiles?

[gregorio]

I gave an honest answer to how the professional world of audio think of the world of the audiophile. I realise my post sounded rather insulting and I apologise if anyone actually feels insulted. I could of course have said that my industry has a lot of respect for the audiophile world but I thought you would appreciate the truth, at least as I've experienced it.

Of course, what I wrote was a huge generalisation. Audiophiles are all individuals and while some I'm sure are perhaps a little too anal, I'm equally sure there are many who are entirely reasonable. Much as one finds in any society (including the professional world).

I've got friends who are audiophiles and in some respects I would consider myself an audiophile. So again, I'm not trying to start a flame war, just telling the truth of what I've seen in my 25 years in the music and audio industry.

I'm happy to discuss why this opinion exists, what the impact of this opinion is and what, if anything, can or should be done about it. I'm happy to talk about facts and equipment that we use and why. But I'm not trying to ruin this thread as so many others appear to have been ruined by personal attacks taking over.

Cheers, G

[Kees]

Originally Posted by gregorio

I gave an honest answer to how the professional world of audio think of the world of the audiophile. I realise my post sounded rather insulting and I apologise if anyone actually feels insulted. I could of course have said that my industry has a lot of respect for the audiophile world but I thought you would appreciate the truth, at least as I've experienced it.

Of course, what I wrote was a huge generalisation. Audiophiles are all individuals and while some I'm sure are perhaps a little too anal, I'm equally sure there are many who are entirely reasonable. Much as one finds in any society (including the professional world).

I've got friends who are audiophiles and in some respects I would consider myself an audiophile. So again, I'm not trying to start a flame war, just telling the truth of what I've seen in my 25 years in the music and audio industry.

I'm happy to discuss why this opinion exists, what the impact of this opinion is and what, if anything, can or should be done about it. I'm happy to talk about facts and equipment that we use and why. But I'm not trying to ruin this thread as so many others appear to have been ruined by personal attacks taking over.

Cheers, G

I don't care a whole lot about "the professional world", although I think it rather strange that they would have such disdain for the people they actually make recordings for, and who should be their most valued customers. (Why don't they try to find out how they like their recordings?)
What I am interested in is: how do you like your music? And what equipment do you use (headphone wise preferably) to enjoy it (at home)?

[greggf]

Based upon the sound quality of most modern recordings, a lot of people roll their eyes at the thought of audio professionals.

[mark_h]

High end to me is the stuff I cannot afford, that one day I hope to hear or own.

[gregorio]

Originally Posted by Kees

I don't care a whole lot about "the professional world", although I think it rather strange that they would have such disdain for the people they actually make recordings for, and who should be their most valued customers. (Why don't they try to find out how they like their recordings?)
What I am interested in is: how do you like your music? And what equipment do you use (headphone wise preferably) to enjoy it (at home)?

You need to remember that by and large the vast majority of recordings commercially released are not designed for the audiophile market. At the end of the day it is a business and a product is being made. While we try to make the highest quality (both technically and artistically) product we can, there are usually trade-offs. This makes sense if you think about it. A very high quality recording for the audiophile market is going to require a top class studio, top class equipment and personnel. So not only is it going to cost a whole lot more to make this product but the audiophile market is considerably smaller than the mass market. So it's kind of a loose, loose situation. So, the vast majority of products are mass market, with varying degrees of technical quality, depending to a large extent on music genre and demographics of the target audience. However, high quality products aimed at the audiophile market are still being made. Quite a few consumers think SACD is better than CD. Professional consensus is that there's actually very little in it. However, SACDs generally sound way better than CDs because SACD players only tend to be purchased by those who are serious about sound quality. So with this demographic in mind a lot more time and effort is usually put into the recording, production and mastering of a product destined for SACD.

The equipment I currently have at home is very modest by audiophile standards. Denon AV/Reciever, Keff Q9i (Q7i for surrounds) with a Velodyne sub. A nice little system but not audiophile quality. If I hear something which I want to analyse then I'll take it into the studio and listen to it there. Headphone wise I carry around a little pair of IEMs (Ultimate Ears Triple-Fi Pros) just for pleasure with an iPhone. Again, definitely not audiophile but useful enough as I need to carry a phone around with me anyway. I also use Sennheiser 250 HD Linear IIs, which are rubbish for a musical experience but excellent for analysis. In the past though I've owned higher quality consumer equipment, I had a lovely DAC from Prism-Sound, a good Cambridge Audio Amp and Acoustic Energy AE3s. Again not the highest of audiophile equipment but as good as I consider worthwhile without spending a considerable amount on a decent listening environment. I have at various times listened to hugely expensive audiophile systems (friends and acquaintances) but again I'm usually left with the overwhelming feeling of how brilliant the system could sound in the right environment.

G

[Happy Camper]

Originally Posted by greggf

Based upon the sound quality of most modern recordings, a lot of people roll their eyes at the thought of audio professionals.

I wrote a long response but decided to waste it. The focus of that response was precisely on that topic. Keep in mind, headphones are the focus of our forum. So room acoustics aren't part of our equation.

Audiophooles listen to our music with gear that performs better than what the music was recorded with. ICs are one of those things that in such a small chain, do make a difference. Our listening habits will tell you how bad the recording was. You hear the overdubbing and even background recordings that were erased to re-use the master tapes. While I believe the professional gear can do this, professionals don't listen to this level. They dismiss it as inconsequental. Guess what, it's not.

The purist audiophiles (theory) will expect a certain level of performance so ignore the typical sound and listen for the faults. They find components with the least amount of faults and tweak those until they shape the sound they want. While this may be the last 2 percent of performance and not worthy of most people's budget that the recording is targeted for, audiophiles are OCD for that last drop.

Does that make us knutts? Perhaps. We all work in a budget. Based on what each has to work with, we try to extract every bit of performance our money can provide.

[gilency]

High end is:
1-when my ears tell me the sound is fantastic.
or
2-when my wallet is very thin and tells me I shouldn't have bought it.
or
3-when everybody in head-fi is drooling after it.
or
4-when I want it but can't have it.

[883dave]

Originally Posted by gregorio

I gave an honest answer to how the professional world of audio think of the world of the audiophile. I realise my post sounded rather insulting and I apologise if anyone actually feels insulted. I could of course have said that my industry has a lot of respect for the audiophile world but I thought you would appreciate the truth, at least as I've experienced it.

Of course, what I wrote was a huge generalisation. Audiophiles are all individuals and while some I'm sure are perhaps a little too anal, I'm equally sure there are many who are entirely reasonable. Much as one finds in any society (including the professional world).

I've got friends who are audiophiles and in some respects I would consider myself an audiophile. So again, I'm not trying to start a flame war, just telling the truth of what I've seen in my 25 years in the music and audio industry.

I'm happy to discuss why this opinion exists, what the impact of this opinion is and what, if anything, can or should be done about it. I'm happy to talk about facts and equipment that we use and why. But I'm not trying to ruin this thread as so many others appear to have been ruined by personal attacks taking over.

Cheers, G

What are you smoking????

Again you quoted

"Joking aside, it would be nice to read what professionals and skilled hobbyists discuss as reference and technically competent components. I would also like to read what musicians and recording technicians think of the musical accuracy of these pieces."

And you answer was to take a pot shot at audiophiles???

Then you come back with a response...which is arrogant, boastfull, and again insulting

You come off sounding like a baffone, in Homer speak " Stupid recording technicians".

[Happy Camper]

OK G,

We are all nerve ragged with some of the current events in our community. Glad to have you here and straighten up or else.

Any master should be the best that studio and equipment can provide. If we want to hear all our music loud, we'd use the volume knob.

I've bought progressively worse quality formats in my time. Vinyl is still the reference format for sound quality. Since, we've had tape, compact disc, DVD, digital file. The technology should have given us better quality. Especially since each format required us to pay full fare for the same material.

The attitude of the recording industry has put it on the verge of extinction. The quality of format has lagged behind technologies. If the industry provided us with what's capable there would still be a market. Sell us sterile, compressed, saturated, talentless crap and when the audiophile calls it out, we're the crazy uncles.


Please give this crackpot some understanding.