What is High End? - Page 6  

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerg 

I think he means he wants summit-fi to be where hardcore audiophiles chat. So if you are only interested in getting the best setup for $1000 budget (for example), and that's it, then this subforum is not applicable for you.

 

So kinda like the modding subforum, except money and audiophile knowledge is being passed around instead of DIY tricks and techniques.

I think this makes a whole lot of sense. This is a hobby forum, and those of us in the hobby have different goals. The DIY forum is for people who's hobby is the making of the equipment. The Music sub forum is for those who's hobby is directly the music, and the music aspect of audiophilia (which I still say is a terrible sounding word). The Summit-Fi forum then would be for those brave and mildly neurotic individuals who are chasing that last 5% of audio clarity, whether it be at the $1000 level or the $100,000 level. The other forums would then be for the more mechanical, less philosophical discussions, of which steps to take on the upgrade path, reviews, etc. etc.

Wait...why am I posting in here anyway? I only come into this sub-forum to oogle at the pretty pictures of the gear I won't be able to have for a decade

Morbid fascination... must read thread....

Anyway, I will take a $7000 DAC feeding $700 cans over any transducer (hp or speaker) with a weak source. It's all downhill after the source, so the higher you start the better off you will be.

KP

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maverickmonk 

 The Music sub forum is for those who's hobby is directly the music, and the music aspect of audiophilia (which I still say is a terrible sounding word). 

If you are into new music would it be considered Pedoaudiophilia?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

It's just a forum, not a judgement on someone's status. 

In effect it's both, not an either-or thing. I'm not saying that I agree or that that is the way it should be, but there are various reasons why it is elitist (Radio_head enumerated some earlier in the thread). To begin with, "summit"? Why not "devoted-fi" or "extreme-fi" or "lifelong-fi"? The semantic connotation of "summit" is a minor issue but it is only the tip of the iceberg (sorry).

Say that early in the evolutionary growth of a webforum there's a group of users who have devoted substantial funds and effort to their hobby and tire of wading through threads asking basic questions or discussing low-tier or subpar goods. They decide to establish a specialized subforum and there is an implicit understanding who should go there and why -- this is the very essence of elitism. Again, just because it is a value judgment doesn't mean it is evil.

There's no one reason that a specific person is attracted to participating in summit-fi discussions, though there are discernible trends. It remains the best place to speak about stats, though not all electrostatic headphones are what I would consider as the top contenders. It's also a place where some snobs congregate, and there's nothing wrong with that. When it comes to headphones I too am a snob, but still I've liked some fifty-dollar headphones over others that have cost thousands. So I'm not a price-oriented snob, nor a snob who feels guilty about being a snob, nor insulted by being labeled a snob.

Quote:

Originally Posted by citraian 

Ok, so basically HD 800 is High End and LCD-2 is not high end even if they cost the same? That makes sense...

 

The HD800 is not the same price as the LCD2's nor in the same league when used in a proper setup. Given that dare I say in my opinion that the HD800 (maybe few others would agree), they are the best dynamic driver based headphones still in production out today. As much as I like the LCD2's (which I own and have heard numerous amount of times), it don't touch the HD800 in a lot of areas. Although both are fairly different beasts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl 

going along with all this, i think that while these headphones are "high end" or at least capable of competing with some of the stats and whatnot, allowing their general discussion on summit fi also leads to alot of people discussing for amps/dacs for them, many of them being mid-fi or worse (seriously, how many hd 800/LCD-2 setups actually use top tier headphone amps, not many) so then that defeats the purpose of summit-fi, and its too much of a hassle to have people post in separate places, remove those posts, etc. 

Couldn't agree more

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

 It's just a forum, not a judgement on someone's status. 

+ 2 Well said.

So at the end of the day it comes down to the type of people who own the LCD-2 and their not considering very pricey amp/dacs?  I can see that argument to a certain point-- but.. Are these same people somehow taking away any possible activity on many of the threads that are already dedicated to the aforementioned expensive amps and sources?  Are they going into other Summit-Fi threads and preaching to everybody that they're wasting their money on these expensive products?  I personally havn't scoured the high-end subforum enough to know whether or not these people are degrading the rest of the topics in it.  Or is it that other people who frequent the high-end subforum feel somehow threatened or intimidated because these select individuals are talking about less expensive setups within their own appreciation threads?  I either read it as extremely elitist or borderline necessary (if they're degrading other threads within the subforum) from that point of view.

It doesn't irk me personally because the LCD-3 is the new 'summit' of Audez'e, just like how the HD800 replaced the HD650 in its spot of Sennheiser's top of the line.  The approach to the argument, however, saying that it's because of the people behind the headphone itself, is somewhat of a letdown.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DefQon 

The HD800 is not the same price as the LCD2's nor in the same league when used in a proper setup. Given that dare I say in my opinion that the HD800 (maybe few others would agree), they are the best dynamic driver based headphones still in production out today. As much as I like the LCD2's (which I own and have heard numerous amount of times), it don't touch the HD800 in a lot of areas. Although both are fairly different beasts.

I'm not sure if I'm reading your post right, but are you saying:

1. price is partially a determining factor of why the HD800 belongs in summit fi, where as LCD-2 does not?

2. insisting that subjective impressions could be a factor for how headphones are judged to be in this subforum or not?  there's a huge divide between LCD-2 and HD800 fans who like one over the other on sound signature alone-- as is there a divide between people who like other headphones like TH900, Grados etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DefQon 

The HD800 is not the same price as the LCD2's nor in the same league when used in a proper setup. Given that dare I say in my opinion that the HD800 (maybe few others would agree), they are the best dynamic driver based headphones still in production out today. As much as I like the LCD2's (which I own and have heard numerous amount of times), it don't touch the HD800 in a lot of areas. Although both are fairly different beasts.

 

Couldn't agree more

 

 

+ 2 Well said.

Firstly, I think Jerg nailed it with the most reasonable explanation for the move.

Who's to say the HD800 is better than the LCD-2? How can such a judgement be made within a subjective hobby?

Likewise, who's to say the SR-009 is better than, say, the HD800? Apples to Oranges. As Tari has pointed out elsewhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl 

going along with all this, i think that while these headphones are "high end" or at least capable of competing with some of the stats and whatnot, allowing their general discussion on summit fi also leads to alot of people discussing for amps/dacs for them, many of them being mid-fi or worse (seriously, how many hd 800/LCD-2 setups actually use top tier headphone amps, not many) so then that defeats the purpose of summit-fi, and its too much of a hassle to have people post in separate places, remove those posts, etc. 

Which is what exactly? Seems to me "high-end" simply gets fragmented into the more expensive category.

Maybe the SR- x, unobtanium-x should be in it's own "highly different" qualifiable category.

Or whatever more acceptable or cool sounding name is coined.

high end amps i'm talking stuff that costs $2k or more just for the amp. so in other words, the lower woo audio amps, schiit audio gear, little dots, umm  and most other sub 1k amps wouldn't fall into the summit-fi category. summit-fi would be upper woo amps, eddie current stuff, and similar (apex, liquid fire, liquid glass, etc)

and just before any1 tries to say anything, im just generalizing, not to say other stuff doesn't belong there, nor that it does, just an example of what gear i think belongs there and why the general discussion threads aren't meant to be there. 

also theres still some LCD-2 and HD-800 threads on the high end forum, except it seems that the threads still there are buyers looking for the best amps or for something in the 2000-3000+ range to fully max out their setup.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl 

high end amps i'm talking stuff that costs $2k or more just for the amp. so in other words, the lower woo audio amps, schiit audio gear, little dots, umm  and most other sub 1k amps wouldn't fall into the summit-fi category. summit-fi would be upper woo amps, eddie current stuff, and similar (liquid fire, liquid glass, etc)

So the distinction is on price and nothing else. Just wanted to clear that up.. 

No one's drawn a clear and precise line anywhere in this thread on the subject of differentiating 'summit-fi' material and 'other' material.  Currawong's argument is that of hobbyism, but even the guy making a gradual journey to completing a rig with the LCD-2 in it and using 500 dollar amps and dacs could consider himself just as devoted of a hobbyist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

To keep the focus on the forum being "Summit-Fi". Quite a bit of non-Summit-Fi stuff was creeping in.  You can shout at me about it -- I moved them and I wont be at all offended if you think it was wrong to do so.  It made sense to me to do so but I totally understand why it might not to someone else. Basically I don't think those headphones are at the "summit" of what is available and don't see them paired so much with serious TOTL systems either (though not at all are they unloved by any means -- I'm referring to pairings with many thousands of dollars of electronics).

Clearly to the contrary, TM.

Which is why Jerg's explanation makes the most sense.

Oh I guess you're right.  So it's an issue of money afterall!

I think my main issue is Currawong made a decision to move the certain gear out of "Summit-Fi" initially based upon the amount of $ spent.

And if so, he shouldn't try to defend his stance by half-butting around throwing in hobbyist, dedication, etc.

Just because something costs more doesn't mean it sounds better. As everything is subjective, yadda yadda.

Be concise, I want the most expensive gear grouped together. And maybe in return that would result in

more concentrated discussions, being derailed less often.

But draw the line somewhere. It's about money not performance or dedication.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMRaven 

I'm not sure if I'm reading your post right, but are you saying:

 

1. price is partially a determining factor of why the HD800 belongs in summit fi, where as LCD-2 does not?

2. insisting that subjective impressions could be a factor for how headphones are judged to be in this subforum or not?  there's a huge divide between LCD-2 and HD800 fans who like one over the other on sound signature alone-- as is there a divide between people who like other headphones like TH900, Grados etc.

1. No I wasn't saying what belongs to the summit-fi section based on pricing I was just correcting the user that said that both the HD800 and LCD2 cost the same if one were to buy it brand new from any retailer. The LCD2 is $995 and HD800 is $1500. 

2. As I said the second half of my post was just my opinion as stated in the post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paradoxper 

Who's to say the HD800 is better than the LCD-2? How can such a judgement be made within a subjective hobby?

 

Likewise, who's to say the SR-009 is better than, say, the HD800? Apples to Oranges. As Tari has pointed out elsewhere.

Which is what exactly? Seems to me "high-end" simply gets fragmented into the more expensive category.

 

Maybe the SR- x, unobtanium-x should be in it's own "highly different" qualifiable category.

Or whatever more acceptable or cool sounding name is coined.

1. It can be made for those who own both and have heard both, I own both which is why I stated it only as my own opinion which I clearly stated in my post, yes they are both different beasts but a lot of people compare them both with each the most due to it's surrounding hype. 

2. I don't know about you and I haven't heard the 009's of yet but I'm pretty sure a large surrounding concensus would be anyone who has owned both the HD800 and the 009 would prefer the 009 more, exact same situation that MorbidToaster was in when he made the jump from his 800 to the 009's. Yes it is indeed Apples to Oranges but at the end of the day we all want that high-fidelity sound out of our gear despite any major/minor differences in the technology used itself.

3. What is this unobtanium-x thing everyone keeps talking about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMRaven 

Oh I guess you're right.  So it's an issue of money afterall!

It is indeed and I've already said this, price and branding determines what is low, mid and high-end at the end of the day. That is all.