HiFi vs MidFi


I’m a relative noob to the audiophile scene, having just invested in an integrated amp and upscale (for me) speakers.  From time to time, I hear the term “MidFi” for some components.  Is there an objective or just largely accepted definition for this term?  I’d be curious to hear feedback on what constitutes HiFi vs. MidFi across various components.  
128x128bigtex22
Post removed 
As an industry lifer since 1973 with more experience in "mid-fi" than I care to admit, I define the term by recognizing the following:  Mid-Fi is not made by a brilliant but misunderstood savant designer...it's made by an industrial manufacturer with economies of scale helping to keep cost per unit down.  It eschews "boutique" parts like designer capacitors, silver plated wire and Teflon insulation.  It performs well enough to comfortably pass conventional performance measurements.  It is well designed enough and well finished enough to give the appearance of high quality, at least on the surface.  It has an assortment of inputs and outputs to satisfy the needs of a diverse audience that includes most people.
These attributes could have been equally met by a Marantz 7/8 or McIntosh C22/MC275 as by a Pioneer or Sansui receiver. If the former were High End, they still met all the mid-fi criteria, just with better sound quality.

The modern concept of High End, with its snob appeal, exploded in the mid-70s with the arrival of Mark Levinson's 25W mono-blocks, 4-chassis linestages (2 separate VCs!) Wima caps, LEMO connectors, etc. Gone wer convenience and practicality, affordability was not a concern, and personality cult status for the designer fueled the myth.  

As Asian made mid-fi brands got more comoditized and glitzy, entry-level high quality audio slipped in to restore original mid-fi values...NAD, Hafler (both Dynaco and his own name-brand), Adcom, Rotel all had their runs.

On the other end you had B&O where looks were everything, and Bose where specs were nothing.

I could go on...
I consider my room Mid-Fi and you wouldn't insult me by saying that.
I was able to piece together a listening room for ~$12k (PL Evo 400, Rega P6, Dynaudio Evoke 50s, Meridan DAC, Cambridge Audio Duo phono etc.). 
It mesmerized me when I dropped the needle (or clicked the IPad) the first time.  Captured me, my kids, and my friends that visit.  Some people would consider this ludicrous money to spend on a "stereo".  Here its considered entry level.
Do I aspire to Hi-Fi?  Absolutely.  Do I think there is some snake oil/marketing in it ABSOLUTELY (I have been a part of that).
To me its more than about sound.  I love this hobby, exploring the science and the art.
Pretty comfortable with the size of my d...drivers.
Price has very little to do with High Fidelity. Take the $3K Benchmark AHB2 that amplies the incoming signal impeccably and the recent $45K D'Agostino that limps along like an Edsel and there's your high fidelity vs mid fidelity. 
To me:
Hi Fi is a very relative term. It has been co-opted to mean Hi-End. But it simply means a system that puts a great priority on sound reproduction. That’s all.

Like Hi-Performance (Hi-Po) in cars, it can mean a Mustang, a Miata or a Miura (Lamborghini).

Hi-Fi covers a lot of ground. Anything that sounds pretty good is Hi-Fi. There can be budget components in a Hi-Fi system. It just needs to perform better than an average audio system.

Once you buy separate components, you are in Hi-Fi territory. An outboard phono preamp gets you there too.

Hi-End is another animal. Some people don’t consider McIntosh in the Hi-End anymore. It is a premium luxury brand for sure.

Just like Mercedes is generally considered a premium luxury brand but not really Hi-End.

Bugatti is certainly hi-end. Certain Mercedes CAN be. Certain McIntosh CAN be.

Hi-End sound at a mid-fi price is possible.
Hi-Fi sound at a Mid-Fi price is also possible.

If you are on this site, you probably have a Hi-Fi system.

I think Hi-End is at the higher end of the premium ladder.