Mid-Fi, Hi-Fi or.....?

Hifi vs. Midfi vs. Lofi… categorical distinctions that are so subjective as to be more confusing than not; mostly marketing terms in how they’re used. Hifi stands for high fidelity - i.e. gear that will play back music with as little alteration to the mastering as possible - add no sound signature past the digital file, cassette, LP etc. Some nice kit by design is in a technical sense not great for the task of true hifi (again, by the literal meaning of the abbreviation). Much kit marketed as hifi is essentially unverified by real / legitimate testing. Hence hifi being more of a marketing moniker in the real world.

Midfi and lowfi came about as relative descriptors of kit that generally revolves around more widely affordable price points - you don’t tend to see folks talking about these three categories in terms of measurements or experiments with proper sampling, so the previous comments alluding to the terms being a way for market tier-ing and purchase-validating seem fairly accurate to me.

How hifi something is has nothing to do with how enjoyable it is to you. Some folks like a lot of “sound signature” from their kit be it from particular tubes, specific peculiarities of speaker cabinet or baffle design, etc. Believing in hifi is believing the mastering job of all music playback you consume needs zero further alteration in-playback chain (or in-room). Of course, many folks will agree that’s often not ideal.

Technically, how hifi a product is has absolutely zero to do with its cost. If something is expensive and has no available metrics / comparative studies to support its ability for (technically, not subjectively) audibly flawless playback, in today’s day and age, it’s not necessarily hifi despite whatever the price tag may suggest.

Better to consider vintage gear as just that - heritage enjoyment. Plenty of it can play splendid together and can result in Hifun - the far more important abbreviation to pursue in all this, eh!? 😉

I dont think and i know that one of the best amplifier of 1987 and the AKG K340 are not mere vintage low -fi or mid-fi...

These labels make no sense but most people cannot put an experimented  hearing  content on acoustics various factors... Then because they only identify price tags they go for this marketing ploy ...And anyway those with the budget will never believe anything as my motto : acoustics and synergy and mechanical and electrical controls matter more than price tags...

Some will say that my observation is born from envy...On the opposite i am very pride of my peanuts cost system...my jaw drop on the floor each time i use my 2 systems because i optimized it as it is...

I lacked the money to go officially in what they called purchase in high-fi, but i acquired the necessary experience to do it with past high fi vintage and acoustics and various mechanical and electrical controls...

Timbre experience and listener envelopment and sound sources dimensions and level of crosstalk , transients, bass, etc are not purely subjective concept they become objective when you had learn how to create and modify them in a system/room...

My speakers and headphones are unique because i modify them...Then instead of being envious of those who paid big amount of money i pity them now... The only one i know really better my low cost system really and not marginally , must own a dedicated acoustic room and a speakers/room system tuned for one another...

I consider myself to be a mere stereo enthusiast as I either don't have or am unwilling to invest the money it takes to be a true audiophile. That being said, I have what I'm sure would be considered a mid-fi integrated despite being class B rated in "Stereophile". My under $200 MM cartridge is also rated class B in "Stereophile". Both of these products were among others that earned the same class B rating, despite costing thousands more. 

This is not to deride others who are fortunate to have the means to invest in reference level systems. In fact I thank you as audio equipment is one of the few areas that "Trickle-down" seems to have benefited those with less income.

If you can swing it I always recommend going to an audio show if you want to get a sense of where your system falls in the range of sound quality. In your case I think you will be pleasantly surprised. Your speakers don't reproduce the deepest bass or go extremely loud but they sound very good at typical listening levels.

I've got "vintage" components as well (Thiel CS6, Krell KSA 300S, KRC-2) and I figured that new state of the art gear would blow my system away until I went to AXPONA a few years ago. Turns out that my system holds it's own against most of the six-figure systems I heard.

If you've got an upgrade itch I suggest you start with getting a subwoofer. This will make a big difference and you don't have to spend huge bucks to get a sub that will do a nice job.

@johnnotkathi

It been said that there are no absolute truths. Just workable truths, and relatative truths. In this regard, there is no "absolute sound", just (very) subjective references to high fidelity and high(er) fidelity.

The caliper I use for "Hi-Fi" is this one: "The suspension of disbelief", which is to say that for a moment in time, you stop "disbelieving" that you are listening to recorded music artifically reproduced in your home. The sum of all the elements you are perceiving trick your brain into believing that the artists are actually in the room with you thru the duration of the listening session. If this happens, all the Hi-Fi stars have lined up and you’ve reached a powerful plateau in musical enjoyment at home.

@roxy54

"Why is everyone calling interconnects "jumpers"?

You are technically correct, sir. While these are, in fact, interconnects, some manufacturers (like AQ) make very short (6") "interconnects" to connect input/output terminals located next to each other. Since they have no other purpose in life, they fondly refer to them as "jumpers."