Perhaps we should stick with midfi...

May I ask how did you choose your equipment?

it does not matter how much any gear costs, or how it measures..what matters is how you and you alone respond to the experience of listening to music through the gear.

only quality time spent listening to music you are familiar with, through various configurations of gear will help at all determining what low0fi, midfi, or highfi qualifies for an individual.

there are no rules.

good luck, and enjoy!

It's all part of the process Troll...errrr fellow audiophile. Gotsta pay the dues!
Pay some restocking fees and take some dat monies and I'll see you at the RMAF, where you will see/hear many full fledged cases of audio synergy at work.
My first system, when I got back into the hobby after a twenty five year hiatus, consisted of an ARC CD-7, Cary SLP-05 preamp, NuForce Ref 9SE mono amps, and Von Schweikert VR4-SR's with all Nordost Valhalla cabling. There are not a few audiophiles cringing right now, and a couple of jealous newbies muttering "Wow! Cool system!".
Synergy trumps cost in every instance. This system was a disaster, and could have been averted if I wasn't inclined to trust my instincts. There is a difference between trusting your ears and trusting your instincts. I don't say you shouldn't trust your ears; but if you ain't heard it TOGETHER, you ain't heard it. Period.

Azaud:

Your comments underscores one of my criticisms of the way that many audiophiles approach equipment purchases. Expressions like "synergy" and "trust your ears" are so mushy and ill-defined, that it makes the whole thing seem like systems come together by magic. In my view, if the system is that poorly matched, then there should be some objective data that would suggest that outcome: either the output impedance of one device is incompatible with the input impedance of a downstream device; or the output level of one device is insufficient relative to the input sensitivity of a downstream device, and so forth. To that extent, there should be someone who can offer some insight as to why some of these device might not work together very well: I mean, something more precise than just "synergy" and "trust your ears". Granted there are some fine points that you can't represent in objective data, but if a system is a "total disaster" (as opposed to being optimal) then there should be some objective evidence of the disaster. I approach this stuff as being partially visceral, but also partially analytical - I tend to not believe in magic.