In your opinion, what is Hi, Medium and Low end?

Glory, yes, that makes me feel better. I thank you for that. I just get fed up with SS being classified as inferior. The best system I ever heard had huge solid state Classe monoblocks with CJ tube preamplification, if my memory serves me correctly. I'll never forget that day. The best of both worlds.

You can achieve fairly high end sound for medium or low end cost if you match any decent speakers properly to a decent amp and focus on good speaker placement within the room

Most systems sound "high end" when speakers can be placed at least a few feet away from walls to avoid early reflections. In general, most speakers sound better when given some "room to breathe" in this manner. Avoid speakers that are too big in a room that is too small. Most decent, smaller "monitor speakers" work well in a variety of room sizes when paired with a decent quality matching amp, like a NAD (warmer sound) or Rotel (more detailed/transparent).

Then add some decent interconnects (anything other than stock cables that come with units, DNM, audioquest or MIT among others are safe bets) and any decent Monster power conditioner and you should be 90% there. Everything from here is a tweak to your particular tastes. If you are using a phono, make sure the cartridge is properly aligned and matched to the phono input properly.

IMHO, hi-fi has become so good and cheap since 50's that there is almost no such thing as low or mid fi around anymore (at least not in your average middle class home). Digital has been the great democratizer - simplifying things with high quality sound with great channel separation, S/N and a dynamic range exceeding previous technologies by about 30 db+.

This has resulted in a battle for differentiation in the high end that is largely one of marketing specs and aesthetics (precious metals/heavy build etc) and plumbing the extremes such as extreme bass performance or SPL capability or odd distinctive colorations. It has pitted tubes against SS (although depending on the topology they can sound similar). It has pitted Analog against Digital - and again depending on the recording quality they can sound similar too.

If this seems a lot like Yves St. Laurent vs Hugo Boss vs Armani, Versace etc. that is because great functional clothing was invented a long time ago and so differentiation moves to aesthetics and type of material ( man made fabrics vs natural etc)

Like the girls discussing clothing - the guys discuss gear but in the end it is just harmless fun - and todays "cock of the wall" product is tomorrows "feather duster". So enjoy the banter but don't for one moment be fooled into thinking there is some raw ground truths or science to it. It is just fun.

Agree with Shadorne.

I'd only add that the underpinnings of audio is science and engineering, but 98% of the end user experience results from the artistic aspect, which includes the recording process.

Hello All,Dcstep I took your suggestion and looked at Mr. Porters system.I also looked at his professional background.
This confuses my even more.
Some of you have stated that there are no low or mid-fi these days all equipment is good.Some say have fun with it.
It seems that the price of Mr.Porters system can support a third world country.I dont think Mr.Porter intentionally wants to spend his hard earned dollars on what I checked to be a very expensive system not to mention the cost of power to fire all this up.So there must be more to it.
So guys,if you had the dollars to put into a higher end system,would you.And would you then say its all good ??
Honest answers only.Please set the ego's aside.
I'm trying to learn
Thank you