What exactly you get more from High end vs Entry level

[sunilj]

Hi all
In HiFi, there is lot of price variations between Entry level and High end models, mainly in Amplifiers, speakers and sources. So curious to know what extra one can get after spending 10x or 100x price. Some time 10x additional spend may boost SQ by 3x only, not proportional to cost. So I tried to contact helpdesk of some companies but did not get clear answers except below:
1. Cambridge audio replied that in costly models, high grade components are used. Then I asked since specs like TDH, etc are same, so what would be difference to the end listeners? No further reply on that
2. One DAC company clearly mentioned that due to high grade components, though specs are same, there would be difference in sonical experience.

Till date I found below answers. I mentioned below my findings wrt High cost vs benefits. Request FM to add in case there are more benefits by spending more.
1. High grade components = long life, reliability, lower variation in results, less noise
2. Solid Build quality i.e. less plastic, more metal, gold, sliver, brass, high grade switches, transformers, heavy stuff = improved trouble free life
3. More features & more connections options, like pre-out, MM+MC support for phono, two pair speakers output, variable loudness control, digital+optical in for audio
4. Where there are few technical options while designing etc. power supply transformer, always selected high quality design options. e.g. toroidal vs normal transformer
5. Some propitiatory stuff where company invested in huge R&D and now patented hence more cost
6 Separation / dedicated approach which may require 2x set of component. i.e. Cambridge audio higher DAC have two DAC chips separate to Left and right channel.
7. Purity approach i.e. pure gold, pure copper connectors, many pure stuff

Any more benefit for spending more?
Do always result into too high grade SQ same time?

Thanks

Plenty BRAG factor !

 

[newlash09]

I have sat in a Mercedes,BMW and some .I have not "felt' anything". The comfort level is no more felt than a Lexus half the price. But with good sounding music, I have danced, cried, felt spiritual, romantic and everything in between. Listening to good sound has a deeper feeling compared to a car.(at least for my brain). last night a friend came over and i played Neck and Neck (mark Knopfler& Chet Atkins). No words were exchanged till the album ended. In a car i would be worried if i get into an accident.LOL!!!

Each to his own as I mentioned tuff...I've realised that a track makes me sing, dance and enjoy music. Not the system. I still enjoy my favourite tracks on my Harman kardon soundsticks which I have at my parents place. And I enjoy them to the same extent when my devialet + PMC floor standers play that same track at home. The 100 times increase in cost of my main 2 channel system over my parents system doesn't add anything to the enjoyment for me.

But of course there are other things we look for, imaging, clarity, sound stage etc...I have never found them contributing to musical enjoyment, except make me a critical listener and make me worry about my cables

 

[sunilj]

Each to his own as I mentioned tuff...I've realised that a track makes me sing, dance and enjoy music. Not the system. I still enjoy my favourite tracks on my Harman kardon soundsticks which I have at my parents place. And I enjoy them to the same extent when my devialet + PMC floor standers play that same track at home. The 100 times increase in cost of my main 2 channel system over my parents system doesn't add anything to the enjoyment for me.

But of course there are other things we look for, imaging, clarity, sound stage etc...I have never found them contributing to musical enjoyment, except make me a critical listener and make me worry about my cables

Well said. Stick with what rocks your boat - your ears, your music, your space.

 

[hifitoaster]

1. Clarity
2. Depth / depth width
3. Scaling
4. pa level Loudness without struggling
5. Uniqueness in tone due to rare materials in building.
6. Cool factor /style statement /luxury


The last point is valid when you are rich. If I drive a ferrari and can afford a dinner at taj everyday and if I am annaudiophile, I would want my sound machine to perform great plus it must have a reflect my lifestyle. I won't bash hi end, if I were to then Rolex, rolls Royce, Gucci are also unreasonable. If I have a stylish interior I don't want some ugly boxes to be there inside for my sound. Luckily I don't have one our bashing stops at the point when everything becomes cheap for us to bother. A mcintosh is cool to look at even when it's not playing anything. It's always nice to feel good about owning something special.

 

[sudhirbhosale]

I've experienced 2 things once you go to super hiend HiFi setup.

i) Resolution
ii) Depth

In one review, author expressed this aspect in Width+Depth in simple manner but useful to judge SQ. I use these as rule to judge.

WIDTH: while listening you should feel that the sound is coming from front stage having 20feet width - Costly setup gives more and more width. Cheap gives feeling that sound is coming from point source rather than spectrum

DEPTH: Highest and Lowest frequencies should give feeling that each frequency source is isolated one. Cheap gives mixed effect of many. Its like using nuts in chocolate as pieces so that each piece would taste differently rather than grinding all and mix nut powder in chocolates which always give mixed taste. To simplify the case I give example of food. Food example is normally and easily understood by folks . Only difference is feeling to ear vs tongue. But both reaches to mind/soul hence still relevant example.

 

[sudhirbhosale]

Also
3) Tonal Accuracy
4) Airy feel (instrumental separation)
5) 3 dimensional Sound : you can actually make out the layers in music. The music director usually tries to convey the emotions of the song (not only by the vocalist variations but ) by way of tonal interplay of instruments or nuances in background score etc, are glaringly evident, instead of being hidden. Psychoaccustics etc
6) Non fatiguing for extended periods of listening (Highs aren't harsh, bass isn't boomy etc)

Agree, very precise ......

 

[sudhirbhosale]

Take someone who has never sat in a Mercedes for a drive in one. He will appreciate the comfort straight away.

Now try getting a non hobbyist to listen to our setups. He would think we are all crazy to spend so much for a difference he can't discern.

Audio quality is a acquired taste. Only after being keenly interested and listening to other setups do we realise what to aspire for.

So each to his own. But if I was starting again today, I wouldn't bother to listen to any better systems and live happily with my own crappy sound

Ignorance is certainly bliss in this hobby

Agree, You quoted another aspect - Interest, State of mind (and pocket as well ), Taste to appreciate (this differs from age to age.... my experience).
One important factor I thought: Ear sensitivity of listener. If its low then for him cheap and costly may not make difference. Very few people can hear between 20HZ to 20KHz. Mine stops at 12-15KHz, so other model is throwing excellent improvement in upper high then I may not able to still make out and hence claim the good change as No change

 

[sudhirbhosale]

1. Clarity
2. Depth / depth width
3. Scaling
4. pa level Loudness without struggling
5. Uniqueness in tone due to rare materials in building.
6. Cool factor /style statement /luxury


The last point is valid when you are rich. If I drive a ferrari and can afford a dinner at taj everyday and if I am annaudiophile, I would want my sound machine to perform great plus it must have a reflect my lifestyle. I won't bash hi end, if I were to then Rolex, rolls Royce, Gucci are also unreasonable. If I have a stylish interior I don't want some ugly boxes to be there inside for my sound. Luckily I don't have one our bashing stops at the point when everything becomes cheap for us to bother. A mcintosh is cool to look at even when it's not playing anything. It's always nice to feel good about owning something special.

Another point:
Pure vs colored sound. Some model (mainly low RMS) have some coloration by boosting some frequencies. Initially those sounds much better. And many listeners do the mistake by judging the colored sound. That does not mean non-colour always sounds good. In recording engineer kep some band much low which dont suite my taste so adding color by bass/trable, equaliser etc would helpful. Another my experience : My speakers were not producing results upot the marks at flat level but increased bass was giving required taste. Later I realized that I wrongly judged some amps due to incapable speakers. Speakers sounds best with bass adjustments means they are lem / handicap needs bass boosting.

 

[Yuvaraj_N]

Found this video apt for the discussion going on here...

 

[hifitoaster]

Another point:
Pure vs colored sound. Some model (mainly low RMS) have some coloration by boosting some frequencies. Initially those sounds much better. And many listeners do the mistake by judging the colored sound. That does not mean non-colour always sounds good. In recording engineer kep some band much low which dont suite my taste so adding color by bass/trable, equaliser etc would helpful. Another my experience : My speakers were not producing results upot the marks at flat level but increased bass was giving required taste. Later I realized that I wrongly judged some amps due to incapable speakers. Speakers sounds best with bass adjustments means they are lem / handicap needs bass boosting.

Everyone's hearing is different. I visited the Munich Hi end show this year and from what I listened over 2 days, I did not feel it wasn't just about flatness all along. My personal favourite system there was a western electric vintage stuff which was having unbeleivably huge soundstage and off axis response. I normally likedcold side of neutral sound before. But now I really wish I could afford an Einstein system which did sound warm to my ears. One of the flattest response speaker from Fink audio sounded rather boring. Sometimes it's the package of soundstage width depth speed and tonality is that matters more than just flat. On pure sound terms, there are some boring hiends and exciting entry levels depending on what our ears like, and how good still our hearing is. For people above 40 years old, they mostly are likely to perceive a little elevated treble as flat.

 

[jls001]

Speaking of sound stage width, I feel a truer test is the size of the width. A close miked vocal recording with a mouth two feet wide is simply not real. Or a piano solo playing wall to wall is not realistic either.

 

[hifitoaster]

In one review, author expressed this aspect in Width+Depth in simple manner but useful to judge SQ. I use these as rule to judge.

WIDTH: while listening you should feel that the sound is coming from front stage having 20feet width - Costly setup gives more and more width. Cheap gives feeling that sound is coming from point source rather than spectrum

DEPTH: Highest and Lowest frequencies should give feeling that each frequency source is isolated one. Cheap gives mixed effect of many. Its like using nuts in chocolate as pieces so that each piece would taste differently rather than grinding all and mix nut powder in chocolates which always give mixed taste. To simplify the case I give example of food. Food example is normally and easily understood by folks . Only difference is feeling to ear vs tongue. But both reaches to mind/soul hence still relevant example.

Isn't soundstage depth mean the depth of the stage to the front and back? Meaning like left and right width, to the other plane - frontal and back?

 

[hifitoaster]

Speaking of sound stage width, I feel a truer test is the size of the width. A close miked vocal recording with a mouth two feet wide is simply not real. Or a piano solo playing wall to wall is not realistic either.

Provided the mix is realistic. otherwise, in most music every instrument is dsp'ed to sound to unreal dimensions. And for modern pop and electronic music there is no rule on dimesion as most objects are artificially made.

 

[jls001]

Provided the mix is realistic. otherwise, in most music every instrument is dsp'ed to sound to unreal dimensions. And for modern pop and electronic music there is no rule on dimesion as most objects are artificially made.

Assuming realistically mixed record for the purpose of this discussion.

Where I come from is I've heard unrealistic image size on specific setups which are not over blown on others.

On a related note to your other post image depth is front to back.

 

[jenson]

apart from the usual high quality parts etc, i also feel these factors matter
1. investment on R&D (how many products to they release? when they release do they push the envelope.
2. Cost of Labor. salary of a audio engineer in India vs China vs England Vs USA...you get it..
3. Cost of finish of product, take a Gibson Les Paul for example. if one were to look at the tradional model specs the cost changes primarily on the finish (gloss etc.) no impact on sound.
4. time to make a product

 

[sound_cycle]

WIDTH: <snip> Costly setup gives more and more width. Cheap gives feeling that sound is coming from point source rather than spectrum
DEPTH:

You have redefined width, depth and expensive

ciao
gr

 

[tuff]

Assuming realistically mixed record for the purpose of this discussion.

Where I come from is I've heard unrealistic image size on specific setups which are not over blown on others.

On a related note to your other post image depth is front to back.

Can there be such a thing? I find intimate music to be larger than lifee in my setup. But if i play live concerts or large orchestration, the sound stage is huge. Can one setup do both?

 

[Ravindra Desai]

I visited WhatHiFi last year. Heard some expensive systems. Some very carefully.
I observed a very strange thing and I am wondering if it was just me:

I carry my own songs/ tunes/ music that my ears are used to. It helps me make a quick judgement.
The song/ tune which the exhibitor plays is the best to listen to.
You change the genre even very slightly, the system performance goes phuss. Literally crap for the price tag.....
This happened with not one but most systems.

So, is this a 'baggage' that these 'expensive' systems carry?
If its expensive, it should play everything nicely, no?

Regards,

Ravindra.

 

[sound_cycle]

<deleted>

 

[drkrack]

I visited WhatHiFi last year. Heard some expensive systems. Some very carefully.
I observed a very strange thing and I am wondering if it was just me:

I carry my own songs/ tunes/ music that my ears are used to. It helps me make a quick judgement.
The song/ tune which the exhibitor plays is the best to listen to.
You change the genre even very slightly, the system performance goes phuss. Literally crap for the price tag.....
This happened with not one but most systems.

So, is this a 'baggage' that these 'expensive' systems carry?
If its expensive, it should play everything nicely, no?

Regards,

Ravindra.

I Auditioned quite High end (Read Costly) setup recently, the FM mostly listens to Jazz & I had to Listen to the available Jazz tracks. Expectedly, it failed to impress me in any manner (I Hardly listen to Jazz), It was too sweet sounding a system without the required sparkle. But, I knew I was pretty wrong to conclude, so I spoke to people who listened to the setup earlier, who always felt the setup was rather good and very balanced. The problem was my current system was rather BRIGHT ( I don't like to call it harsh, Because its like commenting on your wife's bad choices; Failing to realize that , 'You' are one of her bad choices). Probably my Habituation with a bright system over last 2 years altered my sense of music perception. Who knows the music we have been listening all these years was not meant to sound like the way we like it (or the way we Color it to suit our preferences). After the regular commercial audio brands, The higher we go in the setups (price wise) there are more subjective decisions to make, the components will be carefully optimized and paired to suit a specific Genre in mind and specific types of listeners. I know that is kind of weird but specialization costs more. So without an objective data it is mostly a subjective opinion.

This series of Phrases is mostly Apt for our discussions:
"Our Music System is a Prisoner of Our Room & Our Ears"
"Our Ears are Prisoner of Our Mind"
"Our Mind is a Prisoner of Our Experience in Listening (Over the years)"
& Finally
"Our Experience in Listening is a Prisoner of Our Music System (Owned or Listened Repeatedly)"
"Our Music System..."

So, Whenever possible I don't miss an opportunity to listen to different of systems at different places and Now I rate less prejudiced, younger audiophiles opinions slightly higher. I was bit puzzled when @sound_cycle came to listen to my setup with his son, but now I realize; it is the right thing to do. Also I keep changing the Speaker systems often in a periodic manner.

Whenever I read Online reviews of audio products, I mostly look for objective data, because Without Objective Data, it is just like One prisoner sharing his opinions about a New device that entered his Cell and How much it appeals to his/her Listening Experience. By the Way ,Hifi Portals are a platforms for Prisoners to exchange experiences online.