Why is there no Mid End

We are all audiopiles quote un quote who accept the term High End to describe expensive or if you must reference grade sound reproduction. Some of us freely admit that we have mid-fi equipment but never say mid end or even sub High End. Even if you were to use the fact that High End implies a limiting superlative why don't we say this is a Low End piece we use low fi (or other language that's even worse) more frequently.
"Hi end" is relatively recent, and thus the confusion.
Originally, the term was High Fidelity, or Hi Fi for short.
As soon as that term was coined, people naturally determined that what was not Hi Fi, must be Lo Fi(delity).

Mid Fi? I don't remember when that came along, but I'm sure that it resulted from the need to identify the huge proliferation of better-than-lo-fi products (many of them Japanese) in the late 70's and 80's. Many sold through earlier versions of stores like Circuit City, Good Guys, Best Buy, etc.

But there really is a logical continuum -- lo-fi, mid-fi, and hi-fi. What keeps changing is what falls into the last two categories :~))
Because people have to justify thier purchases, and ridicule anyone who spent more all in the same breath. The common maxim is: HiFi is what I have, midFi is what I used to have, lowFi is what anyone else has, either that or tin ears since they did not recognize that MY system is the pinnacle of human achievement.

Audiophiles are too insecure to have it any other way...
Nrchy hit the nail directly on the head. Funny stuff!! One "attaboy" for you. Happy New Year.
For some reason, manufacturers choose not to advertise their wares as mid fi or low fi. In truth, the borders between hi, mid an low are tough to nail down. Is class B or C per Stereophile mid fi? Is everything sold at Circuit City low fi? To a tube fan, everything solid state may be mid fi at best.

To keep things simple, I'm with Nrchy. Hi Fi is what I own and Mid Fi is what everyone else owns ;-) Nice, clear, simple, no gray areas. Who me? Insecure??? Nah. Happy New Year everyone!
Just one more thing to add to Nrchy's excellent distinctions: the more obscure sounding the brand name ... the higher end it must be. True high end can not include SONY or Denon, unless it is in a second or kid's system ... it's a state law.

Regards, Rich
Yes indeed if its a familiar name which also happens to produce mass market gear it can't be high end. That being said some people will allow the best Sony front ends into High end because they cost so much. But that is mainly past tense for Sony. Its mid -fi at best now all the current CDP have multi disc capability. Where do Modded Universals fit in?
To NRCHY I recognize the that Hi-fi did start all this, but no one uses Mid-end- only Mid -fi in this era of High-end. What are we going to do if there is a sudden explosion of super high quality pieces which are inexpensive they may be Hi-fi but never High-end.
Personally I have scraped together a collection of audio gear which would qualify as high end or near it, but I still love my Hifi vintage pieces most of us wouldn't even call -mid fi. I don't know if they can be called high end. fodder for another thread.
Mid is not an end, it's a mean. :)
Mid Fi is what my stuff becomes when I get a jones for something new.
Plato, one word: Grooaan ;-)
Actually, a few more words... On reflection, you can define mid end as whatever is in the middle, regardless of how good the middle becomes over time. If you subscribe to this approach, the majority of equipement is always mid to low end by definition. The rub is that everyone's individual measurement scale differs so we'll likely never reach any kind of agreement on what equipment goes where.
The term mid - fi seems to have fallen out of our vocabulary. In the 80s, there was definitely three classes discussed heavily: mass - fi (Aiwa, Panasonic, Sony), mid - fi (Denon, Onkyo, Sony ES), and high end (where we play). Further, within the high end, there was a distinct term - low end of the high end (Adcom, B&K, Boston Acoustics, Carver, NAD, Nakamichi, etc.).

As these terms have fallen out of fashion, I feel they have been replaced by those which describe not strata, but the game one plays in itself. By that I mean a lot of the mass - fi crowd is iPod/MP3 these days, mid - fi seems to have become part of the HT phenomena, and the high end is what you see the Audiogon/Audio Asylum crowd doing (a lot of which is sadly the manhood measurement Nrchy so wisely pointed out).

The low end of the high end is being ceded to the Chinese today. European and North American companies are heading to higher pricepoints in this shift. I am totally at a loss as to how these companies are staying in business. If there are X number of people who will buy a $2000 component, there must be some fraction of that who are able to buy a $6000 component. Still, it seems as if these companies are continuing on. I just need the mechanics of how they have kept their heads above water explained to me.

Perhaps outlets such as Audiogon, Audio Asylum, and the web in general has motivated a fair number of us to head upstream with the companies? I know personally, I have spent more on high end audio in the past six years that I have been involved with Audiogon than I did previous to that. And, I have watched a lot of us here improve our systems over this same period of time. In that regard, the manufacturers owe Audiogon a tremendous debt (as opposed to being a focus of the ire of so many of them) in being a vehicle for moving a previous purchase, and freeing up funds for the next one. But, I am digressing from the point of this thread...

Still, a lot of us have what was traditionally referred to mid - fi stuff in our systems, such as tuners, cassette decks, equalizers, and the like.
Ozzy, my sentiments exactly, as stated earlier:

"But there really is a logical continuum -- lo-fi, mid-fi, and hi-fi. What keeps changing is what falls into the last two categories :~))"

Thanks for your support.