I don't quite buy into the lo-fi/mid-fi/hi-fi argument myself since it's mainly predicated on price and pedigree (as well as, perhaps, a dose of envy?), but I have also heard a great deal of difference between electronic components.
For example, when I was shopping around for a decent 2-channel setup, I auditioned the NHT 1.5s. I first listened to them hooked up to a NAD C340 amp with a NAD C540 as the source. I was duly impressed since I had really never heard quality sound reproduction before. A few weeks later, I returned to the same store and asked to listen to the 1.5s again. This time, a different salesman hooked them up to a Denon receiver and Yamaha CD/CD-R deck. No offense to owners of Denon or Yamaha, but the setup just did not sound right. The treble was grating and the midrange was lifeless. Wondering if I had 'misremembered' the sound quality of the speakers, I asked the salesman to wire the 1.5s back up to the NAD combo. There was no contest as to which setup sounded better.
On another tangent (I know this post is getting way too long), I own and have paired the M3Tis with equipment costing multiples of its price: Analysis Plus Oval 9 speaker wire, Plinius 8100 integrated, Heart CD6000, which replaced the RadioShack 12 AWG 'megacable', NAD C350, and Pioneer DV333 that I used before. Each new purchase was an 'upgrade' to my ears - but notice what I *didn't* replace: the speakers. I never felt that the M3Ti's were a limiting factor in the performance of my setup.
Gee, so what's the moral?
In my opinion, components do sound different and are priced differently. Whether they're priced *accordingly* is a matter for your ears and wallet to decide. Don't let naysayers from either camp dissuade you from pursuing the kind of sound that *you* want. After all, you're the one who has to live with your system.
p.s. Also consider the used market... Audiogon (www.audiogon.com) has tons of classified ads for audio equipment.
