SQ vs SPL

[OLD_SCHOOL 10+ year member]

i like SQL like to feel it and hear it want a nice mix of high and low if my my lows are bouncing my head off the stearing whell i want my mids and high to be sending it back to the ehad rest, clear and strong, not comp level sq not comp level spl but awesome street machine.

 

[green_slip 10+ year member]

O-Line - need someone strong enough to hold off defenders, to be able to hold their ground, to know when to move, to know their blocking schemes.
RB - someone who is fast, great hands, well balanced, good center of gravity, great agility, knows their blocking schemes, routes, ability to make absurd cuts.

LB - good in coverage, holds their own, make the tackle, shed blockers, read offenses, speed is a bonus.

DB - speed, make-up speed, great hands, ablity to tackle, shed blockers, read offenses, great in coverage.

D-Line - need someone strong enough to shed off opposers, close gaps, to be able to hold their ground, to know who to tackle, to know where the ball is at all times, give their teamates time to make a play.

K/P - strong, accurate leg.

Anyone vaguely interested in football knows that the skill positions are often referred to as QB, WR and often times RB. That being said, of course there is skill involved in every position in every sport. I didn't say that. I specifically said that the KNOWLEDGE (not skill) used in all positions other than QB and WR is not needed nearly as much. Obviously everyone needs to know the plays but the knowledge to read defenses, avoid 250+ lb backers running at you ready to tear ur head off, be able to throw over 6'2-5'' 300+ lb lineman with their hands up, and lastly you have less than 3 seconds to throw the ball within a 2 ft. circle or it will be picked/batted down by corners and safties. Anyway I'm done elaborating, but as you can see QB and WR takes a lot more skill/knowledge than the other positions on the field. Sorry for the off topic response but it really isn't if you read my post before this. have a good one.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[js1 10+ year member]

I guess if there was a sql choice that would double or triple the other 2 choices.

I think I would want more sq if I had to choose. After 500 watts, it's more for other people IMO. I'm looking tight clean bass that blends well with the front stage and hits hard (XXX).

-j

 

[tRiGgEr 5,000+ posts]

SPL can be clean dummies...

 

[analogkid]

i was an spl guy but 1 of my friends with alot more money than me gave me his yukon gt to do a ****** swap. when i put on 1 of my cd's that i had listened to a million times and started noticingheard i didnt know were there, i changed my religion to sq........

 

[green_slip 10+ year member]

what was he running? h/u, speakers, amps etc.

 

[EFFENDI 10+ year member]

SPL can be clean dummies...

I totally agree. My preference is to have a system that can bump hard when needed, but maintains the delicate balance that SQ requires. That is why we have headunits with so many sound shaping options now. So you can adapt to situations like that.

LOL. Back in the day all you had was your balance and fader. If you wanted to bump it you turned the fader all the WAAAAYYY back and bumped it.

 

[EFFENDI 10+ year member]

You did not just say bandpass. Please...tell me you didn't say bandpass.

Who uses bandpass in SPL, especially with such a magnificent woofer as the Brahma?? It must be a crime in some states....