SQ..what is it?

So now you dont know the difference between the words "right" and "winning"?
Well, if there is a "right" and a "wrong", then there is a "win" and a "lose" based on your ability to defend which side of the disagreement your position should appropriately fall on. So, either there is a "win" by demonstrating you are "right", or if there is no "win" then there is no "right" which makes the past few pages just as senseless as they first appear. You previously said this wasn't about "winning", as it wasn't a competition, thus it isn't possible to prove you or I am "right" as proving we're "right" would require a "win".

I'm a little weathered from trying to follow your continually circular logic on matters such as these, so I guess right now I'm not sure how to respond other than to say at this point we are going around in circles so don't expect me to respond to this thread again after this post.

Or maybe they realize the level with which you apparently love to argue,
You're right. I'm so in love with arguing that I exited the thread only to be begged back into by yourself. So who here is in love with arguing? The one who left or the one who requested it continue? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

And yes, you yet again trying to convince everyone Im just the most stupid person
I don't have to prove anything to anyone. You do a sufficient job of that yourself.

My point was that since your very first comment here you have tried to do nothing but down me under the pretense of arguing my point.
1) That was not my very first comment here. My very first comment here is on page 1 of this thread, long before you entered.

2) Other than my tongue-in-cheek comment, I didn't comment about anything at all on your position on the topic until you responded to my post with the intent of offensiveness. So who is attempting to bring who into an argument? I who responded to the topic of the thread with my own thoughts, or you who initiated this discussion by offensively responding to my thoughts? Who intended to put who down under the pretense of arguing their point?

You have a very deluded way viewing things so that it is always yourself who is on the defense or under attack. Must be that egotistical, narcissistic and paranoid personality showing it's ugly head.

Translation: you think you know what Im going to say, yet you were quite wrong. And you call me narcissistic. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
Or, I knew what you were going to say, thus you could no longer say it //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

Again, you only decided you were talking to a brick wall when I called you on getting serious about the topic. I wasn't a 'brick wall' when I was doing nothing but laying out sarcasm for you to portray as my inability to discuss this on a mature level with you.
No, I realized I was talking to a brick wall after repeating myself 4 times. After having described my position in detail multiple times I realized that continuing to argue over this was fruitless as I had clearly stated my position for anyone to read.

More diatribe to imply you know me, or anything about me. Tell me, if you are so interested in a mature and rational debate, how does this comment fit into that?
I gave up on a mature and rational debate long ago, when it was evident you couldn't conduct yourself in such a manor. It's funny how you jump into sarcastic dumbass mode from the get-go, then wonder why no one wants to carry on a "rational and intelligent" debate with you.

And yet here I am still willing to engage you on the topic.
You are here now trying to "engage me" on the topic only after you realized you made a complete fool of yourself. I guess if you wanted a mature and rational debate on the topic, you should have followed that road first rather than the sarcastic dumbass mode you so easily and quickly fell into.

So you simply implying I am somehow the immature one here just because you say so,
I don't say so. You've demonstrated such.

Regurgitating my comments with absolutely no evidence, or even personal opinion based comments, to back them up,
Think what you will, but I've corroborated my feelings with others //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif Not naming names as it's not important who.

only further shows your intent here appears not to be a rational discussion, but to turn this into a personal flame fest.
You initiate this conversation with a negative reply to my post and a complete inability to carry on a mature discussion, and I'm the instigator with flame fest motives. Again your logic is infallible.

You stating you get my point over and over, does not diminish my examples that show you in fact do not.
Your examples only demonstrate you don't understand my point, not the other way around.

And again I find it amusing you did not decide I was not worth 'restating your point' only after you talked me into actually calling your bluff to have a reasonable discussion about the topic.
So after pages of your mindless, sarcastic drivel I'm supposed to just jump into a rational debate with you on your say so? My points on the matter are clearly stated in this thread, continuing to restate them on the basis of "rational discussion" with a clearly irrational individual is pointless.

But now all the sudden its no longer worth your effort to actually type out what you call your point one single solitary more time.
It's been stated here four times. It's apparently not worth your effort to go back and reread what is already wrote rather than go round in circles continuously.

but actually having a rational discussion on the topic is beneath you, your effort is only worth making sarcastic comments to try and defame me.
Doesn't that exactly describe your comments at the very beginning of the debate?

Luckily you've already armed me with an appropriate response here;

At some point I just have to start being a smart ***, as that's my defense mechanism against stupidity and/or incoherence.

So you calling it a metaphor changes my point that you are now trying to get me to defend a position I never took?
You created that position by default of your viewpoint. Your inability to continue to defend your position shows just how fragile your viewpoint is.

If you want to discuss specifics, why not address the specifics I brought up, rather than make up your own and try to claim they are mine? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif
You first //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

I've responded to all of your points that I can recall. You, however, avoid mine.

For anyone who is following this 'debate', which nobody probably is at this point,
Which is exactly why I am again not responding after this post. No sense when it just continues to fuel your ego and nothing else constructive is accomplished.

you just demonstrated what i said above, that you are too scared, apparently, to address my actual points, so make up ones of your own, and claim they are mine.
I have responded to your points. You, however, avoid my points claiming "they are not your own" when they are 100% consistent with your viewpoint. And then you claim to not comprehend the simply metaphors I applied in again another attempt to avoid it.

Again you are so willing to argue with me at any cost,
You're right. I left the thread because I want to argue with you. Oh, wait......

And then you beg me to come back. Who's intent on arguing here?

that you will come at me from any angle you can, even two opposing ones like first Im a purist, now Im a personal preference person. Can you not form a coherent and concise argument for me? Try harder. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
You are seriously not getting it. Now I understand why you default to sarcastic dumbass mode.....you can't carry on a rational debate.

Please tell me my descriptions are not an accurate portrayal. You defend the technical definition of the term "SQ", which I accurately portrayed in my metaphor. You then said you prefer personal preference in your own system, which I again accurately portrayed. If any of this is confusing you, I'm sorry you can't follow your own side of the debate.

Cast me in a negative light, no matter how nonsensical, right?
Nonsensical? You said it, I simply agreed part of it may be accurate //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

okay, here's me addressing your point... I wouldnt have said that, you were 100% wrong. Good enough for you now? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif
Good. So how would you concisely describe your system to someone in less than 5 words?

I was only acting 'beyond the conversation' when I was only giving sarcastic replies, which you didn't like and complained about. Now that Im willing to address you on the actual topic of the thread, you claim Im NOW acting like Im above the discussion.
And what in gods name makes you think everyone wants to play your ridiculous games with you?

As for 'begging' you to continue? lol Now who is the one acting narcissistic?
Well, I left you begged me to come back. I would say it was your narcissistic need to continue to try to correct your failed attempt at proving your superiority that caused it.

Pointing out that once I was willing to address you on the topic, you decided to stop replying, and only came back when I called you out by pointing out your hypocritical action, would only be "begging" to a narcissist. I guess the old saying is really true, the one who smelt it, dealt it. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif
If by hypocritical you mean utterly bored with continuing to state my point in various ways and it still being completely lost on you then yes, I guess I was being hypocritical.

 
I dont know shit about sound systems. BUT this is how I view it. If you are satisfied with what you got and dont participate in competitions then its good SQ. If someone says different simply give them the middle finger and walk off. You can only do good with what you got and to the best of your ability's...and that includes funds that you are able to throw into a system. More opinions do help...but what matters in the end is what you want.

 
Well, if there is a "right" and a "wrong", then there is a "win" and a "lose" based on your ability to defend which side of the disagreement your position should appropriately fall on. So, either there is a "win" by demonstrating you are "right", or if there is no "win" then there is no "right" which makes the past few pages just as senseless as they first appear. You previously said this wasn't about "winning", as it wasn't a competition, thus it isn't possible to prove you or I am "right" as proving we're "right" would require a "win".
I'm a little weathered from trying to follow your continually circular logic on matters such as these, so I guess right now I'm not sure how to respond other than to say at this point we are going around in circles so don't expect me to respond to this thread again after this post.

You're right. I'm so in love with arguing that I exited the thread only to be begged back into by yourself. So who here is in love with arguing? The one who left or the one who requested it continue? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

I don't have to prove anything to anyone. You do a sufficient job of that yourself.

1) That was not my very first comment here. My very first comment here is on page 1 of this thread, long before you entered.

2) Other than my tongue-in-cheek comment, I didn't comment about anything at all on your position on the topic until you responded to my post with the intent of offensiveness. So who is attempting to bring who into an argument? I who responded to the topic of the thread with my own thoughts, or you who initiated this discussion by offensively responding to my thoughts? Who intended to put who down under the pretense of arguing their point?

You have a very deluded way viewing things so that it is always yourself who is on the defense or under attack. Must be that egotistical, narcissistic and paranoid personality showing it's ugly head.

Or, I knew what you were going to say, thus you could no longer say it //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

No, I realized I was talking to a brick wall after repeating myself 4 times. After having described my position in detail multiple times I realized that continuing to argue over this was fruitless as I had clearly stated my position for anyone to read.

I gave up on a mature and rational debate long ago, when it was evident you couldn't conduct yourself in such a manor. It's funny how you jump into sarcastic dumbass mode from the get-go, then wonder why no one wants to carry on a "rational and intelligent" debate with you.

You are here now trying to "engage me" on the topic only after you realized you made a complete fool of yourself. I guess if you wanted a mature and rational debate on the topic, you should have followed that road first rather than the sarcastic dumbass mode you so easily and quickly fell into.

I don't say so. You've demonstrated such.

Think what you will, but I've corroborated my feelings with others //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif Not naming names as it's not important who.

You initiate this conversation with a negative reply to my post and a complete inability to carry on a mature discussion, and I'm the instigator with flame fest motives. Again your logic is infallible.

Your examples only demonstrate you don't understand my point, not the other way around.

So after pages of your mindless, sarcastic drivel I'm supposed to just jump into a rational debate with you on your say so? My points on the matter are clearly stated in this thread, continuing to restate them on the basis of "rational discussion" with a clearly irrational individual is pointless.

It's been stated here four times. It's apparently not worth your effort to go back and reread what is already wrote rather than go round in circles continuously.

Doesn't that exactly describe your comments at the very beginning of the debate?

Luckily you've already armed me with an appropriate response here;

At some point I just have to start being a smart ***, as that's my defense mechanism against stupidity and/or incoherence.

You created that position by default of your viewpoint. Your inability to continue to defend your position shows just how fragile your viewpoint is.

You first //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

I've responded to all of your points that I can recall. You, however, avoid mine.

Which is exactly why I am again not responding after this post. No sense when it just continues to fuel your ego and nothing else constructive is accomplished.

I have responded to your points. You, however, avoid my points claiming "they are not your own" when they are 100% consistent with your viewpoint. And then you claim to not comprehend the simply metaphors I applied in again another attempt to avoid it.

You're right. I left the thread because I want to argue with you. Oh, wait......

And then you beg me to come back. Who's intent on arguing here?

You are seriously not getting it. Now I understand why you default to sarcastic dumbass mode.....you can't carry on a rational debate.

Please tell me my descriptions are not an accurate portrayal. You defend the technical definition of the term "SQ", which I accurately portrayed in my metaphor. You then said you prefer personal preference in your own system, which I again accurately portrayed. If any of this is confusing you, I'm sorry you can't follow your own side of the debate.

Nonsensical? You said it, I simply agreed part of it may be accurate //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Good. So how would you concisely describe your system to someone in less than 5 words?

And what in gods name makes you think everyone wants to play your ridiculous games with you?

Well, I left you begged me to come back. I would say it was your narcissistic need to continue to try to correct your failed attempt at proving your superiority that caused it.

If by hypocritical you mean utterly bored with continuing to state my point in various ways and it still being completely lost on you then yes, I guess I was being hypocritical.
I see thinking we might have a reasonable debate on the TOPIC was a mistake. You now only wish to talk about what you think Im like personally, and veil it with argument that you try to associate with the thread topic. I guess my first instinct was right, sarcasm is the only good response to your nonsense.

Your mom smells.

 
is this still about SQ, should I read it?
Not really. General summary - SQ is defined as accuracy of the original intent of the band/group. The more accurate, the more it corresponds to what they intended it, the better the SQ.

Personal preference is defined as how we all personally prefer to listen to music, if it differs from the intents of the original group.

Did I get it?

 
Not really. General summary - SQ is defined as accuracy of the original intent of the band/group. The more accurate, the more it corresponds to what they intended it, the better the SQ.
Personal preference is defined as how we all personally prefer to listen to music, if it differs from the intents of the original group.

Did I get it?
You pretty much got it as I see it.
 
That's probably true. I hear that is what happens after spending 5 years six feet underground in a coffin. Thank you for your insights Ant.....err, I mean, audioholic.
Yet another attempt to try and make me look bad. Im glad Ive become your hobby. I have a small penis, if you want to work that angle next.

 
it sounds like you have never heard a true SQ car...//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

I offer my car sometime for you to demo...//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
well lets see a build log or some finished pics then? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 
well lets see a build log or some finished pics then? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
http://www.arcaudio.com

then Galleries, team Arc. Dave Edwards. enjoy //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 
Yet another attempt to try and make me look bad. Im glad Ive become your hobby. I have a small penis, if you want to work that angle next.
Ill beat him to it.

MINES BIGGER THAN YOURS!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111111

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

Also my dad can kick your dads ***.

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
Old Thread: Please note, there have been no replies in this thread for over 3 years!
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.

About this thread

atsaubrey

10+ year member
SQ is the real deal
Thread starter
atsaubrey
Joined
Location
CA
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
150
Views
7,657
Last reply date
Last reply from
audioholic
IMG_20260515_202650612_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 15, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260515_202732887_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 15, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top