SQ..what is it?

[zallen2 10+ year member]

what does spl actually stand for i no sq = sound quality

 

[zallen2 10+ year member]

what does spl actually stand for i no sq = sound quality

 

[zallen2 10+ year member]

what does spl actually stand for i no sq = sound quality

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Sound Pressure Level.

 

[FoxPro5 5,000+ posts]

"The lunatic is in my head

The lunatic is in my head

you raise the blade, you make the change

you rearrange me ' till I'm sane

you lock the door

and throw away the key

there's someone in my head but it's not me"

Pink Floyd - Brain Damage

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Dont even get me started on ribbon tweeters and planars.

They sound just fine in my living room //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[Plutoman 10+ year member]

#1 I am not a smartass. Never try to be. Where in this post did I act like a smart ***? I will agree Nickleback DID INDEED distrot the recording. Humans sense distrortion as "loudness", there is no doubt about that. Nickleback is one of those music genres meant to be played loud....too bad they dont have a well recorded version that I could play loud with my system that wasnt clipped on the bottom end and compressed up top.
As far as being able to fart louder than my front stage...NO ONE has sat in my car and has said they needed more volume. A 900wrms front stage leaves alot of volume to be had.

Wait, what? Since when did Nickelback distort recordings? And a lot of their songs don't need to be loud at all... They have a lot of slower paced songs, acoustics, etc.

 

[Ctesibius 10+ year member]

Oh hey, SQ is accuracy to some and personal preference to others... who knew. What a bunch of self-contradictory nonsense. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif My favorite part was when you said "that is really the only real definition that can exist" and then went on to attempt to reinforce a second, self serving subjective definition.

Well, I guess I didn't realize you were a complete dunce. But now that I know, I guess I could try to explain it in a little more detail for your simple mind.

Words and phrases have different definitions to different people. For example, the same word can have two different meanings to two people in different disciplines. There can be a "formal" definition and an "informal" or "slang" definition. The only way to objectively, or formally, define "SQ" would be to define it as absolute accuracy to the source material. There are, however, those who informally define it simply as what sounds best to them with less regard to how accurate or true to the source it is. The original post asked, essentially, "how some of you define SQ setup". This is the division that will never be reconciled. You will never get the two sides to agree on a single definition of "SQ". Some want complete accuracy, others want it to sound good to them even if it's not entirely accurate.

I didn't say I personally would define SQ as subjective. I said there are times when I'm listening to my system and don't worry about the absolute accuracy because I would rather enjoy the music itself than worry about why a particular cord on the guitar doesn't sound exactly perfect. Although the accuracy isn't perfect, it's still enjoyable to listen to. That is all some people are looking for in an "SQ system", something enjoyable to listen to. So I can somewhat relate to why they might prefer their ideals of what makes a good "SQ" system even if I don't share their definition.

yet everyone thinks they are an expert.

This is the internet, everyone is an expert. I would post a picture of my Phds is psychology, acoustics, linguistics and physics.....but I think I put them in a box I took to storage. In the mean time, just take my word for it.

 

[MegaloJntariac 10+ year member]

They sound just fine in my living room //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

Im talking about in the car //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif in my living room they sound fine too //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Words and phrases have different definitions to different people.

Yes, I understand. There's your definition, and then there's the right one. Im glad we've come to an understanding.

 

[smgreen20 10+ year member]

Subjective!

 

[GAM3OVR 5,000+ posts]

sq = simply qrap?

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

SQ is whatever you like and the way you want to hear it.IMO

I don't entirely agree with you. I think TRUE sound quality lies in a system's accuracy at reproducing the original recording. The further from that a system is the LOWER it's sound quality is. Just my opinion.

In other words, sound quality is only subjective to a certain point.

 

[James Bang 5,000+ posts]

That's enough, Nickelback.

 

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

Wait, what? Since when did Nickelback distort recordings? And a lot of their songs don't need to be loud at all... They have a lot of slower paced songs, acoustics, etc.

Don't think he meant it in that way. He's talking about dynamic range compression. Which causes distortion. It raises up all the lower volume mat'l to be almost as loud as the LOUDEST mat'l in the music. This, therefore, compresses the dynamic range to around 10dbs if you're lucky. Sounds shitty.