Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bikinpunk" data-source="post: 6289628" data-attributes="member: 568114">And that&#039;s exactly why I said &#039;for the most part&#039;.&nbsp; I believe there are constraints that should be met a minimum.To me, these are image and staging.&nbsp; You can watch live performances and use those to verify staging and imaging.&nbsp; Focus is another bit hitter, imo.Once you step outside of these &#039;technical&#039; aspects, I believe you have a lot of leeway, and unfortunately that&#039;s often used by people as a crutch to not pursue or simply to call their setup an &#039;SQ&#039; setup.There&#039;s a whole lot of gray area here.&nbsp; It&#039;s really hard not to cut off your own toes when you argue for the side that I argue for.&nbsp; I find it very hard not to contradict myself when these arguments arise simply because what I know to be &#039;SQ&#039; by competition standards, aren&#039;t really fully important to me as some other aspects.&nbsp; Beyond that, you really do have a lot of tradeoffs, ime.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bikinpunk, post: 6289628, member: 568114"] And that's exactly why I said 'for the most part'. I believe there are constraints that should be met a minimum. To me, these are image and staging. You can watch live performances and use those to verify staging and imaging. Focus is another bit hitter, imo. Once you step outside of these 'technical' aspects, I believe you have a lot of leeway, and unfortunately that's often used by people as a crutch to not pursue or simply to call their setup an 'SQ' setup. There's a whole lot of gray area here. It's really hard not to cut off your own toes when you argue for the side that I argue for. I find it very hard not to contradict myself when these arguments arise simply because what I know to be 'SQ' by competition standards, aren't really fully important to me as some other aspects. Beyond that, you really do have a lot of tradeoffs, ime. [/QUOTE]

Verification