Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ctesibius" data-source="post: 6309528" data-attributes="member: 564131">I lost interest in this debate once I had to restate the exact same thing four times and yet it&#039;s still lost on you.&nbsp; And, amazingly, despite all of the other people in this thread you seem to be the only one who has taken a major issue with what I said.&nbsp; So, the problem is apparently not in my explanation but rather your comprehension.&nbsp; Thus, it wasn&#039;t worth my time or effort to continue.But, if I must;I understand your point completely.&nbsp; And I&#039;ve never said that SQ can be formally described as anything other than accuracy.&nbsp; The difference is I am openly expressing my empathy for the non-purist (also the &quot;audiophile&quot; who claims they are seeking completely accuracy, yet want their amps and wires to add &quot;warmth and richness&quot; to the reproduction).And many music purists would tell you that personal preference plays no role in a great musical composition.How do you propose we identify what it is someone is looking for in a system if anything not stringently confined to complete accuracy is identified as personal preference?&nbsp; It would be nearly impossible to discuss these things without a base-line generality we can identify with.&nbsp; As such, people generalize their style into the two groups of &quot;SQ&quot; and &quot;SPL&quot; so there is a common understanding of their interests, even if those interests aren&#039;t confined to the literal definition.&nbsp; And this I can empathize with.I bet you are a hoot to discuss your system with.&quot;So what kind of system do you have?&quot;A personal preference system.&quot;Yeah, but like what kind?&quot;The kind that I like.&quot;But like, is it more sound quality oriented or SPL oriented?&quot;It&#039;s oriented to sound good to me.&quot;Okay.&nbsp; And what would that be?&quot;My preference.&quot;But did you focus on SPL or sound quality?&quot;I focused on my preference.&quot;What&#039;s your preference, sound quality or SPL?&quot;My preference is what sounds good to me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ctesibius, post: 6309528, member: 564131"] I lost interest in this debate once I had to restate the exact same thing four times and yet it's still lost on you. And, amazingly, despite all of the other people in this thread you seem to be the only one who has taken a major issue with what I said. So, the problem is apparently not in my explanation but rather your comprehension. Thus, it wasn't worth my time or effort to continue. But, if I must; I understand your point completely. And I've never said that SQ can be formally described as anything other than accuracy. The difference is I am openly expressing my [I]empathy[/I] for the non-purist (also the "audiophile" who [I]claims[/I] they are seeking completely accuracy, yet [I]want[/I] their amps and wires to add "warmth and richness" to the reproduction). And many music purists would tell you that personal preference plays no role in a great musical composition. How do you propose we identify what it is someone is looking for in a system if anything not stringently confined to complete accuracy is identified as personal preference? It would be nearly impossible to discuss these things without a base-line generality we can identify with. As such, people generalize their style into the two groups of "SQ" and "SPL" so there is a common understanding of their interests, even if those interests aren't confined to the literal definition. And this I can empathize with. I bet you are a hoot to discuss your system with. "So what kind of system do you have?" A personal preference system. "Yeah, but like what kind?" The kind that I like. "But like, is it more sound quality oriented or SPL oriented?" It's oriented to sound good to me. "Okay. And what would that be?" My preference. "But did you focus on SPL or sound quality?" I focused on my preference. "What's your preference, sound quality or SPL?" My preference is what sounds good to me. [/QUOTE]

Verification