General SQ General discussion of Sound Quality related issues.

wher are all the sq guys?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-02-2006, 01:31 PM
  #21  
4000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (5)
 
zzzzzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,643
Originally Posted by Rogue
Hehe.. Style and finesse versus brute force.
Style and finesse is brute force
zzzzzzz is offline  
Old 06-05-2006, 11:35 PM
  #22  
Yankee
 
JohnVroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,599
Originally Posted by Dukk
People still believe that you can get into SPL for cheaper than SQ. If you want to place respectably though in whatever class you choose, IMO you're spending similar money with either.

If you want to dominate though, even locally, you will likely spend more on SPL I figure...

Joe listed many good reasons that people shy away from SQ as well. I think the two big ones are pride (nobody wants their hard work criticized) and too many people think they need the ultimate flash install to compete SQ. Untrue - sure it has to be neat and tidy, but not expensive or flashy.

SQ is on the edge of a nice comeback though. A few more dedicated dealers hosting one or two shows over the summer would sure perk it up.
I agree completely

And what is good SQ? It is the sound of live instruments
JohnVroom is offline  
Old 06-05-2006, 11:54 PM
  #23  
2000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (3)
 
veeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,455
Originally Posted by JohnVroom
I agree completely

And what is good SQ? It is the sound of live instruments
which unfortunately may sound different to different people, but, I do agree that fidelity is the most that can be asked of any reproduction. By the way, many times I prefer the engineered track as opposed to the live performance...some people, and instruments, just don't sound as good live.
veeman is offline  
Old 06-06-2006, 12:02 AM
  #24  
4000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (5)
 
zzzzzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,643
Originally Posted by veeman
which unfortunately may sound different to different people, but, I do agree that fidelity is the most that can be asked of any reproduction. By the way, many times I prefer the engineered track as opposed to the live performance...some people, and instruments, just don't sound as good live.
there is something about this "just don't sound as good live"
the set up i have will never be as good as live BUT I WILL TRY
zzzzzzz is offline  
Old 06-06-2006, 03:29 PM
  #25  
500 Watt CAFz'r
 
SweetnLow91SC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 884
Originally Posted by veeman
which unfortunately may sound different to different people, but, I do agree that fidelity is the most that can be asked of any reproduction. By the way, many times I prefer the engineered track as opposed to the live performance...some people, and instruments, just don't sound as good live.
It's true that people do percieve sound differently..........

There has been research done on music perception..... and one of the interesting finding was that a person with min to no music exposure (to real "acoustic intruments" not from TV, Radio or CD) before the early age of 5 will effects later in life to be able to distinguish the better sounding musical intruments, recordings, audio system etc.

Last edited by SweetnLow91SC; 06-07-2006 at 02:56 PM.
SweetnLow91SC is offline  
Old 06-06-2006, 06:47 PM
  #26  
Yankee
 
JohnVroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,599
Originally Posted by veeman
which unfortunately may sound different to different people, but, I do agree that fidelity is the most that can be asked of any reproduction. By the way, many times I prefer the engineered track as opposed to the live performance...some people, and instruments, just don't sound as good live.
A recording is generally the best take of a long long (multi-day) recording session for live music... so it really should have some advantages. Most music is multi-tracked and may take a year or more to piece together. The danger in this statement is to prefer stylized or flavoured recordings over live music which will generally sound quite different from electrically reproduced events. A live recording is just that, it is the definition of fidelity. To be fair I have listened in poor music halls (rooms that sound lousy) and I have heard superior AND inferior musicianship, so yeah sometimes recorded is better... it should not be that way but it can be.
JohnVroom is offline  
Old 06-06-2006, 07:26 PM
  #27  
2000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (3)
 
veeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,455
^^I agree!!
veeman is offline  
Old 06-06-2006, 10:15 PM
  #28  
4000 Watt CAFz'r
iTrader: (5)
 
zzzzzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,643
so i see you have bin in bc place for a live show
zzzzzzz is offline  
Old 06-07-2006, 07:08 PM
  #29  
Guest
 
Mini Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 961
Instead of the idea of getting your car judged, look at it as improving your system and getting feedback on how to improve your system. You can get opinions from guys how are not tring to make money off you.

Also its great to meet people who are passinate about car audio, sharing info...having fun. That's all I think events should be...[/QUOTE]

I'm with James 110% on this one. I got onto this because I wanted to learn and have the best sounding system I could aford. Over a course of an frustrating season ( step learning curve) my system and the ability to learn from constructive judging it got better. The pastion of both arenas is increadable be it SQ or SPL. This being said I did find SQ substatualy harder but more rewarding in the end.
Mini Steve is offline  
Old 06-09-2006, 12:23 AM
  #30  
1000 Watt CAFz'r
 
theboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,267
Me spending 4hours tonight getting rid of the smallest rattle in my car...thats SQ and I live for it.
theboy is offline  


Quick Reply: wher are all the sq guys?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:34 AM.