How does the SQ-W compare to the SQ-L??

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Cai Campbell said:
Excellent price on the SQ-W! The SQ-W is "full logic" while the SQ-L is "half logic".

You wouldn't happen to have any facts or figures on it would you? I know the SQ-W is the "better" unit to have, but what's the dealio with the logic?
 
Q-Eight said:
You wouldn't happen to have any facts or figures on it would you? I know the SQ-W is the "better" unit to have, but what's the dealio with the logic?

I'm afraid I'm out-of-touch with the technical details. Can someone chime in here and describe the difference between full and half logic? It has to do with active channel steering, that's about all I know, an generally speaking, full logic is more active than half logic. The "logic" refers to the decoding circuits involved.
 
I'm no expert, but here goes. My understanding is that the matrix lp is encoded with in phase and out of phase musical information. A decoder separates the two and steers it to the speaker that is intended. Early decoders got about 7 to 15 dB of separation in the fronts, 3 dB front to back and in the rears. Half logic increased the front to back separation to around 7 to 15 dB with the rears still having about 3 dB of separation. Full logic provided up to 15 dB all the way around, although the SQ decoding scheme attempted to have the most separation in the fronts, the rest being complimentary. It has been suggested that the SQ-W gets closer to 25dB all around, and a Tate as much as 35 dB in all directions.
 
Back
Top