The debate over the equivalence of voice quality measures derived from continuous speech vs steady state vowels is founded in the various definitions of voice quality and the resulting uncertainty about which aspects of speech measures of quality are most important. Measures derived from steady‐state phonation correspond to narrow definitions of voice quality as the perceptual consequence of vocal fold vibration. Measures from continuous speech derive from broader conceptions of voice quality as essentially synonymous with speech encompassing articulation, unvoiced portions of utterances, and sentential prosody. To complicate this matter, quality measures from continuous speech may reflect gestures related to linguistic voicing contrasts (e.g., breathiness near /h/). We will argue that measures from continuous speech depend on the measurement of vocal quality within the vowels: Because vowels form the largest voiced portion of continuous speech, any measure of quality must quantify their sound. To assess the perceptual equivalence of continuous speech vs steady‐state phonation, we therefore used analysis by synthesis to compare steady‐state vowels to vowels extracted from continuous speech, for 20 speakers with vocal pathology. Results will be discussed with respect to the overall manner in which quality should be quantified. [Work supported by NIH.]