Audionics Space & Image Composer / Tate Audio

[Sonik Wiz]

Proof positive a thread never dies on QQ!
Not sure how I stumbled across this today but it has been fascinating reading. What we have here is a 3 pg thread from Steve Kennedy with much interesting information about the transition from S & IC to Tate. It serves as a sequel to the excellent posts & comments Lynn Olson has made on his days at Audionics elsewhere. In fact Steve is quite complimentary of the Shadow Vector decoder & Lynn.

Some excellent info on how to tune & maintain the Fosgate Tate 101A.

Now of course, start at pg1

 

[ar surround]

Some excellent info on how to tune & maintain the Fosgate Tate 101A.

The 101A had to be tuned? That's fascinating.

I'm waiting for the day when AI gets sophisticated enough to make on-the-fly real-time 5.1 mixes out of stereo. You choose whether you want a Steven Wilson flavor mix, an Elliot Scheiner flavor mix and, just for laughs, a Silverline mix.

 

[furui_suterioo]

I was searching the chip numbers ra404 ra404 in images and found this page from Electonique magazine winter 2012. File is too large yo upload, but it is only on this page, Acheté means buy, I wonder they were selling Tate chips:

 

[aludra]

I'm waiting for the day when AI gets sophisticated enough to make on-the-fly real-time 5.1 mixes out of stereo. You choose whether you want a Steven Wilson flavor mix, an Elliot Scheiner flavor mix and, just for laughs, a Silverline mix.
[/QUOTE]


Actually that is a fantastic idea!! Since space is getting cheaper all the time why couldn't the record companies have all the multitrack "tracks" on a file set and just choose your mix type...even a softer wide field mix or to an aggressive discrete mix....Of course that technology might cut into my biz, but I think its an inspiring idea and could make for fun listening choices for the consumer...

Think of all the reissues the record companies could do

 

[DuncanS]

I was searching the chip numbers ra404 ra404 in images and found this page from Electonique magazine winter 2012. File is too large yo upload, but it is only on this page, Acheté means buy, I wonder they were selling Tate chips:
View attachment 55665

As best as I can remember they were standard Analogue Operational Amplifiers (dual & quad I think) that were made by Exar (now part of MaxLinear) & National Semiconductor (now part of Texas Instruments). There are probably no direct equivalents manufactured, but most newer parts would function well.

 

[par4ken]

As best as I can remember they were standard Analogue Operational Amplifiers (dual & quad I think) that were made by Exar (now part of MaxLinear) & National Semiconductor (now part of Texas Instruments). There are probably no direct equivalents manufactured, but most newer parts would function well.

It looks like the chip numbers are RH402 and RH404 on the Audionics diagram, but the ink is smeared a bit. I know that Steve stated the numbers as RA though, I would have to open up my unit again to check. Has anyone heard from Steve? No new posts in a very, very long time, I hope that he is still with us.

 

[furui_suterioo]

It looks like the chip numbers are RH402 and RH404 on the Audionics diagram, but the ink is smeared a bit. I know that Steve stated the numbers as RA though, I would have to open up my unit again to check. Has anyone heard from Steve? No new posts in a very, very long time, I hope that he is still with us.

It hard to tell, looks like both A and H, maybe that's why its scribbled out, I dont get much search results with rh402/rh404.

The National Semiconductor number in the mag is the one that Steve mentioned in an earlier post on this thread but later corrected himself, this made me wonder what exactly lm1492n/lm1494n is. One of your posts on Audionics thread you mention patching up a Tate with Motorola chips, I wonder what other types of chips could be shoehorned into a dead Tate or if one had extra Tate chips(theoretically) if they could be worked into a decoder which originally used the Motorola set, that would be interesting.

 

[par4ken]

It hard to tell, looks like both A and H, maybe that's why its scribbled out, I dont get much search results with rh402/rh404.
View attachment 55745
The National Semiconductor number in the mag is the one that Steve mentioned in an earlier post on this thread but later corrected himself, this made me wonder what exactly lm1492n/lm1494n is. One of your posts on Audionics thread you mention patching up a Tate with Motorola chips, I wonder what other types of chips could be shoehorned into a dead Tate or if one had extra Tate chips(theoretically) if they could be worked into a decoder which originally used the Motorola set, that would be interesting.

The bottom number definitely looks like an H to me. I mentioned the Motorola chips (as a last resort) for a dead Tate as the volume and balance can be done the same way, both are using VCA's. If you the had Tate chips you couldn't work them into a decoder using the Motorola chips unless you also constructed the interface circuit. According to one of Steve's posts had National not screwed things up the interface would not be necessary. The interface circuit is used with the Exar chips as well, I guess that Exar didn't remove all the problems of the National Chips? The idea was supposed to be a chip-set that could be integrated into a mass produced product with few added components (like the Motorola's) and thus sell for a reasonable price.

 

[furui_suterioo]

Even though there is digital Sq decoding, the SM, that IC manufacturing is expensive and schematics for the Tate chips are still not available, but the general functions of the chips are known. In extreme fanciful theory, a substitute patch chip of all new design could be drawn up using all of the knowledge about quad on this site which and elsewhere which would replicate the output of the original Tate chips or even differently if wanted(how about shadow vector chip). If every Tate is doomed to be a doorstop, I think it would be worth the effort to get a design on paper for when the manufacturing cost eventually becomes reasonable one day, and the Tates will live again!

 

[DuncanS]

Even though there is digital Sq decoding, the SM, that IC manufacturing is expensive and schematics for the Tate chips are still not available, but the general functions of the chips are known. In extreme fanciful theory, a substitute patch chip of all new design could be drawn up using all of the knowledge about quad on this site which and elsewhere which would replicate the output of the original Tate chips or even differently if wanted(how about shadow vector chip). If every Tate is doomed to be a doorstop, I think it would be worth the effort to get a design on paper for when the manufacturing cost eventually becomes reasonable one day, and the Tates will live again!

It would be cheaper (relatively) to design and build an analogue board which could be wired in place of the chip. Even analogue ASIC (single mask layer custom chips) costs are high for such small volumes (the market size isn't great), so the unit cost would be very high. Involve's SM2 is probably the last vestige of Quad, and I suspect they don't make that much on each sale.

 

[par4ken]

It would be cheaper (relatively) to design and build an analogue board which could be wired in place of the chip. Even analogue ASIC (single mask layer custom chips) costs are high for such small volumes (the market size isn't great), so the unit cost would be very high. Involve's SM2 is probably the last vestige of Quad, and I suspect they don't make that much on each sale.

I doubt that would be a practical solution, I'm sure that Tate was at least as complex as Shadow Vector (probably more so) and that system took something like ten interconnected circuit boards! While I prefer Analogue processing over digital, DSP is likely the best way to go nowadays. Think of what SM can do with such a tiny board. Involve seems to be proving a bridge between old (quad) and new surround, whereas other manufactures tried to distance themselves from what they considered the unsuccessful quadraphonic experiment.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

I doubt that would be a practical solution, I'm sure that Tate was at least as complex as Shadow Vector (probably more so) and that system took something like ten interconnected circuit boards! While I prefer Analogue processing over digital, DSP is likely the best way to go nowadays. Think of what SM can do with such a tiny board. Involve seems to be proving a bridge between old (quad) and new surround, whereas other manufactures tried to distance themselves from what they considered the unsuccessful quadraphonic experiment.

What I like about the SM design is that is a hybrid. As Chucky would say all the maths is done digital, all the rest is analog.

Somewhere buried in Chucky's posts he mentioned the chips used for "the maths; direction sensing, RMS, LOG values, etc. I forget the number but I checked it out & what's cool is it a Windows programable IC that handles multiple functions in the signal chain order desired. Cool.

 

[furui_suterioo]

Board(s) would be interesting, changes to the circuitry to alter the output could be made, of course it might end up looking like a Frankenstein but it could also be the heart of a new decoder. I always say to myself every month that I will get an SM with my next check but always end up with more records and more grass. I am starting an online electrical regulations class tomorrow evening just to keep my community college status active, it's more about safety codes than electricity though.

 

[par4ken]

It looks like the chip numbers are RH402 and RH404 on the Audionics diagram, but the ink is smeared a bit. I know that Steve stated the numbers as RA though, I would have to open up my unit again to check. Has anyone heard from Steve? No new posts in a very, very long time, I hope that he is still with us.

I checked my unit and the chips are RA402 and RA404, I notice that those numbers are found in many other old posts as well, even some by myself!

 

[furui_suterioo]

Bought a Dolby 150 card recently just out of curiosity from someone parting out a Dolby CP55. It is here today, removed the heat sinks from the chips and scraped of the glue:
National Semiconductor chips

I dont have much use for them but it was cheap. I'd like to make a project decoder with them but would probably be too complicated since I understand that they require some sort of correction circuit. Probably wouldn't use them for spare parts for my Tates either since they seem to have the Exar chips, wonder if the later Dolby 150 card might have the Exar set.

 

[par4ken]

Nice find, I had read that the Tate chips had been used in Dolby decoders, what a waste. I believe that the LM1853 is a pin for pin equivalent to the Exar chip. The LM1852 has a different pin out than the Exar. If you want to sell that card, let me know. It would really be something to find a card with Exar chips!

 

[jefe1]

I had read about those dolby decoders using the Tate chips years ago and vaguely thought of looking for some to have back up chips. Congrats to the clever guy here who actually did it!

 

[furui_suterioo]

If you want to sell that card, let me know.

If the shipping to Canada was cheaper I would consider but post would probably cost more than what I paid originally, wouldn't want pass on the expense for something which is likely to not work. Dolby CP55 units seem to be fairly common though, the CP65 might also have the same card.

 

[par4ken]

Checking some Dolby 150 cards on eBay the 150F has a Dolby chip on it. What version is your card? There are some 150D's listed as well, 2 cards plugged together, cant see the actual chips though. Shipping can be expensive but often you have to pay the high shipping if you want the item.

See my rant about Discogs they want shipping policies put in place, which is not possible without overcharging most buyers. The deadline is fast approaching, it was supposed to be last month. I want to see what they do if many sellers don't comply. I will not comply with their new policy!!!!

 

[furui_suterioo]

Checking some Dolby 150 cards on eBay the 150F has a Dolby chip on it. What version is your card? There are some 150D's listed as well, 2 cards plugged together, cant see the actual chips though. Shipping can be expensive but often you have to pay the high shipping if you want the item.

See my rant about Discogs they want shipping policies put in place, which is not possible without overcharging most buyers. The deadline is fast approaching, it was supposed to be last month. I want to see what they do if many sellers don't comply. I will not comply with their new policy!!!!

I'm not sure which version it is, C or D most likely don't actually see any letters, it says 1978. It is two boards, they have to be separated in order to see the chips, I think E/F version has Sanyo chips(which were supposed to be better for Dolby decoding), the CP55/65 150 card could be upgraded from C/D to E/F. I'd like to try again with a CP65 just to see if it has the Exar set, if I can convince another seller to pull the 150 card out.
Seems like it often costs as much to have records shipped to USA from Canada as it does from Europe, you'd think being on the same continent would keep rates low.