Quad LP/Tape Poll Carlos, Walter: Switched-On Bach [SQ/Q8]

[jaybird100]

It's a completely different album with different music on, recorded decades later. It's like comparing Dark Side Of The Moon with The Division Bell.

Nope, same music, except for the first track.

 

[jaybird100]

Played through the SM, the quirks pointed out by Wendy become much clearer. There are places where some sounds disappear completely while in motion. S-OB2000 is a re-recording of the same music, and sounds way better. Through the SM, the sound is more cohesive and more discrete-like than the original quad.

 

[gvl_guy]

Is there a special version of this that's surround? Or are all of the S-OB2k's in surround and just not marked?

 

[jaybird100]

No special version. All copies are Dolby Surround, and are clearly marked by Telarc as such.

 

[Circular Vibes]

There was a rerelease on East Side Digital that may not have been obviously marked as Dolby Surround. There are 2 different covers as well.

 

[jaybird100]

There was a rerelease on East Side Digital that may not have been obviously marked as Dolby Surround. There are 2 different covers as well.

I know the one. It was a remastering, in stereo, of the original. Not Dolby Surround.

 

[soundsation]

I have the cassette version of switched on Bach 2000. Label same as CD, except indicating TDK SA Type II material, HX-Pro, and B noise recuction. Using QS decoding sounds better than SQ decoding.

 

[jaybird100]

I have the cassette version of switched on Bach 2000. Label same as CD, except indicating TDK SA Type II material, HX-Pro, and B noise recuction. Using QS decoding sounds better than SQ decoding.

That's because Dolby Surround and QS are kindred spirits. SQ is completely different.

 

[chucky3042]

That's because Dolby Surround and QS are kindred spirits. SQ is completely different.

Actually Dolby encode is kinda weird, in some ways it owes more to SQ. Although it does decode better in QS

 

[baward]

It's a completely different album with different music on, recorded decades later. It's like comparing Dark Side Of The Moon with The Division Bell.

A different album, sure, but the pieces recorded are the same as the 1968 original, with the addition of a few new pieces.

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Well, I guess if it is different recordings of the same pieces of music, then technically it’s a totally different album; and doesn’t belong with this Poll IMO. If it was just a matter of different mastering, then that might have been reasonable to include it here. However, the 2000 version does sound like something I’d want to check out regardless.

 

[soundsation]

I suppose a next test for decoding Switched on Bach 2000 would be play using last version of Sansui QS variomatrix decoding and then play using dolby surround that was available in 2000, and then compare. I have several Dolby surround cd's also, mainly classical, to experiment also.
I am also curious testing again Wendy Carlos sonic seasonings lp.

 

[jaybird100]

Well for $8 I just found a copy of SOB2000 to try in my Surround Master.
Understand its not the same recording as the SQ lp which I have but worth a shot.

True. It's a completely new recording, and I noticed some textures that were either covered up by the SQ matrix, or simply didn't exist on the older recording. But it is all the same music, except for the opening track. Wendy should only hear it through a Surround Master.

 

[MidiMagic]

Actually Dolby encode is kinda weird, in some ways it owes more to SQ. Although it does decode better in QS

Actually, Dolby encode is straight RM. You are thinking of Circlesurround.

 

[chucky3042]

Actually, Dolby encode is straight RM. You are thinking of Circlesurround.

Err Um...............

See what I mean......its a strudel.

 

[jaybird100]

I'll take some apple strudel, please!

 

[chucky3042]

I'll take some apple strudel, please!

And a glump of cream for you

 

[jaybird100]

And a glump of cream for you

Sounds good!

 

[MidiMagic]

The ONLY difference between QS and Dolby Surround is where the primary channels are encoded to and decoded from (diamond vs square). The recording made by either for a sound panned to the same location is the same. And both decoders play the same recording the same way. Only the speakers are in different locations.

In both QS and DS, the difference in amplitude between the two encoded channels determines the left-to-right position, while the phase between the two encoded channels determines the front-to-back position. When placed on the Poincare sphere (often called the Scheiber sphere), QS and DS modulations for the same direction are in the same place.

SQ does something totally different. The front channels use amplitude difference to determine left to right panning. The back channels use phase to determine left-to-right panning. When placed on the Poincare sphere, SQ modulations are in totally different places than the ones for QS and DS.

 

[jefe1]

To get back to the earlier discussion I received SOB2000 and played on the SM involve setting the Invention in F major does bounce around the speakers.
But after listening to the SQ album I am finding the CD to be metallic sounding. Yes I prefer the sound of the album over this new version. Did the original ever make it to CD?
My phono stage on my Marantz is acting up so I can't fairly judge the SQ decode of the SM of the record due to left speaker extreme low volume
I think if you are a fan of this music you want both versions.

I must note that playing a Dolby surround encoded CD on the SM in involve setting instead of getting a mono rear it sure sounds like different sounds coming out of left and right rear.