- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,820
ANRS is basically JVC's patent bypass of Dolby B noise reduction (it was play compatible with Dolby B) it is an easy thing to do in either analogue circuitry or DSP
Involve CD4....Is there any life in it????
- Thread starter chucky3042
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
I would buy a Unit if the project Happens.
Thanks AoQ for clearing that up, and giving me one more question. Is the Barry Manilow song on his second LP? I have played it over and over again and I know it is a quad mix and inherently different from the two stereo versions, but I keep losing vocals and some stuff seems way out of place. I found it so bad that I have had to get an 8track just to prove myself right or wrong. Hope it comes soon. Also, I wouldn't mind knowing more about upgrading the CD4-10 as I have one in storage as well. I gave up on CD4 until I got a strain gauge cartridge and a Technics demodulator, now I can at least listen to most of my CD4's without wincing.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,820
Dear Discrete desperado's
Just a quick note, I was in no way suggesting ANRS was inferior to Dolby B as it was rather good and JVC did some very nice cassette decks. I am really an old tape head, just love it....you know tape, mechanisms, dynamic range restrictions, compressing/ expanding, magnetism......ah the good ol days - it was all just so wrong but that's what made it right for me. CD's are bat **** boring- no challenge.
Now the Discrete tally: looking better but no prize yet. We have 22 volunteers (I erroneously predicted a total of 20), meaning the new probable price is $1032. Look at it from the bright side, we have dropped from $100,000 to around $1k in just a few days, at this rate it should be free within a week.
By my numbers we need a total of 100 customers to achieve the $500 target......unless we can do the development cheaper (looking at possibilities).
Lets all hope we get this off the ground.
Regards
Chucky
Just a quick note, I was in no way suggesting ANRS was inferior to Dolby B as it was rather good and JVC did some very nice cassette decks. I am really an old tape head, just love it....you know tape, mechanisms, dynamic range restrictions, compressing/ expanding, magnetism......ah the good ol days - it was all just so wrong but that's what made it right for me. CD's are bat **** boring- no challenge.
Now the Discrete tally: looking better but no prize yet. We have 22 volunteers (I erroneously predicted a total of 20), meaning the new probable price is $1032. Look at it from the bright side, we have dropped from $100,000 to around $1k in just a few days, at this rate it should be free within a week.
By my numbers we need a total of 100 customers to achieve the $500 target......unless we can do the development cheaper (looking at possibilities).
Lets all hope we get this off the ground.
Regards
Chucky
I'm referring to "This One's For You". It was CD4 only, no Q8, and apparently the last songs on each side are notoriously impossible to playback properly. Which is an issue I've had with other Arista CD4 records. The CD4-50 is supposed to be able to do it. I've not heard this album in stereo or quad....just not a Manilow fan, so I'm really just repeating things I've read in other threads around here. I've been tempted to bid on copies of it when I see it come up on ebay, just for the experience of torturing myself trying to convert an impossible record that I don't even like, I'm nuts like that. I do have a sealed CD4 copy of II, not sure when or if I'll open it.
"This One's for You" is the last Arista Quad release, and only released as a CD-4 LP, it's AQ-4090, and it has a white jacket. It was released in "limited numbers", even for quad LPs.
Allegedly the story goes that the guys putting it to disc decided to push the CD-4 spec to the limit and put the grooves really close together. If you look at the LP, the run out area is huge compared to other LPs. I did have that LP back in the day but is wasn't one that I played a lot so I never noticed if it tracked poorly or not. I may still have it somewhere.
At any rate, Nick (Quad First) is the one who told me the story of the LP and says that the really rare JVC demodulator that AoQ is mentioning is the only one that plays it back correctly.
Allegedly the story goes that the guys putting it to disc decided to push the CD-4 spec to the limit and put the grooves really close together. If you look at the LP, the run out area is huge compared to other LPs. I did have that LP back in the day but is wasn't one that I played a lot so I never noticed if it tracked poorly or not. I may still have it somewhere.
At any rate, Nick (Quad First) is the one who told me the story of the LP and says that the really rare JVC demodulator that AoQ is mentioning is the only one that plays it back correctly.
Hey Chucky, maybe you could make contact with Lou's family by snail mail and ask if they may help. I do know Lou's address is on the internet with a simple Google search. I matched it to a package I received with an order of record cleaner from Lou. I am sure someone could receive mail at his address and possibly answer a polite and respectful request. The only clue I will post is that it is in Millbrae, California. If they can help with the design or the name of who made the prototype boards, etc., it may make it cheaper for your design team. Hope my suggestions aren't out of line or disrespectful.
Here's Nick's comments regarding the CD4-10S vs. the CD4-50, when I started inquiring about what it would take to locate a CD4-50
"Another avenue is making a CD4-10 Studio out of a standard CD4-10. I have the JVC hand drawn schematics for the conversion, what was changed to upgrade it to studio level. In case you never heard of the 10S, it was what JVC supplied to studios and record cutting centers for CD-4 mastering work, comparison. It was never sold to the public. I personally have a 10S, and love it, more than my CD4-50 since the separation on the S is like open reel, especially on the high end. The 50 is a bit more refined, carrier comes on with a slow muting, no hiss at all, noise gate circuitry, and plays Barry Manilow Weekend In New England, which the 10S can't since the level is way too high on the record, but in the end the S has far superior separation on all other records and unless they are badly worn the noise gate circuitry isn't critical."
He did find me a CD4-10, and he sent me the schematics that have the notes on changes to make it a studio model....not sure who could do the work though.
"Another avenue is making a CD4-10 Studio out of a standard CD4-10. I have the JVC hand drawn schematics for the conversion, what was changed to upgrade it to studio level. In case you never heard of the 10S, it was what JVC supplied to studios and record cutting centers for CD-4 mastering work, comparison. It was never sold to the public. I personally have a 10S, and love it, more than my CD4-50 since the separation on the S is like open reel, especially on the high end. The 50 is a bit more refined, carrier comes on with a slow muting, no hiss at all, noise gate circuitry, and plays Barry Manilow Weekend In New England, which the 10S can't since the level is way too high on the record, but in the end the S has far superior separation on all other records and unless they are badly worn the noise gate circuitry isn't critical."
He did find me a CD4-10, and he sent me the schematics that have the notes on changes to make it a studio model....not sure who could do the work though.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,820
Count me in for 1 unit if the price is under $600.00.
You can count me in also. For a $500-$700 range, it would be a no brainer.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,820
Dear Quadraphiles.
I have ventured to a high Himalayan mountain this morning and meditated the problem. Then in a blinding flash, it came to me that we could do the CD4 thing with the Surround Master board and keep it in DSP software.
If I am correct this will further reduce the development cost/ time to say US$10,000 ish. Given we have has now a total of 25 volunteers this makes the price around.............................
USD$750
So getting close but no door prize yet. It over you you guys to see if we can dig out a few more starters. Best of luck, my heart is in this one!
Regards
Chucky
I have ventured to a high Himalayan mountain this morning and meditated the problem. Then in a blinding flash, it came to me that we could do the CD4 thing with the Surround Master board and keep it in DSP software.
If I am correct this will further reduce the development cost/ time to say US$10,000 ish. Given we have has now a total of 25 volunteers this makes the price around.............................
USD$750
So getting close but no door prize yet. It over you you guys to see if we can dig out a few more starters. Best of luck, my heart is in this one!
Regards
Chucky
It would be amazing and cost effective if it could be an all in one Surround Master. For this I would happily find the $750. My partner would also appreciate the lack of equipment in our living room. That could mean more room for records or bigger speakers!
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,820
Or how about an all in one in a metal box....Involve/ QS/ SQ/ CD4.........would cost a bit more
I like the metal box. Any chance it would be component width? My biggest problem with vintage components is the varied widths that can't be stacked in one pile. A 19" wide box would sit nicely on my Oppo. 4 analogue meters for channel comparison would be the icing on the cake for me. That is why I liked my lowly QS-1 over the QSD-1 and QS-D1000. Next thing you know, I will have before and after Surround Master photos! It's true, there really is only a "c" between addiction and addition.
Methinks Chucky and Dave are heading for QQ Sainthood.
An all in one Invovle would be possible, but I would prefer a separat cabinet for a CD-4 Demodulator. I will see, how the action and development runs. I think and have hope, that also further orders will come, when the news of an Involve-Dorren Demodulator will reach all of the quadraphonic circle.
Dietrich
Dietrich
Similar threads
