Matrix Quad CD's

[jaybird100]

Actually, EV-4 was around for almost a year before any of the other systems (except Dynaco diamond) were used for released material. Many of the early EV-4 records just said "Quadraphonic" with no other reference to matrix type. They assumed that EV-4 would be the standard.

Ovation, Project 3, and Golden Crest were the first backers of EV-4. Ovation eventually went to QS, as did Project 3. That label also released some titles in all three major formats (QS, SQ, CD-4). Golden Crest went to SQ. EV tried to modify their decoders to be closer to SQ, but it didn't decode anything accurately. CBS licensed out SQ, charging a royalty fee, which included use of the logo. The EMI group used a different logo for SQ; no idea why. Sansui was happy to have record companies use their system, and didn't charge a royalty fee to do so. They did, however, charge to put the QS symbol on the recording. Very strange! ABC wasn't alone in this; in the UK, Pye's 4D series albums clearly stated, on the back cover, that they used the Sansui QS system. They did not use the QS logo, so I don't know for certain if they paid the royalty.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Actually, EV-4 was around for almost a year before any of the other systems (except Dynaco diamond) were used for released material. Many of the early EV-4 records just said "Quadraphonic" with no other reference to matrix type. They assumed that EV-4 would be the standard.

I kinda thought QS was around in 71 . I have a Sansui Sampler dated 1970.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Ovation, Project 3, and Golden Crest were the first backers of EV-4. Ovation eventually went to QS, as did Project 3. That label also released some titles in all three major formats (QS, SQ, CD-4). Golden Crest went to SQ. EV tried to modify their decoders to be closer to SQ, but it didn't decode anything accurately. CBS licensed out SQ, charging a royalty fee, which included use of the logo. The EMI group used a different logo for SQ; no idea why. Sansui was happy to have record companies use their system, and didn't charge a royalty fee to do so. They did, however, charge to put the QS symbol on the recording. Very strange! ABC wasn't alone in this; in the UK, Pye's 4D series albums clearly stated, on the back cover, that they used the Sansui QS system. They did not use the QS logo, so I don't know for certain if they paid the royalty.

EMI maybe used their own SQ logo ,because they built their very own SQ Encoder for use at Abbey Road , maybe elsewhere as well . After all ......EMI stands for Electronic Musical Instruments.
EMI , EMI Electrola, and Harmonia Mundi used that particular logo.

All together....Capitol Records , and Golden Crest , and Stanyan , and Creative World, and A&M with SQ stickers.... ....and possibly 1 or 2 more ,....Discus? all used the "same SQ logo" which was different from CBS/SONY 'S .

And as for the PYE albums some of my later Acker Bilk albums had the QS logo (and QS vario matrix ). But yes most did not.

Bellaphon Bacillus used an even different SQ logo of their own design.

I may be missing one or two or three or more other unique quad logos . (European ,North American , NZ /Aussie inclusive)

Additionally the only ABC/Impulse album I had ,that did indicate QS on the back was of the Keith Jarrett- Backhand album . Different Sansui logo though.

I always found those differing quad logos on any quad album intriguing.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Discogs says there's an unofficial UK CD of the first Rich Mountain Tower album.

The versions of that album I've sampled on streaming services decode identically to the vinyl through the SM.

I saw and shoulda bought a CD by The Free Design-Kites Are Fun EV-4 album ,but no quad indications. Damm it.


Rich Mountain Tower had 2 quad albums on Ovation ,one EV-4 and one QS Vector 4. FWIW there are a few Ovation quad cds for sale on line.

 

[jaybird100]

I kinda thought QS was around in 71 . I have a Sansui Sampler dated 1970.

Sansui originally marketed their QS-1 decoder as a "QuadSonic Synthesizer". The record you refer to was an early QS encoding, made to show off the capabilities of the system. It wasn't until 1971 that record companies started using what was initially called the "Sansui System" for their quad releases.

 

[MidiMagic]

I kinda thought QS was around in 71 . I have a Sansui Sampler dated 1970.

The QS decoder/synthesizer was around in 71.
I said released material. There were no released recordings in QS until later.

 

[par4ken]

The QS decoder/synthesizer was around in 71.
I said released material. There were no released recordings in QS until later.

Sansui retained that terminology "Synthesizer" even when they switched from phase modulation to vario-matrix. Their intent was to let people know that you could get "fake quad" from stereo but they did themselves a great disservice. The vario-matrix technique didn't fake or synthesize anything, it just brought out exactly what was already there in the stereo mix. That fact should've been emphasised much more!

 

[jaybird100]

Sansui retained that terminology "Synthesizer" even when they switched from phase modulation to vario-matrix. Their intent was to let people know that you could get "fake quad" from stereo but they did themselves a great disservice. The vario-matrix technique didn't fake or synthesize anything, it just brought out exactly what was already there in the stereo mix. That fact should've been emphasised much more!

I think it's pretty clear that Vario-Matrix was an extension of the decoding and synthesizing functions of QS. The term
"synthesize" didn't mean to put anything into the recording that wasn't already there; it simply meant to use the phase differences, already present in stereo recordings, to create a surround effect. That 'hidden information", as it were. The synthesizer function merely made better use of information that was already present in the stereo recording.

 

[kfbkfb]

Just ordered the "Free Design - Kites are Fun" CD from Amazon, my EVX-4 decoder hasn't been switched on since 1983-04, will probably limit my listening to using DPL and DynaQuad.

(a comment says the album has probably been remixed - maybe the Stereo-4 encoding didn't survive)


Kirk Bayne

 

[jaybird100]

Just ordered the "Free Design - Kites are Fun" CD from Amazon, my EVX-4 decoder hasn't been switched on since 1983-04, will probably limit my listening to using DPL and DynaQuad.

(a comment says the album has probably been remixed - maybe the Stereo-4 encoding didn't survive)


Kirk Bayne

Playing it with DPL II will sound better than using the EVX-4. The EV matrix is similar to Dolby's, and will decode nicely in with PL II, with enhanced separation.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Oh my.

"Remix" to me is a nasty dirty word ,on any former matrix quad album.
Good luck.

 

[par4ken]

I think it's pretty clear that Vario-Matrix was an extension of the decoding and synthesizing functions of QS. The term
"synthesize" didn't mean to put anything into the recording that wasn't already there; it simply meant to use the phase differences, already present in stereo recordings, to create a surround effect. That 'hidden information", as it were. The synthesizer function merely made better use of information that was already present in the stereo recording.

Yes I used to refer all decoders in general as synthesizers as well but still that is very poor terminology! Using what is already present is hardly synthesizing anything, that is why they should've used a different term such as stereo enhance (used by Audionics)! Or perhaps stereo expand!

 

[par4ken]

Just ordered the "Free Design - Kites are Fun" CD from Amazon, my EVX-4 decoder hasn't been switched on since 1983-04, will probably limit my listening to using DPL and DynaQuad.

(a comment says the album has probably been remixed - maybe the Stereo-4 encoding didn't survive)


Kirk Bayne

I would use the EV4 decoder in preference to Dyna quad. I doubt that anyone would re-mix to get rid of Stereo-4 encoding (what would be the point). Likewise I don't get why Stereo-4 wasn't used more by the major record labels in the early days as single inventory quads.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

I would use the EV4 decoder in preference to Dyna quad. I doubt that anyone would re-mix to get rid of Stereo-4 encoding (what would be the point). Likewise I don't get why Stereo-4 wasn't used more by the major record labels in the early days as single inventory quads.

I feel the same way with SQ as S I . When they finally went S I , it was at the end of quad releases by CBS .
Hell, they could've at least gone back to some big selling SQ albums in pop , jazz and rock and SI release them !!
(COWARDS!)

I wonder if "Quad Classical Supporters" had far more influential sway in the 70's ?

Well considering all those labels that continued in quad ,such as VOX Candide Turnabout , EMI , Harmonia Mundi , Angel Seraphim , Electrola , Sofrason , Eurodisc , PYE NIXA , Nimbus, and others ....all Classical.

 

[kfbkfb]

Sort of related to matrix CDs - anyone know how much extra cost there was/is to prepare a surround sound mix (presuming the multitrack master was already made for a stereo release)?

This is also related to single inventory (matrix) quad - the record company would be absorbing this additional cost so that the single inventory content could be sold at the regular stereo price.


Kirk Bayne

 

[MidiMagic]

Sort of related to matrix CDs - anyone know how much extra cost there was/is to prepare a surround sound mix (presuming the multitrack master was already made for a stereo release)?

This is also related to single inventory (matrix) quad - the record company would be absorbing this additional cost so that the single inventory content could be sold at the regular stereo price.

Kirk Bayne

I don't know how much in dollars the extra mix would cost because I don't know what the rates were.

But a lot of it would depend on which multitrack was used Most studios did NOT have 16 track equipment when matrix quad came out. Many had 8-tracki units or even 4-track units. Many were bouncing parts to get them all on the tape.

With the 16-track multitrack, a 4-bus mixer could be used to make a 4-channel mix to feed the encoder. The cost would be that of mixing down each song.

An 8-track multitrack has more limitations. The original multitrack may have several parts mixed together on the same track to have enough tracks for all of the parts. Those parts are inextricably locked to the same pan position.

Maybe the cost was about the $1 per record Columbia charged for SQ.

It's a nightmare if the album was recorded on 4-trackis. There are only 4 pan positions available. How do you quad that?

Believe it or not, I have done it. I couldn't afford anything more than a 4-track, but I found a way to use it to get the results I wanted.

I was recording a live band to the 4-track multitrack, so I used some matrixing techniques to record more parts:
- I put all of the vocals on tracks 1 and 2, front panned where I wanted them as I recorded them on the fly.
- I put all of the instruments and the ambiance pickup on tracks 3 and 4, already encoded in RM where I wanted them.
- During the mixdown, I could adjust the level and panpots for each track to make minor changes to the levels and positions of the parts.
The same mix works for stereo and surround.

I have never played a matrix album in stereo that I didn't like the stereo mix of. So why two different mixes?

 

[kfbkfb]

I have never played a matrix album in stereo that I didn't like the stereo mix of. So why two different mixes?

I can understand classical music recorded for surround sound (front - music, back - ambience) sounding a little weird when folded down to stereo (either the CD-4 type folddown or QS/SQ type folddown) due to the possibility of the ambience being too loud relative to the music, but with popular music (IMHO), the quad to stereo folddown just adds to the stereo effect (makes headphone listening more involving too).

IMHO, the record companies should have absorbed the added quad cost, gone to single inventory quad and come up with some vague phrase such as: "Because this album is produced in surround sound, it sounds excellent in stereo".

and now...back to Matrix Quad CDs...


Kirk Bayne

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Actually, EV-4 was around for almost a year before any of the other systems (except Dynaco diamond) were used for released material. Many of the early EV-4 records just said "Quadraphonic" with no other reference to matrix type. They assumed that EV-4 would be the standard.

I think your statement for the most part is quite true ,for the North American marketplace.

But in Japan ,it was a whole different story.
King Records introduced its full compatible matrix in October 1971. To date (73) King has released 76 RM Disc's including 10 in the 72-73 "Music In Japan" Catalogue of quad Disc's for import .
Nippon Columbia (QX) was introduced in November 1970 .
Sansui's first demo Album in QS was also 1970.
On the other hand Toshiba/EMI which has released about 60 RM albums ( 73) since introducing its QM (QuadMatrix) system in May 1971 .... has opted for CD-4 and SQ for the following month.

Information provided by the JPRA , Japanese Phonograph Record Association.
BB August 11 1973 page 80.


That article is a good read ,especially for quad release status .

Now the only disc in single inventory quad QS released in 71 , I know of is John Lee Hooker - Kabuki Wuki ,on Bluesway Records .
No doubt only one or 2 QS Albums were released at the end of 1971.(unmarked as QS most likely)




I Hope this research clarifies anyone's curiosity.

 

[gvl_guy]

I found this one is in Dolby Surround. That count?
https://www.discogs.com/release/606...an-Battlestar-Galactica-The-A-To-Z-Of-Fantasy

 

[JediJoker]

I found this one is in Dolby Surround. That count?
https://www.discogs.com/release/606...an-Battlestar-Galactica-The-A-To-Z-Of-Fantasy

Apparently, it was encoded to Dolby Surround from two-channel masters using Pro Logic, so I really don't think it counts.