Matrix vs Discrete

[SeeMoreDigital]

I like still like Windows 7. I wish that we could go back. I use a start menu Classic Shell on Windows 10 that looks like Windows 7! It hasn't been updated since December 2017 but I'm still using it without issue.

Yes, 7 is the best version of Windows since XP.

Oh dear

 

[MidiMagic]

I thought it was October 2025?

EDIT: it is October 2025 end of life for Windows 10.

It should not be allowed.

Think. What if:

- The manufacturer of your car says that the end of life for your car is next year.
- The company that made your favorite CD says that it will stop playing on a certain date.
- You are told that the end of life for your house is next October.

The monopoly power of Microsoft should be removed. When they end-of-life the software, they must also make the software public domain, so others can sell copies and update the antivirus.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

The monopoly power of Microsoft should be removed. When they end-of-life the software, they must also make the software public domain, so others can sell copies and update the antivirus.

I guess you are unaware of another fair competitor called Apple. And quite some others use Linux, even in commercial usage. Private or public domain there are many good antivirus options that are multiple OS and can be updated.

 

[Doug G.]

So, is Microsoft matrix and Apple discrete or vice versa or something else?

Doug

 

[MidiMagic]

I guess you are unaware of another fair competitor called Apple. And quite some others use Linux, even in commercial usage. Private or public domain there are many good antivirus options that are multiple OS and can be updated.

And most of the software I want is sold for windows, not the others.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

And most of the software I want is sold for windows, not the others.

Me too. But my point being MS does not have the monopoly you attest to. And the others progress & move forward as well.

 

[jaybird100]

I'm sure that they will outlive all of us. I've replace capacitors in some for better sound, rarely because they are actually bad. You can often get vintage equipement cheap enough that you can hedge your bet by getting a spare.

Great to hear that you are (close to) getting a couple of Surround Masters.

Correct but you are all downplaying matrix! Tate SQ decodes and QS Vario-matrix decodes sound very nearly discrete. The big plus is what they can do with regular stereo. I don't know how I would have got by for all those years without my S&IC and no new quad releases!

The Surround Master does the same thing with both SQ and QS, all in one package. In addition, it excels at creating surround from stereo sources. The effect is as good as the stereo mix will allow, but it's often as good as, or better than, an encoded source.

 

[par4ken]

The Surround Master does the same thing with both SQ and QS, all in one package. In addition, it excels at creating surround from stereo sources. The effect is as good as the stereo mix will allow, but it's often as good as, or better than, an encoded source.

While the Surround Master does a decent job it lacks a "proper" surround mode. Both myself and Sonic Wiz have gone on about this many times. The decoder should have a purpose built Surround or Stereo Enhance mode. A fully adjustable effect is the most use full as you can tailor the result to suit.

The Composer has such an adjustable setting, fully clockwise the stereo image is stretched around the room; while fully counterclockwise the stereo image remains upfront with mainly ambiance in the rear. QS has surround and Hall modes which produce a very similar effect just not adjustable. And I repeat it is like listening to stereo through a magnifying glass. Intricacies that go mostly unnoticed in stereo playback become readily apparent. Results are often indistinguishable from discrete. I can't understand why many here insist on listening to plain old stereo via only two speakers, blasphemy!

 

[Owen Smith]

I can't understand why many here insist on listening to plain old stereo via only two speakers, blasphemy!

You try buying a Space and Image Composer in the UK! Plus I don't have multi channel inputs on my amp, just HDMI. When someone sells a decoder with HDMI audio out I'm interested, until then I have no means to use it.

 

[jaybird100]

While the Surround Master does a decent job it lacks a "proper" surround mode. Both myself and Sonic Wiz have gone on about this many times. The decoder should have a purpose built Surround or Stereo Enhance mode. A fully adjustable effect is the most use full as you can tailor the result to suit.

The Composer has such an adjustable setting, fully clockwise the stereo image is stretched around the room; while fully counterclockwise the stereo image remains upfront with mainly ambiance in the rear. QS has surround and Hall modes which produce a very similar effect just not adjustable. And I repeat it is like listening to stereo through a magnifying glass. Intricacies that go mostly unnoticed in stereo playback become readily apparent. Results are often indistinguishable from discrete. I can't understand why many here insist on listening to plain old stereo via only two speakers, blasphemy!

I had a S&IC. It was nice until it died, and I couldn't find anyone to fix it. That was way before the launch of QQ, so I had no reference point as to where to send it. It did a great job with SQ, but it couldn't properly decode QS, and I wasn't blown away be its synthesizing on stereo to surround. Finding a decoder that did all three TO MY LIKING, and that cost much less than the S&IC did back in 1980, and I was dancing on the ceiling!

You try buying a Space and Image Composer in the UK! Plus I don't have multi channel inputs on my amp, just HDMI. When someone sells a decoder with HDMI audio out I'm interested, until then I have no means to use it.

 

[par4ken]

It did a great job with SQ, but it couldn't properly decode QS

It wasn't meant for QS but still does a decent job on QS with the Stereo Enhance at 12 O'clock position. All test tones come from the proper location it's just that full centre is skewed to right back.

Without technical skills I'm not advocating buying an S&IC however they do come up for sale along with the Tate II, if you watch the auctions. I now have a whopping 4 Composers and one Tate II, all work but for my original unit which has a bad chip. Even the bad unit can be run with the separation control turned all the way down operating without "logic" an effect that can actually be rather enjoyable.

You try buying a Space and Image Composer in the UK! Plus I don't have multi channel inputs on my amp, just HDMI. When someone sells a decoder with HDMI audio out I'm interested, until then I have no means to use it.

I don't know if the Composer was ever distributed in the UK, it didn't even make it to Canada. They would have likely had to change the name as there is another Audionics company in the UK. It can be changed over to 230 volts simply by moving the fuse to the 220V position, and also change the plug.

The Achilles heel of the S&IC is the power transformer. They tend to break free of the PC board during shipping. I've replaced two or three transformers already.

I hate most modern equipment, I use HDMI mainly for video. No excuse not to include analogue inputs and outputs except perhaps in budget equipment!

 

[kfbkfb]

A fully adjustable effect is the most use full as you can tailor the result to suit.

Perhaps design a simple analog circuit (that can be switched out) ahead of the SM (or other variable matrix logic "decoder") to pre-process the stereo to allow for adjustments of the stereo (boost the L-R portion etc.) to modify the derived surround sound effect.


Kirk Bayne

 

[par4ken]

Perhaps design a simple analog circuit (that can be switched out) ahead of the SM (or other variable matrix logic "decoder") to pre-process the stereo to allow for adjustments of the stereo (boost the L-R portion etc.) to modify the derived surround sound effect.


Kirk Bayne

Yes that is what Sonic Wiz has long suggested! There are many threads here about it. Sonic also developed a process using Audition to pre-process the stereo files, I played with it a bit and it works well.

 

[chucky3042]

I agree that a synth mode of the SM is a good idea and we will look at that. Re the S+IC, both Dave and I have listened to it at Rustyandi's wonderful man cave and we both could straight away pick the difference to the SM . The S+IC had image blurring, I did not have time to evaluate it for stereo to surround synth.

 

[par4ken]

I agree that a synth mode of the SM is a good idea and we will look at that. Re the S+IC, both Dave and I have listened to it at Rustyandi's wonderful man cave and we both could straight away pick the difference to the SM . The S+IC had image blurring, I did not have time to evaluate it for stereo to surround synth.

Blurring? I've never noticed that even when sloshed! You do need to hear it for stereo to surround!

It differs from QS Surround mode in that centre level is not sacrificed (by using out of phase blending) and it decodes more in an inverted V pattern rather than an inverted U like QS Surround.

 

[kfbkfb]

How about some sort of carefully synchronized and level matched difference test - QS encoded test tones fed to an SM and to another QS logic assisted decoder - subtract the outputs and see what the actual sound placement differences are?


Kirk Bayne

 

[jaybird100]

Yes that is what Sonic Wiz has long suggested! There are many threads here about it. Sonic also developed a process using Audition to pre-process the stereo files, I played with it a bit and it works well.

I generally play stereo material through the SM, with a small boost in the rear channel outputs. It sounds great, to my ears, and very often the results sound quite convincing.

 

[jsrstereo]

I agree that a synth mode of the SM is a good idea and we will look at that. Re the S+IC, both Dave and I have listened to it at Rustyandi's wonderful man cave and we both could straight away pick the difference to the SM . The S+IC had image blurring, I did not have time to evaluate it for stereo to surround synth.

Hey Chuckie: I'd like to see Involve produce a stand-alone adjustable pre-synth unit for us SM owners to use with our SM1, 2 & 3's. What say you? John R

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Hey Chuckie: I'd like to see Involve produce a stand-alone adjustable pre-synth unit for us SM owners to use with our SM1, 2 & 3's. What say you? John R

With multiple 2ch inputs and also a L/R balance control it would be a winner for an add on.

 

[jsrstereo]

Hey Chuckie: I'd like to see Involve produce a stand-alone adjustable pre-synth unit for us SM owners to use with our SM1, 2 & 3's. What say you? John R

----- and besides, I suppose such a unit could be used with any matrix decoder of your preference, including speaker-level passive decoder boxes (DynaQuad, Lafayette, etc.).