Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad
- Thread starter Stephen W. Desper
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
JediJoker
Audio Engineer/Enthusiast
I think I can answer this accurately: none. The ProSpatializer did not exist at that time. Rather, an earlier matrix encoder was used.
Stephen W. Desper
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 27
COMMENT:
UPDATE on the SACD fiasco:
This has now become part of the history of Surf’s Up – and you were part of it.
The posters here at quadraphonicquad.com, have unearthed information that has lead to solving the mystery as to why AP thought it was OK to use the EV4 quad record matrix to create new information for the rear channels of their 4-channel SACD issue.
The tip of the spear, as QQ members reveal, points to an LP insert with a little notice right above my name as chief engineer and mixer, stating:
“This recording has been produced so that it may be enjoyed in stereophonic sound or quadraphonically, using the Dynaco and EV Stereo-4 systems”
One poster provided a photo of the insert, which was in a Reprise/Warner issue of the album with a date of 1971. (Warner—the very company that rejected the album being cut in 3D Sound was now boosting that it could be played through an EV4 decoder for quad sound. How hypocritical is that? !)
I pulled out every copy of Surf’s Up I have, which are all first issues, and also posted a photo of the inserts for my albums. Those DO NOT have this quad notice on them and are also dated 1971, but issued from Brother Records Inc., which predates the Warner/Reprise issue. The notice does not appear in any CD booklet.
Comparing the two insert versions, the later one by Warner/Reprise showed some of the other wording on the insert had been shifted in position to accommodate the added notice.
The insert I approved, along with Carl, had evidently been changed after the first run of Surf’s Up to include this quad notice. When we mixed down Surf’s Up, EV4 was yet to be invented, so it would have been impossible to make the album for this quad format. It was made for a virtual format, rejected by Warner.
I have always been under the impression that when artwork is release for an album, it is locked into all future re-issues and all other runs of that album. I can’t remember ever seeing changes to album jackets or inserts after their initial run.
After Surf’s Up was mixed, mastered, and released, the Beach Boys went to Holland and I went to Australia with Frank Zappa. Meanwhile, the quad LP market was expanding. In my opinion, someone at Reprise thought it might increase sales if people, looking to buy quad LPs, were assured that this stereo disk could be decoded by their quad decoders into quad, they would buy the disk, rather than pass over it for some real quad album. So the insert was placed, but no one said anything to anyone or checked the engineering accuracy of the added statement.
I have never had a reason to buy, look into, or wonder about changes to Surf’s Up. As far as I was concern it was a “done deal.” So the change went un-noticed for decades, until technology made it possible to buy 4-channel sound via the SACD.
I apologize to Analogue Productions for assuming they issued the 4-track version without thought or research. AP just followed what they assumed was accurate information on the LP insert and used an EV4 decoder to extract the back channels. I might have done the same.
As I have posted many times on several websites and in my book . . . the album is intended to be heard via a virtual matrix decoder over two-speakers. EV4 is the incorrect decoder and the wrong format, but you can’t blame AP for their mistake, as it remained part of the album’s art, unchanged and unchallenged for all these years. One little erroneous notice, stuck in-between a lot of other stuff on a liner note that is no longer inserted in releases of this album, LP or CD.
It is an unfortunate situation all around. The current offering of Sunflower and Surf’s Up are still not sold in the correct format; confusion abounds. I wish this error had been caught a long time ago, but it has eluded us all. Now it is water under the bridge and the damage cannot be undone.
The only way both albums may be heard as originally intended remains via the educational examples from my book, Recording The Beach Boys. However, the two-channel mastering on the AP SACD is very similar to the sound of the LP and should be considered for purchase as an accurate representation of the stereo master tape version for any Beach Boy fan’s collection. Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
UPDATE on the SACD fiasco:
This has now become part of the history of Surf’s Up – and you were part of it.
The posters here at quadraphonicquad.com, have unearthed information that has lead to solving the mystery as to why AP thought it was OK to use the EV4 quad record matrix to create new information for the rear channels of their 4-channel SACD issue.
The tip of the spear, as QQ members reveal, points to an LP insert with a little notice right above my name as chief engineer and mixer, stating:
“This recording has been produced so that it may be enjoyed in stereophonic sound or quadraphonically, using the Dynaco and EV Stereo-4 systems”
One poster provided a photo of the insert, which was in a Reprise/Warner issue of the album with a date of 1971. (Warner—the very company that rejected the album being cut in 3D Sound was now boosting that it could be played through an EV4 decoder for quad sound. How hypocritical is that? !)
I pulled out every copy of Surf’s Up I have, which are all first issues, and also posted a photo of the inserts for my albums. Those DO NOT have this quad notice on them and are also dated 1971, but issued from Brother Records Inc., which predates the Warner/Reprise issue. The notice does not appear in any CD booklet.
Comparing the two insert versions, the later one by Warner/Reprise showed some of the other wording on the insert had been shifted in position to accommodate the added notice.
The insert I approved, along with Carl, had evidently been changed after the first run of Surf’s Up to include this quad notice. When we mixed down Surf’s Up, EV4 was yet to be invented, so it would have been impossible to make the album for this quad format. It was made for a virtual format, rejected by Warner.
I have always been under the impression that when artwork is release for an album, it is locked into all future re-issues and all other runs of that album. I can’t remember ever seeing changes to album jackets or inserts after their initial run.
After Surf’s Up was mixed, mastered, and released, the Beach Boys went to Holland and I went to Australia with Frank Zappa. Meanwhile, the quad LP market was expanding. In my opinion, someone at Reprise thought it might increase sales if people, looking to buy quad LPs, were assured that this stereo disk could be decoded by their quad decoders into quad, they would buy the disk, rather than pass over it for some real quad album. So the insert was placed, but no one said anything to anyone or checked the engineering accuracy of the added statement.
I have never had a reason to buy, look into, or wonder about changes to Surf’s Up. As far as I was concern it was a “done deal.” So the change went un-noticed for decades, until technology made it possible to buy 4-channel sound via the SACD.
I apologize to Analogue Productions for assuming they issued the 4-track version without thought or research. AP just followed what they assumed was accurate information on the LP insert and used an EV4 decoder to extract the back channels. I might have done the same.
As I have posted many times on several websites and in my book . . . the album is intended to be heard via a virtual matrix decoder over two-speakers. EV4 is the incorrect decoder and the wrong format, but you can’t blame AP for their mistake, as it remained part of the album’s art, unchanged and unchallenged for all these years. One little erroneous notice, stuck in-between a lot of other stuff on a liner note that is no longer inserted in releases of this album, LP or CD.
It is an unfortunate situation all around. The current offering of Sunflower and Surf’s Up are still not sold in the correct format; confusion abounds. I wish this error had been caught a long time ago, but it has eluded us all. Now it is water under the bridge and the damage cannot be undone.
The only way both albums may be heard as originally intended remains via the educational examples from my book, Recording The Beach Boys. However, the two-channel mastering on the AP SACD is very similar to the sound of the LP and should be considered for purchase as an accurate representation of the stereo master tape version for any Beach Boy fan’s collection. Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
lukpac
Well-known Member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2006
- Messages
- 117
Note that besides the blurb in the original pressings of Surf's Up, there's also this article from Rolling Stone, from several months before the release of Surf's Up:
Four for the Price of Two
Rolling Stone/October 29, 1970
"LOS ANGELES - If you have a stereo system, you're a lamp cord and two more speakers away from having a quadraphonic (four channel) system.
Brother Records, the Beach Boys' label, discovered the instant conversion system when their director of engineering, Stephen Desper, read about it in a technical magazine, and their first compatible quadraphonic album - quad, stereo, and monaural - should be out next week.
The system, according to Jack Reilly, Brother's director of creative services, was developed by Dynaco, and electronics parts company in Philadelphia, and it enables consumers to bypass new tape equipment and new kinds of records to get the four-channel effect. Brother Records will include an instruction sheet with their next album releases. The first one will be by Flame, the South African band discovered by the Beach Boys in a London cabaret several months ago.
To get the quad effect in a phonograph record, Reilly said, the stereo mixdown "goes through a matrix which electronically combines and properly shifts each of the four tracks into the walls of the groove." When playing the record, the instruction sheet explains, "the stylus in the groove may move one of four says: left-center, right-center, up-center or down-center...but records have never before been mixed down in a way as to take advantage of the full range of movement by the stylus.
The listener converts his stereo amp into four-track by hooking up all four speaker outputs by either speaker wire or lamp cord.
The system, Reilly said, was successfully tested on the recently released Beach Boys' Sunflower album - two tracks, "Cool Cool Water" and "Got to Know the Woman," are actually quadraphonic - and will be used on all future Brother releases. Reilly is hoping other labels will follow.
"The industry," he said, "would just love for all of us to have to buy new equipment to get quadraphonic sound. But the Beach Boys feel it's time one company give the public what they can get without making them spend more money."
So far, most quadraphonic marketing has centered on four-channel tapes and tape systems."
Wow, amazing, lukpac, thanks for digging this up.
(The cover story for this issue was the death of Janis Joplin, with articles on Jimi Hendrix's funeral and inquest. Heady times.)
I was a senior in high school when this was published and recall reading it at the time.
It gave me a lifetime prejudice against over-priced quadrophonic equipment and media.
Mr. Desper, a class act, enough said.
Last edited:
Stephen W. Desper
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 27
COMMENT to lukpac (again for QQ posters): I did not cite record labels, I said insert. Specifically the insert with dried mud.
Jack Reilly is not an engineer and could barely operate a toaster. So whatever he said in an interview about engineering can be taken with a grain of salt. Sunflower and Surf's Up are not quadraphonic and never were. This is Mr.-know-it-all Jack just talking through his behind. He is extrapolating information he did not understand from one project (the FLAME) to another project (The Beach Boys). One is not connected to the other. The matrices are different. BB matrix I used on their albums was a virtual matrix. Flame used a rudimentary quad matrix. One is 90 degrees shifted from the other. The BB matrix uses two speakers and the Flame used four speakers.
This makes me wonder if Jack Reilly is the real culprit here, as I think you are implying. Did he, in his ignorance, add the line to the Surf's Up insert, when he returned from Holland and I was gone, that has caused all this confusion including AP to use the incorrect matrix for their SACD issue? I wouldn't put it past him to screw this up, from his grave, like he did so many things with the Beach Boys when he was alive.
You will note that Jack says "Quad effect" and then claims that the Beach Boy songs are four track. Yes, you can get a quad-like effect from any record by application of any number of decoders. So what? You can play a stereo record through a modern Dolby 5.1 algorithm and get five channels, but that is not the intension of the producer or engineer. This is just more Bull Sh-t from the king of Bull Sh-t, Jack Reilly.
Sunflower and Surf's Up were recorded over several years. The tracks on some songs date back further. Release dates and recording dates usually are not the same. You don't record an album in a month and then release it. Read my book!
The EV4 and Dynaco systems were designed to encode a 4-track master into two-channels that were cut on an LP. Then when playing the LP the consumer put the signal into a decoder that outputted four channels that were sent to four amplifiers and four speakers. These systems were for quadraphonic LPs, not recording studio use. In order to use any of the quad systems (and there were several), the studio master must be 4-tracks (hence the Greek word, Quad, meaning four.) The demos you cite were demonstrated to mastering engineers and were of interest to them. Recording engineers making quad recordings would think or engineer in terms of four discrete tracks. These discrete tracks would be used by the mastering house to make the quad LP. Quadraphonic records are not encoded at the recording studio or during the recording or mixdown process. On the other hand, two-channel recordings made using virtual matrices would be encoded in the recording studio with the resolution decoding added at the time of mastering (or playback). Two different animals. In the special case of the FLAME album, I monitored using four speakers at mixdown and cut directly to two-tracks. In effect, the monitoring circuit encoded the rear channels so no separated 4-track was needed. To understand all this may require more dialog. I'm sorry, but I just don't have time to explain it in detail. Technically the FLAME album was a stereo album. In order to hear it over four speakers, the user had to connect two extra speakers to a stereo amp following the diagram supplied with the album The diagram was a decoder scheme. The FLAME album did not have a four-channel master, only a two-channel master that was made (monitored) using four speakers. (Incidentally, I still have the two rear speakers we used. I use them in a bedroom system now.)
Looks like Jack should leave engineering to engineers, and hyping to the ad department. Engineering deals with facts. Hype deals with fiction. Jack Reilly should have known the difference.
~swd
Initially, I was taken aback by this thread...but I have to say Stephen, that all the informative background you have provided is absolutely fascinating. I totally appreciate you taking the time to shed some light on all this as for those of us who are huge BB fans...this is just irresistible.
well i'm not the fan of BB and never was, but thank you mr. Desper for all your works and for sharing your knowledge and experience with us. that's interesting read.
in regard of
b.t.w. you mentioned your works with Frank Zappa. i'm curious if you been involved into his quad experiments?
in regard of
not always the case. Black Sabbath did their 1970 debut album, which become iconic, in 3 days, albeit for sure, from technical view it isn't polished to perfection masterpiece.
b.t.w. you mentioned your works with Frank Zappa. i'm curious if you been involved into his quad experiments?
Stephen W. Desper
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 27
COMMENT to Otto: Yes I was. I traveled as chief mixer with Frank for about a year. You will find my name on the albums as one of the engineers associated with Apostrophe* and Overnight Sensation. I will always remember Frank as a fantastic musician, a fanatical perfectionist and a real gentleman. ~swd
that's interesting. Frank Zappa seems was extremely innovative personality and back in 70s he had so much enthusiasm about quad format, that he even named
his then newly founded company DiscReet Records. he planned to release all his works in quadraphonic but sadly the commercial trend at that time took drastic
turn and nothing, beside mentioned by you albums, haven't been released, albeit officially was announced as upcoming quad "Roxy & Elsewhere" and " One Size Fits All".
rumors has it, more was prepared but no one sure, as his family seems not too kind to free out even his known quad mixes in new surround formats, let alone rumored ones.
that's sad, because Zappa's complex music just perfect candidate for surround experience.
i'm curious if you have any sort of insider knowledge about this matter?
Stephen W. Desper
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 27
COMMENT to Otto: Both albums were released in quad on LP, 4-track discrete reel-to-reel issues and CD-4 formates. The quad versions sound so much better than the stereo versions, although Frank used the back channels more for effect than envelopment. My work with the Beach Boys has more to do with phase-related stereo. All Frank's stuff is generally amplitude-related stereo. Nevertheless, if you haven't heard the quad releases, it's worth your time and money to try and find an old copy(s). Here is more information on Apostrophe* and Overnight Sensation IN QUAD >>>http://www.lukpac.org/~handmade/patio/misc/quad.html ~swd
Stephen -
Thank you so much for all your contributions here! The Zappa link above is fascinating. I am only a short way into it, but already this has leapt out at me:
"The key reason we don't know more about Zappa's quad albums is they were designed for a system that died over twenty years ago. From what I've been able to gather, quad died because
The industry couldn't settle on a standard;
Setting it up right was a pain in the ass for the consumer;
The sonic benefit was marginal."
End of excerpt.
Well I agree with the first two points, but the third point is strictly a matter of opinion, and one that I would think would be roundly dismissed by all on this forum, PROVIDED that the music is mixed in a way that properly utilizes the format. I am curious to know your opinion of the Zappa quad mixes, Stephen, and of discrete quad mixing in general. Personally I have experienced MANY a recording in quad and surround with immense sonic benefit, but again this is reliant on the mix.
Zappa seems to have rather pull his punches when it came to mixing for quad, as is also demonstrated on his official QuAudiophiliac release. It seems a little odd too, considering he was very adventuresome in his use of the stereo sound stage on his records, and as smart as he was, I can't imagine he did not grasp the potential of an adventuresome quad mix.
Finally (for now), the other question previously tabled was - are you are aware of any Zappa mixes or experiments that have gone unreleased, and if so, what those might be?
Thanks again so much for your valued input!
Thank you so much for all your contributions here! The Zappa link above is fascinating. I am only a short way into it, but already this has leapt out at me:
"The key reason we don't know more about Zappa's quad albums is they were designed for a system that died over twenty years ago. From what I've been able to gather, quad died because
The industry couldn't settle on a standard;
Setting it up right was a pain in the ass for the consumer;
The sonic benefit was marginal."
End of excerpt.
Well I agree with the first two points, but the third point is strictly a matter of opinion, and one that I would think would be roundly dismissed by all on this forum, PROVIDED that the music is mixed in a way that properly utilizes the format. I am curious to know your opinion of the Zappa quad mixes, Stephen, and of discrete quad mixing in general. Personally I have experienced MANY a recording in quad and surround with immense sonic benefit, but again this is reliant on the mix.
Zappa seems to have rather pull his punches when it came to mixing for quad, as is also demonstrated on his official QuAudiophiliac release. It seems a little odd too, considering he was very adventuresome in his use of the stereo sound stage on his records, and as smart as he was, I can't imagine he did not grasp the potential of an adventuresome quad mix.
Finally (for now), the other question previously tabled was - are you are aware of any Zappa mixes or experiments that have gone unreleased, and if so, what those might be?
Thanks again so much for your valued input!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 26,178
One could ONLY hope for a BD~A 5.1 release of both Overnite Sensation and Apostrophe. I really enjoyed the recent Zappa Roxy BD~V even though it was [gulp!] DD 5.1. Simply amazing musicianship and the sound was actually quite good for LOSSY.
I know the Zappa Family Trust is in pandemonium these days with all the infighting since Gail's passing, but hopefully their entrepreneurial senses will kick in and they'll realize that their father's legacy deserves to be heard in state of the art sonics including all his many QUAD 'experiments.'
I know the Zappa Family Trust is in pandemonium these days with all the infighting since Gail's passing, but hopefully their entrepreneurial senses will kick in and they'll realize that their father's legacy deserves to be heard in state of the art sonics including all his many QUAD 'experiments.'
Not to derail this thread, but the mailman just brought me a blessing.
Here's why I like reading liner notes.
As opposed to folks who think packaging and art are a waste of money and energy when distributing music.
Credits for Track 6, Frank Zappa "Crux of the Biscuit"
Don't Eat The Yellow Snow / St Alphonso's Pancake Breakfast
Recorded live at the Hordern Pavilion, Sydney,
Australia 6/24/73
Engineer: Steve Desper
Original Recording Source: 1/2" 4-Track Analog Tape Master
Mixed by Craig Parker Adams at Winslow Court Studios
5/2/14 to 96K 24B WAV
FZ- Guitar, Lead Vocals
George Duke- Keyboards, Vocals
Sal Marquez- Trumpet, Vocals
Ian Underwood- Reeds, Synth
Jean-Luc Ponty- Violin
Bruce Fowler- Trombone
Tom Fowler- Bass
Ralph Humphrey- Drums
Listening now, @ 17:30 quite a bawdy version of Father O'Blivion's private life.
Stephen,
I find it incredible that someone at Brother Records went to the trouble or bother to indicate "subsequent"versions of the album "Surf's Up" as being quad encoded (via Dynaquad of course.).
Is it possible or conceivable that after you left in 71 to work with Frank Zappa...someone at Brother, another engineer perhaps, encoded this disc ?
I find it incredible that someone at Brother Records went to the trouble or bother to indicate "subsequent"versions of the album "Surf's Up" as being quad encoded (via Dynaquad of course.).
Is it possible or conceivable that after you left in 71 to work with Frank Zappa...someone at Brother, another engineer perhaps, encoded this disc ?
Stephen W. Desper
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 27
COMMENT to fizzywiggs41: I'm sorry that you can't believe such things happen, but I don't understand why you don't.
Looking at my collection of Surf's Up albums, I have the original first issue pressings that were provided to myself and Carl and everyone else involved. These were the versions that Carl and myself signed-off on. The project (Surf's Up) was finished and released. Soon after I left with Zappa for Australia. Jack Rieley was in charge. I did acquire a few albums some time later, some time meaning months later, and played them just to check, but never reviewed all the art work. I suspect, but only an educated guess, that Jack inserted the quad statement to increase album sales into the (then) quad market. He certainly had the authority to do it. I know he made statements to the press about the album being quad compatible, but these were not correct. He may have confused the quad album FLAME with the Beach Boy offering -- I don't know, and the man is dead now. Jack did work with the art department at Warner's and Capitol as an intermediary between them and BRI. At any rate, a change in the art was made early on . . . maybe even with the second pressing -- who knows? No one checked with me, I wasn't there.
As to "someone at Brother, another engineer perhaps, encoded this disc ?", you (along with Jack) don't understand the recording process. You can't just encode something out of nothing. Surf's Up was mixed in two-track stereo using a virtual surround matrix. The matrix requires a decoder that can be applied before or after the album is cut. Warner's did not apply the resolution matrix at the time the album was cut. The virtual matrix has nothing to do with quadraphonic sound. Quad is recorded to a 4-track master -- reduced to a 2-track matrix which is cut on the LP -- and at playback decoded back to 4-channels. It is a 4-2-4 scheme. In order to do what you propose, the entire album would need to be remixed to a 4-track master. With the group in Holland, me in Australia, the house studio demolished, and money in short supply, it did not happen. What did happen is someone inserted the quad statement after the art was approved and it remained a harmless insert change until 45 years later technology caught up with the album and someone at Analog Productions mistakenly read the incorrect statement, applied the wrong matrix and released a version of the album that was never intended and is not a representation of the original intensions of the artists or producer -- or engineer. Whether you consider this inconceivable or not, it did happen. I provided photos to show the changes in the art, and that is the end of it. If you wish to hear the album with the virtual matrix applied, you will find it at my webpage, http://swdstudyvideos.com in the near future, as part two of my book Recording The Beach Boys. Part one deals with Sunflower. Part two will be dealing with Surf's Up. Hope this answers your question. ~swd
Stephen,
I'm not out and out stating it's encoded, just conceivable.If you say it was not and never was, well ok.But let's examine somethings regarding matrixing for quad.
Now encoding for a matrix quad product is relatively simple and people should be made aware of this.
I know because I have encoded discrete Q4 source through a quad encoder to a 2ch tape recorder. (4-4-4) to (4-2-4) Which simply means 4 discrete ( 4 very separate ) into the encoder which reads the 4ch signal and consequently "imbeds" a 4ch signal to a 2ch tape source.
And of course the "embedded" matrix quad is now contained in the 2ch source tape which can be utilized to make/cut a vinyl record.
But of course you know this being an engineer who has mixed and would have been made available to this process. (Re : The Flame )
I mention this because others might not.
Anyway, given the timeline 71/72, we had matrix quad discs being made, or coming on board (EV-4, QS, SQ) and prior DY-4D also known as Dynaquad.This was the "flowering" of quad matrix vinyl timeline, afterall.
The labels were scrambling to get quad product out in vinyl to the majority of audiophile buying public.
As to your ascertain that artists had to all bring a a remixed from multi , well this occured quite frequently indeed.
Columbia records (CBS) did this most often as (and WEA) "dual inventory" discs, separate stereo and quad albums.
So a single inventory disc utilizing Dynaquad could have occurred, but you say no way, so ok.
Often older recordings were recorded in quad be they matrix quad or discrete.Recordings mixed in stereo in the 60's with multi tracks came out later in quad.
BTW we know Columbia Records were mixing in quad tape (Q4) early on in the late 60's.Thanks to Thomas Mowery's info on his and David Scheiber tape encode mix supplied with COLUMBIA RECORDING ARTISTS.This tape encode was done as a presentation/promotion of the Scheiber matrix system in late 69.
That's a chap you should seek out.Quite interesting and personable-Thomas Mowery.And he started recording in quad Q4 for DGG in 70.But that label did not release any commercial quad vinyl, etc.
Now it would seem that David Hafler (Dynaco) was also "hoodwinked" as he supplied a list of (2 dynaquad) albums that were recommended for their decoder.
list of albums Dynaco supplied for Ken Sessions book on four channel,2nd edition.
It's rare but you also know as I do that you can run a 2ch source through a quad encoder to record a "quad like" or surround effect.This was mostly utilized of course for Fm broadcasting.
What's the difference in your latest post regarding; virtual surround matrix and virtual matrix ?
and "Surf's Up was mixed in 2ch stereo using a virtual surround matrix"
"The matrix requires a decoder that can be applied before or after the album is cut" Do you mean ENCODER? before Then Decoder after ?
anyway,
Sorry for "ripping the bandaid off the wound" so to speak,
thankyou for your reply,
Derek
I'm not out and out stating it's encoded, just conceivable.If you say it was not and never was, well ok.But let's examine somethings regarding matrixing for quad.
Now encoding for a matrix quad product is relatively simple and people should be made aware of this.
I know because I have encoded discrete Q4 source through a quad encoder to a 2ch tape recorder. (4-4-4) to (4-2-4) Which simply means 4 discrete ( 4 very separate ) into the encoder which reads the 4ch signal and consequently "imbeds" a 4ch signal to a 2ch tape source.
And of course the "embedded" matrix quad is now contained in the 2ch source tape which can be utilized to make/cut a vinyl record.
But of course you know this being an engineer who has mixed and would have been made available to this process. (Re : The Flame )
I mention this because others might not.
Anyway, given the timeline 71/72, we had matrix quad discs being made, or coming on board (EV-4, QS, SQ) and prior DY-4D also known as Dynaquad.This was the "flowering" of quad matrix vinyl timeline, afterall.
The labels were scrambling to get quad product out in vinyl to the majority of audiophile buying public.
As to your ascertain that artists had to all bring a a remixed from multi , well this occured quite frequently indeed.
Columbia records (CBS) did this most often as (and WEA) "dual inventory" discs, separate stereo and quad albums.
So a single inventory disc utilizing Dynaquad could have occurred, but you say no way, so ok.
Often older recordings were recorded in quad be they matrix quad or discrete.Recordings mixed in stereo in the 60's with multi tracks came out later in quad.
BTW we know Columbia Records were mixing in quad tape (Q4) early on in the late 60's.Thanks to Thomas Mowery's info on his and David Scheiber tape encode mix supplied with COLUMBIA RECORDING ARTISTS.This tape encode was done as a presentation/promotion of the Scheiber matrix system in late 69.
That's a chap you should seek out.Quite interesting and personable-Thomas Mowery.And he started recording in quad Q4 for DGG in 70.But that label did not release any commercial quad vinyl, etc.
Now it would seem that David Hafler (Dynaco) was also "hoodwinked" as he supplied a list of (2 dynaquad) albums that were recommended for their decoder.
list of albums Dynaco supplied for Ken Sessions book on four channel,2nd edition.
It's rare but you also know as I do that you can run a 2ch source through a quad encoder to record a "quad like" or surround effect.This was mostly utilized of course for Fm broadcasting.
What's the difference in your latest post regarding; virtual surround matrix and virtual matrix ?
and "Surf's Up was mixed in 2ch stereo using a virtual surround matrix"
"The matrix requires a decoder that can be applied before or after the album is cut" Do you mean ENCODER? before Then Decoder after ?
anyway,
Sorry for "ripping the bandaid off the wound" so to speak,
thankyou for your reply,
Derek
Stephen W. Desper
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 27
COMMENT to Derek:
Question ONE: What's the difference in your latest post regarding; virtual surround matrix and virtual matrix?
Answer: None. I'm just tired of typing surround all the time so I shortened the name.
Question TWO: and "Surf's Up was mixed in 2ch stereo using a virtual surround matrix"
Answer: I can see how this could be confusing so I'll restate myself. Surf's Up was mixed in 2-channel stereo wherein a virtual surround matrix was imbedded via the original recording using some microphone arrays and some electronic matrices. These techniques constitute the equivalent of an encoding matrix, but utilize acoustically derived vectors to form the encoding matrix. The album and others were mixed down while listening using a decoding matrix over two monitor speakers, but recorded in stereo using a two-track tape machine. Thus, in stereo only playback musical compatibility was maintained whether the final playback was in stereo (unresolved) or in virtual stereo (resolved). Virtual stereo is achieved by application of a playback decoder or reverse matrix. It can be applied at any point in the reproduction chain. That is, while making a tape copy, an LP disc, or just listening. Warner decided not to become involved in such a new technology and cut the LP without the playback matrix. However, the encoding was still in the stereo version that was released on the LP. As I said, the playback matrix could be applied at any stage of playback.
Remember, virtual surround uses the human ear/brain mechanism to provide the surround "effect." When resolved using the playback matrix, the surround or enhanced stereo effect is provided by the same two stereo speakers, so if the listener is positioned between the two speakers, will hear the surround sound field, which extends far beyond the sound stage. In contrast, quadraphonic sound requires four real speakers. The two front speakers create the sound stage and the two rear speakers create the sound field. The advantages of virtual surround have been commented on in past posts at this thread and other posts at Smileysmile.org.
Question THREE: "The matrix requires a decoder that can be applied before or after the album is cut" Do you mean ENCODER? before Then Decoder after?
Answer: In my technique the so-called encoder is not an actual device, but the application of microphone arrays and other electronic "arrays" that are more natural in their derived and unique linear transformation than encoders that use simple electronic circuits.
You see, the human brain does not hear left and right. It hears homophasic and antiphasic signals and the brain's internal processing is all based on these two derivations. So in virtual surround, the encoding microphone matrices derive their encoding using the position of the various microphones in acoustic space. This is a more natural way to achieve expanded stereo than by using four separate channels reproduced at the perimeters of the sound field. Again, look back at my posting on this subject.
In the meantime, you can experience virtual surround by listening to some of the many examples on my webpage at http://swdstudyvideos.com. No decoding matrix is required since it is already there between your ears. ~swd
Question ONE: What's the difference in your latest post regarding; virtual surround matrix and virtual matrix?
Answer: None. I'm just tired of typing surround all the time so I shortened the name.
Question TWO: and "Surf's Up was mixed in 2ch stereo using a virtual surround matrix"
Answer: I can see how this could be confusing so I'll restate myself. Surf's Up was mixed in 2-channel stereo wherein a virtual surround matrix was imbedded via the original recording using some microphone arrays and some electronic matrices. These techniques constitute the equivalent of an encoding matrix, but utilize acoustically derived vectors to form the encoding matrix. The album and others were mixed down while listening using a decoding matrix over two monitor speakers, but recorded in stereo using a two-track tape machine. Thus, in stereo only playback musical compatibility was maintained whether the final playback was in stereo (unresolved) or in virtual stereo (resolved). Virtual stereo is achieved by application of a playback decoder or reverse matrix. It can be applied at any point in the reproduction chain. That is, while making a tape copy, an LP disc, or just listening. Warner decided not to become involved in such a new technology and cut the LP without the playback matrix. However, the encoding was still in the stereo version that was released on the LP. As I said, the playback matrix could be applied at any stage of playback.
Remember, virtual surround uses the human ear/brain mechanism to provide the surround "effect." When resolved using the playback matrix, the surround or enhanced stereo effect is provided by the same two stereo speakers, so if the listener is positioned between the two speakers, will hear the surround sound field, which extends far beyond the sound stage. In contrast, quadraphonic sound requires four real speakers. The two front speakers create the sound stage and the two rear speakers create the sound field. The advantages of virtual surround have been commented on in past posts at this thread and other posts at Smileysmile.org.
Question THREE: "The matrix requires a decoder that can be applied before or after the album is cut" Do you mean ENCODER? before Then Decoder after?
Answer: In my technique the so-called encoder is not an actual device, but the application of microphone arrays and other electronic "arrays" that are more natural in their derived and unique linear transformation than encoders that use simple electronic circuits.
You see, the human brain does not hear left and right. It hears homophasic and antiphasic signals and the brain's internal processing is all based on these two derivations. So in virtual surround, the encoding microphone matrices derive their encoding using the position of the various microphones in acoustic space. This is a more natural way to achieve expanded stereo than by using four separate channels reproduced at the perimeters of the sound field. Again, look back at my posting on this subject.
In the meantime, you can experience virtual surround by listening to some of the many examples on my webpage at http://swdstudyvideos.com. No decoding matrix is required since it is already there between your ears. ~swd
Stephen,
Thankyou, very much.That is an excellent explanation as to how you and any other engineer can achieve a "surround type effect" or expansion of the soundfield to the listener.
I appreciate the part where the utilization of "mic placement" can acheive a surround effect, as I have read this in past written articles on the use of such a practice.
Additionally I have a cd by a Canadian Engineer who did achieve a "surround" effect utilizing mic placement in an appropriate, well appropriate to retrieve a surround and quad effect by utilizing a quad decoder.I this case the cd of natural surround was recommended for specifically quad matrix decoding and preferrably the SQ quad matrix.
It did indeed work, btw. I was using an advanced SQ decoder for this test.
And additionally I had an article on mic placement technique which specified the use of two carefully placed stereo coincident mics in the M-S mode to achieve a quad encode for both Dynaco's 4D matrix and CBS' S SQ matrix.
So yes when you state mic placement in the recording process is and can be revelatory psycho-acoustic in presentation , I can only agree whole heartedly with those findings. And of course this predates big box encoders that do likewise.I think it's also referred to in the audio industry as a "Haas" or even "Blumlein" type of psycho acoustic effect or even "Hafler", effect.
So thankyou for clearing up some misconceptions on the Sunflower disc but mainly on the Surf's Up recording, which to me anyway, was the only disc I would have identified with a quad encode (via Hafler or Dynaquad).
I 'm also curious to know if Capitol Records contacted you back in early 2001/02 about their plans to release a surround DVDA of "SURF'S UP" as they had anounced back then that it was an upcoming release in 5.1 DVDA ?
And finally, I can show you why there are such questions as mine regarding the Quad Encode of Beach Boys discs.This is a pic of liner notes on Beach Boys/Carl And The Passions-So Tough disc.
I believe the reference eludes to the use of a "diamond" matrix which Dynaco had. (leftside, centerfront, rightside, surround)
I had those notes blown up in order to read as the cd was such small print.Originally this disc was attached to "Pet Sounds" as a twofer on Reprise Records.This cd is a twofer attached with "Holland" on Capitol records.
Derek
Thankyou, very much.That is an excellent explanation as to how you and any other engineer can achieve a "surround type effect" or expansion of the soundfield to the listener.
I appreciate the part where the utilization of "mic placement" can acheive a surround effect, as I have read this in past written articles on the use of such a practice.
Additionally I have a cd by a Canadian Engineer who did achieve a "surround" effect utilizing mic placement in an appropriate, well appropriate to retrieve a surround and quad effect by utilizing a quad decoder.I this case the cd of natural surround was recommended for specifically quad matrix decoding and preferrably the SQ quad matrix.
It did indeed work, btw. I was using an advanced SQ decoder for this test.
And additionally I had an article on mic placement technique which specified the use of two carefully placed stereo coincident mics in the M-S mode to achieve a quad encode for both Dynaco's 4D matrix and CBS' S SQ matrix.
So yes when you state mic placement in the recording process is and can be revelatory psycho-acoustic in presentation , I can only agree whole heartedly with those findings. And of course this predates big box encoders that do likewise.I think it's also referred to in the audio industry as a "Haas" or even "Blumlein" type of psycho acoustic effect or even "Hafler", effect.
So thankyou for clearing up some misconceptions on the Sunflower disc but mainly on the Surf's Up recording, which to me anyway, was the only disc I would have identified with a quad encode (via Hafler or Dynaquad).
I 'm also curious to know if Capitol Records contacted you back in early 2001/02 about their plans to release a surround DVDA of "SURF'S UP" as they had anounced back then that it was an upcoming release in 5.1 DVDA ?
And finally, I can show you why there are such questions as mine regarding the Quad Encode of Beach Boys discs.This is a pic of liner notes on Beach Boys/Carl And The Passions-So Tough disc.
I believe the reference eludes to the use of a "diamond" matrix which Dynaco had. (leftside, centerfront, rightside, surround)
I had those notes blown up in order to read as the cd was such small print.Originally this disc was attached to "Pet Sounds" as a twofer on Reprise Records.This cd is a twofer attached with "Holland" on Capitol records.
Derek
Similar threads
