Yes I know , and thanks Steely for all the work and time you put into that Surround Engineers/Quad page.
I noticed quite a few stealth recordings , fwiw.
More stealth quad albums
- Thread starter MidiMagic
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Yes I know , and thanks Steely for all the work and time you put into that Surround Engineers/Quad page.
I noticed quite a few stealth recordings , fwiw.
This information comes to me via Canadian Stereo Guide Winter 78 with the following quote :
The New Hampshire Music Festival - Mozart's Symphony Number 35 , the Haffner. Sonar Records SD-150 (QS ?)
"a sleeve note says it gives a magnificent clarity when played through a QS Decoder"
Now IIRC Sonar Records made a number of Quad Reel-Reels for the quad consumer.
I would consider that notation on the record a worthy mention .
The New Hampshire Music Festival - Mozart's Symphony Number 35 , the Haffner. Sonar Records SD-150 (QS ?)
"a sleeve note says it gives a magnificent clarity when played through a QS Decoder"
Now IIRC Sonar Records made a number of Quad Reel-Reels for the quad consumer.
I would consider that notation on the record a worthy mention .
anyway, the most important thing in this thread that's gone rather scarily OT, is that the Tommy Quintaphonic movie soundtrack on DVD/BD and the Tommy movie soundtrack Stereo album are absolutely not the same thing! phew! glad we cleared that up (thank you, Doctor)
now onto the next stealth Quad (that i hope really is a Stealth Quad!!
Note that John Woram former quad master engineer for Vanguard Records made this page up of what he thought of what were the best albums of the 3 competing vinyl quadraphonic systems.
IIRC Mr. Woram ended up with his own quad consulting agency sometime after leaving Vanguard , and became a huge backer of Discrete Systems. Namely broadcasting and CD-4 .
He wrote articles published at the annual A.E.S.
Anyway I thought it worthwhile that of the Sansui QS albums he found best were 2 popular selections from Vox , Larry Fast's Synergy , and The Who Tommy soundtrack.
I find his review of the Tommy Polydor album very revealing , and pretty much the same as what I heard on my Sansui QSD-2.
Now of course the Blu-Ray blows the vinyl album out of the water as far as the surround mix goes on the Polydor album.
And I notice that the original mix may not be Ron Nevison's 1975 mix , but a slightly different one by James B Young and Greg Faust . Of which I find to be far more superior to the original.
Now of course we now have 5 Discrete sounds that can be accurately heard on the Blu ray , in whereas back in 75 there was only one , the center . The other four were from a QS Decoder .
I also find it interesting that so many version tapes were made , such as mono , and Dolby Stereo ( 3/1).
But as the finality to this Quintaphonic experiment I know of only two music films that were made and unfortunately Quintaphonics died an unfortunate death mainly because they could not outcompete with the well established Dolby Stereo System adopted by Hollywood.
Additionally there were other 5 channel matrix systems that tried to obtain acceptance , such as Ultra Stereo , Chace Stereo Surround , and Shure HTS , but all failed eventually because of Dolby's well established clout .
Whew !
Fascinating stuff, thanks for the info!
Moe Koffman did a "Space" album too, I wonder if it was surround encoded? 1978 or so, I think?
*edit: it was called "solar explorations" and it came out in 1974. Appears to be stereo, but I bet a surround mix would sound good. GRT 9230-1050
Moe Koffman did a "Space" album too, I wonder if it was surround encoded? 1978 or so, I think?
*edit: it was called "solar explorations" and it came out in 1974. Appears to be stereo, but I bet a surround mix would sound good. GRT 9230-1050
Last edited:
Well , for that matter he had another album from the 70's which I kept coming across frequently , and I always wondered if it was a "closet quad".
For that matter I always wondered if one or more of those Stereo Dimension records of Lighthouse on the GRT label had quad encoding (EV-4) , or maybe even just one or more tunes on the vinyl disc .
Right now though, ... and I have to say it's been ongoing for quite some time now , I'm trying to find out more about a certain recording engineer's works regarding some unmarked SQ encoded albums .
I'll know more when I can find some of his notations on quad encoding and his use of a Sony Encoder.
The Apparent SQ encoded album of Pink Floyd - Dark Side Of The Moon
on Mofi Records as a stealth record ,
is noted in this article by Andrew Marshall former studio engineer for The CBC .(Canadian Broadcasting Corp )
And this from his Magazine ,.. Audio Ideas Guide or AIG.---Winter/Spring 2000 edition Vol 19 #3 page 22.
[ Also this particular album(MOFI) was also rumoured to be SQ by editors on either 4 QUAD/EVOLUTION , or The MCS Review. (Late 70's to mid 80's) ]
on Mofi Records as a stealth record ,is noted in this article by Andrew Marshall former studio engineer for The CBC .(Canadian Broadcasting Corp )
And this from his Magazine ,.. Audio Ideas Guide or AIG.---Winter/Spring 2000 edition Vol 19 #3 page 22.
[ Also this particular album(MOFI) was also rumoured to be SQ by editors on either 4 QUAD/EVOLUTION , or The MCS Review. (Late 70's to mid 80's) ]
FWIW ...
That article is a review of The Cantares SSP-1 UHJ/SQ Surround Processor's.
(Ambisonic and SQ Quadraphonic)
That article is a review of The Cantares SSP-1 UHJ/SQ Surround Processor's.
(Ambisonic and SQ Quadraphonic)
Hmm surprised if that is the case: surely people would have figured that out already & it would be common knowledge?
I have the UK SQ quad and the MFSL stereo, which he claims is from the SQ master. Will compare the two.
He also thinks the WYWH Columbia mastersound is SQ encoded.
I suspect they just happen to decode well, similar to the Tangerine Dream stereo LP's people thought were quad encoded.
But you never know. I will check out DSOTM
I have the UK SQ quad and the MFSL stereo, which he claims is from the SQ master. Will compare the two.
He also thinks the WYWH Columbia mastersound is SQ encoded.
I suspect they just happen to decode well, similar to the Tangerine Dream stereo LP's people thought were quad encoded.
But you never know. I will check out DSOTM
I did a search for that magazine, hoping there was a way to see old issues. Looks like you have a real paper copy. Do you know if there is an archive somewhere?The Apparent SQ encoded album of Pink Floyd - Dark Side Of The Moon
is noted in this article by Andrew Marshall former studio engineer for The CBC .(Canadian Broadcasting Corp )
And this from his Magazine ,.. Audio Ideas Guide or AIG.---Winter/Spring 2000 edition Vol 19 #3 page 22.
[ Also this particular album(MOFI) was also rumoured to be SQ by editors on either 4 QUAD/EVOLUTION , or The MCS Review. (Late 70's to mid 80's) ]
View attachment 74130View attachment 74131
Well the MFSL & UK SQ I have here are both very different mixes.
I haven't gone through exhaustively, but one obvious example is "us & them": the sax intro on the SQ version is longer, and the tape head delay panning on the vocals is different & more extreme than the MFSL.
Lots of other differences on instrument levels, reverb amount & panning on other tracks too, but clearly these were not sourced from the same stereo mix.
I played them both stereo, as the claim that MFSL is a stealth quad implies the stereo mix would be the same.
Unless there are multiple SQ surround mixes. Or the MFSL is the Japanese QS encode? The SQ liner notes say Alan Parsons supervised the quad mix.
I haven't gone through exhaustively, but one obvious example is "us & them": the sax intro on the SQ version is longer, and the tape head delay panning on the vocals is different & more extreme than the MFSL.
Lots of other differences on instrument levels, reverb amount & panning on other tracks too, but clearly these were not sourced from the same stereo mix.
I played them both stereo, as the claim that MFSL is a stealth quad implies the stereo mix would be the same.
Unless there are multiple SQ surround mixes. Or the MFSL is the Japanese QS encode? The SQ liner notes say Alan Parsons supervised the quad mix.
I wish there was. I truly do.
He was not a quad naysayer. Unlike so many others. He even had a hand in encoding some quad recordings.
And dammed if I can find that article .
That Alan Parsons did the quad mix is very common knowledge. As a matter of fact it was mixed for quad at the onset ,according to Alan . ("with quadraphonic in mind" is his quote")
And yes it depends where Brad MILLER got his master , as both Capitol U S A , and EMI UK* had both quad matrix and stereo master copies from Abbey Road.
As did EMI/ELECTROLA ,Germany , EMI Australia, and maybe EMI New Zealand , and Jugoton Yugoslavia , (and maybe Supraphon Czechoslvakia ?)
*also the Q4 discrete.
Yes, I am aware of that, I mentioned Alan Parsons as it's in the liner notes of the copy I have. In case someone else was involved with another version.
They used Alan's quad demo recording of the clocks for the intro to "time", so clearly quad was intended during production.
Ps the MFSL stereo mix sounds just like every other stereo mix I've heard, as far as content. The SQ is quite different.
They used Alan's quad demo recording of the clocks for the intro to "time", so clearly quad was intended during production.
Ps the MFSL stereo mix sounds just like every other stereo mix I've heard, as far as content. The SQ is quite different.
I am wondering why a studio engineer from cbc believed the MFSL is SQ encoded? I would give a cbc studio engineer more credibility than some shmoe on an internet forum
Presumably all quad ( vinyl ) copies of DSOTM were derived from the Alan Parsons mix. So unless someone else mixed another quad version, our cbc studio engineer is mistaken.
By the way, I am not arguing with you. You posted that article & other comments of conjecture, with no analysis or thoughts either way. I am taking the time to help determine whether it's true or not.
Curious to hear other people's results, if they compare the two.
Presumably all quad ( vinyl ) copies of DSOTM were derived from the Alan Parsons mix. So unless someone else mixed another quad version, our cbc studio engineer is mistaken.
By the way, I am not arguing with you. You posted that article & other comments of conjecture, with no analysis or thoughts either way. I am taking the time to help determine whether it's true or not.
Curious to hear other people's results, if they compare the two.
Nonsense. The MFSL LP of Dark Side is NOT the SQ encoded quad mix. Neither is the Columbia Master Sound LP of Wish You Were Here.The Apparent SQ encoded album of Pink Floyd - Dark Side Of The Moon
is noted in this article by Andrew Marshall former studio engineer for The CBC .(Canadian Broadcasting Corp )
And this from his Magazine ,.. Audio Ideas Guide or AIG.---Winter/Spring 2000 edition Vol 19 #3 page 22.
[ Also this particular album(MOFI) was also rumoured to be SQ by editors on either 4 QUAD/EVOLUTION , or The MCS Review. (Late 70's to mid 80's) ]
View attachment 74130
View attachment 74131
They are the standard stereo mixes.
Last edited:
I wouldn’t give the engineer credibility in the case. He’s simply wrong.I am wondering why a studio engineer from cbc believed the MFSL is SQ encoded? I would give a cbc studio engineer more credibility than some shmoe on an internet forum
Presumably all quad ( vinyl ) copies of DSOTM were derived from the Alan Parsons mix. So unless someone else mixed another quad version, our cbc studio engineer is mistaken.
By the way, I am not arguing with you. You posted that article & other comments of conjecture, with no analysis or thoughts either way. I am taking the time to help determine whether it's true or not.
Curious to hear other people's results, if they compare the two.
I guess his rational is right there in the article: he's claiming the 10 second intro to "money" proves it's quad.
But a studio engineer should know that matrix encoding uses phase information to split channels. So any stereo recording that happens to have sufficient phase info, will decode into surround.
That segment is spliced up bits of Roger Waters tossing loose change into an urn, in his garden shed. And a cash register.
Who knows what their mixing process was? Maybe the whole thing was done in surround first, then folded down & tweaked for stereo? I will say the stereo version sounds more lush & polished than the SQ quad.
I'm not sure if I've ever heard the discrete Alan Parsons mix though. SQ encoding may be doing something undesireable. There's definitely less bass. "Any colour you like" in particular.
But a studio engineer should know that matrix encoding uses phase information to split channels. So any stereo recording that happens to have sufficient phase info, will decode into surround.
That segment is spliced up bits of Roger Waters tossing loose change into an urn, in his garden shed. And a cash register.
Who knows what their mixing process was? Maybe the whole thing was done in surround first, then folded down & tweaked for stereo? I will say the stereo version sounds more lush & polished than the SQ quad.
I'm not sure if I've ever heard the discrete Alan Parsons mix though. SQ encoding may be doing something undesireable. There's definitely less bass. "Any colour you like" in particular.
Last edited:
There are two extremely fast, easy ways to identify the quad versions of Pink Floyd's 1973 and 1975 albums: The extreme panning you mention in "Us and Them" and the backing singers coming in on the first verse of SOYCD instead of waiting for the second.
I mean, those are incredibly obvious even with vanilla stereo playback (in fact, the SOYCD difference would be obvious in mono!).
Good tips!!
Thanks!
Thanks!
As you say, any recording with out of phase info will decode.
Hell, Electric Ladyland was recorded and mixed in 1968, yet is has all kinds of intentional pseudo-surround using out of phase signals when played back in stereo with no surround decoding of any kind. I would imagine it decodes like crazy. Sympathy For The Devil has a similar effect (which is why a dedicated mono mix of it was done for the mono LP - so the piano wouldn‘t cancel out - while the rest of the album is a folddown). Lots of songs over the years are similar - some probably intentional, many probably not.
There is no evidence or logic to indicate DSOTM was originally a second quad mix and then folded to stereo. It is a dedicated stereo mix. I’m guessing this engineer making the MFSL claim probably was aware there was a quad mix, but wasn’t particularly familiar with the material and just made an incorrect assumption.
Similar threads
