Music streaming on Apple Music in 5.1 (Dolby Audio)

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
i've come to the conclusion any diagonal pan in a CBS Quad mix is intentional.

the O'Jays' "Ship Ahoy" was the Quad that made me really pay closer attention to the whole phenomenon because the "Ship Ahoy" SQ Quad LP when decoded positioned certain things in a diagonal fashion, including on "For The Love Of Money", where a 360-round-the-room pan decoded intact whilst other elements within the same song zig-zagged.. so curious.. but when steelydave confirmed it with Philadelphia International's main Quad man Arthur Stoppe that was the indefatigable proof i needed.

i'm now also sure the diagonal pans on the Isley Brothers' "3+3" SACD that i'd also thought were erroneous years ago are an accurate rendering of the original Quad mix, since the "3+3" SQ LP also decodes with the same diagonal pans.

do these diagonal pans and placements always work? i don't know, that's upto the ears of the listener of course but i'm now sure things like that when i come across them in a CBS Quad mix are that way on purpose, kooky perhaps but as intended.
 
I think that's probably exactly what happened, because that's what I used to think too - in fact I authored a pretty long post in the O'Jays Ship Ahoy poll thread where I laid out the reasons I thought the diagonally panned instruments were wrong, but it turns out I was the one who was wrong.

Some years after that I spoke to Arthur Stoppe, who assisted Don Young on this quad mix (and who mixed many of the other PIR quads) and laid out the same case, and he explained that no, the diagonal spreads were intentional and for SQ compatibility as I laid out in my previous post.

He also said that they never mixed anything in stereo along the side walls (ie left front and left rear, or right front and right rear) because you couldn't hear anything in stereo unless you turned 90 degrees in your seat to face one of those walls, ie turn 90 degrees counter-clockwise and your left ear is pointed at the left rear speaker and your right ear is pointed at the left front speaker, and I think that belief was almost universal amongst all mixers as you'd be hard pressed to find a quad mix that has a stereo element along one of the side walls.

SQ was an imperfect system (to say the very least) and the diagonal "phantom quad center" placements were an imperfect solution to one of its problems, but at least for me, once you understand the thinking, they make more sense in the listening. If these diagonal pans were confined to one engineer, or one studio, you might be able to conclude it was an accident or a mistake, but almost every engineer who did any number of quad mixes used this diagonal method at one point or another. Garfunkel's Breakaway (and if I'm remembering correctly, Paul Simon's Still Crazy After All These Years) makes use of pans on both diagonal axes simultaneously in the majority of songs on the album, and it was done by legendary mixer Bill Schnee so it wasn't just CBS's in-house guys doing this stuff.

I'm sure these Apple engineers just get shipped a bunch of .wav files (or similar) and are left to their own devices to make sense of how the channels should be assigned. I dunno if this is still the case, but when the quad mixes started showing up on Tidal, half of them had the channel assignments so grossly mis-assigned that if you listened to them in stereo, the front speakers were in your left ear and the rear speakers were in your right ear. Apple Music seems to be better, but I'd always trust AF & D-V, who both had/have access to master tape boxes and other associated paperwork.
That all makes sense.

But I have to call BS on the notion (criticizing the message, not the messenger, here) that you can’t anything hear anything along the side in stereo unless you turn 90 degrees to the side. The brain can certainly distinguish what is coming from, say, the front left and rear left which seated forward - and can create a 360 degree (or 270 degree at least) soundstage as such.

Clearly the SACD resolution and mastering is richer and the individual channels more precise than the Apple Music. But I immediately thought “man, why does this sound bigger/wider and more cohesive?” at first listen to it on Apple Music (when I still subconsciously assumed it was just a simple reversing of the left and right channels).
 
Last edited:
I wonder if maybe somebody at Sony is listening to these mixes and thinking the same thing as me, i.e. this can’t correct?
Audio Fidelity probably thought the same thing when they did their Full Sail SACD - several tracks such as "Pathway To Glory" have the bass guitar diagonally suspended in the middle of the room on the SQ LP & Q8, but the SACD's channel assignment places it in one of the phantom side channels. In this case, the Apple Music transfer matches the AF SACD (reversed rears in comparison to the old SQ/Q8).
 
I found that one by accident! I was hoping to find the unissued 5.1 mix of Fifth Dimension :giggle:

A gold doubloon, shipmates, to the first one to spot The Byrds Fifth Dimension (1966) streaming in any surround form, even headphone!

440px-Doubloon.jpg


Keep your spyglass on the horizons!
Sing our 'Thar She Blows!' from the crow's nest! 🐳



LmpwZWc.jpeg



LmpwZWc.jpeg
 
I thought it's been available in 360 on Tidal for some time now? Shouldn't be long until it appears in Dolby Audio on Apple Music.

Ah, my loss, don't do Tidal.
Fingers crossed then for the two A streaming services I use.

But you win the doubloon.
Did I mention it's chocolate candy wrapped in stamped gold foil? ;)

PM me your address to collect.

In the meantime, there's Byrdmaniax and DPLIIm upmixing.
:51QQ
 
Back
Top