New Surround Master coming! Its a jump to the left and a step to the right

[MyCuff]

Yes, it requires a preamp. I'd recommend using a new model rather than a vintage one as SQ decoding is so phase-dependent. When I first got mine I used the ancient preamp in my Lafayette LR-4000 receiver and wondered why there was no separation. Then I picked up a Project Phono-Box and it improved dramatically.



The original model had two modes: SQ and "Involve", which is a proprietary surround synthesizer that decodes QS accurately and extremely well. The QS performance is better than my Sansui QSD-2 single-band variomatrix decoder. I believe (someone correct me if I'm wrong) the QS decoder in the QRX receivers is the same as the QSD-2.

Thanks, your answers took care of my burning questions. I think my QRX 999 has the same decoder as the QSD and is much better than the onboard SQ decoder. However, I think the phono section of my Sansui is terrible in general. Quad DVD/SACD versions sound way better than when played via the phono input (and I mean fidelity, not just surround goodness. Still, it would be the cost of this and a decent phono preamp which arguably will be another $200.

 

[JonUrban]

The SQ decoder on the SQ Surround Master is far better than the SQ mode on my QRX-999. The QS is very close.

(I never said it was better than a Tate II, (Never said it wasn't either), but it IS better than a Sansui SQ decoder section)

 

[karlkastner]

Yes, it requires a preamp. I'd recommend using a new model rather than a vintage one as SQ decoding is so phase-dependent. When I first got mine I used the ancient preamp in my Lafayette LR-4000 receiver and wondered why there was no separation. Then I picked up a Project Phono-Box and it improved dramatically.

I go from Oppo 105 analog stereo into SM, then SM analog 4.0 out to Marantz 4300. Will a preamp between the Oppo and the SM improve separation further?

 

[sjcorne]

I go from Oppo 105 analog stereo into SM, then SM analog 4.0 out to Marantz 4300. Will a preamp between the Oppo and the SM improve separation further?

No. I should clarify I was referring to a phono preamp. If your phono circuits aren’t balanced, you’ll get less (or possible no) channel separation from a vinyl source, no matter what decoder you're using.

Phono circuits don’t degrade uniformly, so it’s best to use a newer preamp when you’re playing matrix quad LPs. I dropped around $80 on a Project Phono Box and the increase in separation was very noticeable.

 

[chucky3042]

hi Chucky, there was a comment made on Facebook a couple of years ago (in response to one of me waxing lyrical about my epiphanic experience running old SQ and QS LPs through the SM) regarding it using 12-bit convertors and i was wondering 1.) where they might have got that info from and 2.) how accurate that info might be?
please find quote below (original poster's identity not disclosed).

"I was quite interested in Surround Master when it came out, especially after hearing people's feedback on separation. But I cooled down when I found out about 12 bit converters... I consider myself an Audiophile first and SurroundHead second. Good separation and surround is for me only good, if the sound is still of audiophile quality when it exits the decoder. I have Tate II, Space & Image composer and Lafayette decoders, which are pure analogue, and give Audiophile sound quality with decent decoding... I am tempted to go for digital decoding, but that 12 bit ADA ... can anyone that considers himself an Audiophile (and have audiophile grade turntable, amp, speakers...) compare above decoders - not for surround separation, but sound quality?"

Hi Fredblue

The DSP has an audio sample of 24 bit not 12 but uses a 48 bit word length floating point sampling , using 28 bit maths coefficients with a 76 bit accumulator. Also uses sigma - delta modulators with 256 times oversampling. Last time I checked 24 bit is 1 part in 16.7 million. Better than my clapped out ears!

 

[fredblue]

Hi Fredblue

The DSP has an audio sample of 24 bit not 12 but uses a 48 bit word length floating point sampling , using 28 bit maths coefficients with a 76 bit accumulator. Also uses sigma - delta modulators with 256 times oversampling. Last time I checked 24 bit is 1 part in 16.7 million. Better than my clapped out ears!

thank you for all the techhy info!
it does sound marvellously bitty!
i wonder wtf that bloke on FBk was going on about then! 🕳⁉

 

[olgitnorm]

Not being someone who understands all the technical jargon can anyone advise in simple terms how to get the best results from the SM. Would I be right to assume that the better quality input would give the best return? For example would a feed of high res stereo give better results than CD quality stereo which in turn would be better than mp3 or is this to simplistic and it depends more on how the original recording was mastered. Just trying to understand if you could choose which future purchases of stereo music would give best results.

 

[beerking]

My question is...Will this work in the equipment format as laid out in the Involve web site. In other words, or in my case, CD player to the SM unit to my Marantz receiver using the analogue cables. Then I presume something has to be disengaged on the receiver to allow the SM unit to pass through it.
I see the diagram on the Involve web site indicates this layout and lists various receivers to use, which as it states is not up to date.
Sorry if my question has already been answered. I'm just trying to get my head around how this operates using my existing setup. As I start to read about pre-amps etc and I then get concerned that there is more equipment I need, to get maximum benefit from this little box of tricks.
I was hesitating to ask this question as it seems like I should know the answer already...but there we have it..I don't !!

 

[Scott65]

My question is...Will this work in the equipment format as laid out in the Involve web site. In other words, or in my case, CD player to the SM unit to my Marantz receiver using the analogue cables. Then I presume something has to be disengaged on the receiver to allow the SM unit to pass through it.
I see the diagram on the Involve web site indicates this layout and lists various receivers to use, which as it states is not up to date.
Sorry if my question has already been answered. I'm just trying to get my head around how this operates using my existing setup. As I start to read about pre-amps etc and I then get concerned that there is more equipment I need, to get maximum benefit from this little box of tricks.
I was hesitating to ask this question as it seems like I should know the answer already...but there we have it..I don't !!

Not sure what it is called on the Marantz, but on my Yamaha it's 'Multi-channel input' - engaging this bypasses all the receiver's settings and allows the SM to output 5.1 (or 4.0!) channel sound from its analogue outputs to the receiver's analogue inputs. You use analogue (RCA) stereo cables from your player to the SM. Hope this helps

 

[Scott65]

Not being someone who understands all the technical jargon can anyone advise in simple terms how to get the best results from the SM. Would I be right to assume that the better quality input would give the best return? For example would a feed of high res stereo give better results than CD quality stereo which in turn would be better than mp3 or is this to simplistic and it depends more on how the original recording was mastered. Just trying to understand if you could choose which future purchases of stereo music would give best results.

Yes, the better the input the better the output. Note that the input must be stereo or the SM will not work.

 

[Scott65]

Yes, the better the input the better the output. Note that the input must be stereo or the SM will not work.

I'm basing this on my experience with the SM v1...the V2 I imagine will be even better.

 

[beerking]

Not sure what it is called on the Marantz, but on my Yamaha it's 'Multi-channel input' - engaging this bypasses all the receiver's settings and allows the SM to output 5.1 (or 4.0!) channel sound from its analogue outputs to the receiver's analogue inputs. You use analogue (RCA) stereo cables from your player to the SM. Hope this helps

Cheers Scott65
All your replies are just what I was looking for. That's my little pea brain sorted!! Just need to wait to get this little magic box, so I can surround myself with even more delights!!

 

[Scott65]

Cheers Scott65
All your replies are just what I was looking for. That's my little pea brain sorted!! Just need to wait to get this little magic box, so I can surround myself with even more delights!!

No worries Beerking - I have had the v1 for 2 years and love it. Currently listening to Santana's cover of She's not there on FM radio through it...sounds quite discrete.

 

[Scott65]

The results do depend on the source material but are almost always pleasing to my ears.

 

[chucky3042]

thank you for all the techhy info!
it does sound marvellously bitty!
i wonder wtf that bloke on FBk was going on about then! 🕳⁉

Yeah that was my opinion to!!

 

[chucky3042]

Not being someone who understands all the technical jargon can anyone advise in simple terms how to get the best results from the SM. Would I be right to assume that the better quality input would give the best return? For example would a feed of high res stereo give better results than CD quality stereo which in turn would be better than mp3 or is this to simplistic and it depends more on how the original recording was mastered. Just trying to understand if you could choose which future purchases of stereo music would give best results.

Hi

Actually the quality of the stereo does not effect the resultant surround quality. I have some really good compressed MP3 stuff of YouTube that sounds great in surround for example.

 

[chucky3042]

My question is...Will this work in the equipment format as laid out in the Involve web site. In other words, or in my case, CD player to the SM unit to my Marantz receiver using the analogue cables. Then I presume something has to be disengaged on the receiver to allow the SM unit to pass through it.
I see the diagram on the Involve web site indicates this layout and lists various receivers to use, which as it states is not up to date.
Sorry if my question has already been answered. I'm just trying to get my head around how this operates using my existing setup. As I start to read about pre-amps etc and I then get concerned that there is more equipment I need, to get maximum benefit from this little box of tricks.
I was hesitating to ask this question as it seems like I should know the answer already...but there we have it..I don't !!

What is the model number of your receiver? I will check

 

[chucky3042]

Yes, the better the input the better the output. Note that the input must be stereo or the SM will not work.

Correct in terms of the HiFi absolute quality but the surround decode is unaffected.

 

[Scott65]

Hi

Actually the quality of the stereo does not effect the resultant surround quality. I have some really good compressed MP3 stuff of YouTube that sounds great in surround for example.

That's been my experience too. The fidelity may vary though. Crystal Blue Persuasion on youtube sounds really good, to give one example

 

[Scott65]

Correct in terms of the HiFi absolute quality but the surround decode is unaffected.

agreed