Quadraphonic Broadcast Transmitting Equipment

[par4ken]

Is this some sort of a tone generator for discrete quad FM alignment?
RARE! Fisher CD4 4 Channel Stereo FM Alignment Generator ONE OF A KIND Fisher! | eBay
View attachment 64011

Starting bid:
US $1,495.00 !!!!!

 

[Soundfield]

Starting bid:
US $1,495.00 !!!!!

The seller has written an hilarious description. I particularly enjoyed "It has a light coat of the original undisturbed dust".

 

[Sonik Wiz]

The seller has written an hilarious description. I particularly enjoyed "It has a light coat of the original undisturbed dust".

A bargain. It would come in very handy for adjusting up your quad FM tuner!

 

[surround.sound.enthusiast]

A little off subject, sorry! But say someone wanted to produce an online service of taking Quad discrete source material and encoding to QS for online Involve decoding, is that something that’s possible? Doesn’t Bill Brent do that for his show?

Hey Pupster, I've been thinking about this very idea for a few years now!

I had considered approaching my then local radio station (WMPG) about a new program, using an Involve encoder (on my time, at home) to transfer all manner of surround sound formats into an encoded signal for FM broadcast, for listeners to decode at home. I had wondered where the FCC stood with broadcasting encoded signals today, recalling from articles in the 70's that there was some sort of dispute about matrix encoding material for broadcast that wasn't already encoded (I can't remember if originated from the discrete camp or the FCC themselves, probably the first case).

There is so much material out there that you could program shows around particular artists or albums, or genres, or years, or any other parallels and relationships you could think of. You could discuss the modern and historical systems and formats, promote surround sound as a whole, and provide snippits of information on modern formats and equipment. Just think, a one to two hour FM show every week about surround music?

However, I moved out of the area in late 2015, so never got into DJ training sessions or getting a show. They now do podcasts as well, and the whole COVID thing has their 200+ volunteer DJ's producing shows at home and sending them into the station for broadcast, so this idea could still have legs. It's something that I think I'd still like to do, but don't have the depth of knowledge that a lot of other members here have, and don't have the large and diverse music collections that a lot of other members have either.

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Hey Pupster, I've been thinking about this very idea for a few years now!

I had considered approaching my then local radio station (WMPG) about a new program, using an Involve encoder (on my time, at home) to transfer all manner of surround sound formats into an encoded signal for FM broadcast, for listeners to decode at home. I had wondered where the FCC stood with broadcasting encoded signals today, recalling from articles in the 70's that there was some sort of dispute about matrix encoding material for broadcast that wasn't already encoded (I can't remember if originated from the discrete camp or the FCC themselves, probably the first case).

There is so much material out there that you could program shows around particular artists or albums, or genres, or years, or any other parallels and relationships you could think of. You could discuss the modern and historical systems and formats, promote surround sound as a whole, and provide snippits of information on modern formats and equipment. Just think, a one to two hour FM show every week about surround music?

However, I moved out of the area in late 2015, so never got into DJ training sessions or getting a show. They now do podcasts as well, and the whole COVID thing has their 200+ volunteer DJ's producing shows at home and sending them into the station for broadcast, so this idea could still have legs. It's something that I think I'd still like to do, but don't have the depth of knowledge that a lot of other members here have, and don't have the large and diverse music collections that a lot of other members have either.

Agreed, it would be special. Lately I've been seeing a multitude of online music radio shows through my ROKU (maybe in the hundreds.) It seems a company like Involve could produce an online Quad show there, and also do some self promotion; as the listeners would of course need a decoder to get it back into Quad. No encoding needed, just conversion to digital.

There is a ton of already encoded music out there. As an example, I could easily put together 1-2 hour show with tasty Quad (Q.M. - QS etc.) on just 1970's era Japanese Jazz/Funk stuff in my little collection that's actually very good IMO.

Would just need to get through all the legal crap with a bevy of lawyers for licensing and broadcasting the music

 

[surround.sound.enthusiast]

Agreed, it would be special. Lately I've been seeing a multitude of online music radio shows through my ROKU (maybe in the hundreds.) It seems a company like Involve could produce an online Quad show there, and also do some self promotion; as the listeners would of course need a decoder to get it back into Quad. No encoding needed, just conversion to digital.

There is a ton of already encoded music out there. As an example, I could easily put together 1-2 hour show with tasty Quad (Q.M. - QS etc.) on just 1970's era Japanese Jazz/Funk stuff in my little collection that's actually very good IMO.

Would just need to get through all the legal crap with a bevy of lawyers for licensing and broadcasting the music

That's where I'm not sure how community, and especially college radio works - I can't image they're paying licensing like big mega-broadcasters might. The two that were around my former home, WMPG and WUNH, had rather massive LP collections that they could just pull from and play, from the well known to the wacky obscure. And I'm not sure how licensing for streaming a podcast over the internet might differ from over the air broadcast.

You could broadcast already encoded music in the vintage formats: Stereo-4, SQ, and QS, and also broadcast newer ones: Dolby Surround, Circle Surround, Shure Stereosurround, and probably Dolby Digital (?). But, by encoding with Involve, you'd be able to broadcast sources that are still only available on discrete disc or tape, or newer 5.1-only releases that are only available in discrete formats, like on SACD. That way, you can give the listeners everything from Dick Schory on Ovation all the way up to Inxs: Kick. If the Involve encode is as universal as the guys are advocating, it would eliminate the need for having the correct matching decoder on the listener end.

Yes, some musicians might object to their surround sound works being decoded>re-encoded>broadcast>final decoded due to changes from original artistic vision. And going through multiple encodes/decodes is not ideal, but could be a good way to reach listeners and give them a taste of what surround sound is in their own homes, at no additional cost or investment, by simply switching their Big Box Store "surround-sound-in-a-box" setups to a 5.1 decode mode. Maybe making a few converts in the process.

 

[chucky3042]

The Pupster is right, we at Involve would love to assist. We do have a cheapo but high performance encoder at $150 in open PCB form , we are working on a free software based plugin (still sounds crap) . We have a zero dollar license fee....just mention Involve!! Hell if you are broke and broadcasting I will give you one!

It really is cross compatible and sounds like stereo

 

[furui_suterioo]

The Pupster is right, we at Involve would love to assist. We do have a cheapo but high performance encoder at $150 in open PCB form , we are working on a free software based plugin (still sounds crap) . We have a zero dollar license fee....just mention Involve!! Hell if you are broke and broadcasting I will give you one!

It really is cross compatible and sounds like stereo

Just out of curiosity, have you ever tried the encoder programmed for SQ? I think it would be kind of neat to have a custom eval encoder with just Involve-Smart encode and SQ encode(with fixed-QS omitted), or an SQ equivalent of Smart-encode(in my dreams). It probably make almost no practical sense at all, but it would be a cool novelty for my collection.

 

[chucky3042]

Just out of curiosity, have you ever tried the encoder programmed for SQ? I think it would be kind of neat to have a custom eval encoder with just Involve-Smart encode and SQ encode(with fixed-QS omitted), or an SQ equivalent of Smart-encode(in my dreams). It probably make almost no practical sense at all, but it would be a cool novelty for my collection.

Would not be hard to do but no we have not.