Random Stuff About Surround Sound

[fredblue]

totally, i keep checking in vain to see if the latest post is actually about the Surround Master 3!

sending out the Bat Signal..

timbre4 steelydave rtbluray Bob Romano

can we move all the off topic stuff from this thread, please?

 

[MagnumX]

totally, i keep checking in vain to see if the latest post is actually about the Surround Master 3!

sending out the I enjoy being a killjoy Signal..

can we move all the off topic stuff from this thread, please?

In other words, seeing no replies at all is much preferable to people like yourself than a discussion of related quad/surround matters (that die when moved as happens in all forums). Gotcha.

I'll do us both a favor and unsubscribe now so you can enjoy the silence.

No worries. I'm sure Chucky will post another manual preview in a few months or so.

 

[chucky3042]

In other words, seeing no replies at all is much preferable to people like yourself than a discussion of related quad/surround matters (that die when moved as happens in all forums). Gotcha.

I'll do us both a favor and unsubscribe now so you can enjoy the silence.

No worries. I'm sure Chucky will post another manual preview in a few months or so.

Like the discussion, it just deserves a different heading in some other location

 

[timbre4]

totally, i keep checking in vain to see if the latest post is actually about the Surround Master 3!

sending out the Bat Signal..

timbre4 steelydave rtbluray Bob Romano

can we move all the off topic stuff from this thread, please?

I will fire up the centrifuge and draw all that debris away sometime today.

 

[fredblue]

In other words, seeing no replies at all is much preferable to people like yourself than a discussion of related quad/surround matters (that die when moved as happens in all forums). Gotcha.

I'll do us both a favor and unsubscribe now so you can enjoy the silence.

No worries. I'm sure Chucky will post another manual preview in a few months or so.

its all good and the discussions great. all i was saying is could we just do it in another thread, please

 

[fredblue]

Like the discussion, it just deserves a different heading in some other location

yep that's it

 

[kfbkfb]

Any changes in the way the variable matrix logic operates (time constants, crossover frequencies) for the SMV3?

(during the Quad era, there were several different variable matrix SQ decoders, all with different approaches as to how the logic worked)


Kirk Bayne

 

[chucky3042]

Thank you Timbre4 for your efforts to straighten up this thread!

Hey kfbkfb
There are no plans to change any of the parameters of the INVOLVE decode or encode matrix. The only changes I see in the future will be a new DSP chip with a larger capacity as I can then clear out one minor shortcut we had to do. I am thinking of adding a height channel but its a distant maybe thought as I really do not thing many want speakers on ceilings.

Has anyone tried the SM on ATMOS or Sony 360 recordings?

 

[kfbkfb]

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archi...ng-Engineer/70s/Recording-1973-12.pdf#page=26^^^
The
Sansui QS "Mono Broadcast" mode is
a decoder function, whereby a 90° right
channel phase shift is used to obtain a
mono signal that maintains 360° signal
content to within 3 dB [40] . The "Mono
Broadcast" mode does not provide a
stereo or quad signal, but it is valuable
because any previously encoded QS ma-
terial may be used for totally compatible
monaural broadcast, and no sacrifices
in quad encoding are required.


Any plans for Windows and/or Macintosh software to implement the QS "Mono Broadcast" mode (stereo QS encoded audio would be output as mono [possibly as stereo, but with both channels containing the mono/phase shifted downmix])?

Current use would be mono playback of QS encoded content (possibly by a consumer w/Involve QS encoder) using a single smartphone speaker.


Kirk Bayne

 

[chucky3042]

Hey all

We are all back......now back to the chat about the pesky side images............................................

 

[furui_suterioo]

Forgot to mention, the new SM3 boards are due to arrive this week so its getting close!

Re recording etc, our guys in USA have failed in writing an INVOLVE encode plugin software based encoder. Basically it just did not sound correct and they gave up.

I will still persue it as it is super important but I need to get someone else who is crazy enough to tackle the beast and experienced in that software world.

Is the software encoder supposed to be "4-corners encoder" or modular like a "position encoder"?

 

[chucky3042]

Is the software encoder supposed to be "4-corners encoder" or modular like a "position encoder"?

Sorry I am just an oversized dumb extremely handsome 63 year old, what do you mean by the "position encoder"? I want to develop the ability for a PC based plugin that enables the recording "engineer" to position an object anywhere in a 360 degree sphere. I am also looking at encoding height

 

[furui_suterioo]

Sorry I am just an oversized dumb extremely handsome 63 year old, what do you mean by the "position encoder"? I want to develop the ability for a PC based plugin that enables the recording "engineer" to position an object anywhere in a 360 degree sphere. I am also looking at encoding height

It is an encoder which had modular inputs instead of 4 in 2 out from what I understand. Other members know much more about than me, some discussion here(and elsewhere on qq):
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/the-legacy-of-dr-bauer.28425/page-2

 

[chucky3042]

It is an encoder which had modular inputs instead of 4 in 2 out from what I understand. Other members know much more about than me, some discussion here(and elsewhere on qq):
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/the-legacy-of-dr-bauer.28425/page-2

Yep that's the correct term .....a position encoder. Many thanks

 

[kfbkfb]

QS doesn't need a position encoder, it already provides optimum encoding for any position with a regular 4 corner QS encoder, only SQ can benefit from a position encoder.

There is a software QS encoder:
https://quark.cykik.com/faq/

Kirk Bayne

 

[chucky3042]

QS doesn't need a position encoder, it already provides optimum encoding for any position with a regular 4 corner QS encoder, only SQ can benefit from a position encoder.

There is a software QS encoder:
https://quark.cykik.com/faq/

Kirk Bayne

Yeah, was just reading about that in the attached thread. Another reason to not like QS

 

[chucky3042]

QS doesn't need a position encoder, it already provides optimum encoding for any position with a regular 4 corner QS encoder, only SQ can benefit from a position encoder.

There is a software QS encoder:
https://quark.cykik.com/faq/

Kirk Bayne

Thanks for that. Unfortunately INVOLVE encode is way more complicated, dare I say Involved!

 

[chucky3042]

QS doesn't need a position encoder, it already provides optimum encoding for any position with a regular 4 corner QS encoder, only SQ can benefit from a position encoder.

There is a software QS encoder:
https://quark.cykik.com/faq/

Kirk Bayne

Oh shit Ooops, weekends, brain dead QUARK was in fact developed by our teak with the assistance of Dave the bitch!! The QS encode is easy and works well. The team ran a ground when tackling the depths of INVOLVE encode and it just sounded poo.

Small world

 

[MidiMagic]

It is better to use valves!!

I built one using only resistors, pots, and transformers. No active electronics.

 

[MidiMagic]

I looked up an article that quoted $10-$50 per PCB. And that was the highest quote that I found by far. Add on top that they are not paying any special licensing fees, unless CBS or whoever owns the patent for SQ even still holds the patents which I doubt. And then maybe $150 tops for parts. Then add overhead like labor and other business costs such as printing and packaging.

Since they carried over the same basic design of the box and the changes seemed to be somewhat minor, the extra $100 is quite a jump in price for something that is a niche product. For the hardcore the price might not seem like much, but to others who might want to dabble or to those who want to upgrade, the price could be a hindrance. In my opinion at least. Also, I tend to think the “Audiophile” crowd would likely be turned off by the basic look of the unit and the small footprint. Again just my opinion and I could be wrong about all of this I admit.

All of the US patents for quadraphonics have expired.

Peter Scheiber held the patent that covered all matrix quadraphonic systems.