Random Stuff About Surround Sound

[doity]

Yes not their only product so be thankful that they are supporting it out of sheer passion rather than expecting to make a fortune on it. Most people don't like working for nothing.

Hey, if you are happy with it that is all that matters. I was just speaking for myself. I mean if it was the only option out there I would pick one up for sure. But it doesn’t hurt to be somewhat critical once in awhile does it? Speaking for myself at least.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Hey, if you are happy with it that is all that matters. I was just speaking for myself. I mean if it was the only option out there I would pick one up for sure. But it doesn’t hurt to be somewhat critical once in awhile does it? Speaking for myself at least.

Perchance, ARE YOU A LAWYER??????

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Some very good points made here of this very small company, with all the typical business expenses, at the end of the day, they may be making very little on the SM. It's also important to note that Chucky and Dave are always here and respond to our questions and issues very quickly; what other company supporting Quad/Surround sound or any other for that matter is doing that? And besides, I love these Quadraholic brothers from down under, they're my kind of crazy *******s!

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Some very good points made here of this very small company, with all the typical business expenses, at the end of the day, they may be making very little on the SM. It's also important to note that Chucky and Dave are always here and respond to our questions and issues very quickly; what other company supporting Quad/Surround sound or any other for that matter is doing that? And besides, I love these Quadraholic brothers from down under, they're my kind of crazy *******s!

Ah, the stuff that goes on here while Chucky sleeps. It seems there's a big deal alt energy convention coming up in the next couple of days that might make his participation sparse around here for a bit.

 

[Soundfield]

Yeah but the SM is not their only product.

That's correct!- which is why its actually so cheap - as Sonik points out above, it's almost certainly cross subsidised by their other products!

 

[DuncanS]

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.

I think we are all used to mass consumer products which are cheap, but they are manufactured in the 100s of thousands per month. I balked at the cost when I looked at the SM2, then worked out its not that bad for a niche product so got one, wonderful thing it is as well. So it is 'expensive' but not when compared with the pricing on high value items like the iPhone, for that the cost of manufacture is a very small part of the selling price.

I'm an Electronic Engineer, and I design 'stuff' where our batch size is around 100, and the cost of board assembly exceeds the cost of the parts, then there are all the test, build costs etc. When we build a prototype batch of 10, the costs can be quite scary, well definitely to the accountants!

 

[par4ken]

That's correct!- which is why its actually so cheap - as Sonik points out above, it's almost certainly cross subsidised by their other products!

Too bad that the majors back in the seventies didn't continue to support quad by subsidising at least one or two models, instead of scrapping the whole idea!

 

[4-earredwonder]

Too bad that the majors back in the seventies didn't continue to support quad by subsidising at least one or two models, instead of scrapping the whole idea!

When the record companies stopped producing QUAD software in the mid 70's WHAT WAS THE POINT? And the Involve SM series except for the inability to decode CD~4, SIGNIFICANTLY improves upon those 70's decoders, especially in SQ mode!

 

[par4ken]

When the record companies stopped producing QUAD software in the mid 70's WHAT WAS THE POINT?

Yes my comment goes for the software manufactures as well. Your comment "WHAT WAS THE POINT" is blasphemy in my books! Even if there never was any quad source material, quad/surround equipment was and is necessary for stereo enhancement. Without surround I would be just as happy listening to MONO! It's also a chicken and egg scenario, no software no hardware and no hardware no software!!

 

[4-earredwonder]

Yes my comment goes for the software manufactures as well. Your comment "WHAT WAS THE POINT" is blasphemy in my books! Even if there never was any quad source material, quad/surround equipment was and is necessary for stereo enhancement. Without surround I would be just as happy listening to MONO! It's also a chicken and egg scenario, no software no hardware and no hardware no software!!

Not to sound counterproductive, but in those early days of QUAD and with NO video in surround at the time, who would want SURROUND ENHANCEMENT for stereo when sales of QUAD hardware/software were MINISCULE to begin with? Cassette sales were robust and most record stores at the time had NO idea how to even market QUAD and the thought of adding additional speakers/QUAD hardware for the purpose of ENHANCING STEREO was hardly on anyone's mind!

 

[par4ken]

Not to sound counterproductive, but in those early days of QUAD and with NO video in surround at the time, who would want SURROUND ENHANCEMENT for stereo when sales of QUAD hardware/software were MINISCULE to begin with? Cassette sales were robust and most record stores at the time had NO idea how to even market QUAD and the thought of adding additional speakers/QUAD hardware for the purpose of ENHANCING STEREO was hardly on anyone's mind!

Obviously all the old timers here plus those that have passed on just for starters. Had quad remained at least an option more people would of signed on to it. If colour TV would of been discontinued after such a short period of time we would still be watching everything in glorious black and white!

 

[4-earredwonder]

Obviously all the old timers here plus those that have passed on just for starters. Had quad remained at least an option more people would of signed on to it. If colour TV would of been discontinued after such a short period of time we would still be watching everything in glorious black and white!

Well, I'm a HUGE Proponent of 3D ..... They finally perfected the format BRILLIANTLY with the advent of OLED TV and then KAPUT .... No more 3D TVs are being manufactured and a paltry number of 3D films have been released on home video and in theaters ...... BOO HOO!

 

[jaybird100]

I would estimate the cost to have the PCBs made, boards manufactured (pick-&-place & solder), tested, shipped to Australia from China, metal work made, printed, unit assembled, tested & boxed to be £300-£350/US$417-US$486 if a 100 were made in a batch. They won't be making them in the 1000s. So US$695/£500 seems fair for a bespoke piece of audio kit to decode obsolete formats.

Since they're not manufacturing the SM's "en masse", they can also pay more attention to quality control.

 

[MidiMagic]

Obviously all the old timers here plus those that have passed on just for starters. Had quad remained at least an option more people would of signed on to it. If colour TV would of been discontinued after such a short period of time we would still be watching everything in glorious black and white!

That actually happened. The FCC removed color TV for two years.

And TV was totally removed for 8 years at an earlier time.

In each case, a different system was approved after the hiatus.

In 1939, the FCC approved two channels for TV.

Then the US entered World War II and the approval was rescinded in 1941.

Then RADAR was invented, and the frequencies of the TV Channel 1 were changed to use for RADAR (Now you know why there is no channel 1 on analog TV sets).

After the war, in 1947, the FCC approved what is now known as the NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) black and white TV. Originally channels 2 thru 6 were approved.

FM radio was approved the same year and placed just above TV channel 6.

In 1950, the FCC approved the CBS field sequential color system. It was not compatible with NTSC black and white TV.

In 1951, the National Production Authority prohibited the manufacture of color sets for the general public during the Korean War. Only 200 color sets had been made.

CBS stopped transmitting color in late 1951.

With that, RCA started developing the compatible color system that became NTSC color.

In 1953, CBS announced that it had abandoned its color system.

In late 1953, the FCC approved NTSC color.

In 1976, quadraphonics was discontinued by most manufacturers.

In 1982, Dolby Surround replaced it.

 

[par4ken]

QUAD hardware for the purpose of ENHANCING STEREO was hardly on anyone's mind!

It was always on my mind from the time of my first Dyna quad type set up. That idea should of been promoted much much more!!! I've long thought that a quad system based on QS Surround mode would of been great for Quad, all stereo releases would already be "encoded".

 

[Sonik Wiz]

It was always on my mind from the time of my first Dyna quad type set up. That idea should of been promoted much much more!!! I've long thought that a quad system based on QS Surround mode would of been great for Quad, all stereo releases would already be "encoded".

Lets not forget that for a while after Quad but before home theater, there was an abundance of devices using delay/reverb aimed at stereo users. Most of these used analog bucket brigade devices for delay but I think one (Sound Concepts??) used digital. The ad copy for these things always ran along the lines of "unlock the ambience hidden in your stereo records!" As units got into homes they ultimately failed to please because they still needed 2 more speakers for the rear, rather lower quality than regular stereo gear, and they didn't properly decode the soundfield. Just adding a few mS delay to stereo or L-R behind you does nothing to put the actual recording's ambience where it should be.

Then of course followed a few years of analog Dolby Surround which was pretty much the same thing but paired with terrible sounding low power receivers. Ugh.

 

[par4ken]

Lets not forget that for a while after Quad but before home theater, there was an abundance of devices using delay/reverb aimed at stereo users. Most of these used analog bucket brigade devices for delay but I think one (Sound Concepts??) used digital. The ad copy for these things always ran along the lines of "unlock the ambience hidden in your stereo records!" As units got into homes they ultimately failed to please because they still needed 2 more speakers for the rear, rather lower quality than regular stereo gear, and they didn't properly decode the soundfield. Just adding a few mS delay to stereo or L-R behind you does nothing to put the actual recording's ambience where it should be.

Then of course followed a few years of analog Dolby Surround which was pretty much the same thing but paired with terrible sounding low power receivers. Ugh.

I was going to build one of those bucket brigade delay lines at one time. I still have the chip (made by Philips, I think). I saw the PC board in a box of junk awhile ago. The project was from ETI magazine or one of their Project books. I lent the magazine it to a friend who was also going to build one but never got it back. I think the original article is available as a download (I might even have it already). I might slap it together for kicks sometime.

I have a Fosgate Dolby Surround decoder that I picked up at a dealers "yard sale". I never used it much, I always got much better results via a real quad decoder.

 

[jaybird100]

That actually happened. The FCC removed color TV for two years.

And TV was totally removed for 8 years at an earlier time.

In each case, a different system was approved after the hiatus.

In 1939, the FCC approved two channels for TV.

Then the US entered World War II and the approval was rescinded in 1941.

Then RADAR was invented, and the frequencies of the TV Channel 1 were changed to use for RADAR (Now you know why there is no channel 1 on analog TV sets).

After the war, in 1947, the FCC approved what is now known as the NTSC (National Television Standards Committee) black and white TV. Originally channels 2 thru 6 were approved.

FM radio was approved the same year and placed just above TV channel 6.

In 1950, the FCC approved the CBS field sequential color system. It was not compatible with NTSC black and white TV.

In 1951, the National Production Authority prohibited the manufacture of color sets for the general public during the Korean War. Only 200 color sets had been made.

CBS stopped transmitting color in late 1951.

With that, RCA started developing the compatible color system that became NTSC color.

In 1953, CBS announced that it had abandoned its color system.

In late 1953, the FCC approved NTSC color.

In 1976, quadraphonics was discontinued by most manufacturers.

In 1982, Dolby Surround replaced it.

A minor correction; the original FM radio band was 42-50 MHz. It was moved to 88-108 MHz in 1946.

 

[Soundfield]

I was going to build one of those bucket brigade delay lines at one time. I still have the chip (made by Philips, I think). I saw the PC board in a box of junk awhile ago. The project was from ETI magazine or one of their Project books. I lent the magazine it to a friend who was also going to build one but never got it back. I think the original article is available as a download (I might even have it already). I might slap it together for kicks sometime.

Odd those BBD devices. They were not brilliant I seem to recall (fairly high distortion in most applications I think), but there was nothing else like them. Strange then that they seemed to vanish practically overnight.

 

[MidiMagic]

BBD devices were easily damaged by static electricity. None of mine work correctly now.

The old FM frequencies were rescinded at the same time TV was rescinded for World War II.

After the war, it was decided that the very few sets that existed for both FM and TV were expendable, since both existed for less than two years.. New frequencies and modulation standards were allocated for both in 1947.