W E A unreleased titles in Schwann R&TG

[fizzywiggs41]

Just noticed Jimi Hendrix CRASH LANDING [Reprise] now under SONY MUSIC.....So WHERE IS IT?

'It's always someplace that you haven't checked before'.

Did you check your back pocket ?

 

[4-earredwonder]

I'd still love to have both Sweet Baby James and Mud, Slide Slim & The Blue Horizon as a two fer STEREO BD~A in pristine 192/24 sonics! We all have DSP decoders and I'm sure both would sound AMAZING!

 

[jaybird100]

I think that A&M were the only label to go through all three systems. Only Project 3 released in more formats but they released in multiple formats all at the same time. Both examples show just how fast technology was advancing in those days.

A&M started with QS. At that early stage QS decoders were not very good, I know neither were SQ. SQ got the jump on QS when full logic decoding was introduced. A&M didn't wait and jumped ship. IMHO had they waited a bit for Sansui to develop Vario-matrix they likely would not have switched. A&M's SQ releases were not up to the quality of those from CBS because they were not mixed specifically for SQ. Still it is amazing just how good they can sound decoded by a Tate decoder like the S&IC. QS was better suited to simply encode from a discrete master, it would have been better if A&M had remained in the QS camp.

CD-4 was improving throughout this period as well, to the point that A&M felt it was now good enough. They switched just before the premature end of quad came. That has always angered me, quad had no time at all to fully evolve and reach its full potential. It also angers me when I read something like "quad was a dismal failure", it certainly was not!!!! It was simply killed off prematurely.

I agree fully. Quad was never really given the chance to evolve and become what we all know it could be. A&M's one QS release, here in the US, was actually mixed better than most of their subsequent SQ issues. As for the decoders, a basic QS decoder could still deliver a better sound field than the equivalent SQ models. With the promise of Vario-Matrix on the horizon, A&M shouldn't have jumped ship so quick. What's interesting is that A&M was also distributing Ode Records back then, and Ode opted to stay with QS for their two (that I know of) for their quad releases.

Project 3's idea was very different, opting to release certain albums in all three systems. This would give quad lovers, like us, to choose the version that matched the best capabilities of their systems, or to buy all three to compare them. That was me! All three versions used the same mix, allowing for that comparison to be completely fair.

Quad, on vinyl, was a compromise, any way you look at it. CD-4 tried to give us discrete quad, but had to cram not only the audible signals, but also those supersonic carriers. CBS attempted to develop a similar system; SQ was also supposed to be a discrete system. They encountered the same problems JVC did with the system, the difference being that JVC didn't give up on it. The matrix systems seemed to be more practical, but the decoders were still rather primitive in their performance. If there had been a decoder back then, with the performance of the Surround Master, I'm sure quad would not only have succeeded, but QS would have been the chosen system. Just my opinion...

 

[barfle]

I think that A&M were the only label to go through all three systems. Only Project 3 released in more formats but they released in multiple formats all at the same time. Both examples show just how fast technology was advancing in those days.

A&M started with QS. At that early stage QS decoders were not very good, I know neither were SQ. SQ got the jump on QS when full logic decoding was introduced. A&M didn't wait and jumped ship. IMHO had they waited a bit for Sansui to develop Vario-matrix they likely would not have switched. A&M's SQ releases were not up to the quality of those from CBS because they were not mixed specifically for SQ. Still it is amazing just how good they can sound decoded by a Tate decoder like the S&IC. QS was better suited to simply encode from a discrete master, so it would have been better if A&M had remained in the QS camp.

CD-4 was improving throughout this period as well, to the point that A&M felt it was now good enough. They switched just before the premature end of quad came. That has always angered me, quad had no time at all to fully evolve and reach its full potential. It also angers me when I read something like "quad was a dismal failure", it certainly was not!!!! It was simply killed off prematurely.

I don’t jave any A&M QS recordings, but I do have Rick Wakeman’s “Six Wives” in SQ and “Journey” and “King Arthur” in CD4. I always wondered why they made it so difficult to listen to him in quad.

 

[jaybird100]

I don’t jave any A&M QS recordings, but I do have Rick Wakeman’s “Six Wives” in SQ and “Journey” and “King Arthur” in CD4. I always wondered why they made it so difficult to listen to him in quad.

The only album A&M issued in QS, in the US, was "Come From the Shadows", from Joan Baez. One other was released in Australia and New Zealand, "A Song For You", by The Carpenters. I'm trying to get my clutches on that one! The Joan Baez album is worth seeking out.