What's the Latest MATRIX LP/CD Added to Your Pile? SQ, QS, RM, EV

[jaybird100]

Let's not forget that CD-4 discs are also cut much better for stereo playback, they are afterall "Half Speed Mastered".

That's not so much for stereo as it is to make it easier to cut the carrier signals into the grooves. Also , CD-4 requires cutting at lower signal levels.

 

[fredblue]

That's not too bad, other than off center side two issue.

Do you like CD-4 LPs just as much? I tend to like CD-4 so far as playback in stereo goes. They generally sound lovely and with very strong separation, stronger L to R than SQ. But it really comes down to the individual title.

An ok price for a relative toughy to find I guess.. its academic really but its side 1 thats pressed off centre, side 2 is ok.

I only have 1 x CD-4 LP (EJ covers thing) and I've not got around to playing it yet, I'm going to draw the line at SQ and QS for the time being I think, still hundreds of those to go before the curtain falls on my SQ folly!

 

[quicksrt]

Have you tried playing QS records in stereo? With SQ records, sounds that were placed in the rear channels tend to display between the stereo speakers. With QS, the rear sounds tend to come from beyond the stereo speakers, creating a wider image. CD-4 records, played in stereo, simply display the left front and left rear channels on the left, right front and right rear on the right.

Yes and this is what I don't like, I don't want a center blur playing back a quad LP (SQ), I want strong and hard separation (CD-4).

I don't want anything matrix'd together in a nice sweet spread across imaginary front and center speakers. Give me discreet separation, and my brain can do the rest, no worry. CD-4 certainly has a wide soundstage when the mix requests it. SQ is known to have phase issues that are not intended, and can cancel out sounds unintentionally, especially played back in stereo.

Both have LPs that are amazing to listen to and enjoy in quad or stereo.

 

[jaybird100]

Yes and this is what I don't like, I don't want a center blur playing back a quad LP (SQ), I want strong and hard separation (CD-4).

I don't want anything matrix'd together in a nice sweet spread across imaginary front and center speakers. Give me discreet separation, and my brain can do the rest, no worry. CD-4 certainly has a wide soundstage when the mix requests it. SQ is known to have phase issues that are not intended, and can cancel out sounds unintentionally, especially played back in stereo.

Both have LPs that are amazing to listen to and enjoy in quad or stereo.

You need to remember that, when playing a CD-4 record in stereo, what you're hearing is still the quad mix. If you listen to a stereo version of the same record, you'll see what I mean. The mix was meant to sound best when actually played via a CD-4 demodulator and cartridge, along with 4 speakers. Also, remember that playing a CD-4 record with a stereo cartridge and stylus will erode the carrier that would provide a CD-4 demodulator with the information on how to separate front from rear on both sides. I don't really consider CD-4 records fully compatible for that reason.

You say you like a nice spread across the speakers. Remember that quad never used a center speaker. And you're right about SQ having phase issues that are more noticable when the record is played in mono. That's where cancellations occur. QS spreads the sounds out when played in stereo so that the rear information is seemingly outside the stereo speakers, rather than between them. And cancellations are less likely to occur. Since you don't say whether or not you've played QS records in stereo, I assume you haven't. Try it.

 

[jaybird100]

Yes and this is what I don't like, I don't want a center blur playing back a quad LP (SQ), I want strong and hard separation (CD-4).

I don't want anything matrix'd together in a nice sweet spread across imaginary front and center speakers. Give me discreet separation, and my brain can do the rest, no worry. CD-4 certainly has a wide soundstage when the mix requests it. SQ is known to have phase issues that are not intended, and can cancel out sounds unintentionally, especially played back in stereo.

Both have LPs that are amazing to listen to and enjoy in quad or stereo.

If you want to ever play your CD-4 records in quad, you need a cartridge with a Shibata stylus to insure you don't wear away the supersonic carrier too quickly. You also need the CD-4 demodulator to split the sound into the four channels and send them to an appropriate amplifier and speaker system.

 

[quicksrt]

If you want to ever play your CD-4 records in quad, you need a cartridge with a Shibata stylus to insure you don't wear away the supersonic carrier too quickly. You also need the CD-4 demodulator to split the sound into the four channels and send them to an appropriate amplifier and speaker system.

Do I look like I just jumped off the back of a turnip truck? I'm not sure which of my posts imply that I know nothing of carrier signals, micro-line stylus' which is what they are called today btw), or center information on a quad LP, CD-4 or otherwise. But any instrument or vocal panned between the two fronts is essentially "centered".

"You need to remember that, when playing a CD-4 record in stereo, what you're hearing is still the quad mix."

And quad mixed to CD-4 played back in stereo floats my boat baby. I figured this out when I was a child playing Machine Head, and Paranoid CD-4s in stereo. And have been chasing more of that alternate mixed magic (even in plain stereo) ever since. And to arrive at this place we now find ourselves in with many of the "crown jewels" in the quadraphonic catalog now out in discreet digital. My childhood and teen years' research was not in vain.

I waited a long time for Wish You Were Here, Aqualung, Space in Time, and several others to come out. My post count is very low, but I've been around the block several times.

Thanks anyway for the effort to fill me in.

 

[quicksrt]

That's not so much for stereo as it is to make it easier to cut the carrier signals into the grooves. Also , CD-4 requires cutting at lower signal levels.

But it results in better stereo definition by default.

 

[bigbillquad]

Hi. you guys
Great talk on CD-4 but you are drifting a bit from this matrix post it`ll be grate to her more on the subject here (https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...DISCRETE-Quad-LP-Added-to-Your-Pile-CD-4-UD-4 )
so more discussion would be great there or here(https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...4-Is-there-any-life-in-it&p=267989#post267989 ) ....
Bill...

 

[quicksrt]

Hi. you guys
Great talk on CD-4 but you are drifting a bit from this matrix post it`ll be grate to her more on the subject here (https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...DISCRETE-Quad-LP-Added-to-Your-Pile-CD-4-UD-4 )
so more discussion would be great there or here(https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...4-Is-there-any-life-in-it&p=267989#post267989 ) ....
Bill...

And which forum thread is for comparing various attributes of CD-4 and SQ LPs?

 

[kap'n krunch]

But it results in better stereo definition by default.

True for CD-4 but not so for SQ since the rears are in the middle (hence, the "center channel extractor" for the scripts), the left and the right being 90ºL and 90º R respectively...

 

[jaybird100]

Do I look like I just jumped off the back of a turnip truck? I'm not sure which of my posts imply that I know nothing of carrier signals, micro-line stylus' which is what they are called today btw), or center information on a quad LP, CD-4 or otherwise. But any instrument or vocal panned between the two fronts is essentially "centered".

"You need to remember that, when playing a CD-4 record in stereo, what you're hearing is still the quad mix."

And quad mixed to CD-4 played back in stereo floats my boat baby. I figured this out when I was a child playing Machine Head, and Paranoid CD-4s in stereo. And have been chasing more of that alternate mixed magic (even in plain stereo) ever since. And to arrive at this place we now find ourselves in with many of the "crown jewels" in the quadraphonic catalog now out in discreet digital. My childhood and teen years' research was not in vain.

I waited a long time for Wish You Were Here, Aqualung, Space in Time, and several others to come out. My post count is very low, but I've been around the block several times.

Thanks anyway for the effort to fill me in.

Not trying to ruffle your feathers here; sorry if you took it that way. I haven't seen the turnip truck, either. But we did get off the subject of this forum, and to those who might be a bit unhappy about that, mea culpa.

 

[fredblue]

Anyway.. Got some cool SQ records (including more elusive titles on Columbia et al) to share first impressions and pics etc of with you all in the days to come.. you'll see what I mean as the week plays out

 

[jaybird100]

Anyway.. Got some cool SQ records (including more elusive titles on Columbia et al) to share first impressions and pics etc of with you all in the days to come.. you'll see what I mean as the week plays out

Bring 'em on, Fred!

 

[fredblue]

Bring 'em on, Fred!

Thanks matey :upthumb
Lets keep the flag flying at QQ for surround music in all its forms, even the humble SQ record now we can do it justice with the Surround Master, such a wonderful little bit of kit with its unprepossessing looks and clunky funky little switches and all, what it can do with those old matrix LPs is nothing short of revelatory imho.. of course it'll never replace the discrete 4-channel master tapes and sterling work Quaddies do with Q8 tapes but with a bit of luck Audio Fidelity will bring about as many viable releases of old Quads on Surround SACDs as they can and SQ thru the SM unit can help fill in any gaps with those titles that never saw a Q8 release or will more than likely never see reissue in discrete form for whatever reason. Its a glass more than half full situation now for us here, when not so long ago the glass was half empty bordering on unfillable.

 

[bigbillquad]

Hi. All
More matrix LP`s
( EMI. SQ Giuseppe Verdi Macbeth )-
( EMI. SQ Richard Wagner Rienzi )-
( EMI. SQ Giaoomo Puccini Turandot )-
( EMI. SQ Giuseppe Verdi Nabucco )-
( EMI. SQ Johann StrauB HedermUS )-
( EMI. SQ Giacomo Puccini Turandot )-
( CBS. SQ Tammy Wynette )-
( Ovation. QS Geoffrey Stoner )-
( CBS. SQ Beatles Song Book )-
Bill..

 

[fredblue]

Geoffrey Stoner.. some of my best friends are those

Anyway, thank you for the lovely photos as ever Bill (and for showing me more discs I didn't know about, just to tip me over the edge into bankruptcy!) :nuke

So.. on an SQ Matrix LP theme, today I have a day off - at last - and I'm going thru some of the SQ LPs that are bright/sibilant, there aren't many which is pretty amazing when you think of it, it's like 3 in 150! (Isleys/Guns, Wild Cherry/Electrified Funk, Burton Cummings are probably the worst offenders).

So I suddenly remembered that VTA can be used to combat such distortion - basically you run that stylus into the grooves with greater force than usual and get one good transfer out of it.. ..which is what I am doing right now.. and it's working, to a certain extent.. and helped the Isleys no end, what was pretty tough to stomach sibilance-wise before in a couple of tracks is now much more palatable, still not perfect and aspects of the overall treble is dulled and bass slightly heavier but most of the obnoxious "S" sounds on vocals are miles better with this simple (temporary) adjustment.

So there you go, vinyl 101 = don't be afraid to plough through the grooves of your splashy sounding old records if the letter "S" hisses away like a snake!

 

[fredblue]

Oh yeah and another one to add to the list of "testing" SQ LPs.. (i.e. CHALLENGING to transfer well..!!)...
Maynard Ferguson's "Conquistador"...

Can it be any coincidence this is yet another late era Quad (1977) that really gives my record player a hard time..!? Hmm... did something change in 76 with Columbia's mastering technique of these LPs?

I suspect also as a recording it's a toughy in any format, there is usually so much going on at any one time.. what an album! There are various tracks - the Rocky theme, Star Trek, The Fly.. where it's almost an assault on your senses! The Quad mix itself is a veritable force of nature with all manner of things literally flying about all around the place! :yikes

(I guess it doesn't get discussed because it's seen as "Muzak" by some, deemed fit only for elevators like Winelight, Breezin et al.. well I love it, musical snobs can go hang afaic..)

...anyway (that little rant over).. it's also mastered oddly in that some numbers per side are hot (Rocky Theme, Star Trek) so you have to back off on the input levels when transferring.. and then others "Mr Mellow" for example are mastered so quiet it's virtually impossible to get a decent overall level (this is my 5th attempt at trying to make a decent copy of it! Many late nights spent trying to get this one right.. without total success.. )..

I actually think the recording itself is such a full on obtacle course of dynamics and potential tracking issues for your turntable it's beyond my meagre setup.. Uh oh, I can feel upgrade-itis coming on...!! :yikes

 

[bigbillquad]

Hi. fredblue
I know where you are coming from near bankruptcy just pull the belt titer ???? but its like a drug to me now I cant get enuff of these Quad LP`s :beer2

Geoffrey Stoner.. some of my best friends are those

Anyway, thank you for the lovely photos as ever Bill (and for showing me more discs I didn't know about, just to tip me over the edge into bankruptcy!) :nuke

So.. on an SQ Matrix LP theme, today I have a day off - at last - and I'm going thru some of the SQ LPs that are bright/sibilant, there aren't many which is pretty amazing when you think of it, it's like 3 in 150! (Isleys/Guns, Wild Cherry/Electrified Funk, Burton Cummings are probably the worst offenders).

So I suddenly remembered that VTA can be used to combat such distortion - basically you run that stylus into the grooves with greater force than usual and get one good transfer out of it.. ..which is what I am doing right now.. and it's working, to a certain extent.. and helped the Isleys no end, what was pretty tough to stomach sibilance-wise before in a couple of tracks is now much more palatable, still not perfect and aspects of the overall treble is dulled and bass slightly heavier but most of the obnoxious "S" sounds on vocals are miles better with this simple (temporary) adjustment.

So there you go, vinyl 101 = don't be afraid to plough through the grooves of your splashy sounding old records if the letter "S" hisses away like a snake!

 

[fredblue]

Loggins & Messina (SQ LP).

 

[fredblue]

Small Talk - Sly and The Family Stone (SQ LP).