Re: Quadraphonic PINK FLOYD Dark Side of the Moon


"Fleetie" <fleetie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Mo2dnRQ-6PQCGaTVnZ2dnUVZ8vSdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxx
Title lifted from an Ebay auction with Pink Floyd
search terms.

I've read a little about quad LPs recently. If my understanding
is correct, the encoding is a little like FM stereo in that there
is information encoded in HF above the audible range, and it's
something to do with sum-and-difference, that when decoded, yields the rear channel information. How close am I?


I was surprised when I read that, since I assume a lot of that
information is above 20kHz, and quad was en vogue back in the 70s.
Were cartridges and preamps of the time capable of picking up signals
way in excess of 20kHz accurately?

Let's suppose I were to buy a Floyd DSOTM quad LP from Ebay:
Is there any equipment now that could take the output from
my cartridge and decode it? (Kinda irrelevant in fact because
I only have 2 speakers and a stereo amp, but... In the bottom of
my heart...) I would imagine that you can't easily get that kind
of gear any more.

Also, since the groove modulation extends to much higher frequencies
than it does with normal stereo, would playing it with a normal
cartridge/stylus be likely to cause it great (brain) damage (I use a Sumiko Blue Point Special Evo III)?

How different was the back-channel information from the main
front signal? Could you, in practice, have 4 completely
different signals (vocals, for example) coming from the 4
speakers with very little crosstalk? Would the strident
tintinnabulation starting "Time" be different from each corner?

Yours, not-old-enoughly-but-very-nearly,


Martin

There were three basic encoding methods for quad records in the 70s. SQ and QS were matrixed systems which means that the rear channels were encoded essentially by phase differences in with the front channels. This would make it reasonably compatible with normal stereo and almost compatible with mono, important for broadcasting which was mostly on AM in those days.

The third encoding method, which you allude to in your post was CD4, which was a carrier system similar to FM in that the front plus rear channels were mixed in the base-band, and the front-rear encoded on a carrier and then decoded on playback in a similar way to FM stereo. The great advantage of CD4 was that separation between front and back was much greater than a matrix system, and stereo and mono compatibility was excellent. The great disadvantage of CD4 was that it didn't work! Under laboratory conditions, with clean, unworn records it would work fine, but in the real world, with records of varying cleanliness and wear, it would just collapse. Cartridges had to track up to 45 kHz to recover the carrier and sidebands, and even one playing by the blunderbuss cartridges fitted to most record players those days would render the LP unplayable as a quad LP.

Different labels adopted different encoding standards. DSOTM was on EMI and they used the SQ system as did CBS and, I think, did Decca, so a quad DSOTM on EBay would be SQ encoded and you wouldn't need to worry about recovering an HF carrier. If it's in good condition for stereo, the quad encoding should also be in good condition.

Decoding SQ these days is pretty much impossible unless you can find a good decoder dating back to the 70s. Sony made a few good ones the best probably being the Tate decoder. As standard, the SQ system has only something like 7dB of crosstalk between L and R and only 3 dB between front and back if I remember my matrix co-ordinates correctly. The later decoders had logic steering to improve the subjective separation at the expense of wavering positions.

The combination of three incompatible systems that never really worked properly (there was a fourth, Dr. Duane Cooper's UD4, which however never came to Europe in significant numbers)and the need for four loudspeakers arranged in a square around the listener meant that the quadraphonic craze only lasted a few years in the mid '70s.

If you want to find out more about quadraphonics in general, there's http://www.quadraphonicquad.com/ which has information on the systems, a forum etc.

S.

--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: compressing mp3 files
    ... > structure of encoding process is identical in all Layers. ... The continuation of the encoding process depends on used Layer. ... > encoded with its own bitrate, calculated by encoder. ... > We shall consider now existing encoding techniques of stereo data stipulated ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.music)
  • RE: compressing mp3 files
    ... > structure of encoding process is identical in all Layers. ... The continuation of the encoding process depends on used Layer. ... > encoded with its own bitrate, calculated by encoder. ... > We shall consider now existing encoding techniques of stereo data stipulated ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.music)
  • Re: Multiplex decoder nearly rewired.
    ... It only took you 9 vacuum triodes to do what QUAD did with 3 PNP ... I have a stereo radio from 1962 that uses only the two ... identical to the QUAD decoder topology right down to the "diode ring ... can be the result of weak signals, or it can be due to interference from ...
    (rec.audio.tubes)
  • RE: compressing mp3 files
    ... structure of encoding process is identical in all Layers. ... The continuation of the encoding process depends on used Layer. ... compression of obtained stream by the ... We shall consider now existing encoding techniques of stereo data stipulated ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.music)
  • Re: Quadraphonic PINK FLOYD Dark Side of the Moon
    ... I've read a little about quad LPs recently. ... Were cartridges and preamps of the time capable of picking up signals ... I only have 2 speakers and a stereo amp, ... Dolby later realised that what didn't work for music could well work for movies, and launched the analogue matrixed Dolby Surround, which then led to the discrete Dolby Digital we know and love. ...
    (uk.rec.audio)