I remember someone who told me they came back from a Michael Jackson concert, put the CD album in their Playstation 1, applied the reverb and said "It wounded just like the concert." Some people really don't care about audio quality. Also, hard panning to the left or right is not 'creative,' it's just he obvious thing to do and if anything shows a lack of creativity... wow a new know, let's turn it all the way to the right... amazing!
Thanks! To be totally honest, this one was really difficult for a bunch of reasons, and I'm kind of happy to just have it done. But I'm glad at least someone thinks the production quality was still high.
i think 8 tracks sounds really great when you record a new one. most used tapes have been played to death, they have a muddy sound. a brand new home recording restores the high end and can sound surprisingly good.
That Beatles disc is, without a doubt, one of the best surround discs I've ever heard. And not just a surround disc but a complete reworking of the songs into new sequences and transitions. An absolutely mesmerizing piece of work.
Great doco, superb overview! For myself, I have gone with the 70's open reel Quad tapes and player, the best format of Quad from that era, albeit also the most expensive. Luckily I have immersed a large collection of tapes over the years because, as you say, the price people are now asking for various tape formats have become outrageous indeed.
You were not there at the time so I don't expect you to know this. The Quad wars were very confusing, but in the end discreet quadraphonic tape quickly became recognized by audiophiles as the ONLY true Quadraphonic Music Source. 8-Track could be phenomenal BUT you had to have the right equipment, just like today! I don't care what your source is; if you don't have good speakers or you are listening on ear buds, your experience will suck! I had good amps, good speakers and a set of REAL QUADRAPHONIC HEADPHONES all of which I can tell you blows away today's 5.1 for a couple of reasons. First, the speakers were all full range; meaning that all four could reproduce the full spectrum of sound. Today you get a bunch of limited range speakers and a sub-woofer. Not exactly the same thing! Full range speakers were important for the second reason, which was that each of the four discreet channels had full spectrum sounds directed toward them! This meant that the person mixing the album could throw any instrument at any speaker, any time that they wanted to! Which brings me to another VERY important point with regard to Quadraphonic Sound. Some studios released "Quad" tapes and records that had only stereo tracks on them with the front and the back being the same or reversed to mimic a Quad experience! Those recordings SUCK! 8-Track Quad sounded pretty damn good! It had double the speed, double the tracks and twice the tape width of cassettes. Later, when cassettes had gone through many improvements, they finally surpassed 8-tracks in sound quality, but at this time 8-Track, especially Quad 8-Tack was far superior! Now on to the difference between Quad 8-Track and Quad Reel to Reel. As you can imagine Quadraphonic Reel to Reel tapes were far superior to Quad 8-Tracks. There was MUCH less hiss and cross-talk, and doubling the speed greatly improved the frequency response. You have NOT heard the true capability of Quadraphonic Sound until you have heard a properly recorded Quadraphonic Program played through a system set up to reproduce that Quadraphonic Sound the way it was meant to be heard! And that CAN NOT BE DONE listening to a 5.1 or even a 7.2 Home Theater System that has compromised every speaker in the system for the sake of cost! Like you pointed out, the rear system speakers are put there for ambience and NOT for the purpose of listening to High Quality Sound! And the mixes are planned with that purpose in mind! When you listen to a properly set up Quadraphonic Sound System, there is nothing like it! Then WHY did Quadraphonic Sound FAIL? The BIGGEST part of the PROBLEM with the 1970's Quad Wars was the confusion over the formats! No one knew which system to buy and none of the systems could play any other format but its own! Then there was the used car aspect of the show-rooms. They had these FANTASTIC sounding systems in them and then people would go home with a cheap piece of crap system with speakers like what you got with your player and they would be mightily disappointed! They would then come to the conclusion that Stereo was much better because they got more for their money with two better speakers and a stereo amp. The confusion with all the forms of "Quadraphonic" Sound turned out to be insurmountable! A side note here. I used to get a real kick out of putting my Quadraphonic Headphones on a friends head and then having them look around the room for the sound! It happened EVERY time! I still laugh when I think of it! Boy! The good old days! May those stereo salesmen rot in hell with only Apple earbuds to alleviate their suffering! LoL
Richard, thank you for letting us experience your history with Quadraphonic sound. Just a point of clarification on the modern surround sound format DVD-Audio: This format was never intended for frequency limited home theater systems as all 5 channels are full range 24/96 - IF AND ONLY IF, played using the 5.1 analogue outputs of the player and NOT the digital or HDMI outputs. The digital/HDMI outs were down-rezed to 16/44 CD for copy protection purposes and I very rarely see anyone mention that DVD-A MUST be played using the analogue outputs in order to get the best audio quality. DVD-A properly played by 5 matching speakers (with or without sub) is AMAZING!
1st Gen (Fat) Playstation 3's will play SACD. It was a feature that often got overlooked, but if you see a ps3 at the pawn shop or garage sale, its a darn good SACD player.
Dammit. I had one; it broke like many others. I tried reflowing the solder, but it broke again within a week. (I at least got my save games off of it.) Nowadays I might be able to properly fix it, but I sold it long ago :( Well, I checked around while making this video and there are actually used SACD players for only about $40-$50 these days.
Most DSD DACs don't even do DSD. They resample to hi-res PCM internally, then decode that. At any rate, unless you already have an SACD library, get ready to go broke. I looked at finding some discs recently and decided I am not quite THAT in to it. Maybe if you're lucky and find them at a thrift shop...
Nick Wallette The reason the PS3 is so popular, is that it can rip SACD into ISO. And that ISO can be burned into a DVD-R and some SACD players can play it. And those ISO’s are available online, practically the entire SACD library. So, you won’t go broke. Since I only use SACD for multichannel, I have it connected to my AVR, and most of the new ones decode DSD, so I have my Marantz UD5007: that can play SACD ISO backups connected to my Integra DTR 30.6, and that way I can listen to native DSD from the SACD. For Stereo I have another system and my source can read native DSD files, .dsf. So I don’t use discs I converted the SACD Iso to .dsf stereo files.
Great synopsis of the surround wars (debacle?) of the 1970s. My home is still littered with artifacts from that tech skirmish. I found it interesting to notice that in the original Red Book Compact Disc standard, there was a "Quadriphonic Mode" spec - that was never implemented (same bitrate/depth but half the playing time). Apparently even during the gestation of the CD the powers that be hadn't COMPLETELY given up on 4-Channel sound.... even though they never delivered a product. Perhaps it's all for the best since DVD-A/SACD & even Dolby/DTS lossy surround was a more pragmatic approach to deliver surround sound.
Love this channel and the direction it's going :). As a part of newer generations, I always fascinated by tech that was considered the "modern tech" back then!
Thanks - yeah, one of the things I try to get across is that good ideas are good ideas and good tech is good tech. So there's good stuff from all eras. Some older tech has been surpassed but some hasn't, or it has been in some ways but not others, and maybe we've left behind some stuff we shouldn't have. I think surround sound is one tech that has clearly improved over time, though :)
I was introduced very early in my life to 5.1 because of my dad. Since I have a memory he had a 5.1 DVD system. When I was a kid I didn´t really care (I´m 21 years old just about to hit 22). Then, as I grow and enter teenage, my interest begin to set for the music and little on audio. After a few years, we moved to another house and my dad just didn´t hook up the system like I think "giving up" or not caring anymore, so I was like "I want to plug in that system in my room" he said "alright". Today, I have a PS3 that is plugged by toslink onto the 5.1 as a CD, DVD and Blu Ray player, (I collect music and movies). For the CD as you said I use Dolby Pro Logic II that comes with the DVD and hear the music on "fake 5.1", also when possible (and if I really like the artist or band) I get the 5.1 mix on DVD or Blu Ray audio. In addition, most of the games released on the PS3 comes with Dolby or DTS 5.1, so I´m getting all the juice that the system can give! I love and enjoy 5.1 sooooo much, but as I said, I only get the 5.1 mixes of the music I really love. In fact, I only buy (CD, DVD or Blu Rays) the music, series, movies and games I really love. Great video man!
When I was 13 in Detroit and just starting listening to FM radio there was a dj that started a thing about the prospect of Paul McCartney being dead. There were a lot of cryptic recordings being put out by the Beatles but I got to listen to one he had from Revolution 9. He had a special recording of that tune that had a lot of the ' covering ' noise removed. You could hear John and George reciting a story of sorts describing someone getting in a car accident , getting all their hair burned, going to a hospital. I only heard it that one time, never heard it again. I often wondered where he got the recording of Revolution 9 without most of the cover- up noise. The best I could figure is it came from a special edition of 4 - channel tape of the White album. Never found any more on it from the internet.
I really enjoyed your video. I had a very similar experience to yours. One of my very first albums was DSOTM in vinyl in quadraphonic. For years I only played it in stereo as the quad era was well and truly over. Thirty years later I got a modern quadraphonic decoder and heard it for the first time in true (matrix) quad! It was mind blowing, truly. I also have several versions of the "immersion" Pink Floyd quad releases and an SACD of DSOTM. I'm a Pink Floyd tragic, so watching your video was a lot of fun, and informative. Thanks.
I believe that 8-track would've been better if they kept the 'pop-up' pinch roller (which radio stations kept using though the 90's) instead of the cartridge containing its own pinch roller.
David Perkins that tape that had the pop up pinch roller was an 4track the brainchild of MUNTZ .And the predecessor of 8track design Muntz also made a 4track /8track 2in one player that i had in my 65 impala . With a fine tuneing knob that adjusted the head alignment right on the front of the deck.it had 25watts rms into 8ohm per channel and sounded pretty good.
I've been slowly building a collection of surround sound music, and I'm a fan. I think it opens up a lot of opportunities for the band and/or mixer to create the effect on the audience they want that aren't possible in stereo recordings. My most recent surround album was Steven Wilson's remix of Yes's Fragile, and it's a great example of how surround can be used. In some parts the surround channels are primarily used for effects, and in others they're used to widen the soundstage dramatically, sort of treating the front and surround channel on each side as a stereo pair. The latter helps envelop you in the music, while the former can be used to emphasize an impact. Of all the formats that exist, Blu-ray (High Fidelity Pure Audio or otherwise) is the one I would like to see win. Unlike DVD-A and SACD, it doesn't require a special player at all, since it fits entirely within the standard Blu-ray *video* standard, and it's the easiest for me to transfer into files for server storage. I'll definitely be looking at picking up more surround sound albums in the future, and at upgrading my surround sound setup. Surround music doesn't let you skimp on the surround speakers like home theater does.
I did not see anybody mention it but SACD is still alive. Classical and audiophile titles are still being released on SACD. The popular Oppo Blu-Ray players will play SACD and most other formats. SACD's that are surround usually, if not always, have a stereo mix on the same disc. Some SACDs are hybrid with a CD layer as well.
I'll have a video on SACD pretty soon! I have a player on the way right now, plus a couple of discs. It'll be sort of an addendum to this video, since it's the one format I really didn't have the ability to test here. So probably pretty short, but there are definitely some things I want to make people aware of if others are considering getting into SACD at this point in time. (Especially if you want multichannel sound!)
My dad had one of those Panasonics, as a youngster I was enamoured by the radio tuning tumblers. He had some Railroad steam quad soundtracks, and the steam engine would drive around the room! The receiver would be in my 'hifi' collection if not for it getting whacked by lightning in the mid 80s.
coming in late, but my first 5.1 was flaming lips dvd inclusion in the 'yoshimi battles the pink robots' deluxe I got from tower records as a teen; opened me up to really appreciating sound engineering
I got a Quad system in the 80's. At first it was for my bedroom, but it soon ended up in the living room. It was SQ and CD4 70wpch. When I got an 8 track recorder I put Q8 in the car. I lost quite a lot of 8 tracks in a move. I still have my record collection but I was banned from having Quad anymore when I moved to a smaller place in 2000's surrounded by neighbours. (They are the ones who banned it. LOL.)
Great exploration into surround sound music! It very much a standard in movies because we might go to the theater to have that special full experience of video/sound. We're very much used to listening to music casually, or a live show is the equivalent of going to a theater, yet it's in stereo. I've grown up a set of 5.1 gear and media just over the last 3 years or so and still enjoy the hell out of it, hope you continue to as well!
Great video. I work in hifi retail and would really like more people to appreciate surround sound audio. To my ears it’s still the best way to enjoy proper high fidelity music and more exciting than the vinyl revival. Thankfully there’s still surround albums getting remixed and released and the guys over at quadraphonicquad are an excellent resource too.
Very cool, just got a old 70s D Technics SA-8000XC CD - 4 channel unit with 4 Yamaha B-40s. Same here on Dark side of the moon one of the first 4 LPs i got...
Having grown up in the Valley (home of Marantz and HK) during stereo wars, Quad was it. And Thanks so much for this info on that 4 CD set Dark side of the Moon, having heard prior the Alan Parsons format, did not know you could get it on CD\ROM and not have to pay a bloody fortune.
I recently bought a quad reel deck and start looking for the quad version of Dark Side Of The Moon. I found an .ISO file to make a DVD-Audio disc and it was well worth the work
I knew someone who modified a Fostex open reel 1/4" 8-Track to run @ 3-3/4 ips and used it to convert unspooled 8-Tracks to discrete PCM digital. Blasphemy to collectors, but it managed to suck whatever fidelity remained on those crappy old Q-8 cartridges into tolerable (amazingly discrete) Quad digital captures. A few labels have re-released some old 1/2" 4-Track masters onto digital formats, but the bulk of my playable surround collection is the amazing captures of these old 1970s 8-Track mixes (Steely Dan, Doobie Bros, 10 Years After, Issac Hayes etc) into DTS & discrete 4-Track PCM captures.
Joe Plett Are those available anywhere? I have heard the DSotM quad and really enjoyed it. I would love to hear more. The Alice Cooper mix here sounded really interesting - for what you could hear from an ambient mic in stereo.
I, too, love the DSOTM immersion set; and the Parsons quad mix makes my pants tight. My favorite surround album, however, is Sting's "Ten Summoner's Tales". Every time I upgrade my sound system, that's my benchmark. Love the dynamic experience for an album I so loved in the early nineties. Truly beautiful. I hear his "Brand New Day" surround album is also amazing, though I have not yet purchased it in either of the surround formats on which it was released.
I just bought a Marantz UD5007, and can play SACD, DVD-A, Blu-ray, etc... great for multichannel music, can also decode almost any high res audio you throw at it. You can get it for about 200 USD and it’s worth every penny. It plays SACD and DVD-A backups as well, burned to DVD-R and DVD+R DL. So you don’t have to spend that much on actual discs.
Both of my OPPOs and my new Sony x800 play SACD just fine. Multichannel SACD is not dead. Audio Fidelity put out dozens over the last several years and now Dutton-Vocalion have taken up the mantle, having released several dozen in the last couple of years, with no sign of slowing down.
I really wish I could listen to your Pink Floyd album under quadraphonic. It is my favorite album alongside echoes from meddle. I love the sound effects I love the noise the richness of the album. Ah crap, I love floyd period. I'm very jealous of you oh, you bastard LOL
I listen to Sansui Quad. I stack 2 speakers on each side. 4 corners, like regular quad, is counterintuitive. 2 speakers stacked or side by side on the left and right. THAT is the real sweet spot. It's not what DIRECTION the music is coming from. The real holy grail to quad sound is that different frequencies, instruments, come out of different speakers. Each instrument can be heard independently if you concentrate on it. You will hear parts in familiar music you never knew were there. Try it.
I'm honestly kinda disappointed you didn't talk about the vinyl and reel-to-reel quad variants. Vinyl quad is its own beast, especially with how people have managed to eliminate about 95% of the crosstalk in SQ and QS/matrixed surround by either using a Dolby Surround encoder from the 1980s (which operated on the same principle) or by making plug-ins for Adobe Audition that allow for the decoding of high-res tracks.
of course the big problem is that, even though I have SQ and QS albums, the decoders are hard as hell to find. so I've given up and just burned a bunch of quad rips to DVD and DTS CD.
You keep giving me new aspects of tech to nerd over! Great job on all your videos man, they just get better. Do you have any more sound/music related video ideas in mind? Music is my main passion besides computers so this is now one of my favourite channels :)
Steven Wilson's 2017 5.1 mix A Farewell to Kings, by Rush, puts Richard Chycki's earlier HFPA mix to shame. It's on Blu-ray in the 40th anniversary box. It's a must if you're a Rush fan and love surround.
With quad and surround sound music, a big problem has always been that the "sweet spot" and proper positioning becomes even more criticial than with stereo; unless you're sitting in the middle of all the speakers and facing forward, you could end up with the "front" and "rear" to your left and right, or with front and rear completely reversed. This isn't a problem with movies because you're always facing the screen, but with music, especially nowadays most people just have it playing in the background while they walk around and do other things, in which case the additional channels are of little or no benefit. But nonetheless you should try listening to some CDs that were recorded with QSound, B.A.S.E. (Bedini Audio Spacial Environment), or RSS (Roland Sound Space). These were all matrixed surround sound formats in the '80s and '90s that downplayed the multichannel aspect and instead touted a "3D stereo" listening experience. but all three provide good results when played through a Dolby Pro Logic II system. You might especially like Roger Waters' "Amused To Death" album in QSound.
I think quad sound really demands that you sit down and actively listen, which is probably one reason why it never caught on. But that's what I want to do while I'm listening to it; it engages me in a way that stereo usually doesn't, and just like when I started listening to vinyl again, I've enjoyed the act of just sitting and listening. (Of course, I'm really talking about just one release here; I'm sure a lot of quad recordings were pretty tame and boring.) That's how I used to listen to music; I don't know when or why I stopped. But the way most modern recordings are made, with their heavy compression and just generally nasty sound, hasn't been encouraging me to do that. All the modern surround recordings I've tried, at least, but probably especially the one made from a quad master, have really made me want to sit and really hear it. I will try the other recordings you mentioned too!
Ironically, this is why when I DJ in most bars I mix my sound either mono or blended stereo that is almost mono. (right and left inputs each panned just a little to the right and left of center) Better to have a good mix everywhere than have a sweet spot that most people are not correctly positioned to hear. Sadly, most people just don't sit or lie down and actively listen to music. For most people, listening to music is a passive background thing they do while doing other things. Multichannel, even well done stereo, really isn't somthing that matters to them. That's why so many consumer level wireless speakers are mono, and when they are stereo, and placed so close together as to not really give any stereo imaging. It's amazing how many people are content to listen to music on their smartphone speaker. Same goes for TV and movies. While at home I insist on a 7.1 system with well placed speakers, most of my friends and extended family are content to watch using nothing more than the speakers on their TVs or a mediocre soundbar.
Anthony Martino The irony is, the car is a perfect spot for surround sound. Yet the road, wind, and engine noise basically ruin the experience. I think only Lexus made a car with a proper surround system. Otherwise there are aftermarket systems available, though you'd have to go looking for them.
Anthony Martino I think you just saw car, and didn't read the rest. I may have not gone into minute detail like you, though I did cover some of the basics concerning the pitfalls of such an environment. My comment was from the point made earlier in this thread about no one in reality sitting around in one place while listening to music, the same way people view films. Whereas in a car people HAVE to sit in one place for prolonged periods. That's what my comment was about.
you still got that same screwdriver? mine got the batteries gone bad nobody wanted to do soldering in my country so in the end I had to buy a spot welder in Amazon, a set of batteries and put everything together that screwdriver is AWESOME! small but packs a punch
I think surround sound would take off better if you could buy the surround discs separately instead of, as is far too often the case, only in the deluxe box sets.
At one time back in the 1970s Columbia Magnetics(Columbia Records)Made Blank Recording Tapes in Convertaquad(Quadraphonic Sound)8-track, Cassette and Reel To Reel
I just bought the Beatles white album in blu ray 5.1 remixed by Giles Martin and it sounds incredible. I owned a quad 8 track in the 1980s with the dark side of the moon quad 8track and it sounded sweet for the time. Anyway a few bands have reissued their albums remastered and mixed in blu ray 5.1 surround like the Beatles, Yes, and the Velvet Underground and I recommend these to everyone who loves music.
We do have only two ears but how come we can distinguish from a sound in front of us a anther in our backs? Maybe because we listen with our brains and not with our ears. I'm also a big fan of 4 channel audio! Nice video!!!
Yeah, I've never understood that argument, although I hear it all the time. (I didn't include a screenshot of someone making it because that section of the video was kind of rapid-fire already.) We as a species would probably have died out long ago if we could only determine sounds coming from left or right. We wouldn't survive for long in the wild like that.
the shape of the ears defines front and back sounding sounds for you. basically, that's how "surround" in headphones work. it simulates the distortions the shape of ears makes to make you hear it as coming from forward or back. i've not listened to any music that does this, but i've noticed it in a lot of video games. sometimes they have an option like "dolby atmos surround emulation" but that always seems to reduce the effect for me, though perhaps it'd be the other way round on less good headphones?
Exactly! Experiments where they fill the ear's curves with something like play-doh have resulted in a greatly reduced ability to detect whether the sound is coming from the front of rear - and it seems that's because of a difference in equalization. The simulation idea seems very good for video games where noticing something coming from behind is very useful but for quadraphonic recordings the channel separation is much greater - sometimes putting different instruments on different channels. I've never done a side by side comparison and that would be a nice video idea for Modern Classics!
It's a similar situation with our eyes really. We only have two eyes (stereoscopic vision), yet we perceive things visually in three dimensions. The brain is a wonderful and miraculous thing.
Watching this many years down the road from when you released it, I can't help but wonder how you feel about the new Schiit Syn that takes 2 channel music and distributes it across 4-5 channels...
One of the reasons surround sound music hasn't taken off may be that it requires an entire second mix/mastering, effectively doubling the time/money invested in post-production, for a format the artists themselves probably don't understand or appreciate. Maybe if they start putting it into car stereos it will go mainstream...
I know a guy who had several copies of the UK Q8s of DSOTM aswell as other choice titles like ELO 2 and Band On The Run but wanted at least £500 a pop for each of them and I could never justify paying that amount of money for any single audio artefact, no matter how desirable.
The reason I think it hasn't caught on is that it is too confusing for most people. This is true even for movies. The industry should have stopped at 5.1. Now we are to Dolby Atmos, which goes beyond 7.1, 9.1, and 11.1. Few people need this and almost none know what it means. This has also made the operation of equipment too complex for most. By the way, you can gat SACD audio on a $150-200 Blu-ray player from Sony or Samsung. Just check the particular models. It might not last long.
Btw I own around 600 records.... I have a quadraphonic stereo system it plays stereo as well. I need to clean it up better but the sound is amazing like you said.
I love 60s hard panning stereo, even with headphones so going to surround with that is just awesome. Do you know if modern high-end cartridges can handle CD4???
Multichannel music playback has never been very popular; but now with the popularity of multichannel home theater systems for movies, there are a lot of consumers equipped for at least reasonable playback of multichannel music. Most home theater systems do not employ rear/surround speakers of equal quality or capability as front and center speakers, so that's a drawback, but at least many can play a multichannel audio DVD or Blu-Ray at home and get some sense of what is going on in the audio production; the rear channel playback gear can always be upgraded to match the front channels if the listener finds multichannel audio playback compelling enough. I think that because there is this base of surround-capable home theater setups out there that there is some kind of market for multichannel audio releases and we may well see them continue, albeit not in huge numbers. But if you are a fan of multichannel audio, things are as good today as they've ever been.
Great video, but just one question... You say you cleaned and demagnetised the head, but did you check its alignment? It sounds way off here and I'm sure can sound at least as good as the FM radio if the alignment was adjusted. Not that it's easy... it's fraught with trial and error on 8-track machines, especially Quad ones, but it can be done, and it makes a big difference. Also it's worth checking and often replacing the sponge pads in the cartridges to make sure the tape presses against the head firmly.
Very interesting and informative. As a professional musician, I've envisioned the ideal listening environment to be a spheroid arrangement of equally-spaced speakers, with the listener at the center; this would provide basically 360 degrees of audio points. Of course, the source material would have to be recorded with a similar number of mics, so it would be cumbersome and costly... but I've thought about it for a while. Quad sound is very stimulating though; a technology that, like stereo cameras, provides added depth to a common medium.
Yeah, there's always going to have to be *some* amount of compromise in the number of speakers you can realistically put in a home right now. We are up to something like 11.2 systems, though I doubt many people have that and no music format I know of supports it. I have a small house, so 5.1 is about all I can realistically do (I may upgrade to Atmos at some point, with overhead speakers), but even that is just a totally new experience vs. stereo.
I'd just love to experience what it would sound like, to see if I could really "lose" myself in what I was hearing. So if you hear of anyone or any university building such a setup, let us know! In the meantime, we have some great-sounding technology already available. Keep up the great work!
I am a long-time listener ti the quadraphonic format, and I own a 1975 Technics SA-8000x quad receiver amp that sounds as the first day I bought it, and I bought it new in 1975(!) At one point I had the system set up to play CD-4 quadraphonic vinyl records, and have several in my collection. The amp is perfectly matched (my opinion) to four DCM speakers. It sounds better than the Yamaha 5-1 system I also own, by a long shot. What I would like to find out is if the digital audio equipment using the disc formats you covered in your video have either RCA type monitor outputs that could connect directly to my quadraphonic amp 4 monitor or Aux inputs (doubtful), or if there might be a method for the digital audio from the DVD player to used with a converter of some type to convert to four analog RCA outputs. I have been wanting to get discrete-quad format classic audio recordings that could be played through the old system. I have had the thought for some time that remastering the original four-channel recordings done by rock, jazz and classical musicians in the 70s using a Compact Disc format would be a perfect use for old CD technology - a dedicated four-channel discreet product for the vintage quad amps that, like mine, still sounds spectacular!
What good is any of this if there no music to listen to in this format . I personally love the idea of quad and I was there in the 70's and would've love it
You don't need a lot, you just need one or two things you really love. The quad mixes of both DSOTM and Wish You Were Here were easily enough to get me to spend $100+ each on both of those box sets, which is more than I spent on the entire quad-8 setup shown here.
I bought that same immersion box set from eBay New Old Stock love it also might want to try Steven Wilson's releases Porcupine Tree also his band and remixes of gentle giant produce remixed by Steven Wilson a really great buy for me makes my 5.1 system really sing Great video,
I am commenting on this video exactly 9 seconds into it. I purchased a Marantz 4400 receiver, 2 Klipsch Heresy speakers, 2 Jennings Research speakers, a Technics 1500 turntable, and a I can't remember what quad 8-track player in 1978 for enough money to buy a slightly used Shelby Mustang. The Shelby would have been a way better investment. 30 bucks for a quad record album in 1978 dollars and maybe 3 albums I would have bought? (I did buy Dark Side of The Moon). 20 bucks for a quad eight track tape? (I bought Grand Funk Railroad). No wonder quad died. The receiver WAS sweet tho. Ok, now I will watch the rest of the vid BTW. Stereo, quad, whatever, becomes mono when you walk out of the room.
My comments may not end here. lol.. so, I should have bought Floyd on 8? damn.But 8 track was was soo reliable and trouble free. Especially if you had a matchbook to shove under it. All in all, I had three versions of Dark Side. An "Original Master" a regular stereo and the quad thing.. Plus I have no Idea what format I was set up for. Both sounded great. But old eightie acted as usual. Mr matchbook helped. Trust me, it wasn't a cheap 8-track player
I didn't like the Beatles surround mix. It f-up the songs to me! But of course I am used to what music can REALLY sound like! You haven't heard what possibilities Surround Sound has until you hear each of the members of Jefferson Airplane standing on the height of their own mountain yelling Hello! Hello! Hello! Hello! It STILL sends shivers up my spine and I haven't heard it for YEARS! Or how about Country Joe and the Fish with their instruments floating through the room so real that you duck for fear of being hit in the face! The Doors early recordings were 3 track so those are a bit iffy. But the separation between those tracks is SO STARK that you still feel like you are hearing it for the first time! By the time you get to Riders on the Storm you are soaking wet and looking for cover from the thunder and lightning! Mixes like those YOU NEVER FORGET! I recently (to me that means in the last couple of years) listened to the Moody Blues surround sound disc from the second album that they did with the London Festival Orchestra, Days of Future Passed, expecting to be blown away! It left me cold! I looked at the waveform on my computer and I instantly knew why. They had bricked it! There wasn't one decibel of dynamic range left! These idiot producers today have NO F-ING IDEA what they're doing!
The only 5.1 albums I have are the Bjork 5.1 DVDs (has the music videos as well). If you have any interest in Bjork, they're worth checking out. I, now, will have to check out some more 5.1 mixes like that Pink Floyd set. Unfortunately my large Klipsch setup is in storage, and my bedroom is only wired for my vintage stereo setup (Technics SA-700 and a pair of Kenwood LS-660s). Thanks for the vid. :)
Addendum: the Bjork mixes are very tame, nothing that really exploits all of the channels... but they're very well done, moves just the right things to the right places+directions.
I like Bjork, though I haven't bought anything of hers for a while. But I'll look up those 5.1 DVD's; I didn't know she had any. I wish the Pink Floyd stuff was available in a cheaper set, because DSOTM, at least, was literally made for surround sound. But you shouldn't need to pay $100 to hear it. (I paid $75 for my used copy.) The SACD is cheaper but only by about half - it's still often about $50, and you need a player that can play it.
Love the video. Just curious why you didn't mention reel to reel Quadraphonic. Better than the 8 track quad due to the play speed was double (7 1/2ips). I am big into quad and have numerous formats. SQ, QS, CD4, and Q4 reels. Never got into 8 track. Love all the formats in their own way.
Sounds to me like the pressure pad probably needs to be replaced on the 8 track! this could be why the sound is very muffled and not very clear. Almost all 8 tracks pads pretty much are deteriorated now a days, the only ones ive noticed that still hold up well are the ones that came from old comlumbia house mail order in the early 80s.
The Alan Parsons Quad mix of DSOTM is to me the best version ever of this album. 16:15 "people don't care about audio quality" me: WTF is wrong with them??
Yes the AP quad mix was a revelation to me. It sounds like how this album was supposed to sound. I feel like if you're the kind of Floyd fan who goes to laser Floyd shows in planetariums, then you've got to listen to this mix - you've never really heard this album before otherwise.
Short of a great copy of a quad vinyl Dark Side played on a quality quad system the next best is the Parsons quad mix on sacd but played into a quality 70's era Quad unit such as Sansui or Pioneer and 4 matched speakers.
I'd love to hear some good surround systems recorded in binaural. I have a set of the Sennheiser AMBEO binaural recording headphone, just don't have a good surround playback system any longer to record.
Big fan of descreat quad!
Discrete Quad!
I remember someone who told me they came back from a Michael Jackson concert, put the CD album in their Playstation 1, applied the reverb and said "It wounded just like the concert." Some people really don't care about audio quality. Also, hard panning to the left or right is not 'creative,' it's just he obvious thing to do and if anything shows a lack of creativity... wow a new know, let's turn it all the way to the right... amazing!
Also, most concerts are mixed mono or nearly mono (with nothing panned more than just a little off center).
I really like the High quality production of your videos. Good Job.
Thanks! To be totally honest, this one was really difficult for a bunch of reasons, and I'm kind of happy to just have it done. But I'm glad at least someone thinks the production quality was still high.
Great presentation and information. Great editing too.
i think 8 tracks sounds really great when you record a new one. most used tapes have been played to death, they have a muddy sound. a brand new home recording restores the high end and can sound surprisingly good.
Thumbs up for the ELO, Alan Parsons & Floyd mentions as well.
That Beatles disc is, without a doubt, one of the best surround discs I've ever heard. And not just a surround disc but a complete reworking of the songs into new sequences and transitions. An absolutely mesmerizing piece of work.
Great doco, superb overview! For myself, I have gone with the 70's open reel Quad tapes and player, the best format of Quad from that era, albeit also the most expensive. Luckily I have immersed a large collection of tapes over the years because, as you say, the price people are now asking for various tape formats have become outrageous indeed.
You were not there at the time so I don't expect you to know this. The Quad wars were very confusing, but in the end discreet quadraphonic tape quickly became recognized by audiophiles as the ONLY true Quadraphonic Music Source. 8-Track could be phenomenal BUT you had to have the right equipment, just like today! I don't care what your source is; if you don't have good speakers or you are listening on ear buds, your experience will suck! I had good amps, good speakers and a set of REAL QUADRAPHONIC HEADPHONES all of which I can tell you blows away today's 5.1 for a couple of reasons. First, the speakers were all full range; meaning that all four could reproduce the full spectrum of sound. Today you get a bunch of limited range speakers and a sub-woofer. Not exactly the same thing! Full range speakers were important for the second reason, which was that each of the four discreet channels had full spectrum sounds directed toward them! This meant that the person mixing the album could throw any instrument at any speaker, any time that they wanted to! Which brings me to another VERY important point with regard to Quadraphonic Sound. Some studios released "Quad" tapes and records that had only stereo tracks on them with the front and the back being the same or reversed to mimic a Quad experience! Those recordings SUCK! 8-Track Quad sounded pretty damn good! It had double the speed, double the tracks and twice the tape width of cassettes. Later, when cassettes had gone through many improvements, they finally surpassed 8-tracks in sound quality, but at this time 8-Track, especially Quad 8-Tack was far superior! Now on to the difference between Quad 8-Track and Quad Reel to Reel. As you can imagine Quadraphonic Reel to Reel tapes were far superior to Quad 8-Tracks. There was MUCH less hiss and cross-talk, and doubling the speed greatly improved the frequency response. You have NOT heard the true capability of Quadraphonic Sound until you have heard a properly recorded Quadraphonic Program played through a system set up to reproduce that Quadraphonic Sound the way it was meant to be heard! And that CAN NOT BE DONE listening to a 5.1 or even a 7.2 Home Theater System that has compromised every speaker in the system for the sake of cost! Like you pointed out, the rear system speakers are put there for ambience and NOT for the purpose of listening to High Quality Sound! And the mixes are planned with that purpose in mind! When you listen to a properly set up Quadraphonic Sound System, there is nothing like it! Then WHY did Quadraphonic Sound FAIL? The BIGGEST part of the PROBLEM with the 1970's Quad Wars was the confusion over the formats! No one knew which system to buy and none of the systems could play any other format but its own! Then there was the used car aspect of the show-rooms. They had these FANTASTIC sounding systems in them and then people would go home with a cheap piece of crap system with speakers like what you got with your player and they would be mightily disappointed! They would then come to the conclusion that Stereo was much better because they got more for their money with two better speakers and a stereo amp. The confusion with all the forms of "Quadraphonic" Sound turned out to be insurmountable! A side note here. I used to get a real kick out of putting my Quadraphonic Headphones on a friends head and then having them look around the room for the sound! It happened EVERY time! I still laugh when I think of it! Boy! The good old days! May those stereo salesmen rot in hell with only Apple earbuds to alleviate their suffering! LoL
Richard, thank you for letting us experience your history with Quadraphonic sound. Just a point of clarification on the modern surround sound format DVD-Audio: This format was never intended for frequency limited home theater systems as all 5 channels are full range 24/96 - IF AND ONLY IF, played using the 5.1 analogue outputs of the player and NOT the digital or HDMI outputs. The digital/HDMI outs were down-rezed to 16/44 CD for copy protection purposes and I very rarely see anyone mention that DVD-A MUST be played using the analogue outputs in order to get the best audio quality. DVD-A properly played by 5 matching speakers (with or without sub) is AMAZING!
1st Gen (Fat) Playstation 3's will play SACD. It was a feature that often got overlooked, but if you see a ps3 at the pawn shop or garage sale, its a darn good SACD player.
Dammit. I had one; it broke like many others. I tried reflowing the solder, but it broke again within a week. (I at least got my save games off of it.) Nowadays I might be able to properly fix it, but I sold it long ago :(
Well, I checked around while making this video and there are actually used SACD players for only about $40-$50 these days.
It’s not the best alternative, and can only do PCM multichannel out via HDMI, not DSD.
Most DSD DACs don't even do DSD. They resample to hi-res PCM internally, then decode that.
At any rate, unless you already have an SACD library, get ready to go broke. I looked at finding some discs recently and decided I am not quite THAT in to it. Maybe if you're lucky and find them at a thrift shop...
Nick Wallette The reason the PS3 is so popular, is that it can rip SACD into ISO. And that ISO can be burned into a DVD-R and some SACD players can play it. And those ISO’s are available online, practically the entire SACD library. So, you won’t go broke. Since I only use SACD for multichannel, I have it connected to my AVR, and most of the new ones decode DSD, so I have my Marantz UD5007: that can play SACD ISO backups connected to my Integra DTR 30.6, and that way I can listen to native DSD from the SACD. For Stereo I have another system and my source can read native DSD files, .dsf. So I don’t use discs I converted the SACD Iso to .dsf stereo files.
I know this video was posted years ago, but I just can't get over how awesome that Panasonic receiver is. I would love to have one of those!
Great synopsis of the surround wars (debacle?) of the 1970s. My home is still littered with artifacts from that tech skirmish. I found it interesting to notice that in the original Red Book Compact Disc standard, there was a "Quadriphonic Mode" spec - that was never implemented (same bitrate/depth but half the playing time). Apparently even during the gestation of the CD the powers that be hadn't COMPLETELY given up on 4-Channel sound.... even though they never delivered a product. Perhaps it's all for the best since DVD-A/SACD & even Dolby/DTS lossy surround was a more pragmatic approach to deliver surround sound.
Love this channel and the direction it's going :). As a part of newer generations, I always fascinated by tech that was considered the "modern tech" back then!
Thanks - yeah, one of the things I try to get across is that good ideas are good ideas and good tech is good tech. So there's good stuff from all eras. Some older tech has been surpassed but some hasn't, or it has been in some ways but not others, and maybe we've left behind some stuff we shouldn't have. I think surround sound is one tech that has clearly improved over time, though :)
This channel is all about history, and i love it!!!
Riders on the Storm, Frankenstein, Tres Hombres, Birds of Fire, and Abraxas got heavy play in my van and on the home stereo! 🎶😎👏
I was introduced very early in my life to 5.1 because of my dad. Since I have a memory he had a 5.1 DVD system. When I was a kid I didn´t really care (I´m 21 years old just about to hit 22).
Then, as I grow and enter teenage, my interest begin to set for the music and little on audio. After a few years, we moved to another house and my dad just didn´t hook up the system like I think "giving up" or not caring anymore, so I was like "I want to plug in that system in my room" he said "alright".
Today, I have a PS3 that is plugged by toslink onto the 5.1 as a CD, DVD and Blu Ray player, (I collect music and movies). For the CD as you said I use Dolby Pro Logic II that comes with the DVD and hear the music on "fake 5.1", also when possible (and if I really like the artist or band) I get the 5.1 mix on DVD or Blu Ray audio. In addition, most of the games released on the PS3 comes with Dolby or DTS 5.1, so I´m getting all the juice that the system can give!
I love and enjoy 5.1 sooooo much, but as I said, I only get the 5.1 mixes of the music I really love. In fact, I only buy (CD, DVD or Blu Rays) the music, series, movies and games I really love.
Great video man!
When I was 13 in Detroit and just starting listening to FM radio there was a dj that started a thing about the prospect of Paul McCartney being dead. There were a lot of cryptic recordings being put out by the Beatles but I got to listen to one he had from Revolution 9.
He had a special recording of that tune that had a lot of the ' covering ' noise removed. You could hear John and George reciting a story of sorts describing someone getting in a car accident , getting all their hair burned, going to a hospital. I only heard it that one time, never heard it again.
I often wondered where he got the recording of Revolution 9 without most of the cover- up noise. The best I could figure is it came from a special edition of 4 - channel tape of the White album.
Never found any more on it from the internet.
I really enjoyed your video. I had a very similar experience to yours. One of my very first albums was DSOTM in vinyl in quadraphonic. For years I only played it in stereo as the quad era was well and truly over. Thirty years later I got a modern quadraphonic decoder and heard it for the first time in true (matrix) quad! It was mind blowing, truly. I also have several versions of the "immersion" Pink Floyd quad releases and an SACD of DSOTM. I'm a Pink Floyd tragic, so watching your video was a lot of fun, and informative. Thanks.
I believe that 8-track would've been better if they kept the 'pop-up' pinch roller (which radio stations kept using though the 90's) instead of the cartridge containing its own pinch roller.
David Perkins that tape that had the pop up pinch roller was an 4track the brainchild of MUNTZ .And the predecessor of 8track design Muntz also made a 4track /8track 2in one player that i had in my 65 impala . With a fine tuneing knob that adjusted the head alignment right on the front of the deck.it had 25watts rms into 8ohm per channel and sounded pretty good.
HDCD and SACD sounded phenomenal, even on a quality 2-channel system!
Yes, it was.
I've been slowly building a collection of surround sound music, and I'm a fan. I think it opens up a lot of opportunities for the band and/or mixer to create the effect on the audience they want that aren't possible in stereo recordings.
My most recent surround album was Steven Wilson's remix of Yes's Fragile, and it's a great example of how surround can be used. In some parts the surround channels are primarily used for effects, and in others they're used to widen the soundstage dramatically, sort of treating the front and surround channel on each side as a stereo pair. The latter helps envelop you in the music, while the former can be used to emphasize an impact.
Of all the formats that exist, Blu-ray (High Fidelity Pure Audio or otherwise) is the one I would like to see win. Unlike DVD-A and SACD, it doesn't require a special player at all, since it fits entirely within the standard Blu-ray *video* standard, and it's the easiest for me to transfer into files for server storage.
I'll definitely be looking at picking up more surround sound albums in the future, and at upgrading my surround sound setup. Surround music doesn't let you skimp on the surround speakers like home theater does.
I did not see anybody mention it but SACD is still alive. Classical and audiophile titles are still being released on SACD. The popular Oppo Blu-Ray players will play SACD and most other formats. SACD's that are surround usually, if not always, have a stereo mix on the same disc. Some SACDs are hybrid with a CD layer as well.
I'll have a video on SACD pretty soon! I have a player on the way right now, plus a couple of discs. It'll be sort of an addendum to this video, since it's the one format I really didn't have the ability to test here. So probably pretty short, but there are definitely some things I want to make people aware of if others are considering getting into SACD at this point in time. (Especially if you want multichannel sound!)
My dad had one of those Panasonics, as a youngster I was enamoured by the radio tuning tumblers. He had some Railroad steam quad soundtracks, and the steam engine would drive around the room! The receiver would be in my 'hifi' collection if not for it getting whacked by lightning in the mid 80s.
coming in late, but my first 5.1 was flaming lips dvd inclusion in the 'yoshimi battles the pink robots' deluxe I got from tower records as a teen; opened me up to really appreciating sound engineering
There was always DTSCD which any system could decode easily, the problem is, very few people care about surround.
I got a Quad system in the 80's. At first it was for my bedroom, but it soon ended up in the living room. It was SQ and CD4 70wpch. When I got an 8 track recorder I put Q8 in the car. I lost quite a lot of 8 tracks in a move. I still have my record collection but I was banned from having Quad anymore when I moved to a smaller place in 2000's surrounded by neighbours. (They are the ones who banned it. LOL.)
Great exploration into surround sound music! It very much a standard in movies because we might go to the theater to have that special full experience of video/sound. We're very much used to listening to music casually, or a live show is the equivalent of going to a theater, yet it's in stereo.
I've grown up a set of 5.1 gear and media just over the last 3 years or so and still enjoy the hell out of it, hope you continue to as well!
Also, at least we now have blu-ray to end the format wars!
Great video. I work in hifi retail and would really like more people to appreciate surround sound audio. To my ears it’s still the best way to enjoy proper high fidelity music and more exciting than the vinyl revival. Thankfully there’s still surround albums getting remixed and released and the guys over at quadraphonicquad are an excellent resource too.
Very cool, just got a old 70s D
Technics SA-8000XC CD - 4 channel unit with 4 Yamaha B-40s. Same here on Dark side of the moon one of the first 4 LPs i got...
Having grown up in the Valley (home of Marantz and HK) during stereo wars, Quad was it. And Thanks so much for this info on that 4 CD set Dark side of the Moon, having heard prior the Alan Parsons format, did not know you could get it on CD\ROM and not have to pay a bloody fortune.
I recently bought a quad reel deck and start looking for the quad version of Dark Side Of The Moon. I found an .ISO file to make a DVD-Audio disc and it was well worth the work
8:08 - you may want to adjust the head azimuth. This can greatly affect the highs!
That may be possible. I've sold this system on at this point, though.
I knew someone who modified a Fostex open reel 1/4" 8-Track to run @ 3-3/4 ips and used it to convert unspooled 8-Tracks to discrete PCM digital. Blasphemy to collectors, but it managed to suck whatever fidelity remained on those crappy old Q-8 cartridges into tolerable (amazingly discrete) Quad digital captures. A few labels have re-released some old 1/2" 4-Track masters onto digital formats, but the bulk of my playable surround collection is the amazing captures of these old 1970s 8-Track mixes (Steely Dan, Doobie Bros, 10 Years After, Issac Hayes etc) into DTS & discrete 4-Track PCM captures.
Joe Plett Are those available anywhere? I have heard the DSotM quad and really enjoyed it. I would love to hear more. The Alice Cooper mix here sounded really interesting - for what you could hear from an ambient mic in stereo.
I, too, love the DSOTM immersion set; and the Parsons quad mix makes my pants tight.
My favorite surround album, however, is Sting's "Ten Summoner's Tales". Every time I upgrade my sound system, that's my benchmark. Love the dynamic experience for an album I so loved in the early nineties. Truly beautiful.
I hear his "Brand New Day" surround album is also amazing, though I have not yet purchased it in either of the surround formats on which it was released.
Great job, love your vids!
I appreciate your appreciation of Rush :)
Man, imagine if you made this video today. You would have to add on another section talking about Dolby Atmos and 360 Reality Audio.
I just bought a Marantz UD5007, and can play SACD, DVD-A, Blu-ray, etc... great for multichannel music, can also decode almost any high res audio you throw at it. You can get it for about 200 USD and it’s worth every penny. It plays SACD and DVD-A backups as well, burned to DVD-R and DVD+R DL. So you don’t have to spend that much on actual discs.
Sony UBP-X800M2 & UBP-X1100ES. Both of these affordable units can playback SACD, Bluray audio & also DVD-Audio discs.
Both of my OPPOs and my new Sony x800 play SACD just fine. Multichannel SACD is not dead. Audio Fidelity put out dozens over the last several years and now Dutton-Vocalion have taken up the mantle, having released several dozen in the last couple of years, with no sign of slowing down.
I really wish I could listen to your Pink Floyd album under quadraphonic. It is my favorite album alongside echoes from meddle. I love the sound effects I love the noise the richness of the album. Ah crap, I love floyd period. I'm very jealous of you oh, you bastard LOL
you should make videos with Techmoan
The Steven Wilson remixes in 5.1 are killer, really something to behold (or listen to), i also like the ones from Peter Gabriel's concerts
I love those 8 TRACKS
These videos are super aesthetically pleasing i would like to see your collection
My collection of audio stuff is not that big. I'm a lot more of a video game collector, and you will be seeing more of that :)
Modern Classic cool thanks
4:47 - Listens to 80's Hair-Metal while working on 70's technology.😊
I have the Dark Side Immersion set, but I'd love to hear Dark Side in Quad on vinyl
I've developed a processor that does that with stereo to be used at your car.
coisasnatv explain
I listen to Sansui Quad. I stack 2 speakers on each side. 4 corners, like regular quad, is counterintuitive. 2 speakers stacked or side by side on the left and right. THAT is the real sweet spot. It's not what DIRECTION the music is coming from. The real holy grail to quad sound is that different frequencies, instruments, come out of different speakers. Each instrument can be heard independently if you concentrate on it. You will hear parts in familiar music you never knew were there. Try it.
I'm honestly kinda disappointed you didn't talk about the vinyl and reel-to-reel quad variants. Vinyl quad is its own beast, especially with how people have managed to eliminate about 95% of the crosstalk in SQ and QS/matrixed surround by either using a Dolby Surround encoder from the 1980s (which operated on the same principle) or by making plug-ins for Adobe Audition that allow for the decoding of high-res tracks.
of course the big problem is that, even though I have SQ and QS albums, the decoders are hard as hell to find.
so I've given up and just burned a bunch of quad rips to DVD and DTS CD.
6:57 is the Amiga Demoscene 4-Channel Protracker MOD file mixing strategy.
Great job. Great presentation, good editing. Great information.
Excellent. Thanks for this.
You keep giving me new aspects of tech to nerd over! Great job on all your videos man, they just get better. Do you have any more sound/music related video ideas in mind? Music is my main passion besides computers so this is now one of my favourite channels :)
Quadraphonic classical analogue recordings from the ‘70s are available on SACD from Pentatone. They sound absolutely superb - really 3 dimensional.
Steven Wilson's 2017 5.1 mix A Farewell to Kings, by Rush, puts Richard Chycki's earlier HFPA mix to shame. It's on Blu-ray in the 40th anniversary box. It's a must if you're a Rush fan and love surround.
With quad and surround sound music, a big problem has always been that the "sweet spot" and proper positioning becomes even more criticial than with stereo; unless you're sitting in the middle of all the speakers and facing forward, you could end up with the "front" and "rear" to your left and right, or with front and rear completely reversed. This isn't a problem with movies because you're always facing the screen, but with music, especially nowadays most people just have it playing in the background while they walk around and do other things, in which case the additional channels are of little or no benefit.
But nonetheless you should try listening to some CDs that were recorded with QSound, B.A.S.E. (Bedini Audio Spacial Environment), or RSS (Roland Sound Space). These were all matrixed surround sound formats in the '80s and '90s that downplayed the multichannel aspect and instead touted a "3D stereo" listening experience. but all three provide good results when played through a Dolby Pro Logic II system. You might especially like Roger Waters' "Amused To Death" album in QSound.
I think quad sound really demands that you sit down and actively listen, which is probably one reason why it never caught on. But that's what I want to do while I'm listening to it; it engages me in a way that stereo usually doesn't, and just like when I started listening to vinyl again, I've enjoyed the act of just sitting and listening. (Of course, I'm really talking about just one release here; I'm sure a lot of quad recordings were pretty tame and boring.) That's how I used to listen to music; I don't know when or why I stopped. But the way most modern recordings are made, with their heavy compression and just generally nasty sound, hasn't been encouraging me to do that. All the modern surround recordings I've tried, at least, but probably especially the one made from a quad master, have really made me want to sit and really hear it. I will try the other recordings you mentioned too!
Ironically, this is why when I DJ in most bars I mix my sound either mono or blended stereo that is almost mono. (right and left inputs each panned just a little to the right and left of center) Better to have a good mix everywhere than have a sweet spot that most people are not correctly positioned to hear.
Sadly, most people just don't sit or lie down and actively listen to music. For most people, listening to music is a passive background thing they do while doing other things. Multichannel, even well done stereo, really isn't somthing that matters to them. That's why so many consumer level wireless speakers are mono, and when they are stereo, and placed so close together as to not really give any stereo imaging. It's amazing how many people are content to listen to music on their smartphone speaker.
Same goes for TV and movies. While at home I insist on a 7.1 system with well placed speakers, most of my friends and extended family are content to watch using nothing more than the speakers on their TVs or a mediocre soundbar.
Anthony Martino The irony is, the car is a perfect spot for surround sound. Yet the road, wind, and engine noise basically ruin the experience. I think only Lexus made a car with a proper surround system. Otherwise there are aftermarket systems available, though you'd have to go looking for them.
Anthony Martino I think you just saw car, and didn't read the rest. I may have not gone into minute detail like you, though I did cover some of the basics concerning the pitfalls of such an environment. My comment was from the point made earlier in this thread about no one in reality sitting around in one place while listening to music, the same way people view films. Whereas in a car people HAVE to sit in one place for prolonged periods. That's what my comment was about.
most of the acura vehicles with the ELS systems play awesome dvd-audio and DTS cd's in surround sound, its an awesome sound
Quickly becoming a new fave channel
Wasn't the original 60gb Playstation 3 an SACD Player?
I really like your videos, very well made! Keep going man!
Lots of Blu-Ray Audio discs ship with LPCM 5.1 tracks in addition to Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio tracks.
you still got that same screwdriver?
mine got the batteries gone bad
nobody wanted to do soldering in my country
so in the end I had to buy a spot welder in Amazon, a set of batteries and put everything together
that screwdriver is AWESOME!
small but packs a punch
I think surround sound would take off better if you could buy the surround discs separately instead of, as is far too often the case, only in the deluxe box sets.
Outstanding video. Good luck on your new venture.
pink floyd also explored with stereo immersion like the beatles did, they actually worked in the same studio lol
The Doors Quad recording is another that works just like the Pink Floyd Dark side of the moon.
Have you heard any of the Beatles Dolby Atmos mixes? A lot of them sound incredible
At one time back in the 1970s Columbia Magnetics(Columbia Records)Made Blank Recording Tapes in Convertaquad(Quadraphonic Sound)8-track, Cassette and Reel To Reel
I just bought the Beatles white album in blu ray 5.1 remixed by Giles Martin and it sounds incredible. I owned a quad 8 track in the 1980s with the dark side of the moon quad 8track and it sounded sweet for the time. Anyway a few bands have reissued their albums remastered and mixed in blu ray 5.1 surround like the Beatles, Yes, and the Velvet Underground and I recommend these to everyone who loves music.
We do have only two ears but how come we can distinguish from a sound in front of us a anther in our backs? Maybe because we listen with our brains and not with our ears. I'm also a big fan of 4 channel audio! Nice video!!!
Yeah, I've never understood that argument, although I hear it all the time. (I didn't include a screenshot of someone making it because that section of the video was kind of rapid-fire already.) We as a species would probably have died out long ago if we could only determine sounds coming from left or right. We wouldn't survive for long in the wild like that.
the shape of the ears defines front and back sounding sounds for you. basically, that's how "surround" in headphones work. it simulates the distortions the shape of ears makes to make you hear it as coming from forward or back. i've not listened to any music that does this, but i've noticed it in a lot of video games. sometimes they have an option like "dolby atmos surround emulation" but that always seems to reduce the effect for me, though perhaps it'd be the other way round on less good headphones?
Exactly! Experiments where they fill the ear's curves with something like play-doh have resulted in a greatly reduced ability to detect whether the sound is coming from the front of rear - and it seems that's because of a difference in equalization. The simulation idea seems very good for video games where noticing something coming from behind is very useful but for quadraphonic recordings the channel separation is much greater - sometimes putting different instruments on different channels. I've never done a side by side comparison and that would be a nice video idea for Modern Classics!
Modern Classic lol we don't live in the wild
It's a similar situation with our eyes really. We only have two eyes (stereoscopic vision), yet we perceive things visually in three dimensions. The brain is a wonderful and miraculous thing.
Grab Beck's "Sea Change" album on BluRay Pure Audio disc. It's a great album in stereo, and its the only surround mix I've heard that I liked.
Watching this many years down the road from when you released it, I can't help but wonder how you feel about the new Schiit Syn that takes 2 channel music and distributes it across 4-5 channels...
One of the reasons surround sound music hasn't taken off may be that it requires an entire second mix/mastering, effectively doubling the time/money invested in post-production, for a format the artists themselves probably don't understand or appreciate. Maybe if they start putting it into car stereos it will go mainstream...
Personally I would have liked more discussion of the pro logic and pre-lossless 5.1 formats, but overall quite good.
I know a guy who had several copies of the UK Q8s of DSOTM aswell as other choice titles like ELO 2 and Band On The Run but wanted at least £500 a pop for each of them and I could never justify paying that amount of money for any single audio artefact, no matter how desirable.
How did you set up 4 channel speakers for the Blu-ray Audio. Can you just connect 4 speakers??
The reason I think it hasn't caught on is that it is too confusing for most people. This is true even for movies. The industry should have stopped at 5.1. Now we are to Dolby Atmos, which goes beyond 7.1, 9.1, and 11.1. Few people need this and almost none know what it means. This has also made the operation of equipment too complex for most.
By the way, you can gat SACD audio on a $150-200 Blu-ray player from Sony or Samsung. Just check the particular models. It might not last long.
Btw I own around 600 records.... I have a quadraphonic stereo system it plays stereo as well. I need to clean it up better but the sound is amazing like you said.
I love 60s hard panning stereo, even with headphones so going to surround with that is just awesome. Do you know if modern high-end cartridges can handle CD4???
Multichannel music playback has never been very popular; but now with the popularity of multichannel home theater systems for movies, there are a lot of consumers equipped for at least reasonable playback of multichannel music. Most home theater systems do not employ rear/surround speakers of equal quality or capability as front and center speakers, so that's a drawback, but at least many can play a multichannel audio DVD or Blu-Ray at home and get some sense of what is going on in the audio production; the rear channel playback gear can always be upgraded to match the front channels if the listener finds multichannel audio playback compelling enough. I think that because there is this base of surround-capable home theater setups out there that there is some kind of market for multichannel audio releases and we may well see them continue, albeit not in huge numbers. But if you are a fan of multichannel audio, things are as good today as they've ever been.
Great video, but just one question... You say you cleaned and demagnetised the head, but did you check its alignment? It sounds way off here and I'm sure can sound at least as good as the FM radio if the alignment was adjusted. Not that it's easy... it's fraught with trial and error on 8-track machines, especially Quad ones, but it can be done, and it makes a big difference. Also it's worth checking and often replacing the sponge pads in the cartridges to make sure the tape presses against the head firmly.
Very interesting and informative. As a professional musician, I've envisioned the ideal listening environment to be a spheroid arrangement of equally-spaced speakers, with the listener at the center; this would provide basically 360 degrees of audio points. Of course, the source material would have to be recorded with a similar number of mics, so it would be cumbersome and costly... but I've thought about it for a while. Quad sound is very stimulating though; a technology that, like stereo cameras, provides added depth to a common medium.
Yeah, there's always going to have to be *some* amount of compromise in the number of speakers you can realistically put in a home right now. We are up to something like 11.2 systems, though I doubt many people have that and no music format I know of supports it. I have a small house, so 5.1 is about all I can realistically do (I may upgrade to Atmos at some point, with overhead speakers), but even that is just a totally new experience vs. stereo.
I'd just love to experience what it would sound like, to see if I could really "lose" myself in what I was hearing. So if you hear of anyone or any university building such a setup, let us know! In the meantime, we have some great-sounding technology already available. Keep up the great work!
I am a long-time listener ti the quadraphonic format, and I own a 1975 Technics SA-8000x quad receiver amp that sounds as the first day I bought it, and I bought it new in 1975(!) At one point I had the system set up to play CD-4 quadraphonic vinyl records, and have several in my collection. The amp is perfectly matched (my opinion) to four DCM speakers. It sounds better than the Yamaha 5-1 system I also own, by a long shot.
What I would like to find out is if the digital audio equipment using the disc formats you covered in your video have either RCA type monitor outputs that could connect directly to my quadraphonic amp 4 monitor or Aux inputs (doubtful), or if there might be a method for the digital audio from the DVD player to used with a converter of some type to convert to four analog RCA outputs. I have been wanting to get discrete-quad format classic audio recordings that could be played through the old system. I have had the thought for some time that remastering the original four-channel recordings done by rock, jazz and classical musicians in the 70s using a Compact Disc format would be a perfect use for old CD technology - a dedicated four-channel discreet product for the vintage quad amps that, like mine, still sounds spectacular!
I used to have Jethro Tull's Warchild on Quad 8
Wow, great vid. Subbed 😎
Analog is still 👍👍👍👍👍👍
Thumbs up for Tomita!!!
What good is any of this if there no music to listen to in this format . I personally love the idea of quad and I was there in the 70's and would've love it
You don't need a lot, you just need one or two things you really love. The quad mixes of both DSOTM and Wish You Were Here were easily enough to get me to spend $100+ each on both of those box sets, which is more than I spent on the entire quad-8 setup shown here.
I bought that same immersion box set from eBay New Old Stock love it also might want to try Steven Wilson's releases Porcupine Tree also his band and remixes of gentle giant produce remixed by Steven Wilson a really great buy for me makes my 5.1 system really sing Great video,
I am commenting on this video exactly 9 seconds into it. I purchased a Marantz 4400 receiver, 2 Klipsch Heresy speakers, 2 Jennings Research speakers, a Technics 1500 turntable, and a I can't remember what quad 8-track player in 1978 for enough money to buy a slightly used Shelby Mustang. The Shelby would have been a way better investment. 30 bucks for a quad record album in 1978 dollars and maybe 3 albums I would have bought? (I did buy Dark Side of The Moon). 20 bucks for a quad eight track tape? (I bought Grand Funk Railroad). No wonder quad died. The receiver WAS sweet tho. Ok, now I will watch the rest of the vid BTW. Stereo, quad, whatever, becomes mono when you walk out of the room.
My comments may not end here. lol.. so, I should have bought Floyd on 8? damn.But 8 track was was soo reliable and trouble free. Especially if you had a matchbook to shove under it. All in all, I had three versions of Dark Side. An "Original Master" a regular stereo and the quad thing.. Plus I have no Idea what format I was set up for. Both sounded great. But old eightie acted as usual. Mr matchbook helped. Trust me, it wasn't a cheap 8-track player
Last comment. I promise. I dunno diddly about blu ray. But you have excellent taste in tunes
Awesome video
If I recall right PS3 have a SACD player built in, but only the first models 60GB
I didn't like the Beatles surround mix. It f-up the songs to me! But of course I am used to what music can REALLY sound like! You haven't heard what possibilities Surround Sound has until you hear each of the members of Jefferson Airplane standing on the height of their own mountain yelling Hello! Hello! Hello! Hello! It STILL sends shivers up my spine and I haven't heard it for YEARS! Or how about Country Joe and the Fish with their instruments floating through the room so real that you duck for fear of being hit in the face! The Doors early recordings were 3 track so those are a bit iffy. But the separation between those tracks is SO STARK that you still feel like you are hearing it for the first time! By the time you get to Riders on the Storm you are soaking wet and looking for cover from the thunder and lightning! Mixes like those YOU NEVER FORGET! I recently (to me that means in the last couple of years) listened to the Moody Blues surround sound disc from the second album that they did with the London Festival Orchestra, Days of Future Passed, expecting to be blown away! It left me cold! I looked at the waveform on my computer and I instantly knew why. They had bricked it! There wasn't one decibel of dynamic range left! These idiot producers today have NO F-ING IDEA what they're doing!
The only 5.1 albums I have are the Bjork 5.1 DVDs (has the music videos as well). If you have any interest in Bjork, they're worth checking out. I, now, will have to check out some more 5.1 mixes like that Pink Floyd set. Unfortunately my large Klipsch setup is in storage, and my bedroom is only wired for my vintage stereo setup (Technics SA-700 and a pair of Kenwood LS-660s).
Thanks for the vid. :)
Addendum: the Bjork mixes are very tame, nothing that really exploits all of the channels... but they're very well done, moves just the right things to the right places+directions.
I would love to get the Bjork set... especially to hear the tracks from Post and Homogenic.
I like Bjork, though I haven't bought anything of hers for a while. But I'll look up those 5.1 DVD's; I didn't know she had any.
I wish the Pink Floyd stuff was available in a cheaper set, because DSOTM, at least, was literally made for surround sound. But you shouldn't need to pay $100 to hear it. (I paid $75 for my used copy.) The SACD is cheaper but only by about half - it's still often about $50, and you need a player that can play it.
Love the video. Just curious why you didn't mention reel to reel Quadraphonic. Better than the 8 track quad due to the play speed was double (7 1/2ips).
I am big into quad and have numerous formats. SQ, QS, CD4, and Q4 reels. Never got into 8 track. Love all the formats in their own way.
Sounds to me like the pressure pad probably needs to be replaced on the 8 track! this could be why the sound is very muffled and not very clear. Almost all 8 tracks pads pretty much are deteriorated now a days, the only ones ive noticed that still hold up well are the ones that came from old comlumbia house mail order in the early 80s.
If early quad had 1 format, it would have been very successful. I remember wanting a quad system, but it was confusing.
The Alan Parsons Quad mix of DSOTM is to me the best version ever of this album.
16:15 "people don't care about audio quality" me: WTF is wrong with them??
Yes the AP quad mix was a revelation to me. It sounds like how this album was supposed to sound. I feel like if you're the kind of Floyd fan who goes to laser Floyd shows in planetariums, then you've got to listen to this mix - you've never really heard this album before otherwise.
Short of a great copy of a quad vinyl Dark Side played on a quality quad system the next best is the Parsons quad mix on sacd but played into a quality 70's era Quad unit such as Sansui or Pioneer and 4 matched speakers.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on surround sound vs binaural audio. :)
I'd love to hear some good surround systems recorded in binaural. I have a set of the Sennheiser AMBEO binaural recording headphone, just don't have a good surround playback system any longer to record.