Again, I wish to thank all of those who worked so hard perfecting the various scripts. These have become my primary decoding sources for Quadraphonic music. In fact, as I write this I'm working on yet another conversion and plan many more.
In the last 4 months since April 2007 I have done literally over 100+ conversions of my record collection using both Adobe Audition 1.5 / 2.0 and many different scripts. I take pride in my work which takes many, many long hours of work only to discard a whole months worth of work because I've found a small improvement or my work was wrong. It's important not to have too much of an ego and keep a "Scientific" point of view about doing conversions. My question is simple: can we please improve the SQ and QS scripts? This is not meant to be critical of all the great hard work already achieved. Far from it. I'm just wondering if we can improve the scripts or is there only so much separation that can be achieved using Adobe Audition?
Recently, I was able to listen to "Oye Como Va" through a Fosgate TATE II Space and Image Composer. The sound separation was unbelievable and was so much more dramatic than the SQ scripts I've been using. I was also able to listen to Four Tops "Keeper Of The Castle" through the Sansui QSD-1000. This is a favorite title of mine that I've recently converted, so I know how it sounds decoded with the various QS scripts. The separation seemed perfect. No bleed through to the other channels with vocals or other instruments. Let me emphasize that the difference between the scripts and vintage machines is like night and day in many respects. You can really hear the differance.
I'm just wondering if we can improve the scripts or is there only so much separation that can be achieved using Adobe Audition? How much db of separation are we getting from the scripts? And are there other factors that need to be considered in order to get the best possible decoding from SQ and QS sources using a computer? Can we build a virtual Tate?
In the last 4 months since April 2007 I have done literally over 100+ conversions of my record collection using both Adobe Audition 1.5 / 2.0 and many different scripts. I take pride in my work which takes many, many long hours of work only to discard a whole months worth of work because I've found a small improvement or my work was wrong. It's important not to have too much of an ego and keep a "Scientific" point of view about doing conversions. My question is simple: can we please improve the SQ and QS scripts? This is not meant to be critical of all the great hard work already achieved. Far from it. I'm just wondering if we can improve the scripts or is there only so much separation that can be achieved using Adobe Audition?
Recently, I was able to listen to "Oye Como Va" through a Fosgate TATE II Space and Image Composer. The sound separation was unbelievable and was so much more dramatic than the SQ scripts I've been using. I was also able to listen to Four Tops "Keeper Of The Castle" through the Sansui QSD-1000. This is a favorite title of mine that I've recently converted, so I know how it sounds decoded with the various QS scripts. The separation seemed perfect. No bleed through to the other channels with vocals or other instruments. Let me emphasize that the difference between the scripts and vintage machines is like night and day in many respects. You can really hear the differance.
I'm just wondering if we can improve the scripts or is there only so much separation that can be achieved using Adobe Audition? How much db of separation are we getting from the scripts? And are there other factors that need to be considered in order to get the best possible decoding from SQ and QS sources using a computer? Can we build a virtual Tate?
Last edited: