PYE 4d Discography

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

oxforddickie

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
1,104
Location
UK
Hi Mark

Not sure if you were aware of the PYE 4D discography i've amassed on my blog. As there are many not listed in your 'bible' i thought you may want to add those when you re-do the lists


OD
 
Last edited:
No, i'm afraid not. ironic a small label should have two artists of the same name.
 
You've obviously not been to the blog then........ QS

I had only a few minutes before I had to dash out the door to a doctors appt, so I asked the question quickly without going to your blog.

Do I bother you or something? When we first 'met' here on QQ you were really nice and helpful in giving me an invite to Demonoid, but ever since, you're always snippy in any replies to me and I just don't understand it.
 
I'm sorry, but i've had some bad dealings with some people on the the other group who seem to have migrated to here. I'm just a little touchy at the moment, just ignore me
 
I'm sorry, but i've had some bad dealings with some people on the the other group who seem to have migrated to here. I'm just a little touchy at the moment, just ignore me

Thank you for explaining - ever since you and I had that disagreement about SQ having a center front "channel" or not (and the disagreement, I believe, stemmed from the fact that we used the term "channel" in different senses, because, as you know, in SQ, other than the actual Left and Right channels from the CD or LP, there are no other "real" channels present - they are 'imaginary' phase and/or amplitude encoded channels, rather than real ones, and I believe we were misunderstanding each others usage of the terms "channels", but I don't believe we have any real disagreement as to the properties of the SQ matrix)

I can understand your reaction to me because of people like the infamous "QuadBob" who has filled many peoples heads with garbage as to how the various matrix systems work (as well as their history & development), so why shouldn't I be one of those people who thinks I know more than I really do thanks to an education from "QuadBob"? As a side note and real irritant to me, QuadBob also spread considerable misinformation as to the development of the Dolby Stereo/MP Matrix system; in fact, I've been working on an article about that very subject to try and set the record straight. Thankfully, many people at Dolby labs have been reviewing my writing and have confirmed or corrected certain statements - Dolby has published so very little (and a lot of misinformation too!) on Dolby Stereo's development, so I figure it's about time for an accurate article detailing the systems history as well as the changes Dolby made to the Tate DES system to create the Dolby Stereo decoders. (Sadly, many of the people who engineered the Dolby MP encoder and modified Tate decoding never left notes as to what they did - even people like Roger Dressler don't know some of the 'technical' history of Dolby Stereo) In my Dolby Stereo article I also hope to dispel the myth that Sansui's QS matrix formed the basis of Dolby Stereo encoding, which it didn't - and Dolby found Vario-Matrix system so unacceptable (even though it was NEVER used for decoding the front channels) that they stopped using the Vario-Matrix IC's as soon as the Tate DES IC's became available - SQ didn't factor into Dolby Stereo's development either, although it has more compatibility with Dolby Stereo than QS does - yet that's another QuadBob 'myth', that CBS sold "the SQ patent" to Dolby which Dolby turned into Dolby Stereo! As if there was a single "SQ Patent"! Just musing here, but at the most basic level, DynaQuad probably comes closest to Dolby Stereo, but DynaQuad has all 'real' encoding coefficients, it's not a phase matrix in any manner, whereas Dolby MP Matrix employs quadrature shifts to eliminate signal cancellations as well as allow interior pans and also improve mono compatibility. (which is why SQ decoders, even the Fosgate Tate 101A in the "cinema" mode, don't make good Dolby Surround decoders - the 'interior' position of Dolby Surround, which film mixers use most of the time since it decodes to the back with a Pro-Logic decoder yet doesn't cancel in mono, decodes in an SQ decoder as Right Back since it's a quadrature shift with Right Leading Left. When I first got my Fosgate Tate I always wondered why so many films had Right Surround information in most scenes - in a Dolby Stereo mix, only with sound sent fully to the surround channel, which is rare since it has absolutely no mono compatibility, does an SQ decoder properly place the signal at Center Back.

Anyway...
Our disagreement saddened me, not only because you were a great guy to have helped me get on Demonoid, but because I come to QQ to make friends, not argue with people and make enemies. (I do like to argue/discuss technology, etc... but not actual 'fight' argue, if you know what I mean) When I worked for DTS as their Internet Rep, I found it to be such a depressing job due to the levels of attacks I would get on the newsgroups, both from pro-Dolby/anti-DTS people AND from PRO-DTS people! If I'd mention something truthful about Coherent Acoustics, something innocent like that it used a common bit-pool, I'd get hate-filled emails from rabid pro-DTS'ers - even Gary Reber sent me hate mail once because I took him to task over the article he ran in Widescreen Review about his DTS equipped Buick! One person actually hacked into my DTS account on AOL and sent out emails making it look like I'd lost my mind or something. I was almost fired over that until AOL looked into it and proved to DTS that the person who hacked my account was in Canada using AOHell to avoid paying fees. When the job with DTS ended, I stopped posting to the various newsgroups completely because I was so bummed and burned out over the whole thing. It was Karen Hultgren at DTS (who had been my boss at DTS) that got me out of my 'funk' and posting online again.

This is probably a dumb question, but what other quad group are you referring to above? Do you mean the original Google (or was it Yahoo?) quad group? If so, I didn't even know it was still around except as an "archived" site - that's how I originally found the QQ forum and ever since, I never looked at the other site.

If you don't mind my asking, what's happening bad with the others on the other site?

One thing that sucks about the online communities like the QQ forum is there is no context, such as facial expression, voice inflection etc... so something someone writes can sound absolutely 'asshole-y' and they never meant it to - I'm certainly guilty of that all the time and I try my damnedest not to do it. I try to write and re-write replies so they don't come off sounding confrontational or like I'm a know it all, since I clearly don't know nearly as much as I wish I did. I remember IM'ing and talking on the phone with Cai Campbell - we were both working on quad articles for the Primal Vinyl newsletter (they basically gave us the entire issue! I don't know if the newsletter is even around anymore.) - I did a very in-depth review of the Fosgate Tate while Cai reviewed the Lafayette SQ-W and CD-4 format. He and I had very different viewpoints technically - he was into subjective reviewing and believed things like audio cables affected sound quality, while I am more technically oriented (in other words, I was a huge fan of The Audio Critic (click link for free back-issues in PDF form) magazine and hated The Absolute Sound). Yet I had a blast talking and arguing/discussing with him about our differing viewpoints. I was so sad when he died...

Hopefully, I haven't ever pissed off any QQ Forum member or made anyone dislike me. I just want to make friends and discuss a hobby that is near and dear to my heart.
 
At the risk of inflaming things, I have a suggestion: perhaps any disagreements might be directly E-Mailed to the individual member, off-line. That way, we avoid involving the entire group and the world at large. I currently participate in a number of "closed groups" on-line and am the owner of two groups, which are only open to people in physical groups which I run. We have had similar situations and have instructed people to "take it off-line."

I apologize for being a "buttinski" and intend this as a personal attack on no one.
Linda
 
At the risk of inflaming things, I have a suggestion: perhaps any disagreements might be directly E-Mailed to the individual member, off-line. That way, we avoid involving the entire group and the world at large. I currently participate in a number of "closed groups" on-line and am the owner of two groups, which are only open to people in physical groups which I run. We have had similar situations and have instructed people to "take it off-line."

I apologize for being a "buttinski" and intend this as a personal attack on no one.
Linda

Miss Linda,
You are 100% correct - and boy, have you ever inflamed things; since I read your post I've been pacing the house swearing blood-oaths against you. (And I hope you know I'm just kidding.)

I should have taken it 'off-line" and PM'd oxford but I just wasn't thinking clearly since I was kind of upset and confused about his reply to me (which I now understand thanks to his kind explanation). But, things are always learning experiences (or at least, they should be) and I'll be more discrete next time anything like that happens. We certainly don't need public arguments where people might take sides and cause problems all around - I've seen many forums and newsgroups destroyed or at least made seriously unpleasant that way.

So, far from being a "buttinski", I thank you and will take it as a gentle reminder for next time.
 
Pye did have several QS recordings... I have 4 of Mr Acker Bilk's LPs that are Pye 4D right off the top....

I'm probably wrong, but I've always assumed that companies like Pye used QS or RM because no license fees were involved. While CBS charged $4,000 for a yearly 'blanket' SQ encoding license to a studio, $6,000 for a yearly license to make non-logic SQ decoders, with higher rates for the higher forms of logic. And if a studio didn't have a 'blanket' SQ license, individual albums were licensed for SQ with a flat one-time fee of $1200. That was stupid - since all matrix systems are simply specific methods of mixing down multiple tracks into 2 channels, any studio could use quadrature phase shifts and create an SQ encoded recording without paying CBS one penny - and there would be nothing they could do about it either. CBS certainly didn't have any patents on phase shifting, which was well known since the earliest days of electrical recording, and many artists, such as Jimi Hendrix, used phase shifting to create all kinds of cool audio effects. So paying for an SQ encoding license was dumb - especially since the various SQ encoders, such as the 16-input Model 4211 Position Encoder and the original model 4200 SQ encoder were sold by CBS outright and CBS didn't monitor thier use. CBS sold the truly awful Full Wave-Matching W/Front-Back Logic Model 2400 -ahem- "professional" SQ decoder outright to studios too (its attack time was well over 120 milliseconds due to the slow optocoupler/photoresistive cells used to effect the gain-riding of the logic instead of the very fast four-quadrant matrix multipliers and the feedback based linear envelope comparison in the directional detector of the Tate) . They gave away the 5 prototype Model 2410 Paramatrix decoders that were made - I assume to get feedback from mixers about the new decoders performance. Since CBS were using axis-crossings (phase sensing) in the directional detector to determine channel dominance plus true crosstalk signal cancellation and gain-riding to attempt to maintain total power, the decoder was sailing in totally uncharted territory when it came to decoding existing SQ recordings. So I figure they wanted a lot of feedback from mixers who knew their own mixes, and how they should sound, better than anyone else. But then the Tate DES came along and performed so much better than CBS best Paramatrix prototype and CBS quickly abandoned the Paramatrix, instead pouring substantial funds into the development of the DES IC's.

But back to CBS and their lack of support - they didn't provide any sort of after-the-fact engineering help during SQ mixdown, like Dolby did for so many years to ensure that the sound mixer didn't create film sound mixes that couldn't be decoded by Dolby's logic decoding system or caused audible artifacts. Even now, Dolby has extensive documents on their website about mixing in both Dolby Stereo and for Pro-Logic II - with ample advice on how to mix to avoid collapsing the matrix or generating side-effects.

I have the instruction manual for Sony's SQE-2000 SQ encoder and it provides absolutely no guidance as to SQ encoding or ways to encode that make the logic perform in a less audible manner - it explains the use of the Normal, Forward, Backwards and "Interior" switches and what they do, but gives no examples of when/why to use them, etc... With CBS, a producer or artist wanting to encode in SQ was totally 'on their own'. CBS made a book that gave tips and stuff about SQ encoding, but that was it - I just wish I could find a copy of that booklet.

In regards to QS/RM, from what I understand, being the "underdog" system - at least in the USA - Sansui provided a lot of help to mixers achieve optimal results from QS and the Vario-Matrix. And as a side note, I wish QS and RM weren't always lumped together - they were not the same system! QS was 'derived from' RM, but only the four corners. RM was an N:2:M 'great circle' kernel system, like Ambisonic UHJ's 2-channel BHJ format and not a matrix - RM required a position encoder, while QS was a 4:2:4 'square' pair-wise mixed Matrix system with no position encoding being used.
 
Pye did have several QS recordings... I have 4 of Mr Acker Bilk's LPs that are Pye 4D right off the top....

Could you possibly check to see if the four you have are on the list? I'm sure i'm missing one or two of his 4D releases

OD
 
Thank you for explaining - ever since you and I had that disagreement about SQ having a center front "channel" or not (and the disagreement, I believe, stemmed from the fact that we used the term "channel" in different senses, because, as you know, in SQ, other than the actual Left and Right channels from the CD or LP, there are no other "real" channels present - they are 'imaginary' phase and/or amplitude encoded channels, rather than real ones, and I believe we were misunderstanding each others usage of the terms "channels", but I don't believe we have any real disagreement as to the properties of the SQ matrix)

I never thought our discussion was a disagreement, in fact i'd forgotten about it until now. You've not done anything to upset me, so please don't beat yourself up about it.

The issues elsewhere started because i wouldn't close down my blog and move it over there. It was/is run by a control freak, and i refuse to be controlled!! I believe my point has been made, the blog grows in strength day by day, you don't need to be a member or obey stupid rules and is free for all :)

He is here (no names) and so are the others who are not trust-worthy, and basically "idiots". Hence i keep a low profile....

End of subject!

I noticed you made mention of the poor center front software decoding of SQ - i'll answer you there.....

OD
 
OD
here is the items that are missing that i know about

vic lewis my friends the bandleaders nsph 402

41003 this was released with 2 different covers and names-same number wigwam(yellow cover) sleepy shores (purple cover) sounds orchestral and sounds orchestral featuring johnny pearson
41004 drex nelson the 4 pianos of
41031 alan haven organ show

golden hour series
ray davies golden hour button down brass gh 500
tony hatch mister nice guy ghx 628
norrie paramore paramagic pianos ghx 637
diverse brass bands top brass gh 641
alen tew orchestra you are the sunshine of my life ghx 642
sampler golden hour spectacular ghx 645
cyril stapleton big band is back gh 531


top brass series
national brass band series at royal albert hall tb 3004
royal doulton band clayhanger tbx 3005
yorkshire imperial metalband superstar brass tbx 3008
royal chatam engineers concert parade tbx 3010

1000 series
1027 scott joplin played by the ragtimers
1032 aker bilk his clarinet and strings

never seen
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
18
24
28
29

special pye

army benevolent fund military pagent 1975 wembly station pkd 2001/astor 1032
city of westminister string band home loving hits splp 1362 astor

choristers of winchester cathedral benjamin britten 13065
services silver jubilee musical pagent siver jubilee reserve and cadet forces review wembley 1977 pkdx 2002


41002 "should read" john macleod presents hits philharmonic vol3 london pops orch

stowkowski overtures national philharmonic pcnhx 6

alan ainsworth the entertainer pklk 5538
 
Many thanks for that amazing list, will add them to the blog. Nice to see the Golden Hour albums as well, i figured there would have been more

Having gone through the list, I suspect some are ASTOR versions of the PYE UK releases. I think it's best if this list is kept to just the UK releases, hopefully Mark will be able to include the additional numbers on his list

OD
 
I have a few of the Pye "4D" albums, and they are pretty much all easy listening music. From a label that had a nice stable of pop performers of the time, it's surprising that they didn't release some more varied repertoir in quad. I do have a Castle CD of Ray Davies and the Button Down Brass, titled "Girl Talk", that seems to be gleaned entirely from the QS albums Davies recorded for Pye. It's worth seeking out, if you like good easy listening tunes.
 
Hi

I have the same CD as well. It's due to be done, just never quite get around to it. I agree with you, they could have pushed the boat out with some releases from the likes of 'The Enid' and any of the other more progresive groups they had signed.

At least they didn't push Max Bygraves in Quad on us... Iwanna tell you a story coming from all four corners of the room.... ARGHHHH!!!!!!

OD
 
Hi

I have the same CD as well. It's due to be done, just never quite get around to it. I agree with you, they could have pushed the boat out with some releases from the likes of 'The Enid' and any of the other more progresive groups they had signed.

At least they didn't push Max Bygraves in Quad on us... Iwanna tell you a story coming from all four corners of the room.... ARGHHHH!!!!!!

OD


what do you call a guy standing in a raincoat..........Mack

what do you call a 2 guy's standing in a raincoat.....Max


So what do you call a 2 guy's standing in a raincoat in the middle of a cemetary




Max Bygraves
 
Back
Top