Reality Technologies Surround Master - Owners Thread

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Chucky thank you for explanation, but it's not really what i meant. the sound system, you're working on, albeit under different perspective,
is still an attempt to compete at "audiophile" market.
what i mean, is a new direction, lately has appeared in the field of music listening - mobility and universality.
you noted that no many of the folk at QQ got interest in full system, but here is explanation - all members in here alredy own the systems
for this purpose and quite established habits and preferences. my guess the same apply to those, who isn't here but also avid music listeners.
at same time pretty obvious lack of decent playback devices for cars and hi-end universal but yet simple devices for work with digital data as
a hub, integrated in home system.
 
Chucky thank you for explanation, but it's not really what i meant. the sound system, you're working on, albeit under different perspective,
is still an attempt to compete at "audiophile" market.
what i mean, is a new direction, lately has appeared in the field of music listening - mobility and universality.
you noted that no many of the folk at QQ got interest in full system, but here is explanation - all members in here alredy own the systems
for this purpose and quite established habits and preferences. my guess the same apply to those, who isn't here but also avid music listeners.
at same time pretty obvious lack of decent playback devices for cars and hi-end universal but yet simple devices for work with digital data as
a hub, integrated in home system.

Hey there Otto,

What Charlie is trying to say is that we're aiming ourselves at the segment of the market who aren't enthusiasts, aren't avid music listeners, haven't spend thousands of dollars on their listening arrangement.

The philosophy is that it's the casual listener, the person who believes or says they are passionate about music and audio but lack the knowledge and/or time and/or money to dedicate to doing it properly. Also to the person who doesn't yet know that they are an enthusiast - we're trying to provide the best quality listening experience to people without actually selling it that way or telling them that. We're visibly offering style and simplicity, and also the wow factor of a technology that not many outside of enthusiast culture are aware of. We should be able to sell based purely on these factors.

What we're sneakily doing is converting these people into stereo or surround sound audiophiles without them even realising it, until the day they listen to someone else's normal speaker system and realise they can't go back. It's a trap!

This is the direction for the mass market. And for those that already have their setups, and those we successfully convert, we have products such as the Surround Master and the eventually up-coming pre-amp.

~David
 
thanks Overture. that's interesting but at $4500 for end users, quite costly philosophy :p
 
Hello Everyone!

For those who don't know me my name's Chris, I'm one of the engineers at Involve Audio, I deal mainly with Mechanical engineering and Industrial design (with graphic design on the side) but I occasional get to do some cool research and experimentation.

I don't think I've made a post on this thread before. So before I get into the stuff below I'd like to say that I've loved using the surround master at home and love it so much I'm going to set it up in my car at some point in the future. Has anyone done this before?

My favourite artists/genres to listen to through the Surround Master for their cool effects (in no particular order) are Andreas Vollanvieder, Pink Floyd (of course), Crowded House (especially their live stuff), pretty much all Orchestral & Choral stuff and Kimbra. I also occasionally play xbox and watch movies through the Surround Master.



Introductions over, here's the bulk of the post.



We've been doing a bit of research into some cool stuff at Involve and as part of that I got to test out what music sounds like over headphones when it's been Decoded and then Re-Encoded with Involve.

Short answer.... it sounds exactly the same! Well pretty much anyway, there was the tiniest broadening of the sound field.
I also did a few more other tests comparing the effects off the encode being set to smart, dumb and whether the track was decoded first.

Has anyone else tried this to see what the decode or encode sounds like through headphones or speakers?

Here's the write up for the experiment, hope you enjoy it!

Involve Encode/Decode to Headphones
Christopher Coller
Involve Audio Pty Ltd 12/7/16

Aim:
To determine whether a series of decoding and encoding processes through Involve will produce a noticeable increase in immersion and sound space of music when listened to through headphones.

Hypothesis:
There will be no difference other than level mismatch between the encoded/decoded track vs the track played straight.

Method:
• An AB setup using a standard A/V RCA switch was used to compare the encoded/decoded track and the straight track.
• For the encode/decode path the track was first decoded then encoded before going to the amplifier.
• Andreas Vollanvieder and Diana Krall were used for test tracks
• Sound Source: Fiio X3
• Headphones DT 770 Pro 80 OHM
• Decoder: Involve Surround Master (on bottom with lid on in image)
• Encoder: Involve Ultrasmart Encoder Board B (on top with lid off in image)
• Desk: Eurorack MX 602A

WP_20160714_14_40_55_Pro.jpg

Results:

All comparisons made to the straight track

1. Decode ON, Smart Encode
a. Very slight broadening of sound field
b. Very slight ~0.5db level increase

2. Decode ON, Dumb Encode
a. Very slight broadening of sound field
b. Very slight ~0.5db level increase

3. Decode OFF, Smart Encode
a. Level ~2db down
b. Image slightly more central, in the head

4. Decode OFF, Dumb Encode

a. Image more central, in the head
b. Level ~2db down

5. Decode to TSS, Smart Encode
a. Level ~1db down
b. Sound opened up slightly

6. Decode to TSS, Dumb Encode
a. Level ~1db down
b. Slight transience increase
c. Sound field

7. Decode ON, Smart Encoding only rear channels - Track: Frim fram Sauce
a. Central/Mono channel removed, only hear echoes/reverb
b. Instruments on sides (piano) stayed in same location

8. Decode ON, Smart Encoding only front channels - Track: Frim fram Sauce
a. Central/Mono channel retained
b. Echoes/reverb removed

9. Decode ON, Dumb Encoding only front channels - Track: Frim fram Sauce
a. Echoes/reverb lessened

10. Decode ON, Dumb Encoding only rear channels - Track: Frim fram Sauce
a. Central/Mono channel removed, only hear echoes/reverb
b. Instruments on sides (piano) moved out more

11. Decode ON, Smart Encode Rear and Front channels swapped
a. Central images moved to outside
b. Outside image moved to centre

12. Decode to TSS, bypass Encode
a. More transience
b. Slight smearing
c. More out of the head but localised to headphone drivers


Discussion:
• There was very slight crosstalk between the channels on the sound desk used
• Testing showed it to be insignificant
• No delay in sound when switching was heard

Conclusion:
No noticeable change was produced when comparing the decoded/encoded track to the standard stereo track. This shows the effectiveness of Involve at maintaining correct audio placement and maintaining audio quality. A range of other tests were completed which showed the effectiveness of Involve Encode, Decode and TSS at producing high quality audio with varying effects.
 

Attachments

  • Involve decode to encode headphone test figure 1.jpg
    Involve decode to encode headphone test figure 1.jpg
    129.3 KB · Views: 367
Last edited:
Hi Chris,
I just want to be clear what you did here. When you say, for example, “Decode ON, Smart Encode” you mean you took the straight stereo track, decoded it with Involve and then encoded the resultant 4 ch output from the SM back into a 2 ch pair using the Involve encoder? If so, do your comments “a. Very slight broadening of sound field b. Very slight ~0.5db level increase” refer to listening to the resulting encode as a 'stereo' signal again ?
Cheers,
Soundfield
 
"So before I get into the stuff below I'd like to say that I've loved using the surround master at home and love it so much I'm going to set it up in my car at some point in the future. Has anyone done this before?"

While I haven't done this with the SQ Vinyl Surround Master that I have, I did do it with the Tate unit. Tate provided a customized version for a few customers that had a 12v power input provided on the back for connection to the car's electrical system.
I bought one and enjoyed it in my vehicle for many years. The Tate came out in the 80's after Quad had died, and it was the only way to get Quad in a vehicle (there was one other unit out then, made specifically for vehicles, but only had simple logic, poor decoding).
 
Hi Soundfield,

Yes, that's exactly what I did and that's what I listened to.

I've made a little diagram to show the setup.

View attachment 26735

Thanks Chris, I assumed that's what you were doing. With regard to the stated aim "To determine whether a series of decoding and encoding processes through Involve will produce a noticeable increase in immersion and sound space of music when listened to through headphones." - did you reach any conclusion here? To be honest I can't see why it should, what mechanism might have been in play that you thought was worth investigating (i.e. does Involve Encoding which I thought was effectively transparent, of itself actually turn out to confer a benefit in the two channel domain?)
Cheers,
Soundfield.
 
My finest experience with the Surround Master is cliché, Pink Floyd DSOTM! Yes I know, but I owned it for 30 years before I could listen to it for the first time with the Involve. Of course since then I've hunted down as many SQ LPs as I could.
But I'm constantly amazed how good none quad stuff sounds on the Surround Master in Involve mode. War of the Worlds (Jeff Wayne version) amazing! The Wall, can't believe it's not quad! But right now I'm listening to Jean Michel Jarre's Oxygen as I write this. Seriously, it's surround!
It's the most used item in my system. Which is why I would be really interested in the Involve pre amp when it does come out as I would like to incorporate it into the rest of my system as a result of including HDMI inputs. I don't find the "Involve" mode tiring or fatiguing after a while like the rest of the pedestrian surround formats. And I'm too lazy to switch between the vinyl and CD, DVD etc. And I haven’t even considered Xbox and movies!
I’m counting the days
 
after reading a thread where someone mentioned running something through the surround master I thought 'what's that' and did some research (mainly on this site). So I bought one and I am running it now. What a great device. I tried Jim Croce's 'The definitive Croce' (CD) and was pleased with the output. I am now listening to 'The Essential Santana' (CD) and really pleased. I played the start of 'Evil Ways' 10 times in a row to listen to the drum move around the room.

I used to like the DSPs on my amplifier until two years ago when I started listening to Steve Wilson 5.1 mixes/remixes and Audio Fidelity Quad releases - so far this device is the next best thing to a discrete 5.1 mix.

:51banana:
 
I've ordered the SQ version and I'm patiently waiting for it to arrive. I also have QS records. Will this Surround Master do just as good a job on the QS records when I switch from SQ to Involve?
 
I've ordered the SQ version and I'm patiently waiting for it to arrive. I also have QS records. Will this Surround Master do just as good a job on the QS records when I switch from SQ to Involve?

The Surround Master's default mode - Involve - is the mode for decoding QS encoded material.
And converting Stereo to simulated Surround Sound. You will find it very effective with QS recordings!
 
Thanks, that's great to know. One of the magazine reviews posted here confused me a little. It made me think that I had to buy the non-SQ one to do the proper job with QS.
 
Well, the Surround Master with SQ arrived yesterday. I am indeed very impressed. I have determined that this device is worth every penny. I was impressed 9 years ago when I got my hands on the Lafayette SQ-W decoder, and even more impressed when I recapped it. I did not think that matrix recordings could sound much better than what came out of the SQ-W. I knew about the holy grail Tate but was never able to get one due to the highly competitive bidding whenever they show up online. So along comes the Involve Surround Master and for less than half of what a Tate might cost, I have a brand new device that is on par with or better than the Tate and the Sansui SQD1.
I connected the Surround Master yesterday and played some SQ records through it. I was immediately impressed. Billy Joel's Captain Jack off of the Piano Man album is indeed very discrete as is Charlie Rich. I haven't tried my SQ DSOTM yet but I will. Santana in QS sounds amazing Black Magic Woman is obviously discrete sounding also, as is One Fine Morning by Lighthouse. I have the ubiquitous Radio Shack EV-4 sampler and two Enoch Light albums (one EV-4, one QS). They both decoded perfectly on the involve setting. I then moved onto playing stereo material with the decoder set to involve; again, very impressed. Carole King's Goin' Back from her Writer album sounds like a whole new song and the stereo version of Melissa Manchester's "Just You and I" sounds incredibly natural. Now here's what is interesting- I own the Q8 version of Melissa Manchester's "Better Days and Happy Endings album, and for this recording, I prefer to hear the regular stereo version though the Involve mode, as opposed to the discrete version. With the stereo version decoded, they piano and the rest of the instruments exist in the space of the listener, just creating an immersive soundstage, where the Q8 discrete version sounds like 4 completely different parts of the song coming from 4 corners of the room. I guess poorly mixed discrete sounds way worse than well synthesized stereo. It is great to know that with the right equipment, matrix quad actually is completely doable.
 
Questions :

1. Since there is a sub output on the back, does your crossover in your HT Receiver still have control, or does the SM unit have a fixed crossover setpoint?

2. I read all the posts on here talking about the various modes to choose from, but I don't see any switches on the front or back that lets you select them. I only see an on/off switch, and a 2ch/4ch switch.
 
Questions :

1. Since there is a sub output on the back, does your crossover in your HT Receiver still have control, or does the SM unit have a fixed crossover setpoint?

2. I read all the posts on here talking about the various modes to choose from, but I don't see any switches on the front or back that lets you select them. I only see an on/off switch, and a 2ch/4ch switch.

Hi
1. The SM has a fixed frequency crossover point of 80 Hz

2. On the standard SM the 2ch is in fact a 2 channel surround that works with 70% of heads, a bit like Q sound and others, the 4 ch will decode Involve format, QS, RM, PL1, PL2, EV, Ambiosonics and even dummy head recordings. We offer a QQ special where the 2 ch mode is deleted and replaced with SQ decode. In addition on the back panel you can select 5.1 or 4 ch depending on the way you plug the RCA connectors in.

Hope that helps

Regards

Chucky
 
Hi


2. On the standard SM the 2ch is in fact a 2 channel surround that works with 70% of heads, a bit like Q sound and others, the 4 ch will decode Involve format, QS, RM, PL1, PL2, EV, Ambiosonics and even dummy head recordings. We offer a QQ special where the 2 ch mode is deleted and replaced with SQ decode. In addition on the back panel you can select 5.1 or 4 ch depending on the way you plug the RCA connectors in.

Chucky

Ok, I didn't study very hard in school, but you are saying that normal 2 channel stereo recordings will go into the L and R inputs and come out in a fake surround sound. Any 4 channel original recording that is sourced will need the switch flipped over to the 4 channel setting and the SM will decode it and send out its own version of 4.0 or 5.1?

I am really interested in just taking all my stereo recordings (800 Lp's, cassettes, CD's) and getting a fake quad surround sound. Everything else would be SACD , DVD-Audio, discreet multi-channel recordings that I would run from a Universal Player into my preamp processor and be completely separated from the SM unit. So I would just need the standard unit? I don't have but 3 or 4 SQ recordings and I don't have a 4 channel cartridge which would also be needed right?

So the QQ version won't do anything with a Stereo recording?
There's always one person who never quite gets it.....thats been me my whole life, must have been bad DNA)..lol

Thanks for the extra help, I am close to ordering.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top