INVOLVE SQ - IS HERE

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Colin, Thank you for that very thorough review. I am glad to see a bit of a consensus forming as a result of serious listening. We all seem to be hearing the same good things!
Dwight

Hey Dwight. Did you upgrade your SM or did you just get a newer one?
 
Jon, I bought a new one...I was going to upgrade, but I thought...If I'm giving up two classic pieces of equipment, well, I wanted to have an original... even though I was not excited by the two channel expansion.....also I was so grateful to these guys who are really doing this for a very, very, small group of fanatics....I owed it to them...I haven't had this much aural fun in a long time!
Dwight
 
Jon, I bought a new one...I was going to upgrade, but I thought...If I'm giving up two classic pieces of equipment, well, I wanted to have an original... even though I was not excited by the two channel expansion.....also I was so grateful to these guys who are really doing this for a very, very, small group of fanatics....I owed it to them...I haven't had this much aural fun in a long time!
Dwight

Thought so, and good for you. Nice to support their effort. Mine is making the journey back for a reunion and an upgrade. Hope to break out the SQ's in a few weeks. Have fun with the unit, and with your visit. :phones
 
Just wondering if I can order from the secret SQ SM site using my own Visa or MasterCharge directly without creating, signing on & using the PayPal site. I see what looks like an option to use your own cards directly without the supposed extra verification your account gets via PayPal. So will a regular (and active) Visa card from the USA work down under to cover the cost of the SM payment? If so, that is the route I would prefer to go to purchase the SQSM model. It may take a little longer but I can wait. So again I ask: Can I use a regular credit card from the US to purchase the Surround Master SQ. Directly...no PayPal. Are there any negatives? Thanks in advance for your answers.
 
Just wondering if I can order from the secret SQ SM site using my own Visa or MasterCharge directly without creating, signing on & using the PayPal site. I see what looks like an option to use your own cards directly without the supposed extra verification your account gets via PayPal. So will a regular (and active) Visa card from the USA work down under to cover the cost of the SM payment? If so, that is the route I would prefer to go to purchase the SQSM model. It may take a little longer but I can wait. So again I ask: Can I use a regular credit card from the US to purchase the Surround Master SQ. Directly...no PayPal. Are there any negatives? Thanks in advance for your answers.

In theory you can order through the Paypal gateway on the website using your credit card without having to sign up for Paypal - they handle credit card payments as well.
Failing that, for whatever reason, I can ask the money man later today if this is feasible - I'm fairly certain we can accept credit cards direct, but there is a surcharge I think, around the 2% mark. I'll check it out and get back to you.
If you can do it through the paypal cart without signing up that would be preferable, if only because it makes it much easier for us to track orders.

Cheers
~David
 
After a suggestion from LizardKing, and Dwight's in-depth review of this "Magic Box" I went and ordered one for myself! Although my receiver came equipped with a SQ 2 decoder, I believe it to be not working as it should. Without being a member of the QQ forums, I would've never had known an improved QS-SQ decoder ever existed! I was searching e-bay hoping to find a fairly priced replacement that worked well, I'm guessing I don't have to. But hearing for myself is also believing. I was wondering if it would work with the discrete quadra discs as well. I know that the format is different, but the encoded information is still there on the vinyl. I only have a couple of records in the SQ-QS format, as I'm discovering this to be my new hobby. I'm hoping, and looking forward to testing out this device.
 
After a suggestion from LizardKing, and Dwight's in-depth review of this "Magic Box" I went and ordered one for myself! Although my receiver came equipped with a SQ 2 decoder, I believe it to be not working as it should. Without being a member of the QQ forums, I would've never had known an improved QS-SQ decoder ever existed! I was searching e-bay hoping to find a fairly priced replacement that worked well, I'm guessing I don't have to. But hearing for myself is also believing. I was wondering if it would work with the discrete quadra discs as well. I know that the format is different, but the encoded information is still there on the vinyl. I only have a couple of records in the SQ-QS format, as I'm discovering this to be my new hobby. I'm hoping, and looking forward to testing out this device.

Hey there,

No, the system won't decode quadra / CD4 - apart from the fact that it was a discrete system and requires its own cartridge to read the additional tracks, it was also encoded as FM multiplexing rather than a matrix system, so the demodulator is a completely different topology.

I hope you enjoy the SM, feel free to weigh in with your pros and cons, all feedback welcomed. If you don't have so many encoded albums, perhaps you'll have more fun initially experimenting with stereo tracks to see what is hidden in them.

~David
 
Discrete 4, Please forgive me Overture for saying that which you cannot say….The SM will not decode the discrete FM modulation, but you will be stunned by how well the SM decodes the mix, and how close it is to the intended CD-4 discrete result…..not perfect…just very close!..so close you may be quite happy..I get into trouble every time I bring this up…but the truth is in the listening!
Dwight
 
Discrete 4, Please forgive me Overture for saying that which you cannot say….The SM will not decode the discrete FM modulation, but you will be stunned by how well the SM decodes the mix, and how close it is to the intended CD-4 discrete result…..not perfect…just very close!..so close you may be quite happy..I get into trouble every time I bring this up…but the truth is in the listening!
Dwight

Thanks Dwight, I do have a needle that has been known to get deep down into the grooves and detect all information on the vinyl. (AT-440 MLa) If it comes close, with some more separation, and better sounding to what I am currently hearing, I probably won't need to seek out a working CD-4 demodulator.
 
Discrete 4, Please forgive me Overture for saying that which you cannot say….The SM will not decode the discrete FM modulation, but you will be stunned by how well the SM decodes the mix, and how close it is to the intended CD-4 discrete result…..not perfect…just very close!..so close you may be quite happy..I get into trouble every time I bring this up…but the truth is in the listening!
Dwight

I concur...Discete 4 - I think you'll be pleasantly suprised with the results of the CD4 record played in stereo through to the Surround Master even if it isn't "Discrete". ;)
 
Hey there Colin,

1) There are connections for 4-channel or 5-channel output. If I want to do 4.0 upconversions of both SQ and QS, should I be using the 4-channel output jacks? Or use FL, FR, SL, SR from the 5.1 jacks? I read over the manuals and addenda twice but did not fully understand the difference between these two connections, and how the front channels differ. There had been some past discussion about the QS decoding only being in 5.1 and not 4.0. Is that still the case? Or can I decode QS in 4.0 (as it was done in the '70s)?

We only included the 5.1 mode for people who like that sort of thing. It's not really our preferred mode, but some people want to use their existing speaker setup, or like the inclusion of the centre channel. Long story short, QS and SQ modes both use the same 4-channel outputs.
The 5.1 fronts have the centre content separated into the centre channel output, that's the difference. You can ignore them completely if that's your thing.

Sorry if the manual is unclear on that, I'll give it a bit of a read and see how it can be clarified.

2) What sampling rate / bit depth are used internally to the Surround Master for digitizing and processing the audio? I usually rip LPs at 96/24, but if the Surround Master works at 48/24, there's no point in doing a 96/24 LP rip. I ask this so I can use the highest bit rate for quality reasons, but not waste space by grabbing higher-resolution samples than the Surround Master can re-output as analog audio.

The processor is running at 48/24, though internally it has 76 bit registers so that the maths doesn't overflow and lose resolution during the more complex calculations.
The a/d process uses 256 times over-sampling so that it doesn't have to rely on anti-aliasing for accuracy, d/a does 128 times up-sampling for conversion, you could argue that the analog output is interpolated accurately enough that you would still get some advantage from recording it at 96, but that enters that grey area between academic and listening that I don't want to broach in the scope of the question :p


3) How to improve Surround Master and make it appealing to a broader market? The main thing that is missing is digital audio input and output. Relying upon analog input and output is somewhat obsolete in the current home theater world, which has largely migrated to HDMI for everything (except vinyl). I made the switch to HDMI for all my digital sources in 2009 and haven't looked back, as it combines multi-channel audio and video in ONE cable, and eliminates duplicate investment in multiple high-end D/A stages.

Yes, it's something we've been discussing for a while now. Our trouble is, we're a small team with limited funding and time. I would love to incorporate hdmi into the next iteration of the surround master. Architecturally the system can be made capable of accepting the sort of digital output that most hdmi receiver ICs would provide. Interestingly enough it's only over the last 12 months that the hdmi loopback capability has really been implemented in the market - we could use it, but as you say the license fees are exorbitant, and the development time is prohibitive to us right at the moment. Also, HDMI re-encoding and output would require us for compatibility reasons to then remux the video or generate a blank screen for audio-only - before loopback mode, all hdmi signals had to include some kind of video signal (if I'm reading the spec correctly) It also introduces the issue of whether or not we would need to include a frame delay for resync. Anyway, this is largely academic.

The short answer is, we'd love to, and it's in our future, we just lack the resources to implement it just yet.


I'd think perhaps the digital "guts" of the Involve stereo-to-surround processing should be sold/licensed to receiver manufacturers. I'd love to pull up "Involve" modes alongside all those Dolby / dts modes. That would also solve the HDMI / bass management / room correction issues. But I realize receiver manufacturers would probably pay $10-$25 per unit shipped for the firmware. It would take a 20X the sales volume to make the same money, and that's if these big multinational conglomerates even bite in the first place.

Couldn't agree with you more. The first problem we face is getting in the door. Every door-guard is self important and reaching the decision makers is hard without knowing someone who knows someone higher up in the chain.
The second problem is that very few receiver manufacturers are leaders; they're followers, and they almost all wait for other companies to adopt a new technology before they'll consider including it. We've been told that to our face by some C.E companies who have traditionally been innovators. And those that do innovate tend to reject technology not developed by their own in-house r+d.

Still, watch this space. We haven't given up on the idea just yet. :)

Hope this answers your questions.
~David
 
You are right! Looks I can use my credit card on the PayPal link without signing up. This is great! You have no idea how wonderful it is to have a SOTA SQ-QS-Synth decoder that is new & doesn't need constant maintenance due to age! (Like me!) I'll be ordering one tomorrow. Thanks Dave! And thanks to all the staff at Involve!
 
David -

Thanks for the detailed responses. That helps a lot.

I'm glad to read that both SQ and QS can be decoded in 4.0 form. For preserving 1970s-era quad recordings, that's exactly what I want to use.

My thought is that if the processor operates at 48/24, I will record the output at 48/24. I had been recording at 96/24, which arguably is overkill for vinyl with a 30Hz-20KHz response. I don't hear an audible difference between 48/24 and 96/24, so I'll switch to 48/24 and halve the disk space and post-processing time required. (I've wondered why the Nyquist theorem works since a sample at 2X the highest frequency would get only 2 samples per wave near the high-frequency limit, not enough to construct the exact shape of the wave in analog form. However, mathematicians who are much smarter than me have proven that it really does work.)

I share your frustrations about how the audio industry works. I've noticed that the mass-market companies tend to use/license only Dolby, dts, and Audyssey technologies for surround sound processing. I wonder how Audyssey got in the door since they were little-known 10 years ago, but ubiquitous today. Maybe some of the niche audiophile brands (the likes of Arcam, Outlaw Audio, Emotiva, etc.) would be more receptive to building Involve into their products? However, I know those companies also struggle with limited resources for product development, and a complete home theater pre/pro or receiver is a very complex product that requires a big team to design, build, and bring to market.
 
I wonder how Audyssey got in the door since they were little-known 10 years ago, but ubiquitous today.
Tomlinson Holman and his huge credibility is behind Audissey. I'd guess his success with THX and Audissey in making them industry standards is the reason he was hired by Apple.
 
Discrete 4 -

As others have said, using the Involve on a CD-4 / QuadraDisc will result in stereo playback with simulated surround sound. This is not identical to the results of playing back the LP through a CD-4 demodulator.

There's another thread over in the CD-4 section about the Lou Dorren CD-4 demodulator project. He is working on a modern CD-4 demodulator that will properly decode those QuadraDiscs.

See this link for details: https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showthread.php?9035-Lou-Dorren-A-new-CD-4-Demodulator!!!
And this thread if you want to get on the pre-order list: https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...u-Dorren-s-QQ-CD-4-Demodulator-Pre-Order-List
 
Ok, where's my beer??? I need a BEER!!!

well, almost!!
My unit arrived just an hour ago, already hooked up and playing both SQ and QS
What else can I say??? THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!!
You did a great job on this unit, I was comparing to my QRX7001 QS decoding and it's right there! BUM!! It just decodes perfect!
I also tried a SQ material and while I sat in the sweet spot I was watchin my quad scope unit and it was DISCRETE as the best Tate II

Thank you guys, you made my day a better one for sure!!! BACK TO LISTENING IN THE SWEET SPOT
 
I actually prefer the sound quality of the Involve SQSM to a Tate II. The Tate II sounds "harsh" and "electronic" by comparison. Whereas the Surround Master has a smoother, more lifelike reproduction.

There are some nice restored / upgraded Tate II units out there, at about 5X the cost of the Surround Master.
 
Back
Top