CD-4 INSERT
- Thread starter quadtrade
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Well, there's no arguing with that statement, which was true enough...but it should also be said that to get the optimum CD-4 playback at the time, you had to spring for some fairly expensive hardware.
The irony, of course, is that quad as a format was finished by the time true hi-fi decoders became available. But this leads me back to the 4-channel cassette situation. Since there were three major disc formats, this left Q8's, cassettes and reels as the logical format of choice for the average listener without the deep pockets to invest in the equipment necessary to decode CD-4, SQ and QS in at least a decent way. Cassettes were never approved, and 8-track sucked, so that left reel tapes, always an audiophile choice to begin with, but with limited sales potential.
The mystery--beyond hubris--is why those at Sony/Columbia chose SQ matrix when they must have known the CD-4 system was the best choice, and that competing formats would not only confuse consumers but dilute the sales of ALL formats (Lesson learned: when the compact disc was offered as a take-it-or-leave-it option, companies just took it--at least until you-know-who attempted the ridiculous minidisc format).
And while I'm at it...y'know, that collection of CD-4 titles didn't appear to be all that exciting, did it?
ED
The irony, of course, is that quad as a format was finished by the time true hi-fi decoders became available. But this leads me back to the 4-channel cassette situation. Since there were three major disc formats, this left Q8's, cassettes and reels as the logical format of choice for the average listener without the deep pockets to invest in the equipment necessary to decode CD-4, SQ and QS in at least a decent way. Cassettes were never approved, and 8-track sucked, so that left reel tapes, always an audiophile choice to begin with, but with limited sales potential.
The mystery--beyond hubris--is why those at Sony/Columbia chose SQ matrix when they must have known the CD-4 system was the best choice, and that competing formats would not only confuse consumers but dilute the sales of ALL formats (Lesson learned: when the compact disc was offered as a take-it-or-leave-it option, companies just took it--at least until you-know-who attempted the ridiculous minidisc format).
And while I'm at it...y'know, that collection of CD-4 titles didn't appear to be all that exciting, did it?
ED
Hey Ed! If quad cassettes were never ok'ed, what about the four channel cassettes that came out in Germany? Do you know if they were legit or made without Philips permission?
I'd bet that list would have been more exciting to the Japanese than to us, but to be fair, any I have bought on JVC, including those I didn't know the artists, ended up sounding pretty good. I did however buy one(title escapes me)that was a stereo disc remastered for CD4 by placing 4 microphones in a concert venue and recording the room acoustics from 2 channel record playback to 4 channel tape. It was the only one I wasn't thrilled with.
As to the equipment being expensive, yes, to the rest of the world, but while surfing Yahoo Japan Auctions, I see a fair bit of CD4 equipment that was made for the everyday consumer, not the audionut, er, audiophile. There were a lot of all in one units that included decoder/demodulator, turntable, all speakers, and a Q8 player in a few. The only thing to buy was a reel deck. They may have been crumpack systems, but you didn't need to do anything until you needed a new stylus.
I'd bet that list would have been more exciting to the Japanese than to us, but to be fair, any I have bought on JVC, including those I didn't know the artists, ended up sounding pretty good. I did however buy one(title escapes me)that was a stereo disc remastered for CD4 by placing 4 microphones in a concert venue and recording the room acoustics from 2 channel record playback to 4 channel tape. It was the only one I wasn't thrilled with.
As to the equipment being expensive, yes, to the rest of the world, but while surfing Yahoo Japan Auctions, I see a fair bit of CD4 equipment that was made for the everyday consumer, not the audionut, er, audiophile. There were a lot of all in one units that included decoder/demodulator, turntable, all speakers, and a Q8 player in a few. The only thing to buy was a reel deck. They may have been crumpack systems, but you didn't need to do anything until you needed a new stylus.
......The mystery--beyond hubris--is why those at Sony/Columbia chose SQ matrix when they must have known the CD-4 system was the best choice, and that competing formats would not only confuse consumers but dilute the sales of ALL formats (Lesson learned: when the compact disc was offered as a take-it-or-leave-it option, companies just took it--at least until you-know-who attempted the ridiculous minidisc format).....
ED
Ed,
We know the reason. It was the same reason they pushed SACD when DVD-A was approved by everyone and ready to go. The same reason they went with MD over DCC. And Beta over VHS. Unfinished BluRay over the finished and superior (at the time) HD-DVD. And their original Memory Stick over what became the industry standard. And other products, formats, and things I've forgotten.
But who could forget their great advertising slogan from a few decades ago: "Sony, No Baloney!" (I always covered up the "No" in my mind when I saw it in print)
History repeats itself time and time again when CBS/Sony is involved.
I've said those things for years on forums to anyone that would listen...Sony has wrecked more technology than it has ever created...if you look in the dictionary for the word proprietary they should just include the word "Sony"
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 4,209
Unfortunately the catalog shows the inherent flaw of the CD4 camp: the music selection. Basically there was no title to be thrilled about at the start of the cd4 experience from Victor/JVC, so it was a hard sell. Warner and RCA came soon, King and Philips later. Only later JVC/Victor did the right thing and licensed some groovy thing (Motown...)
Compare this catalog with the one from Columbia at the early days of Sucky Quad and you get the big difference.
Compare this catalog with the one from Columbia at the early days of Sucky Quad and you get the big difference.
I agree with you Winopener, the US had it much better in terms of quantity and in quality of titles, but the Japanese were trying to show off the format to its best advantage. I think there is a cultural difference. We buy music we like and upgrade our stereo later, in Japan the stereo has to be good as there is a lot of competition for the market, and their recordings are top notch. What I see is a lot of demonstration quality CD4 titles, some perhaps from artists that are known only in Japan and wouldn't seem popular here. I wish JVC had pushed CD4 and affordable systems here. We might have forgone SQ/QS if CD4 had been easier, cheaper, and with lots of popular titles for our market. I remember as a 9 year old walking by a stereo shop in a mall. I heard Queen's Another One Bites The Dust playing on big speakers with the grills removed. The first thing I thought was that the speakers and their undulating woofers were vulgar, the next was that the sound was awesome and that I wished I could do that at home! If CD4 was like that(and in Japan, maybe it was), a good sounding record on a spectacular, but affordable, system would have sold more methinks.
Ed , I have been recording all the cd-4 material, and it includes Hot Tuna, Jeff Air, Moody Blues, Wilson Pickett, Creedence Clearwater, Marvin Gaye, Supremes, Jackson 5, Average White band, Nilsson, Jerry Reed, Dolly Parton, Alice Cooper, Joni Mitchell, Carpenters, Gil Evens, Guess Who, Rare Earth, Nini Rosso, Brenda Lee, Mills Brothers, Temptations, Montenegro, Presley, Sinatra, Flora Purim, Chet Atkins, Stylistics, Louis Armstrong and on and on. the list is by far the best of quad. Plus the weird Japanese Lps can be very interesting music with wild mixes. And when set up right, it works very well, the records are the key and 40 years on, good lps are even more difficult to locate. But even then, the Japanese were much more willing to accommodate the insanity of setting up such things. Forty years on and this society can't even sit still long enough to listen to an lp, much less have technical skills to set up a turntable. Good Lord music just comes out of a pad. Sounds fine to most folk, they are off and running.
And for me to nod yes to all the SONY bashing just makes me have a headache, I have been proclaiming for years how they are the devil in disguise. I saw it in action when DVDA was coming on strong and the buzz at AES was this new Sony thing SACD. Nobody not associated with Sony would say it sounded better than DVDA, and everyone saw the downside, we need zero format battles. Of course Sony prevailed and since it is one monster company pushing it, they can roll over the rest. Capitalism at it's finest.
And for me to nod yes to all the SONY bashing just makes me have a headache, I have been proclaiming for years how they are the devil in disguise. I saw it in action when DVDA was coming on strong and the buzz at AES was this new Sony thing SACD. Nobody not associated with Sony would say it sounded better than DVDA, and everyone saw the downside, we need zero format battles. Of course Sony prevailed and since it is one monster company pushing it, they can roll over the rest. Capitalism at it's finest.
Last edited:
Doug G.
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Don't you guys think the early quad offerings were, in part, an effort to appeal to those our parents' age (The Greatest Generation) who would have been in their late forties - early fifties then and would have had more money to spend on the new inovation than their hippie children?
I mean, a buck more per selection was quite the extra expenditure for us younger generation and we would have probably had to resort to the regular 2 channel version records let alone have the cash to spend on an extra amplifier and speakers and. in the case of CD-4, an expensive cartridge.
Doug
I mean, a buck more per selection was quite the extra expenditure for us younger generation and we would have probably had to resort to the regular 2 channel version records let alone have the cash to spend on an extra amplifier and speakers and. in the case of CD-4, an expensive cartridge.
Doug
I would love to see all those CD-4 albums I could never afford, or get, when I was a youngster being re-released by someone like Audio Fidelity or the like on SACD or Blu-ray, all the Joni Mitchell for a starter.
You raise a good point Doug, look to the money! I suspect that we only had the expensive carts, the Japanese had cheaper ones like the 4MD-1X and inexpensive belt drive turntables with it preinstalled. BTW, shouldn't there be 3 more cups in your avatar?
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2002
- Messages
- 4,209
Sure these was the first targeted demographic, however the problem was that beside these easy-listening cd4 titles there was nothing else in the jvc catalog to shows off, while Sony has Santana, BST, Chicago etc... along with Johnny Mathis and similar stuff.
JVC did it right, but did it late.
You know, I bet if the Volkswagon van had come stock with a quad 8-track system it might have had a bigger impact...
[video=youtube;eOnne-90CLI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOnne-90CLI[/video]
Doug G.
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
I have some further thoughts to my above. Even though the manufacturers may have aimed at the Greatest Generation, they may have made a mistake in that that generation was a bit resistive to change (I'm not buying a color TV until they perfect it) and sales of quad equipment ended up not being what they had hoped. Most wives my mother's age would not have allowed the extra speakers in their living rooms.
In contrast, most young people I knew were fascinated by Quad and embraced it but most didn't have the ready money and complained about why buy more equipment if the records weren't there. More pop/rick may have made a difference.
Vibes, if by cups you mean the reproducer on that little phonograph, yes, ideally there should have been four of them but that was in the days of the famous mono/quad. BTW, I had one of those little players exactly like that one when I was about 2 1/2 - 3 years old.
Doug
In contrast, most young people I knew were fascinated by Quad and embraced it but most didn't have the ready money and complained about why buy more equipment if the records weren't there. More pop/rick may have made a difference.
Vibes, if by cups you mean the reproducer on that little phonograph, yes, ideally there should have been four of them but that was in the days of the famous mono/quad.
BTW, I had one of those little players exactly like that one when I was about 2 1/2 - 3 years old.Doug
Didn't quite know the best place to post this but it is a type of insert for cd-4.Apologise in advance for the blurry photo.
Me thinks they was fibbin' when they said "and we're adding more all the time". I ain't seen nuttin' new in a while.
Similar threads
