Thanks Thanks:  153
Likes Likes:  219
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 78

Thread: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad


    To set the record straight . . .


    Sunflower is in virtual surround, if you like to call it that. This is where all the misunderstanding is located, even AP does not understand my patented matrix (now part of DTS). Please read my long post for further clarification (provided at the end in two-parts). The matrix, when decoded or resolved through application of the playback matrix makes audible over two-stereo speakers, so called virtual surround. VIRTUAL means you only need two speakers up front, those and only those cause your brain to process what it hears as if there were real speakers to your back. You don't need anything else, in fact, additional speakers just screw up the imaging due to the multiple propagation pathways set up by the additional sources. Rear speakers will, again, confuse the brain and we're back to non-virtual stereo.

    Surround schemes such as 5.1 are peripheral systems. The speakers are placed around the listener. In virtual sound the two speakers get a signal that causes the brain to act as processor (or as a neural-decoder ... a brain decoder) by itself. This makes you think you are hearing sounds all around you, but also anywhere in front of the speakers. In some ways it can do things that the peripheral scheme cannot.

    Everyone wants real speakers to be used, and it isn't designed for that, it is not designed for four real speakers. IT IS A VIRTUAL SURROUND SYSTEM. Two speakers and one listener make it work! That is what is wrong with this AP SACD offering.

    Even this Quadraphonic quad site is dedicated to multi-speaker peripheral surround systems. The virtual matrix predates quad by several years, came to be popular again after quad as “3D Sound” and now seems to be completely misunderstood as unaware engineers try to fit virtual into real, with the mis-understanding that it will improve the situation. All it does is destroy it.

    Sunflower’s encoded signals have always been embedded within the stereo release. I figured out how to put the decoded signals on to the LP itself. Here-to-fore thought impossible. Putting so-called "3D sound" right on the Sunflower LP would have made it listenable by anyone over a two-speaker system NO DECODER NEEDED. Alternately, as the record company decided to do, the stereo with encoded signals unresolved, was released. What they failed to capitalize on was making cheap decoders and selling them. I just wanted the LP to have the 3D sound already decoded, but the record company was not willing to try something new. That's OK, what was released was good stereo. Had it been released as intended it would have sold more copies and put the Beach Boys in a technically advanced league way ahead of other groups of the day.

    In the meantime you can avail yourself of the "3D" or Virtual Surround experience by visiting my website http://swdstudyvideos.com

    Because Sunflower was released when Stereophonic Sound was the standard format, no diagram was enclosed -- as none was needed. The explanation on the Sunflower nor Surf’s Up jacket says anything about a diagram, only recorded for good stereo. I don’t know where some posters get their information. I think they just make up history and pass it on as factual. They may be confusing Sunflower with the later FLAME album. By the time work started on that album quadraphonic sound was becoming popular. We mixed down the Flame album monitoring through a simple circuit that did use back speakers. It was released in Stereo, but some directional information was embedding in that disk, which the enthusiast could play over his rigged-up extra back speakers. That album beat out every one of the major studios by several months, becoming the first commercially released quadraphonic LP in history. It was released into a young quad market. A diagram of the extra wire and speakers was enclosed with the LP. If you had two matching speakers and some wire lying around, you could make in work in minutes. The separation was 6dB front to back, and the back speaker separation was 3dB from side to side. The front speaker separation was unaffected. That may not sound like much these days, but 3dB is all that is needed to make the ear think all the sound is coming from the louder source. Thus, if the left speaker is only 3dB louder than the right speaker, the brain will assign the source of sound to the left. Given that story, the little diagram did provide some directionality of the sound to the rear speakers, if you did it right. Those fans that tried it, had a lot of fun listening in this "new" way -- quadraphonic. The Flame album is not virtual surround. Sunflower, Surf's Up and all the rest are not quadraphonic albums. Only the Flame album ventured into quad on a commercial level. I did make a discrete 4-track quad demo tape with the help of Dennis Wilson and Daryl Dragon for a paper presented to The Audio Engineering Society on quad recording techniques, but it was only played at the AES Hollywood meeting and was never released.

    Today, you say matrix and everyone thinks of disc decoding schemes of quad days. But, those came later. Sunflower was ahead of its time with regard to directional and dimensional presentation. Unfortunately, no one got to hear it. ...until now.

    AP blew it. They could have done it right, but they failed. If they had done their homework, all this information is out there. One has only to make a click or two on Google to find me or the story of this album, but they choose to fall into the trap of assuming real speakers would improve the product, when just the opposite is true. It’s a shame and very unprofessional of AP to issue such a well-anticipated album reissue and get it all wrong. They could have done it right by issuing the album with the signal resolved through the virtual matrix, but for some reason used a matrix that was intended for quadraphonic encoding. Such a matrix is 90 degrees shifted from the original, which screws up all the dimensional cues, and the matrix is based on x-y coordinates whereas the virtual matrix is based on x-y-z coordinates. This means some depth cues are missing.

    It's done right on my website, part of the 49 year history of this album along with other interesting things, the sight is educational, not commercial, so there are no charges for visiting, and it is me - the engineer - communicating with you, not via a third-party interview. ~swd

    HERE IS PARTS ONE AND TWO of a previous post on the Steve Hoffman board. This will provide you with some insight into those times.

    COMMENT: (In Two Parts -- PART ONE)

    I have read all of your discussion posts about this madness and, if you will indulge me a rather long post, I’ll try to bring some understanding to the situation.

    There seems to be some confusion about the terms used here.

    The term “matrix” has several definitions. There is the LP matrix, which refers to the master Acetate disk from which all pressings are made along with the mother, stamper etc. I usually refer to that as the “LP matrix.”

    With the advent of quadraphonic sound, the term “matrix” was coined to describe various schemes based on circuitry used to encode 4-channel discrete signals onto the LP V-Groove, which is a two-channel signal.

    When Dolby came onto the scene they took the old quadraphonic schemes, shifted the math 90 degrees, so that the matrix (so-called) for quad of left-right-left rear-right rear, with speakers placed at the four corners of the sound field, became left-center-right-rear, with speakers now placed left/right/center/rear. The surround signal was mono with all rear speakers the listener, but created a center channel. The main objective of Dolby was to provide a stable center channel for dialog in movie sound tracks. Later as various schemes were developed, discrete rear channels were incorporated so that stereo rear channels were possible.

    Today it is common-place to buy a movie soundtrack as 5.1 or 7.1 with all channels discrete, that is, not in a matrix.

    When I recorded Sunflower and was the Beach Boys' engineer, I had a studio to my own, with all the funding, time, talent and equipment I wanted. That was around fifty years ago. Quadraphonic sound would not be invented for several years. I became fascinated with psychoacoustics, but while studying that topic I realized the real reasons for sound doing what it does lies in the brain and brain function. So I began to study neurology with respect to recording stereo and found that microphone arrays were the key to making sound appear to originate outside the normal sound stage. I found that I could get sounds, voices, instrument, effects to image out in the sound field or beyond the two stereo speakers and in some cases, image over your shoulder, and even behind you. Not all types of sounds could image at all locations, but with practice I identified which types of sound did best to image forward of the speakers, or beyond the two speakers.

    After some time I also developed circuits that created a matrix that could accomplish almost the same effect. Now remember that we are reproducing stereo over two speakers, that was the standard of the day – and in many cases is still the standard today from FM radio, CD’s, LP’s and cassettes.

    I found that I could capture three-dimensional space using just microphone arrays of three or five microphones, matrixed into two channels. The connection of the three or five mics to two channels was done via an electronic circuit, but their inner relationships was acoustic. At first I used transformers connected in a way that generated a matrix, but soon developed circuits to do the same.

    The microphones captured audio in an acoustically related way that can only be achieved through the use of arrays. This generates an x-y-z lattice. In other cases I used circuits to produce an x-y lattice, with the z coordinate being synthetically derived.

    In order to overcome the limitations of stereophonic reproduction over two speakers, I developed a matrix that would generate a sound field in reproduction that today we would call, virtual surround. Back all those years ago, I called it a matrix sound. In today’s language this can cause some confusion.

    You see, your ears and brain were designed to perceive an environment that caressed you with a plethora of sounds encircling 360 degrees to all sides, above and beneath. But note: every sound came from one single source that had a given direction, physical size and distance, all useful to primitive man whether protecting or providing. Your brain evolved to process life's ocean of sounds — what's approaching, what's moving, what's large or small — to save you from harm. The brain was designed for survival — flight or fight — not for entertainment. The fact is . . . the brain has not changed, and how could it? Your body’s ear/brain system has been the same for 60 million years. Around 60 years ago, stereophonic sound reproduction entered into commercial entertainment. Unlike the single-point and constantly varying sound sources of our evolutionary history, entertainment stereo propagates from two widely separated, but stationary sound sources. By using differing signals, two loudspeakers create imagery that seems to emanate mostly between the two sources – an artificial representation of life. Because your brain is not formatted to accurately extract the information from a stereo sound field, it is represented to you as less-then-lifelike. The matrix resolves that limitation by tailoring what you hear from your stereo system so it's compatible with the brain's cognitive methods.

    The design philosophy of the “matrix” is based upon a neural processing model. It is not an HRTF device, nor does it use DTF, IACC or PCA functions or formulas. The bases of the design rests on “Perceptual Precedence” as a means of biasing the brain’s auditory spatial perception. Perceptual precedence is a reflex action wherein the mind is nudged to realize an entire auditory pattern by presentation of partial information only, similar to our ability to recognize familiar shapes even if most of the shape may be blocked from view.

    These techniques are based on an understanding of labeled line code, discharge patterns of rapidly and slowly receptor adaptation encoding and frequency and population codes, etc. used by the brain to overcome its big problem, latencies of action-potentials as each synaptic connection is made to the next level of neural processing.

    I realize these are not topics or terms familiar to the average recording engineer, but if you really want to understand how recording and reproduction function, you have to move past sound as something in the air (psychoacoustics). There is no sound, as such, anywhere in reality. In reality all there is is movement of molecules and changes in barometric pressure. Sound becomes meaningful or even identifiable only in the brain. Sound, or what we call “sound” is only a concept. Like music, it is a brain function. An orchestra does not produce sound or music; all it does is move molecules around in the air. By way of brain activity a dog hears the sound of the orchestra and by way of higher brain functions, a human hears the music of an orchestra.
    Science calls this "Conceptual Image Space (from a paper at JPL), which basically states that all perceived reality takes place between our ears, not in the external model that is presented to us as humans. Thus, the reality each of us perceives is uniquely, personal, and is a representation of reality, not reality itself. You can see how this plays into the recording of sound. The engineer is not capturing sound, rather is ultimately compelling the brain to process the undulations of the two speaker cones in a way that will convince the brain of a produced reality.

    So it all comes back to the human brain. Using applied neuralplasticity the matrix I developed causes new neural pathways to grow, which bring the added dimensions to stereo perception by the brain. This is not like the matrixes used today that are based on psychoacoustics. Those are based on sound as reality in air, whereas neuralplasticity uses the brain as a processor.

    Having said that, Sunflower and all the stuff I recorded for The Beach Boys has within its two channels, a matrix that is musically compatible with regular stereo. That is, all the inter-balance and relationships of elements within the mix offer a compatible listening experience if reproduced in stereo. If however, the matrix is resolved the sound field is expanded and will image well beyond the stereo speakers, in front of them, and in some cases to the rear. This is similar to surround sound but is not the same.

    Today’s surround sound is a perimeter surround. That is, real speakers are placed about the edge of the sound field and create a sound around you, which you hear with your two ears. The matrix used in Sunflower, etc. creates sound around you and also within the sound field using your two ears and your brain as a processor. Under controlled listening conditions, you cannot tell the virtual experience from the real experience. In fact, because the virtual system is based on spectral time shifts rather than amplitude changes, the virtual system can also steer sounds to points within the sound field. Thus, rather than hearing sound around you, the virtual can place violins in front of horns, or the lead singer forward of the group. You can’t do that with multiple speakers, only with two speakers. Two ears; two speakers. Multiple speaker surround sound is very good and works over a large listening area (such as a cinema), but using many speakers in a smaller room can confuse the image with its multiple sound sources all speaking at once. Virtual surround is limited to one or two listeners, but if in the “sweet spot” can mimic the envelopment of the speaker-surround format.

    PART TWO FOLLOWS . . .

    COMMENT: PART TWO

    As I said, this concept (later to be patented internationally) was thought up when state-of-the-art was the 12 inch LP. The mixes made on Sunflower, etc., were done with NO consideration of anything like a four-discrete-track future release. These mixes are not conceived for reproduction over a multiple speaker surround system. The matrix is meant to be heard over two stereo speakers only. That is the sound the producer has set as a standard.

    I will be the first to agree that there is no right nor wrong in art; only preferences. But if the art form is supported by science, then a standard must be applied that represents the producer’s intentions with respect to the science. In this case, the standard is by listening in virtual surround over two speakers.

    To make a musically compatible stereo version of the matrixed version, we mixed down while monitoring (listening) through the matrix (resolved), but recording without. The “without” is the stereo version. To get the virtual surround sensation the stereo must be resolved through the matrix. Remember, I was the engineer for a huge group, their market is the stereo LP. So if I’m using an advanced idea, in the end it must become an LP vinyl record. Knowing this, I cut hundreds of Acetates as recording of the songs advanced, correcting many problems. Together with Brian Ingoldsby of Sound Master Studios and using his lathe, we worked out the geometry and ballistics of how to get the cutting stylus to cut a groove that the average consumer could trace. It required the change of two parameters on the cutting lathe. Now I’ve already cut a matrixed version of Sunflower onto an LP using Brian’s lathe. It plays on all varieties of players, poor and great. I played parts of the record for the cutting engineers at Warner. They were impressed with the sound, but not willing to re-adjust the lathe. Even when presented with concrete (or acetate) proof, looking at it through the microscope and the results on the scope – shaking their heads NO, impossible. But yet there it is in the looking glass and being played on their record-player. So we fell back on the master without resolution that is musically compatible with the matrix version. That became what has always been issued; remastered, yes, but always the two-track stereo. When I left the Beach Boys to move on with Zappa, the matrix and the entire studio was discarded as a new console and engineer moved in.

    Some years ago I decided to rebuild the matrix and started listening, refining the design as time let me. No one at Capitol, Warner’s and BRI has shown interest in releasing a matrixed version of Sunflower – even after demonstrations – claiming that other versions would confuse the public. When digital came along, I tried to get matrixed versions released – now completely mechanically compatible. But "stay the course" was always the answer.

    Finally, I decided to decode many songs that have never been heard that way, doing it under the educational aspects of the copyright law. Only the diehard Beach Boy fan is going to care about listening this way so I provided a playback of the original mastering done with Carl’s (acting producer) and my approval, resolved through the matrix, the one I built to use back then. How much more original do you need? The original mastering, done the way we heard it at playback. To me that is the standard.

    By way of a need for education on this subject, you can hear the original intention of the producer at the time of mixdown, by going to my (now working) webpage, and at page 3, click on the “Recording The Beach Boys – part one (Sunflower)” button. There you can read part one of the book and hear the album in virtual surround or whatever you wish to call it.

    What makes me mad is that after no one was interested in making the virtual surround version available to the public, Capitol licenses all the Beach Boy catalog to AP with the express stipulation not to change or modify, or re-mix anything.

    So out of ignorance and arrogance, AP takes it upon themselves to apply a matrix for speaker surround to the virtual surround lattes. To make matters worse, they use a matrix designed for quadraphonic record playback, not recording, is 90 degrees shifted, and intended for four discrete channels as the source. My matrix uses x-y-z coordinates. They used x-y coordinates.

    You bet I am mad. I tried over the years, decades, to get the record companies to embrace, what has come to be termed 3D Sound, the Beach Boys would be the first group to offer such a sound, and on a record, but no. Now AP misses the mark entirely, screws up the matrix, makes changes to the standard, and disrespects the terms of their contract (as I understand it).

    And it pisses me off that after so much work was put into recording the virtual experience, getting it to cut to an LP, and to be compatible for broadcasting, to have it butchered so openly, is an offence to me and to the memory of Carl Wilson. AS I’ve always said, it’s the music business – emphasis on business. If there’s a buck to be made, they’ll do it. It is such a shame that the original intension of the producer was shoved aside by engineers who have no idea what they are doing. And then shoved onto an unsuspecting audience.

    After all, my engineering efforts have been demonstrated to work. Professional Spatializer with its 24 joysticks, was/is used by Warner Pictures (Spielberg used it) MGM, Hans Zimmer bought three, NBC, many major studios domestic and foreign, the Olympic committee bought 11 units broadcasting virtual surround to 2-Billion people, Michael Jackson even put a song on an LP called HIStory. Then the commercial offering of an IC sold over 60 million channels of virtual surround (called 3D Sound). So the concept is well proven. With the advent of 5.1 surround and surround-sound-in-a-box, consumers liked getting real speakers rather than virtual ones and could relate to that. Soon so-called 3D sound was gone.

    AP did not do their homework. They should have made a connection between the guy who engineered these albums and his company that made matrixes. After all, my devices, equipment and albums are known. I have written numerous articles and been reviewed and analyzed in the press. The Spatializer product came after The Beach Boy recordings and is more refined, but the Sunflower matrix is based on microphone arrays whereas the chip is not. At least AP could have tried something virtual or contacted me for consultation, or something other than just blindly venturing into a field they evidently know little about. Talk about confusing the public. AP is doing it royally, through misrepresentation. I wonder if they understand how a matrix works, or does just any ole one work?

    If you disregard the standards of science as an art form, then the bottom line in listening is to enjoy what you hear. If it makes you happy – the entertainment value is high, money will be made, and the hell with the artist.

    Let me relate a story to you. When I had my sound research lab in Los Angeles, it was located up in the northern part of the city in the foothills. I lived in the area too. There was a fellow, a retired frail old man who, with his dog, would wonder the neighborhood with a cart full of used radios, speakers, and amplifiers of all sizes and shapes. I learned he was a retired radio repair serviceman. He must have been in his 80’s and had been collecting for a decade. Occasionally I’d give him a piece of equipment no longer needed. Over the years we became friends. I don’t know where he got all his used equipment, but his cart was always brimming with audio things. I always assumed he repaired and sold the stuff, and one day asked him how he was doing with that. To my surprise I learned he did not sell anything, rather he took it home and added it to his collection of working sound devices of all types. Fascinated, I ask if I could see his collection, which was in his home. The day of my visit I found that his home was nestled, or should I say, hidden way back off a small street, behind hedges, bushes, and up against a hill. It was an old house, kinda rundown. Going inside it had that musty smell I remember from my grandparent’s house. I was shown into a rather large room, I guess the living room. Then looking around I could not believe all the speakers, some mounted in enclosures, some just sitting by themselves I could see. There were guitar amps, clock radios, tweeters, PA speakers, and every other type of sound generating transducer you can imagine. They were everywhere, floor to ceiling, left, right, behind me, in corners, shelves, tables – every nook and cranny. An amazing sight. But not as amazing as what happened next. I ask him if this was his stereo system. But he said he didn’t think much of stereo, instead he liked mono and told me that every one of the devices I was seeing was connected to his one turntable. I said, you mean all this stuff is one very large and elaborate sound system? Yes was the emphatic answer. Knowing in my head that this was going against every design fabric in my audio head, I was anxious to hear this gathering of sonic junk. My friend pulled out an LP of symphonic pops and placed it on his old Garrard record changer, fitted with, I think, a mono GE pickup cartridge. Now I had been living with state-of-the-art Tannoy monitors in the lab, so this was going to be an interesting sound, I thought. But was I wow-ed! It wasn’t anything like I was expecting to hear. In fact it wasn’t anything like I had ever heard, or have heard since. The sound was certainly open, and spacious – what with all those separate sources, each with its own sound tonality. Yet it was surprisingly detailed and interesting. You could direct your ear’s attention and hear whatever part of the sound you wished. In that way it was enveloping. As I listened I thought, here is a guy who could not begin to afford one of my lab speakers, and yet, his ingenuity and resourcefulness has put that refined listening experience to shame. Here was something completely different in approach and execution, but it worked and it worked just fine. I could relate to what I was hearing and could see how a person could be quite happy listing in this way. During the next few hours, I was treated to many old and wonderful songs, even some of the early 45 Beach Boy surfing hits. Those were especially enchanting, sounding anything but mono.

    The point of this little story is to illustrate that in art, there is neither right nor wrong, only what you like.

    If you wish to buy a re-mastered SACD and have some wrong algorithm re-negotiate the spectral and spatial elements, so that it is no longer near the intentions of the producer, go ahead. If it turns you on, makes you sing along with the music, gets your foot tapping, and leaves you satisfied, that makes it a good listening experience. Or if you just like to collect things, spend your money. I think what you get is the most expensive bootleg of all times. Bootleg because it wasn’t authorized, screws up the sound, and is not what the producer intended to be released, and is sold for profit.

    You know the Beach Boy organization paid me a lot of money to keep them at state-of-the-art. Then they sat on the technology until finally releasing it through a bungling mastering house. Now the product Sunflower, etc., is officially released with the wrong matrix in place. This is worse than releasing it, just in Stereo.

    For Carl and the rest of the Beach Boys and myself, at the time of release, the sound we liked and set as a standard can be heard at my website, that is, if you are interested from an education aspect in the history of this album, in words and sounds. I suppose you could compare it to the SACD version, but that does not change the original intensions of the artist, as does this latest reissue. Not only does the SACD multi-channel change the sound concept of the album(s), but invents tracks that were never there and were never suppose to be there.

    If you’re still reading, thanks. I hope I have clarified some of the issues.

    Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper

    http://swdstudyvideos.com[/SIZE]
    Last edited by Stephen W. Desper; 08-20-2016 at 05:24 PM.

  2. #2
    600 Club - QQ All Star elroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    606
    Points
    14,247
    Level
    77
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 203
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Mr. Desper, thanks very much for taking the time to provide your input. I just wanted to mention that we do have very responsive mods on this forum and you should see your name spelling corrected soon.

  3. Likes Snood liked this post
  4. #3
    Malnarnian edisonbaggins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    East Bay, CA
    Posts
    2,636
    Points
    12,783
    Level
    73
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 85.0%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocialTagger Second Class10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Is this Virtual Surround similar to what was used on Roger Water's Amused to Death stereo mix? "Q-sound" or something?

  5. Likes Snood liked this post
  6. #4
    700 Club - QQ All Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    727
    Points
    7,327
    Level
    56
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 23
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Thank you Stephen W. Desper. You have answered questions I wanted to ask for years. I became obsessive looking for your book Recording The Beach Boys until it dawned on me that exists online, and expanded. It is indeed unfortunate that the resolved matrix was deemed unpressable by the lathe people, and worse that it could not be corrected (so far) in digital reproduction (that would not be subjected to constraints of lathe movement). But the records still sound great. I've been involved in building/refining mic preamps and used to build a few other things. I wish I could reproduce playback as intended for these records as they are some of my favorites. Thanks again, I hope you have time to share more info here, I'd guess there will be more interest as folks find it.

    -JMS
    Last edited by quadsearcher; 08-19-2016 at 12:18 AM. Reason: signature

  7. Thanks Snood thanked for this post
    Likes ar surround, Snood, timbre4 liked this post
  8. #5
    Board Operator JonUrban's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    13,344
    Points
    1,170,806
    Level
    100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 46.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranOverdriveCreated Album picturesCreated Blog entry
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Stephen,

    I'm on it. BTW - I never received any such emails, and I have no idea how your username ended up with two s's.

    And no one that I know of can change your password other than you or another mod.

    At any rate, it has been fixed. Done D-U-N Done
    :-jon

  9. Thanks rtbluray, peterzach, Quad Linda, timbre4 thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, peterzach, Quad Linda, timbre4 liked this post
  10. #6
    700 Club - QQ All Star Cibola's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    707
    Points
    10,305
    Level
    67
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 145
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Oh man, visit the website. I'm listening on an older MacBook with simple headphones and the sound is truly outside, very impressive. Thank you for your work Mr. Desper. Lovely vocal separation indeed. Haven't been a big Willie fan but he delivers, crisp here.
    Last edited by Cibola; 08-19-2016 at 04:15 AM.
    Daniel

  11. Thanks Snood, rtbluray thanked for this post
    Likes Snood, rtbluray, himey, timbre4, Simon A liked this post
  12. #7
    1K Club - QQ Shooting Star ChristopherLees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    2,074
    Points
    17,775
    Level
    84
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 75
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    lol...all that screaming from OD about ev dy and qs decoding for beach boys turned out to be pointless after all.
    Last edited by timbre4; 08-21-2016 at 10:43 PM.

  13. Likes watsontr, timbre4 liked this post
  14. #8
    900 Club - QQ All Star skherbeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    SoCal, USA
    Posts
    995
    Points
    7,495
    Level
    57
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 55
    Overall activity: 42.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassCreated Album picturesCreated Blog entrySocial1 year registered
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Wow! I just visited the website to hear "Cool, Cool Water" as it was intended... fantastic. Mr. Desper really did achieve enveloping "virtual surround" with this recording. I could swear my rear speakers were active based on the placement of sounds around me. Visit the website if you have capabilities to play the sound through a decent stereo system. It's definitely a rewarding experience. Too bad AP screwed this one up (and I bought these SACDs, too!).
    "One Quad to rule them all, One Quad to find them; One Quad to bring them all and in the darkness bind them."
    "The Quad is what gives a Sound System its power. It's a sound field created by four pulsing speakers that surrounds us and penetrates us."

  15. Thanks peterzach thanked for this post
  16. #9
    600 Club - QQ All Star rustyandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    696
    Points
    23,478
    Level
    94
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 872
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassVeteran10000 Experience PointsSocialCreated Blog entry
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Stephen
    My copy of Surf's Up has in the inside cover that it is
    EV4 4 channel?
    So from what you said that it is not?

    Ron

  17. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by elroy View Post
    Mr. Desper, thanks very much for taking the time to provide your input. I just wanted to mention that we do have very responsive mods on this forum and you should see your name spelling corrected soon.
    COMMENT to Elroy: Thank you for making the corrections. I have reset my password so that now all is well. Look forward to posting my views as topics appear. ~swd

  18. Thanks rtbluray, himey thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, timbre4, Simon A liked this post
  19. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by edisonbaggins View Post
    Is this Virtual Surround similar to what was used on Roger Water's Amused to Death stereo mix? "Q-sound" or something?
    COMMENT to edisonbaggins: You are correct in that Q-Sound (QS) is a virtual dimensional scheme. QS cost me 1 1/2 million dollars. History: QS and Spatializer Audio were in development around the same time. However, QS entered the market first with some artists using their process. The most noted was Madonna's album "The Immaculate Collection". It works quite good, although it can be further improved by the application of the Spatializer matrix. QS was also heralded as a break-through technology when it was used in a Coke commercial for the Olympics, but failed to impress anybody. The following year the Olympics was broadcast in virtual surround using Spatializer technology and it was heard by 2-Billion people! At that time the QS system was only rented to a studio, the equipment was the size of a refrigerator, and was not a real-time process. That is, you made your mix, then waited about a half an hour for the system to generate a QS interpretation. Not very user friendly. The Spatializer system was sold to a studio, was the size of a VCR, and worked in real-time. When we entered the market QS took a back seat. Many famous artists used our system and we sold hundreds of systems to studios. QS sued Spatializer for patent infringement, and we counter sued. After a year of legal battle and 1 1/2 million dollars in legal fees, we won on all counts. But the main purpose of the QS litigation was to tie up our ability to license our technology and acquire investors. No one wants to be associated with a technology involved in a court battle. This frivolous law suit greatly impacted my business for a while and allowed a third system (SRS) to gain market share. Meanwhile my company Spatializer Audio Labs, Inc. went on to sell 60 million channels of its virtual technology to every major manufacture in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Also Compact and Apple computer used our technology for several years. When Dolby 5.1 was introduced, the "surround-in-a-box" concept was greatly accepted by the marketplace. Consumers could easily identify with real speakers, rather than virtual ones, and it marked the end of the so-called 3D sound. The big advantage of 5.1 was that it could be heard by many people rather than in a small sweet-spot of the virtual systems.
    I was recording using virtual matrices long before the advent of quadraphonic schemes. Those used real speakers each placed at the corners of your room, i.e., right/left/rear right/rear left. The basic patent of these quad schemes was held by Peter Scheiber. All the 4-channel quadraphonic matrices used for encoding the LP record with four channels are based on this patent. The variations of levels, steering circuits, and vector angles are still only slight modifications of the basic patent, done to give each record company its own identity in the quad market. As each record company had its own scheme and required its own decoder, the public became confused, dis-enchanted, and quadraphonic sound for the LP failed in the marketplace. When Dolby acquired the Scheiber patent, the Dolby engineers re-worked the mathematics of the matrix to, in effect, twist the matrix by 90 degrees. This created a dedicated center channel, but eliminated stereo in the rear. The center channel was needed for movie dialog as the movie industry needed a real speaker for dialog and not a phantom image. So early movie theaters now had left/center/right/surround. The surround channel was mono but sounded over many speakers placed to the sides and rear of the audience. This was still a matrix, soon superseded by 5.1, a fully discrete system.
    When I formed my company we judged the product would have a market life of around six years. The first four years were quite good, but after the introduction of 5.1, tapered off for the last two years, until we closed the company and I sold my rights to the patent to DTS. All my patents have now expired.
    What remains are the masters of Beach Boy product that were recorded in virtual surround.
    QS is still in business, or at least has a website. From the looks of the website you would think QS is all over the market, but it's all a show. They have always done good demos (still on website), but never much else. The current value of QS stock is 4/10s of one cent, or four mills, in case you wish to invest.
    ~swd

  20. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by quadsearcher View Post
    Thank you Stephen W. Desper. You have answered questions I wanted to ask for years. I became obsessive looking for your book Recording The Beach Boys until it dawned on me that exists online, and expanded. It is indeed unfortunate that the resolved matrix was deemed unpressable by the lathe people, and worse that it could not be corrected (so far) in digital reproduction (that would not be subjected to constraints of lathe movement). But the records still sound great. I've been involved in building/refining mic preamps and used to build a few other things. I wish I could reproduce playback as intended for these records as they are some of my favorites. Thanks again, I hope you have time to share more info here, I'd guess there will be more interest as folks find it.

    -JMS
    COMMENT To quadsearcher: Thanks for your post. Now that you have found my book, or at least the first part and the Addendum, Recording The Beach Boys , I'm certain that you have also found that all the sounds associated with my webpage are resolved through the playback matrix as intended to be released. Thus, you can hear what is on the records, but with the virtual matrix over your stereo system.

    Designing and building microphone preamps is one of the hardest devices to get right in all of sound equipment. Good luck with that.
    ~swd

    http://swdstudyvideos.com

  21. Thanks rtbluray, skherbeck, himey, ar surround, timbre4 thanked for this post
  22. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by JonUrban View Post
    Stephen,

    I'm on it. BTW - I never received any such emails, and I have no idea how your username ended up with two s's.

    And no one that I know of can change your password other than you or another mod.

    At any rate, it has been fixed. Done D-U-N Done
    COMMENT to JonUrban: Thanks again for the corrections. Although we like to think not, computer do sometimes have the hiccups.

    Being a new-be here, could you tell me how to edit a post once it is posted. Can't find an "edit" button, but I see other posts have been edited here post-script.
    ~swd

  23. Thanks rtbluray, himey thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, himey, Simon A liked this post
  24. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by Cibola View Post
    Oh man, visit the website. I'm listening on an older MacBook with simple headphones and the sound is truly outside, very impressive. Thank you for your work Mr. Desper. Lovely vocal separation indeed. Haven't been a big Willie fan but he delivers, crisp here.
    COMMENT to Cibola: Thanks for your kind words. Glad you listened to the Surfing Hits study-video. Really enjoyed doing that one, and Willie's interpretation is also one I really like. ~swd

  25. Thanks rtbluray, himey thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, himey, Simon A liked this post
  26. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by skherbeck View Post
    Wow! I just visited the website to hear "Cool, Cool Water" as it was intended... fantastic. Mr. Desper really did achieve enveloping "virtual surround" with this recording. I could swear my rear speakers were active based on the placement of sounds around me. Visit the website if you have capabilities to play the sound through a decent stereo system. It's definitely a rewarding experience. Too bad AP screwed this one up (and I bought these SACDs, too!).
    COMMENT to skherbeck: Thanks for visiting the website. Each button will take you to a different experience I'm certain you will find educational and entertaining. ~swd http://swdstudyvideos.com

  27. Thanks rtbluray, skherbeck, himey, timbre4 thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, skherbeck, himey, timbre4, Simon A liked this post
  28. #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by ChristopherLees View Post
    lol...all that screaming from from OD about ev dy and qs decoding for beach boys turned out to be pointless after all.
    COMMENT to ChristopherLees: All that screaming could have been avoided if AP had use the correct matrix instead of EV-4. They have demonstrated their ignorance of matrices with this SACD issue -- that's for certain -- along with a giant dis-service to every Beach Boy fan. ~swd

  29. Thanks rtbluray, skherbeck, himey, timbre4 thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, skherbeck, himey, timbre4, Simon A liked this post
  30. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by rustyandi View Post
    Stephen
    My copy of Surf's Up has in the inside cover that it is
    EV4 4 channel?
    So from what you said that it is not?

    Ron
    COMMENT to rustyandi: When you say "cover" I assume you mean the Jewel Case insert of the SACD. The LP jacket says nothing about EV4. And yes, your are correct. EV4 has nothing to do with the Sunflower or Surf's Up. They are two-channel recordings meant to be reproduced over a stereo system. If a matrix is used in the playback, it is a matrix that produces a virtual matrix, not a speaker matrix. The latter type of matrix only confuses the image. You are invited to hear the correct version at my website http://swdstudyvideos.com ~swd

  31. Thanks rtbluray, skherbeck, himey, timbre4 thanked for this post
    Likes rtbluray, skherbeck, GOS, himey, timbre4, Simon A liked this post
  32. #18
    700 Club - QQ All Star himey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    742
    Points
    5,141
    Level
    45
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 9
    Overall activity: 11.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Thank you Mr. Desper for posting here!

    Does the standard stereo version use the same "special" mic placement as the stereo surround version? My guess would be yes. If they are indeed the same, how much inferior do you consider the standard stereo version vs the stereo surround version, considering the fact the mic placement was for a specific effect which the standard version doesn't take into account. Or was both considered during the origional recording and mixing process. Thanks again.

  33. Thanks JanBakker thanked for this post
    Likes JanBakker liked this post
  34. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by himey View Post
    Thank you Mr. Desper for posting here!

    Does the standard stereo version use the same "special" mic placement as the stereo surround version? My guess would be yes. If they are indeed the same, how much inferior do you consider the standard stereo version vs the stereo surround version, considering the fact the mic placement was for a specific effect which the standard version doesn't take into account. Or was both considered during the origional recording and mixing process. Thanks again.
    COMMENT to himey: What an interesting question. The released version is in compatible stereo. The microphone arrays were developed to keep compatibility issues at bay. That is, the inner-instrumental balance is similar, or put another way, the musical balance is the same. Listening through the matrix only brings out depth, and dimension. The directional aspect remains the same in either case.
    Let us discuss "compatibility." It use to be more significant than today, although any good engineer will still pay attention to it.
    Musical compatibility -- the relationship of all the elements in the mix remains unchanged from one format to another.
    Broadcast compatibility -- Since AM is mostly mono and FM is mostly stereo, too much difference information will be lost when stereo is converted to mono (usually). The music business is about selling music. At one time AM radio was the vehicle for music sales. Good AM coverage usually assured the artist of more sales because AM reached more listeners. To a lesser extent that is still true today. If your stereo recording had excessive near out-of-phase signals, such as background singers, or poorly recorded piano or drums, the AM sound might not be so commercial. In some cases, it could restrict transmission coverage.
    Mechanical compatibility -- This has to do with the cutting of the V-Groove in an LP or 45 record. Actually the phase is reversed in one channel on a record and inverted on playback. That is done so that a mono record can be played using a stereo pickup. Mono sound produces lateral motion. Bass is centered to give it lateral motion. If it were vertical motion the stylus could be pushed or squeezed out of the groove on loud passages. So a stereo recording with too much "stereo" information may not be track-able. That would reduce sales. I'm not saying that you cannot cut an out-of-phase signal onto a disk, but it is tricky if the signal has high amplitude or deep bass.
    For the recordings I did with The Beach Boys, I addressed all three types of compatibility issues. And after much trial and error figured out how to overcome all the problems. The fact that virtual surround was broadcast worldwide with success during the LA Olympics, puts that issue to rest.
    And I have cut virtural surround LP test cuttings of Sunflower and Surf's Up that track on both cheap and expensive players without any problem. Michael Jackson cut HIStory as an LP without problems (I was an advisor) and some of those songs were in virtual surround. So I know it can and has been done.
    Once you overcome broadcast and mechanical compatibility problems, any musical compatibility issues will become non-issues.
    Therefore to answer your question, neither the stereo nor the matrix stereo formats have compatibility problems. So that now it becomes an artistic preference. For me, these records just sound correct, or better, or more listenable with the matrix, than without.
    ~swd

  35. Thanks LizardKing, Mike the Fish, ar surround, himey, timbre4 thanked for this post
    Likes ar surround, himey, timbre4 liked this post
  36. #20
    600 Club - QQ All Star rustyandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    696
    Points
    23,478
    Level
    94
    Level completed: 13%, Points required for next Level: 872
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassVeteran10000 Experience PointsSocialCreated Blog entry
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Stephen

    Sorry I should have said
    That the EV4 is inside sleeve the LP that I have had for many years.

    Ron

  37. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    13
    Points
    58
    Level
    1
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 42
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    7 days registered
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Hello, Stephen.

    I'm really thrilled to find your correspondence here as well as finding your web site. We lost touch with each other some time back! I can't even estimate how many stereo CDs I recorded using your Spatilaizer for creating virtual surround sound. The Spatializer was so effective, I had listeners look around them for the additional speakers in demos I conducted! I also employed the Spatializer across the LF/RF channels in many 5.1 mixes I made for both DTS-encoded surround CDs and for SACD. There were times I preferred the virtual surround to placing sounds in the physical channels as it would guarantee the imaging I wanted to convey without relying on the listener having the surround speakers set up properly.

    There are a few of us engineers out here who still have the joystick-controlled Spatializer. However, all of have the same problem: the control circuitry no longer works. Is there anyone you can refer us to to make the needed repairs? I know of at least (4) Spatializers that would get put to use if they were working again.

    I look forward to your reccomendation, Stephen. In the meantime, I'll spend awhile going through your facsinating recollections at your website. Your work on those great recordings was very inspiring to me in making my recordings!

    Best Regards,
    Michael Bishop

  38. #22
    QQ member number 4041 fredblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    17,666
    Points
    179,909
    Level
    100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdriveCreated Album picturesSocial50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Frequent Poster
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    WOW..

    Are you THE Michael Bishop of TELARC fame??

    Welcome to QQ!
    "Surround Sound From The End of the World to Your Town"
    808 SACD (660 MultiCh), 345 DVD-Audio, 298 SQ Vinyl,
    135 CD-4 Vinyl, 126 Audio-DVD, 109 Blu-ray Audio, 108 DualDisc,
    79 DTS CD,
    32 QS Vinyl, 29 Dolby Surround CD, 5 MultiCh Download

  39. #23
    Friendly Moderator bmoura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Redwood City, CA
    Posts
    7,742
    Points
    111,677
    Level
    100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdriveSocial50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by fredblue View Post
    WOW..

    Are you THE Michael Bishop of TELARC fame??

    Welcome to QQ!
    Yes, he's a Spatializer owner and that Michael Bishop.

  40. Thanks fredblue thanked for this post
    Likes fredblue, Snood liked this post
  41. #24
    QQ member number 4041 fredblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    17,666
    Points
    179,909
    Level
    100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 100.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranOverdriveCreated Album picturesSocial50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Frequent Poster
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by bmoura View Post
    Yes, he's a Spatializer owner and that Michael Bishop.
    Good Lord.. how wonderful..!!

    Well fwiw I bought pretty much everything he ever did in Surround (is he working on any 5.1 at the moment, I wonder?) and loved a lot of it.. I am "a fan" of his work, put it that way

    Gotta ask ourselves who ISN'T a member of QQ now that's a mover and shaker in the Surround Music industry..??
    They're pretty much all signed up here now in one shape or form.. amazing..

    Calling Mr.Scheiner..!??!
    (Although I've suspected he's been a covert member under a pseudonym for years.. or at least a frequently visiting guest.. )
    "Surround Sound From The End of the World to Your Town"
    808 SACD (660 MultiCh), 345 DVD-Audio, 298 SQ Vinyl,
    135 CD-4 Vinyl, 126 Audio-DVD, 109 Blu-ray Audio, 108 DualDisc,
    79 DTS CD,
    32 QS Vinyl, 29 Dolby Surround CD, 5 MultiCh Download

  42. Likes GOS, himey, Snood liked this post
  43. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    28
    Points
    398
    Level
    7
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 2
    Overall activity: 33.0%
    Achievements:
    31 days registered250 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Misconceptions about "Sunflower" so-called quad

    Quote Originally Posted by rustyandi View Post
    Stephen

    Sorry I should have said
    That the EV4 is inside sleeve the LP that I have had for many years.

    Ron
    COMMENT to rustyandi: I think you should go back and review what you believe you saw because there is no EV4 designation on the sleeve. (#1) I wrote the tech notes for the LP and EV4 was never there, (#2) EV4 was developed by Leonard Feldman and Jon Fixer one year AFTER the release of Sunflower and did not reach the consumer until months after that. So it would be impossible for such a designation to be on the LP sleeve of this album. And (#3) EV4 requires a 4-track master as a source which Sunflower was never mixed in. It was mixed to a two-channel master. ~swd

  44. Thanks timbre4 thanked for this post
    Likes timbre4 liked this post
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •