The EV4 Surround Master and Software decode shoot out!

Find deals on ebay
Advertise with us
Amazon
QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
bigbillquad said:
Here is the link to the video on youtube of ' rustyandi `s vectorscope ' of Ev demo

The Surround Master has never claimed to be a Ev Decoder, it just does a good job of decoding a 4 channel sound from a Ev LP...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81Uzp2U6lBs
Click to expand...

..I'm finding more recently it does a good job of QS.. and that SQ vinyl mod is smooth as butter melting on a nice hot potato in its jacket... mmm... :p

A-jacket-potato-with-butter-salt-and-pepper-on-a-wooden-chopping-board.jpg



..but back to this EV4 experiment AOQ is conducting, which to me is really interesting..

what is also impressive is the quality of the Quad mixes, I'm discovering some great surround stuff thanks to this EV4 shoot out.
 
Stop it you are making me hungry looking at that spud...

Yes there are hidden gems of Ev4 LP`s out there but not to everybody`s taste......Hehehe.....

fredblue said:
..I'm finding more recently it does a good job of QS.. and that SQ vinyl mod is smooth as butter melting on a nice hot potato in its jacket... mmm... :p

A-jacket-potato-with-butter-salt-and-pepper-on-a-wooden-chopping-board.jpg



..but back to this EV4 experiment AOQ is conducting, which to me is really interesting..

what is also impressive is the quality of the Quad mixes, I'm discovering some great surround stuff thanks to this EV4 shoot out.
Click to expand...
 
bigbillquad said:
Here is the link to the video on youtube of ' rustyandi `s vectorscope ' of Ev4 demo

The Surround Master has never claimed to be a Ev4 Decoder, it just does a good job of decoding a 4 channel sound from a Ev4 LP...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81Uzp2U6lBs
Click to expand...


They did actually advertise that it decoded a lot of systems as well as ev-4. just checked and any mention of quad systems has dissapeared.
 
You are right that they tested there device on other systems and done some test with " rustyandi`s equipment & oscilloscope " for visual analies of what it can do ,but at the end of the day, they came up with there Surround Master unit for QS decoding & there version of SQ decoding and was sold to QQ members.
They actually made no money in manufacturing this unit but done so for QQ members..

willothewisp said:
They did actually advertise that it decoded a lot of systems as well as ev-4. just checked and any mention of quad systems has dissapeared.
Click to expand...
 
cant understand why you mention that there are 3 versions of the unit as i see two only for sale. The issue here is regarding ev-4 and not sq which has nothing to do with it.
 
forgot to add that they did also advertise on there site that it decoded more systems including ev-4. i believe this may be one reason why aoq has done this shoot out.

ive downloaded the disc and have found the comparison very interesting. i think he should be congratulated for doing this and if he does qs and sq as well then all the better.
 
I started all this about EV4
I have said years ago on this forum that the QSD1 is the best sounding surround decoding
Of EV4 I have had a EV4 decoder and I did not get a very good decoding
Maybe because they did not go ahead with the system
If it had been accepted as a major system there may have a better decoder
Then came along the Surround master
You know Charlie did not think of Quad Sound when he made the unit
It was made to Synthesize Stereo into Surround
When he played the unit at my home it was nearly as good as the QSD1
I pointed out something on the Scope and he went away and
When he came back it was as good as the QSD1 and a 3 band Decoder
I asked him if I could let the club know about it
Because I thought that maybe a new Quadraphonic decoder maybe the kiss of Death
For the unit
The units he made are

1st it had TSS/stereo enhancement system and Involve(QS

2nd it had Involve (QS) and SQ standard

3rd it had Involve (QS) and SQ vinyl

The 2 SQ types of SQ were because the standard SQ did not take into account
The problems of vinyl LPs so another twist in the decoding was needed.

My thoughts on the decoder are
And I would like to point out I am not an expert Math or Teck. Head
Just a Vinyl floor layer and a Surround sound lover
As a QS decoder 10/10
As a SQ decoder 10/10
As a EV4 Decoder 8/10
As a DY decoder 8/10
As a UHJ decoder 5/10
As a stereo Synthesizer 8/10 by the way this is how I use the unit the most way
For radio and LPs
 
Thanks " rustyandi " for clearing the air...

But " willothewisp " has totally missed my point the Surround Master was never sold as a Ev4 Decoder as I said it will do a good job of giving a good surround 4 channel sound which my not be accurate to a Ev4 LP. & this SHOT out between " oxfordddickie " computer decoding of a Ev4 music file to the out put of the Surround Masters QS decoding of the Ev4 file --may be a good thing or not.
I think this would not be a accurate test because "oxfordddickie" computer Ev4 system was pacificly done to decode a Ev4 file where the Surround Master was never made to decode a Ev4 music file..

willothewisp said:
cant understand why you mention that there are 3 versions of the unit as i see two only for sale. The issue here is regarding ev-4 and not sq which has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
and bigbillquad you miss my point in that the website spefically stated it decoded ev-4 as well as others.

I am unsure what to make of the ranking of decodes by rustiandi. to continue would move the discussion off the main topic so its best left there
 
Sorry to burst your bubble...

No the formula for QS is totally different to the formula of Ev4, but there are some similarity.

fredblue said:
fizzywiggs41 said:
oh right! so EV-4 works the same way as QS then..?

and so the two systems would be cross-compatible?

(I don't know anything about all this stuff so its like being back at school.. only more fun! :eek: )
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
fredblue said:
fizzywiggs41 said:
oh right! so EV-4 works the same way as QS then..?

and so the two systems would be cross-compatible?

(I don't know anything about all this stuff so its like being back at school.. only more fun! :eek: )
Click to expand...

I will way in my incoherent thoughts on this subject. 1st off let me say that I consed to the more knowledgeable here on the forum about matrix systems. I have consecrated all my efforts to discreet formats simply due to time and money which are both in short supply:). I have been doing a lot of reading up on the subject thou and I have at most 4 matrix albums to my name and only because an Ebay seller did not now that the advertised CD4 as not accurate.

One thing I found unusual is that EV used different sets of coefficients for encoding and decoding.

Leonard Feldman was quoted as saying: "The EV and QS records are very close to each other—it would take an expert to tell them apart by ear.[3]"
Note 3 is from "Feldman, Leonard (1973). Four Channel Sound (1 ed.). Indianapolis Indiana: Howard W Sam's. pp. 44–49, 70." When I make a statement I do try to back it up with published sources from experts in the field.

Below are Wiki Links that are interesting read and provide References and Bibliographers to get more info.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo-4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QS_Regular_Matrix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadraphonic_sound
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_Quadraphonic
Click to expand...
 
jwb474 said:
I will way in my incoherent thoughts on this subject. 1st off let me say that I consed to the more knowledgeable here on the forum about matrix systems. I have consecrated all my efforts to discreet formats simply due to time and money which are both in short supply:). I have been doing a lot of reading up on the subject thou and I have at most 4 matrix albums to my name and only because an Ebay seller did not now that the advertised CD4 as not accurate.

One thing I found unusual is that EV used different sets of coefficients for encoding and decoding.

Leonard Feldman was quoted as saying: "The EV and QS records are very close to each other—it would take an expert to tell them apart by ear.[3]"
Note 3 is from "Feldman, Leonard (1973). Four Channel Sound (1 ed.). Indianapolis Indiana: Howard W Sam's. pp. 44–49, 70." When I make a statement I do try to back it up with published sources from experts in the field.

Below are Wiki Links that are interesting read and provide References and Bibliographers to get more info.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo-4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QS_Regular_Matrix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadraphonic_sound
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_Quadraphonic
Click to expand...

Thanks for reinflating my bubble :)

When roughly are you thinking of publishing the results of this shoot out, AOQ?
 
bigbillquad said:
Sorry to burst your bubble...

No the formula for QS is totally different to the formula of Ev4, but there are some similarity.
Click to expand...

interesting ..and yet.. Leonard Feldman was quoted as saying:

"The EV and QS records are very close to each other—it would take an expert to tell them apart by ear"

Now I've no idea what Marty Feldman had to say.. unless it was published in a white paper we may never know, the poor blighter is now pushing up daisies in Golders Green cemetery.. his eyes were in all directions though, so its quite possible he liked his Quad all over the shop in matrix form too :eek:
 
This is quite an interesting topic. Between hearing things about EV4 and QS having different formulas that make them incompatible, and hearing claims that they are very close and compatible, and hearing reports of QS decoders performing well with EV4 sources, it did raise my interest and made me curious to find out the results if we put it to the test. I've been finding this shoot out to be quite fun and very interesting.

I don't have an exact date planned to post results, I do want to give enough time for everyone that wants to get in on this to listen and respond, I was thinking in the ballpark of about a month, but maybe longer depending on how many results I get in, and if people request more time. As we get closer to the end of the month I'll see where we are, and come up with a deadline, and post that.
 
ArmyOfQuad said:
This is quite an interesting topic. Between hearing things about EV4 and QS having different formulas that make them incompatible, and hearing claims that they are very close and compatible, and hearing reports of QS decoders performing well with EV4 sources, it did raise my interest and made me curious to find out the results if we put it to the test. I've been finding this shoot out to be quite fun and very interesting.

I don't have an exact date planned to post results, I do want to give enough time for everyone that wants to get in on this to listen and respond, I was thinking in the ballpark of about a month, but maybe longer depending on how many results I get in, and if people request more time. As we get closer to the end of the month I'll see where we are, and come up with a deadline, and post that.
Click to expand...

Excellent, thank you.

Yes, it is a lot of fun, I'm still going back to your various decodes and listening some more
(have to say personally I'll be even more interested with your QS and particularly SQ shoot outs :) ).

Did you get my PM at all?
Apologies for doing it that way rather than emailing you btw,
was having some hotmail problems at the time.
 
Are EV-4 and QS compatible with each other? Decide for yourself. EV-4 encoding uses a front blending coefficient of 0.2, slightly less than QS at 0.414. The back channels use a blend coefficient of 0.5 compared to QS at 0.414, slightly more. The decoded result will shift the fronts a bit toward the sides and the rears a bit closer together. Overall the decode should still be quite good.
The only other difference is that QS encoding phase shifts the rears by +90 degrees (left) and -90 degrees (right) to create a 180 degree (out of phase) difference. This phase difference is done directly with EV-4. This rear phase shift is reversed by the QS decoder. Ideally the rear phase shift should be switched out for EV-4 decoding and for stereo enhancement and switched in for QS. I believe that Sansui decoders leave the phase in shift both for simplicity and to increase the apparent separation of the rear decoded outputs for stereo enhancement (as they always referred to their units as "SYNTHESIZERS").
I would think that one could tweak the separation pots in a QSD-1 or QSD-2 to perfectly decode EV-4. At some point I might try bypassing the phase shift in my unit to see if I hear a difference, positive or negative on none QS encoded material.
Forget about "correct" EV-4 decoding, those units were designed more stereo enhancement, basically an active version of the Dyna-Quad speaker connection. The asymmetrical decode was the best that could be done without using any form of logic.
 
I have been compelled to share with you a reply to " par4ken " from a X member of QQ " Oxfordddickie " a fellow Quady how has expanded the bonders of matrix reproduction to very high degree in the fairness of knowledge . In doing this I hope I will not be chastised .

I am given his reply to " par4ken "



(Now normally i refuse to have the going on in QQ mentioned here but i’ve been sent the details of a post there thatdoes so annoy me. As many will know, one of my gripes about QQ is the total lack of real knowledge about the subject that they profess to know about. One of the areas where they completely fail is in the area of the early pre- phas-shifting matrix systems DY & EV-4.

As i’m sure your all aware of, AOQ is running a ‘shoot-out’ on this very subject and i feel this new posting not only blurs his attempts.. Here’s what i’ve been sent:)

par4ken said:
Are EV-4 and QS compatible with each other? Decide for yourself. EV-4 encoding uses a front blending coefficient of 0.2, slightly less than QS at 0.414. The back channels use a blend coefficient of 0.5 compared to QS at 0.414, slightly more. The decoded result will shift the fronts a bit toward the sides and the rears a bit closer together. Overall the decode should still be quite good.
The only other difference is that QS encoding phase shifts the rears by +90 degrees (left) and -90 degrees (right) to create a 180 degree (out of phase) difference. This phase difference is done directly with EV-4. This rear phase shift is reversed by the QS decoder. Ideally the rear phase shift should be switched out for EV-4 decoding and for stereo enhancement and switched in for QS. I believe that Sansui decoders leave the phase in shift both for simplicity and to increase the apparent separation of the rear decoded outputs for stereo enhancement (as they always referred to their units as "SYNTHESIZERS").
I would think that one could tweak the separation pots in a QSD-1 or QSD-2 to perfectly decode EV-4. At some point I might try bypassing the phase shift in my unit to see if I hear a difference, positive or negative on none QS encoded material.
Forget about "correct" EV-4 decoding, those units were designed more stereo enhancement, basically an active version of the Dyna-Quad speaker connection. The asymmetrical decode was the best that could be done without using any form of logic.
Click to expand...

...................... ‘100% Wrong!’............................
 
Saying something is wrong but not explaining why adds nothing to the discussion. I knew what was said was wrong, but didn't say anything myself as I'm not well enough versed in the details to be precise in any rebuttal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

William Gallaty
New Surround Master owner having trouble with set-up
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
jaybird100
jaybird100
steelydave
Arthur Stoppe on mixing the O'Jays, Spinners and Sigma Sound's quad output
Replies
12
Views
1K
staygroovy
staygroovy
J
My journey from pentaphonic to dodecaphonic sound! (ie. Atmos)
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
MidiMagic
MidiMagic
ted_b
Spatial Audio Calibration Toolkit is the real deal
Replies
12
Views
4K
ted_b
ted_b
A
Atmos review by a non-surround Beatles audiophile
Replies
0
Views
1K
artwwweb
A

Latest posts

Back
Top