Personal observations regarding SQ LPs and software decoding

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

kap'n krunch

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2008
Messages
9,207
Location
Erased land
Last night I couldn't help comparing the software decode I did a few years ago of Chicago X to the actual discrete BluRay mix.

I have been comparing some homebrewed conversions to the discrete counterparts in SACD (HH's Thrust) and BD, and found out these basic differences:

No, it will never decode PERFECTLY,
BUT,
it's a VERY close approximation of the discrete mix.

You WILL get the "featured instruments" in the correct "corner", but there will always be some "bleeding", especially drums and bass, be them Fr to Re or vice versa.

In a way, it is quite "twisted" of me to say that I enjoy conversions very much because the "bleeding/crosstalk" will make a GREAT "bubble" as opposed to the TOTAL separation of the instruments between channels in their discrete form.

Still, a good conversion (I use Lucanu's scripts) sounds VERY good, and the other point I always make , is that Q8s, even though they are totally discrete, are really "lo-fi" compared to the full spectrum SQ (or QS) LPs...that is, unless you can get your hands on a "Robin reel"!!!!

This is as far as I can take it cause , even though I know my stuff, I still can't come up with a real answer and a perfect "decode" for SQ. My guess is that in the not so far future, someone will finally come up with a "LASER SCANNING" turntable , which would replace a stylus (I'm positive that it probably exists cause it'd be "old technology" by now-and yes, I'm aware of the $10K Japanese one, but its output is only limited to 20K, which is the same setback that I find from the "Surround Master" converter), so that the info on the groove can be manipulated and converted with the correct adjustments, but also we'd have to tale into consideration the ENCODING of the signals...

As it is , my Chicago X conversion sounds VERY good and it could give the BD a run for its money, but I'm definitely a fan of the BD version...curiously enough I remember that I slightly EQ'd and compressed my LP after converting it in the authoring stage, along with some Apogee UV22 dithering, and it comes VERY close to the sound quality of the BD....
 
My guess is that in the not so far future, someone will finally come up with a "LASER SCANNING" turntable , which would replace a stylus (I'm positive that it probably exists cause it'd be "old technology" by now-and yes, I'm aware of the $10K Japanese one, but its output is only limited to 20K, which is the same setback that I find from the "Surround Master" converter), so that the info on the groove can be manipulated and converted with the correct adjustments, but also we'd have to tale into consideration the ENCODING of the signals...

I very dimly remembering someone posting a claim that the ELP turntable really would work with CD-4 and the published specs are conservative. It may surprise no one that I've never spent the money to find out.

My fantasy: A flatbed scanner that "reads" an entire record in a single pass. Very slowly would be fine as long as it could run unattended. The resulting WAV file could then be post-processed as usual. My biggest gripe with digitizing vinyl (aside from the usual infuriating fussiness and other shortcomings of the format) is that it takes so damned long. The initial capture can only be done in real time, after which the prettying up can take even longer. Skipping that capture time would be very, very nice.
 
I very dimly remembering someone posting a claim that the ELP turntable really would work with CD-4 and the published specs are conservative. It may surprise no one that I've never spent the money to find out.

My fantasy: A flatbed scanner that "reads" an entire record in a single pass. Very slowly would be fine as long as it could run unattended. The resulting WAV file could then be post-processed as usual. My biggest gripe with digitizing vinyl (aside from the usual infuriating fussiness and other shortcomings of the format) is that it takes so damned long. The initial capture can only be done in real time, after which the prettying up can take even longer. Skipping that capture time would be very, very nice.

There has been some work on reading record grooves by taking an image. https://www.nps.gov/edis/learn/photosmultimedia/edison-talking-doll-recordings-1888-1890.htm

But the technology is more about playing back historic formats without doing any physical damage or wear to the materials. And also playing back damaged records.

I visited the New England document conservation center after exchanging some emails with the person that worked with the Irene technology there at the time, and spent some time watching him record in some cylinders and listening to some of what he had recorded in. I had wondered how the technology could do with cd4. But from spending the time there and talking about it, I found that at this time the technology is mono only, and modern lps would do better with standard playback methods than this technology. However, he did find my work in preserving quadraphonic recordings quite interesting, and encouraged me to write up some sort of article about it to post somewhere in the archiving community. Something on my long list of things to do.

So, with the focus on preserving one of a kind recordings on archaic formats, I don't see this technology coming to stereo playback, and I"m not sure it has anything to offer to improve on standard playback methods, but it's still fascinating stuff.

Some more fun related links for those that also find this type of stuff interesting:

http://www.wbur.org/news/2014/11/28/irene-audio-preservation-technology

https://www.nedcc.org/audio-preservation/irene-blog/
 
I very dimly remembering someone posting a claim that the ELP turntable really would work with CD-4 and the published specs are conservative. It may surprise no one that I've never spent the money to find out.

My fantasy: A flatbed scanner that "reads" an entire record in a single pass. Very slowly would be fine as long as it could run unattended. The resulting WAV file could then be post-processed as usual. My biggest gripe with digitizing vinyl (aside from the usual infuriating fussiness and other shortcomings of the format) is that it takes so damned long. The initial capture can only be done in real time, after which the prettying up can take even longer. Skipping that capture time would be very, very nice.

funnily enough I'm in touch with a gentleman with a laser turntable and an extensive (to put it mildly) Quad vinyl collection and in our last brief exchange about a month ago when I asked about this very subject he said he had never tried any of his Quad LPs with his laser TT but would have a go for fun soon.. so if he ever gets around to it I may have something (or nothing!) to report on that front at some point! if it works for CD-4 i'll be saving up me pennies for one for sure!
 
I have taken the hint
It has been a couple of hot days here today is cooler
I have an older model of the Laser Turntable
And am using the CD4 1000 Demodulator as it is a higher model the tests may not apply to
Domestic models
The playing varied a lot the CD4 light lit up and stayed on.
But the separation was good and poor,
When there was a lot going on the separation fell away

I played
Latin Festival (Japanese)
Not bad separation

Hugo Montenegro Others by Brothers
Poor separation when everything played together


Tony Olando He Don,t love you
Not bad


Enoch Light Charge
Very bad separation poor Vinyl
Are all Enoch light CD4 vinyl Bad?

Gordon Lightfoot Sundown
Very good separation good vinyl

So it plays CD4 but just maybe the newer Models would be better
Ron
 
Thanks for chiming in with a few things I wasn't aware of!

IMO, he Japanese laser TT will be no good for CD-4 because I thought the output cut at 20k, but if there are people who have gotten results from it, it means that only the OUTPUT is cut at 20K and the READING laser goes up to at least 45K (for it to demod CD-4 correctly), so, if it's like that, it'd work for CD-4.

Now, the "big mystery" is why, with the "ever thinner" laser beams used from CD, to DVD to BD, why hasn't it been applied to LP technology?
Would it be that reading pits is much easier to processing the info on a groove?
 
Last edited:
I visited the New England document conservation center after exchanging some emails with the person that worked with the Irene technology there at the time, and spent some time watching him record in some cylinders and listening to some of what he had recorded in.

I had forgotten about IRENE, but that must be where my idea came from. Unconscious plagiarism!
 
Back
Top