The EV4 shoot out results

Just finished recording my live quadcast, hope some of you watch the recording. But for those that don't have an hour to spare, here are the results of the first shoot out, EV4 - Involve decoder vs. software script.

First, here's what the contents were



From the comments I received, it seems both methods have their merits, in some cases it may have been close to call, and for some tracks a toss up. This was an interesting comparison. But when it comes down to making a choice, here are the results.



Generally speaking, the Involve decoder was preferred more than software. However, it was a close vote on One Fine Morning, and a toss up on the Big Band Moog tracks. I think at the end of the day, what we've learned here is that the Involve decoder is certainly a worthwhile decoder for playback of EV4 materials. Also, software decodes are certainly worth listening to, and the pursuit of software decoding is definitely worthwhile. More quad = more good, right?

I'm quite excited now to see how the QS shoot outs go, because we still haven't answered the question of whether or not a single decoder can do a superb job of decoding both QS and EV4, and if there's anything to the suggestion that EV4 and QS are compatible formats.

As a follow up to this, I recently got word from Oxford Dickie that he has further modified his EV4 decoding process. At this time if you visit his dreamingspiresquadarchive.wordpress site, there is more information about that on his Jan. 5th post. For those that participated, it might be worth comparing the new decode of One Fine Morning to what was on the shoot out materials, and posting any thoughts on that.

Coming up soon will be the first part of the SQ shoot out. This one is going to be done in 2 steps. First, a shoot out between the Involve SQ vinyl edition decoder and the Tate II. Then after that, if one of those decoders stands out above the other in the results, that one will go up against the software decode. (I'm not sure what I'm going to do if the decoders is a toss up.) Stay tuned for that, I hope to have something posted next weekend.

wow.. :yikes I was not expecting the software decoding to get so trounced by the Surround Master!

looking back through my little summary for each song a couple of the tracks really seemed closer to the discrete version to me thru what turned out to be the software than the SM (Big Band Moog in particular I thought was really great thru the eventual software decode) but thats not reflected in all the results (am slightly confused a couple of tracks got only 4 votes and others 5.. were there abstentions or spoiled ballot papers? ah its late and I've had a few.. at this witching hour not everything makes sense thru the matrix quadraphonic haze! )

thanks so much for doing all this AOQ, can't wait for your QS and SQ shoot outs which will be of even greater interest personally (seeing as I'd never heard of the EV-4 format until you announced your shoot out of it.. guess I'll pick up a few discs in the format now seeing as the Surround Master seemingly does a good job of decoding it!)

Hi. All

I would like to thank armyofQuad for the setting up of this EV4 Shot out & the results, I find it very interesting of the outcome.
It just tells you that the early EV4 vintage decoder of the times that were released were rubbish no more than 3db separation same with early SQ & QS decoders were.
And the findings were in favour of the SM Unit but the software script were very close.

And you have to remember the SM unit was not made to decode EV4 it was sold as a SQ & QS decoder only it was rustyandi with chucky that made a video to see what the SM performed like decoding EV4 and rustyandi past a comment to compare the SM to Vintage EV4 decoder that he has and put the SM as the best decoder for decoding EV4.

I will be waiting to see the SQ shot out, will most likely be VERY interesting...

A very interesting exercise. It is fascinating when one has the original discrete mix to compare with a decode. Some of the Dutton Vocalion SACDs should be very useful for future comparisons.

Thanks for your efforts with this!

bigbillquad said:

Hi. All

I would like to thank armyofQuad for the setting up of this EV4 Shot out & the results, I find it very interesting of the outcome.
It just tells you that the early EV4 vintage decoder of the times that were released were rubbish no more than 3db separation same with early SQ & QS decoders were.
And the findings were in favour of the SM Unit but the software script were very close.

And you have to remember the SM unit was not made to decode EV4 it was sold as a SQ & QS decoder only it was rustyandi with chucky that made a video to see what the SM performed like decoding EV4 and rustyandi past a comment to compare the SM to Vintage EV4 decoder that he has and put the SM as the best decoder for decoding EV4.

I will be waiting to see the SQ shot out, will most likely be VERY interesting...

Click to expand...

That is most revealing. Yes I agree that a good decoder (SM or SANSUI) would always make EV-4 or DY-4 perform more discretely over their own respective matrix decoders.



So "software" conversions from matrix can be good or poor, that I was not aware of. WOW.

Well for all the discussion about it
The results went down like a lead balloon
Only a very few were interested
I did no know the Maths, just used my ears

I submitted my results and was glad to see how well the Surround Master fared compared to the software decode. I found that there wasn't much of a difference.

I have the Lighthouse track on vinyl and thought the Surround Master did a good job on it, but had no comparison.

I was shocked at just how clean each decoding was. Having the luxury of comparing the two not only against each other, but also both against the discrete mix certainly helps one determine differences, but both matrix decoding systems had no obvious image wander, no pumping, and fidelity was excellent. The soundfield even in those occasional cases of lowered separation was always stable. Having previously listened to (or on occasion suffered through) my share of vintage 1970s full logic matrix decoders, that's a major win for both systems.

Just another contention
I play my Circle Surround Disc's
With the QSD1 or Involve (QS)
And find the sound as good maybe better than the Circle Surround Decoder
This is just my listening

Do not bring (Charlie into it)

Charlie is in on it....I am watching you Ron!

rustyandi said:

Just another contention
I play my Circle Surround Disc's
With the QSD1 or Involve (QS)
And find the sound as good maybe better than the Circle Surround Decoder
This is just my listening

Do not bring (Charlie into it)

Click to expand...