Sony SQE-2000 SQ Encoder

[Wagonmaster_91]

The Sony 2020 and 2010 SQ decoders come up for auction fairly often, but the 2000 encoder is a real rarity. As of this writing two bidders are duking it out.

https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/264099045782?item=264099045782&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

 

[ar surround]

Anyone know what "SQ Mode" means for that switch on the left-top rear panel? Looks like it says Normal, Int, F.O. and B.O.

 

[surround.sound.enthusiast]

The odd thing about this auction is, I thought, that there had been bids into the $300-range, but it appeared toward the end of it's auction time as having no bidders and appears to have not sold. I was watching it to see how high it would go.

I've also wondered about the setting knob on the rear. I had been thinking that F.O. might mean Front Oriented, and B.O. might mean Back Oriented. Int - Internal? You can only hear that setting from inside the device ?

 

[Soundfield]

I've also wondered about the setting knob on the rear. I had been thinking that F.O. might mean Front Oriented, and B.O. might mean Back Oriented. Int - Internal? You can only hear that setting from inside the device ?

Almost right! The user manual explains as follows:

 

[Soundfield]

I was always puzzled by the intended market for the SQE-2000 Encoder. Surely the only significant applications would have been in recording or radio studios – but it isn’t made like a professional bit of kit. It matches the domestic SQD-2000 decoder series (not sure why) and is made to the same build quality (decent higher end retail hifi of the day, but nothing exceptional) - it’s rather flimsy switches and tiny slider pots would surely not have survived the rigors of a working studio very long. It is not rack mountable and has very limited input facilities (for something which claims to be a mixer) – but strangest of all, it only has domestic, single ended connections for microphones (jack sockets) and line level in/out (RCA sockets)– what use would they have been in a commercial studio environment? The user manual also looks like it was aimed more at home user than an audio engineer. I wonder if the design was undertaken by Sony’s retail hifi division without any real understanding of the requirements of the professional market. Did they sell many? I somehow doubt it.

 

[Q-Eight]

I was always puzzled by the intended market for the SQE-2000 Encoder. Surely the only significant applications would have been in recording or radio studios – but it isn’t made like a professional bit of kit. It matches the domestic SQD-2000 decoder series (not sure why) and is made to the same build quality (decent higher end retail hifi of the day, but nothing exceptional) - it’s rather flimsy switches and tiny slider pots would surely not have survived the rigors of a working studio very long. It is not rack mountable and has very limited input facilities (for something which claims to be a mixer) – but strangest of all, it only has domestic, single ended connections for microphones (jack sockets) and line level in/out (RCA sockets)– what use would they have been in a commercial studio environment? The user manual also looks like it was aimed more at home user than an audio engineer. I wonder if the design was undertaken by Sony’s retail hifi division without any real understanding of the requirements of the professional market. Did they sell many? I somehow doubt it.

Not only that, but you could only output to a TAPE format. What the hell is the point? SQ was a disc-specific format, if you were going to use a tape, why wouldn't you go discrete? I can't see a use for it in the automotive landscape as there were no SQ-capable car stereos...... ever! Some Craig and Sanyo pieces had their own proprietary "Matrix" circuitry, but all that did was invert the rear channels.

You're so right in that it doesn't really fit any sort of consumer market and it's too basic to be a professional unit. I never thought of it like that before, but you're totally hitting the nail on the head.

 

[Soundfield]

Not only that, but you could only output to a TAPE format. What the hell is the point?

Well, I guess any recording studio that did use this thing would want to produce an SQ encoded two channel tape to send to a disc mastering plant. Interestingly, the user manual says that the encoder’s output can be connected to a tape recorder or directly to a disc cutter – but I can’t imagine there were many recording studios back then that cut their own records on site (or that such lathes were connected via single ended RCA phono leads)!

 

[quadsearcher]

With mic inputs I wonder if someone at Sony imagined a market for Live Direct-to-Disc (or 2ch tape) SQ quadraphonic recording hobbyists (for those with unbalanced mics but somehow also a record lathe) sort of like, well, nothing else ever.

I've found studios with lathes were more common than I once thought. I met someone who cut records in the '60s forty miles west of here and he said there was another studio then who was then forty miles on the east side of me who also cut records, they split the cost of vinyl shipments. I assume he meant lacquers and not actually that they had presses, but who knows? I should've asked, still could probably.

 

[surround.sound.enthusiast]

Interesting question and points about it's dubious target customers. What units did the professional set-ups use anyway, I haven't heard of any brands or models yet?

I've recently perused some articles in Billboard from June 9, 1973 that talk about the early positive feedback on King Biscuit Flower Hour SQ encoded broadcasts, and KAA Productions planning an SQ encoded syndicated broadcast. Perhaps these "semi-professional" SQE-2000's found a niche in transcription and syndication programs - encode for distribution to radio stations?

 

[Monkeyboi]

I'd hazard a guess and say that you are probably correct. The encoder would have possibly been used to encode from discrete 4 channel sources (master quad tapes) or from CD-4 discs into the SQ format for broadcasting over stereo FM. Decoding at the receiving end would be simple and as the SQ system was reasonably popular it had the potential to exploit a basic 2 channel (stereo) analogue broadcasting medium that was incompatible due to bandwidth and tuner hardware limitation that prevented the discrete formats like CD-4 from transmission at the time.

 

[surround.sound.enthusiast]

You/we are correct. I found some Billboard articles from I think September and November of 1973, when the SQE-2000 was being rolled out, and they mention the intended customer to be radio stations for broadcasts in SQ.

 

[Wagonmaster_91]

The seller pulled the auction down. Must have made a side deal for the unit. Bids were over $1k before it was pulled.