hobie1dog
500 Club - QQ All-Star
I located my SMv2 around knee level in my rack ( just was the only spotI had for it), and all the knobs block out the LED's which I love anyway.
Surround Master v2: Thoughts and Impressions
- Thread starter ar surround
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Request for SMv3:
(1974-12) SQ Stereo Enhancement [CBS Labs] | QuadraphonicQuad
Please consider adding SQ SE mode 180 and mode 270 to the SQ decoding part of the (planned) SMv3.
Kirk Bayne
(1974-12) SQ Stereo Enhancement [CBS Labs] | QuadraphonicQuad
Please consider adding SQ SE mode 180 and mode 270 to the SQ decoding part of the (planned) SMv3.
Kirk Bayne
After about 7 months of listening to, and enjoying, my SMv2, all I can say is it's the best component in my system! Having a processor of this calibre in my humble system, all I can say is, I AM NOT WORTHY! I have an extensive collection of matrixed quad records. I've been rediscovering them in ways that are overwhelming. Many of the ABC/Command QS albums, which didn't seem to deliver great amounts of separation through either QS decoders or PL II, sound damn near discrete through the SM. SQ records also sound better, with more separation and no pumping, than they did with the S&IC. Stereo records? I've heard details in the sound that I never heard before, and the wraparound is the added bonus. I generally use the 4.1 modes, but I have played movies from laserdisc with the Involve 5.1 mode. They sound like DTS!. Full separation!
One criticism I remember from the early days of quad was how decoders could become "confused" if too much was happening in the mix at once. I haven't noticed that at all with the SM. Since the records I noticed that the most on were mostly SQ, this is a testimony to the quality of the SM's SQ circuitry.
So, summing up, this little unit is the shit! If you love quad, and don't have the SM, what are you waiting for? The v3 will be out in the near future; while I'm satisfied with the v2, the v3 could be the only reason to wait. Thank you, Chucky and crew, for delivering on the promise of quad that no other matrix decoder ever did.
One criticism I remember from the early days of quad was how decoders could become "confused" if too much was happening in the mix at once. I haven't noticed that at all with the SM. Since the records I noticed that the most on were mostly SQ, this is a testimony to the quality of the SM's SQ circuitry.
So, summing up, this little unit is the shit! If you love quad, and don't have the SM, what are you waiting for? The v3 will be out in the near future; while I'm satisfied with the v2, the v3 could be the only reason to wait. Thank you, Chucky and crew, for delivering on the promise of quad that no other matrix decoder ever did.
The Surround Master already has 180 stereo enhancement as integral to the QS/Involve decoding. This is when left only stereo input equals center left where left front & rear are equal level & right front & rear are silent. It was this way in Sansui gear or by Involve, it's just the way QS works.
What would be benefit is 270 deg wrap around effect. In QS mode this is accomplished in the easiest of ways by simple opposite phase blending at -7.7 dB between the input chs. I accomplish this with an external front end to the SM. It can make a huge imrovement. Much easier than SQ enhancement.
do you have a piece of equipment/method/suggestion for cancelling out the CF vocals and other guff thats bled to the Rears in SM SQ decodes?
the Tate somehow does this (i think its something to do with summing aspects of the Rears to Mono at some stage of the game? maybe?) many thanks in advances
Hey Fred!
I might refer you to a previous post of mine where I did some testing on the SMv2 & directly addressed the question of center front to back leakage in the SQ mode:
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2020-sm-v2-testing.29536/
For a quick referral center front is the same in either QS or SQ encoding. In decoding on the SM there's about -50dB speration to the rear in QS & in SQ about -16dB. Clearly there's a difference there but the -16dB is plenty much to lock the focus up front.
I never pass up the chance to mention the quality of input signal to the SM is of high importance. We tend to take it for granted that our LP records are balanced to a gnats eye lash, that our pre-amps are really "neutral" when knobs set to the 12:00 position, etc and sometimes they are not. As an example I suggest, if you can, apply a true mono signal to the SM, listen to only the rear chs & adjust input balance to the SM left & right a bit. You'll find at one point the center front bleed through will be markedly reduced.
I might refer you to a previous post of mine where I did some testing on the SMv2 & directly addressed the question of center front to back leakage in the SQ mode:
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2020-sm-v2-testing.29536/
For a quick referral center front is the same in either QS or SQ encoding. In decoding on the SM there's about -50dB speration to the rear in QS & in SQ about -16dB. Clearly there's a difference there but the -16dB is plenty much to lock the focus up front.
I never pass up the chance to mention the quality of input signal to the SM is of high importance. We tend to take it for granted that our LP records are balanced to a gnats eye lash, that our pre-amps are really "neutral" when knobs set to the 12:00 position, etc and sometimes they are not. As an example I suggest, if you can, apply a true mono signal to the SM, listen to only the rear chs & adjust input balance to the SM left & right a bit. You'll find at one point the center front bleed through will be markedly reduced.
Last edited:
furui_suterioo
Quad & 70s Enthusiast
One thing that I've noticed is that Involve SQ has "drier" rear channels than than other SQ decoders like S&IC or my Kenwood receiver. I can hear the difference with some songs(in stereo) which produce distinct echo in the rear channels when played through the Kenwood, S&IC, and even on JVC 5944 quadphones(only when configured so that the rear channels are L/R swapped AND 180 degrees out of phase at the same time), but not with Involve SQ, it does not produce this echo. I believe that the echo is a result of blending the front channels with an out of phase L/R swapped/blended signal, which I think I recall Chucky saying that the SM does not do, so I guess that would make sense. I use Involve SQ for non-quad quite often(also the quadphones configured as above, which really sound trippy), maybe a button/pot for phase/channel blending which could work with both SQ and Involve mode would be a fun stereo synthesis option.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
The quality of the source signal is more critical on SQ
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,358
Chucky, when are you going to finalize the SM V3?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
Still waiting for the boards to arrive from China, only found out 2 days ago that there was a delay in payment that slowed the train down.....DOH!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,358
Will it come with Wutan Bat Soup?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
NO BATS FOR YOU!Will it come with Wutan Bat Soup?
holland123
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Ok, so how are you guys hooking this up to a newer receiver that does not have 5.1 analog inputs ? or are you only connecting this to legacy equipment?
I have a Lexicon RV-9
I have a Lexicon RV-9
Don't believe they are; that's the big issue and hopefully the new preamp will provide some relief, albeit at a cost. I'm using legacy Sansui QRX-8001 for the SMv2.
I bought an AV Amp with 5.1 analogue inputs, a Pioneer SC-LX86 in 2013 (was about £2000). Unfortunately they are becoming rarer and most that are available are 'top of the range' or close to, so cheapest I have seen now is the Marantz SR7015 at around £1500, another is the Denon AVC-X8500H at about £3000, and I think Yamaha has a couple with 5.1/7.1 analogue inputs.
holland123
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
So it sounds like it's legacy equipment. well if they can somehow get this to convert to hdmi I would be all in
Let's not forget also, that there are still tons of just slightly older AVRs with 5.1-7.1 analog inputs; that sell for very little (and all electronics are prone to a myriad of failures.)
It is indeed unfortunate that the current Lexicon processors/receivers do not have multichannel analog inputs. I use a Lexicon RV8. It's three zones and TWO sets of 5.1 analog inputs allow me to directly hook up 5.1 outputs from an Oppo and 5.1 outputs from the SMv2 without any fancy outboard switches. But the RV8 does not have 7.1 analog inputs or HDMI...so I've got wires all over the place!
i've done all that and had Rears summed
to Mono where CF vocal elements all but disappear (posted sample clips at QQ to show that) yet there's CF leakage to the Rears in SQ that isn't there in QS/Involve. i'm past caring now tbh and just enjoy it for what it is, the best decoder money can buy on the market today
Similar threads
