Dvorak Sym.9 on EMI -Von Karajan CD is SQ encoded

[kap'n krunch]

The SQ encoding has been left untouched on the CD. It decoded very discretely using the SQ script (not the latest one).
Heads up!
THe CD is the red backed jewel box that also has Smetama's Moldau.
Recorded 1977, Digital remastering 1987,
code CDM 7 69 5 2

Will try next the Finlandia cd.

 

[kap'n krunch]

The Finlandia one is also SQ encoded inb spite of the ADD SPARS code and the "Digital Remastering" from 1987. It looks like they remastered the SQ masters.

The rears are not ambience as mentioned in some threads here, the mic'ing is very discrete in these recordings,
Violins on the Lr and violas on Rr, with orchestra spread through all 4 channels.

At least in these 2 recordings the Rears are as loud as the Front Channels.

 

[jefe1]

Hi,
Can you give me the cd edition info of the Finlandia recording? If you posted it elsewhere I've missed it.
Thanks!

 

[kap'n krunch]

Hi,
Can you give me the cd edition info of the Finlandia recording? If you posted it elsewhere I've missed it.
Thanks!

Here it is

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/showpost.php?p=87470&postcount=23

 

[watzman]

Hi Cap'n,
hie quadies

what makes one convinced that this CD (or other classical CDs as well) is still having an intact SQ encoding? I am asking because one cand find the phase effects which are inherent to matrix recordings at almost every classical recording. So, are you simply relying on the (visual) results of the phase analysis in AA 2.0 (or 1.5) or are there other (and better ways) to distinguish SQ enoded (Matrix-) CDs from conventional CDs in stereo, particularly when it comes to classical recordings?

Any kind advise is welcome!

 

[kap'n krunch]

Hi Cap'n,
hie quadies

what makes one convinced that this CD (or other classical CDs as well) is still having an intact SQ encoding? I am asking because one cand find the phase effects which are inherent to matrix recordings at almost every classical recording. So, are you simply relying on the (visual) results of the phase analysis in AA 2.0 (or 1.5) or are there other (and better ways) to distinguish SQ enoded (Matrix-) CDs from conventional CDs in stereo, particularly when it comes to classical recordings?

Any kind advise is welcome!

Well, it's a bit of everything, but your ears are the ultimate test(along with the decoded Fr & Re pairs).
The layout of the orchestra is the key of the process and the end result.
As far as I know, the encoded rear info in SQ is "panned " in the middle, not to the sides-that's why the script uses the "Center Channel Extractor". If you get the instruments that are in the middle of the orchestra in the rear channels, then there is no encoding.
This is very evident in the Von Karajan CDs-they are VERY discrete. The Jean Martinon ones are more tame-at least the ones I've decoded.
There are very knowledgeable members in this forum who can give you a more in-depth and technical information than I can (Quad pioneers like Lou Dorren and Quadtrade-and Lucanu, who tweaked the SQ script that Andreas Banberger wrote originally), so I hope some of them see this and contribute to this thread.

 

[watzman]

Thank you for your feedback!!

I just took from the mojave blog the Dvorak/Karajan CD, which you had transcoded to DTS. Via Foobar and Tranzcode I re-transcoded the file to six mono files and then I re-assembled them to get a front and a rear channel (via AA 2.0).

After that, I compared the front and rear channels, however I (my ears) could not find any significant difference regarding the instruments (or their locations) ...

Do you have any samples, where I could see the discreteness, which you had mentioned?



NB: I am currently working on a EMI/Angel's recording (not listed as quad): Richard Strauss - Kempe & Dresdner Staatskapelle - Don Quixote (recorded 1973, remastered in 1987) and I am wondering, whether it could be quad (I have understood that most EMI/Angel recordings of those period were sq encoded) :sun

 

[kap'n krunch]

Well, as far as discreteness goes , it's as not EXTREMELY discrete, being a Classical recording with several spot mics, so the best way to prove the Front/rear difference is instrument placement-along with reflections from the structure of the hall it was recorded in.

I've a few Columbia ones I haven't decoded yet, so we'll see about those ---

This link:

http://members.cox.net/surround/quaddisc/emiquad.htm

which is linked to the Mark Anderson page, is pretty informative-and MAYBE (there's a VERY high probability it IS Quad) the Don Quixote you have is actually Quad...