Enoch Light & Project 3 Quadraphonic Test Record

[Wigwam Jones]

I thought I'd have a little fun today. I picked up this record recently at a thrift shop:


test_record_cover
by Wigwam Jones, on Flickr

http://www.discogs.com/Enoch-LightJ...-Out-Your-Quadraphonic-System/release/1935297

From the inside right cover:

TECHNICAL NOTES: The single frequency and pink noise test signals on this record were recorded using the RIAA recording characteristic. The signals were fed directly to a CBS Laboratories SQ encoder module 4211. The standard reference level used was a 3.5 cm/sec. peak velocity of 1,000 Hertz. The master disc was cut in a crolled atmosphere on a Neumann VS 66 lathe utilizing an SX68 cutter. A basic pitch of 350 lines/inch was used. However, a pitch of 175 lines per inch was required for the low frequency tracking tests. This record requires the use of an SQ decoder for proper quadraphonic playback.
​

I recorded it to my PC using a vintage Technics SL-D2 turntable, AudioTechnica stylus, and Harman/Kardon 730 receiver. I sent the tape-out to a Xitel Inport Analog-to-Digital converter, and the USB was recorded using 'arecord' in WAV format on my PC running Linux. I cleaned up the clicks and pops as best I could (it was not in good shape, despite heavy cleaning by me) and edited it with Audacity. Then I exported the tracks as FLAC in the highest possible resolution.

I copied the files over to my home theater digital music server and played it on my Harman/Kardon AVR 2600 using 5.0 ouput (I have no subwoofer) and set the output at Dolby PLII and 'Expand'. My speakers are KLH Six fronts, Wharfedale Diamond 10 center, Wharfedale Diamond VI rears.

I am frankly thrilled with the response. It may not be decoding the back channels exactly properly, but they sure sound pretty good to me at the moment.

Any thoughts on what else I might try with the playback to enhance the quad experience?

 

[1tumbleweed]

Wiggy, this record came in three formats: QS(RM), SQ and CD4. It appears you have the SQ version, which is best decoded with an SQ decoder (unless there's a software method I'm unaware of). What you're doing is probably best for the QS(RM) version, but if what you're getting sounds good, I'd just enjoy it. Short of actual SQ decoding, I think you've got the best that can be gotten. Enjoy!

Happy trails,
Larry B.