• QuadraphonicQuad welcomes you and encourages your participation! Treat all members with respect. Please keep all discussions civil, even when you have a strong opinion on a particular topic.

    Do not offer for free, offer for sale, offer for trade, or request copies or files of copyrighted material - no matter how rare or unavailable to the public they might be. We do not condone the illegal sharing of music. There are many places on the internet where you can participate in such transactions, but QuadraphonicQuad is not one of them. We are here to encourage and support new multichannel releases from those companies that still provide them and as such the distribution of illegal copies of recordings is counter-productive to that effort. Any posts of this sort will be deleted without notification.

    Please try to avoid discussions that pit one format against another. Hint for new users: make liberal use of the search facilities here at QuadraphonicQuad. Our message base is an incredibly rich resource of detailed information on virtually all topics pertaining to surround-sound. You will be surprised at what you can find with a little digging!

Focus - Moving Waves - channel assignment?

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

ArmyOfQuad

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Apr 22, 2002
Messages
2,014
Location
Attleboro, MA
Perhaps if after multiple attempts of analysis one can't determine whether or not there is a channel assignment error, and if so, what layout makes the most sense, that's a sign that a quad mix wasn't done all that great.

Being a GRT cart, it makes sense to be wary of the channel assignment.

Things that jump out as possible signs of an assignment error:

In Hocus Pocus, the vocals are on the left, with reverb to the right. If one were to think that the vocals should be anchored to the front or back, that would suggest a swap of a diagonal pair, with GRT I believe front right to back left is an error that comes up. That would also put another vocal part in the rear, panning back and forth between the back channels, instead of panning back and forth between the right channels.

But....I'd go as far as to suggest following this logic to do the fr/rl swap would be a rookie mistake.

After all, the stereo mix of this song does do a stereo effect of vocal to one side, reverb to the other. Was it decided to keep this in the quad, resulting in what we see? I'll need further evidence before making a swap.

And then we get to some areas that have common elements between the diagonals, which is often a sign of a channel assignment error. But that requires a non-diagonal swap to correct. Tyipcally, with GRT, that would mean swapping the lefts.

Ok, swap the lefts, and you still have vocals to the left, reverb to the rights, and flute to the front, instead of split to front right/rear left. This also "fixes" the track that follows, that has diagonal paring channels.

But, then you get to "Moving Waves", and the vocal now moves around the room in an X due to the "correction"

As we've learned, sometimes diagonals is a valid mixing choice. And also, sometimes X's are a valid mixing choice.

So now we're playing a game of....guess the mix?



Ok....did anyone in the past analyze this and come to a conclusion? A forum search turns up a reference to a conversion with "corrected channels".....(I suppose I could track that down and see what "correction" was used there)

But....I"m starting to lean towards, leave it alone, and consider the diagonal pairs a mixing choice. Seems more likely than the X panning.


Anyways, I've gone through this exact same dilemma/process multiple times now, which is why the Teac recorded files continue to be closed, forgotten, not worked on.....until the next time I decide, come on now, you can figure this out, just open it up and take a listen....how complicated can it be to figure out what someone behind a mixing boards was thinking 40 something years ago.......



Anyways, that's my line of thought. Anyone have anything to add to this?
 

humprof

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Jun 10, 2016
Messages
1,368
Location
NoCal
Perhaps if after multiple attempts of analysis one can't determine whether or not there is a channel assignment error, and if so, what layout makes the most sense, that's a sign that a quad mix wasn't done all that great.

Being a GRT cart, it makes sense to be wary of the channel assignment.

Things that jump out as possible signs of an assignment error:

In Hocus Pocus, the vocals are on the left, with reverb to the right. If one were to think that the vocals should be anchored to the front or back, that would suggest a swap of a diagonal pair, with GRT I believe front right to back left is an error that comes up. That would also put another vocal part in the rear, panning back and forth between the back channels, instead of panning back and forth between the right channels.

But....I'd go as far as to suggest following this logic to do the fr/rl swap would be a rookie mistake.

After all, the stereo mix of this song does do a stereo effect of vocal to one side, reverb to the other. Was it decided to keep this in the quad, resulting in what we see? I'll need further evidence before making a swap.

And then we get to some areas that have common elements between the diagonals, which is often a sign of a channel assignment error. But that requires a non-diagonal swap to correct. Tyipcally, with GRT, that would mean swapping the lefts.

Ok, swap the lefts, and you still have vocals to the left, reverb to the rights, and flute to the front, instead of split to front right/rear left. This also "fixes" the track that follows, that has diagonal paring channels.

But, then you get to "Moving Waves", and the vocal now moves around the room in an X due to the "correction"

As we've learned, sometimes diagonals is a valid mixing choice. And also, sometimes X's are a valid mixing choice.

So now we're playing a game of....guess the mix?



Ok....did anyone in the past analyze this and come to a conclusion? A forum search turns up a reference to a conversion with "corrected channels".....(I suppose I could track that down and see what "correction" was used there)

But....I"m starting to lean towards, leave it alone, and consider the diagonal pairs a mixing choice. Seems more likely than the X panning.


Anyways, I've gone through this exact same dilemma/process multiple times now, which is why the Teac recorded files continue to be closed, forgotten, not worked on.....until the next time I decide, come on now, you can figure this out, just open it up and take a listen....how complicated can it be to figure out what someone behind a mixing boards was thinking 40 something years ago.......



Anyways, that's my line of thought. Anyone have anything to add to this?
Nothing to add, really--except that (without wanting to color outside the lines of forum rules here) I'm dying for you to finish your Teac conversion!

These kinds of dilemmas are like those faced by textual critics: they involve so much educated speculation, comparison, and inference, and the arguments are often convincing, or at least interesting to follow, but there's a rarely an airtight, definitive answer. I don't think there's a base your analysis hasn't covered. I'd say leave it alone and let the end-users play around with channels if they choose. Unless you want to assemble a "variorum" edition...
 

Q-Eight

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
Castlegar, BC, Canada
I did try to straighten out the Q8 on my PC.... and I did do a DTS conversion of my own.... but it was many years ago now and I honestly do not remember what I did. Giving it a listen tonight, (using Hocus Pocus as the reference) I put the channels with the driest vocals front and the echo-y, delayed vocals to the rear. Low, Growly Guitar Back Left, High pitched guitar Back Right. There is a guitar part that briefly appears in Front Right, but that channel usually winds up as guitar echo and organ in Front Left.

The result? Dry Vocals front center, Echo vocals back center. A different instrument in every corner, bass in the full center and the drums in a lovely stereo pair in the phantoms.

But now looking at my PC files (wow, surprised I still had them!) I went track by track, not full tape.

But listening to my DTS CD, "Le Clochard" has the flute in back center and the other wind instrument in the front. This mix put bass in the middle.

On "Janis", drums are in the rears in a nice pair.

"Moving Waves" my vocals move in a counter-clockwise motion, but they seem to go: FL, BL, then FL again, THEN start the trot around the room.

"Focus II" and "Eruption" have the organ in the rears, piano is mostly to the front. "Focus II" also has drums dry in the front, wet in the rear" I don't know if I manipulated the bass at all but for these two songs, the bass is definitely heavier at the front.

It's a really delicate mix. It's not great, but it's pretty good given the source material. But I quite prefer the front / rear soundstages versus strange cross-channel "it'll sound good in mono" logic. I never understood that. Download my Elvis remix and see what you think of that. I'm pretty sure I hit the nail on the head on that one.
 
Last edited:
Group builder
Top