• 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!

"Home Made" DTS and DVD-A Conversions of 1970's Quadraphonic releases

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Old Quad Guy

Preservationist
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
3,101
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
If I'm reading it right, I believe they've upgraded some of the programs to do Multi-Channel 24/96, 5.1, perhaps using "HD-Audio Solo Ultra" and writing to standard DVD as a Blu-Ray? I believe there are frewaree tools to do this as well to BR. One thing that would be good to know is if any of their programs can accept MLP files either Stereo or Multi-Channel. That would be a nice feature to have.

http://cirlinca.com/products.htm

Blu-ray authoring
Author music Blu-ray discs up to 25GB and Blu-Ray compatible AVCHD on standard DVD discs. Tracks resolution can be 24bits / 96kHz and 5.1, even in AVCHD. Add pictures to each track in high-definition up to 1080p.


Yes, but can the tracks be 5.1, 24bits / 96kHz? ;) Further down..

"Author DVD-Audio discs, DVD-Video discs, universal DVD-Audio/DVD-Video, Blu-ray discs or export to computer files in wav / wma / flac / A52 / aac/mp4/iTunes / mkv formats from audio tracks in a variety of input formats.

If you want the best audio quality for stereo and multichannel, the clear choice is DVD-Audio. This standard supports up to 24bit/192 kHz in stereo and 24 bit/96 kHz in surround 5.1. It offers many unique features for audiophiles. You will need a DVD player that is DVD-Audio capable (many mid-range and above players are capable, e.g. from Denon, Marantz, Harman-kardon, Meridian, Oppo, Pioneer, ...). DVD-Audio players tend to have higher quality audio paths than standard DVD-Video players.

If your interest is for stereo at 24bit/96kHz or 24bit/48kHz, then a standard DVD-Video disc is a sufficient media when played through a good quality player.

To author surround 5.1 tracks in full 24bit / 96kHz or if disc capacity is a major concern, consider choosing Blu-ray.

Export to audio files if your audio playback devices are PC or Mac or Media center or Multimedia disc based player."
 
Last edited:

Rockledge

New member
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
9
I have, and I too have gotten some interesting replies. Steve Miller has said they "Might" remix The Joker and Book of Dreams to modern 5.1, but he has other projects to finish up first (like his new album).

Members of the Grass Roots whom I have had indirect contact with have stated "We had a Quadraphonic Album?". Dennis Provisor has actually stated he has no recollection of recording an alternate organ solo for Temptation Eyes.
None of them have any idea who possesses the multitrack tapes to their hits/albums, if they even still exist. None of them own the rights to them. Even the Anthology CD set from a few years back was culled from existing Stereo Masters. Though I am up to six differing mixes of Sooner or Later, all from different dates.

Ditto with the Guess Who & Randy Bachman. Well, Randy was aware he had the Quad albums - he produced them! With any luck, whoever owns the rights to the Mercury catalog might still have the multitracks there.

Lips are sealed as to the location(s) of the Guess Who multi's, though rumors abound that they Do in fact exist. Specifically Jack Richardson, who went back to some multi's for the Guess Who's "Anthology" from a few years back. Nothing was re-mixed, just re-engineered as some Stereo Masters are dubs of dubs of dubs and sound horrible.

In closing, there's a way. There's just very little will.
Don't quote me on this, because my memory sucks. but seems to me that I remember reading that part of the problem R Bachman and B Cummings had was because Mr Cummings found out Nimbus was going under and bought up the rights to the Guess Whos songs for a song and a dance. Again, I might not remember this well. But if this is the case then it would seem that either Mr Cummings owns the masters or is the one guy that would have any clout in dealing with whoever does.
 

Surround_Junk

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
27
Sorry to say that, but IMHO there is ZERO will.
The most disappointing story happened some months ago, whne Universal did the reissue of Diana Ross "last time i saw him".
They located and found the japanese quad mix only to release it in folded-down stereo cd.
(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)
Seriously? I was wondering why it sounded so weird, no wonder.
 

jaybird100

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
1,104
Location
Pembroke Pines, FL
I haven't heard that mix, but I could see The Supremes, as well as Diana's solo recordings, being worthy of remixing for surround, 4.0 or 5.1. I have to wonder how much of the music that was recorded never reached us because it would have made the stereo (or mono) mix sound too cluttered, but could have been included in a multichannel mix.
 

ndiamone

600 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
637
Location
Silicon Valley (but I don't own it)
RE: Wendy Carlos.

Well, London Box and Paramatrix or not, and properly decoded or not, the SQ mix on LP of Switched On Bach is terrible no matter which way you slice it. Rears are mostly reverb, and wa-a-ay too much of that leaks back into the front channels.

If I was her, and that was gonna be my quad mix, I'd have thrown a fit too. Just like Joni Mitchell did when she asked Kris Kristofferson what he thought about her Blue album and he told her `Damn, girl! Keep some of that shit to yourself!'

Now you listen to the original Q8 of that and it's a nice balance - if a little quirky - like the quad version of a stereo-demo record from the 50's with the calls-and-responses set into different speakers. No drowning in reverb, no going crazy with the pan-pot - nothing. Just a nice listen.
 

jaybird100

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
1,104
Location
Pembroke Pines, FL
Part of the problem with the SQ mix is in the matrix itself. There were a few tracks where sound was put into motion (a quad version of the ping-pong of early stereo), and some sounds cancelled out when they hit certain places in the 360 degree sphere. If Ms. Carlos had been involved in the mix, she might have had a better idea of how to overcome the limitations of the SQ matrix. Since the 8-track was discrete, these limitations don't exist.
 

neil wilkes

Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
4,301
Location
London, England
Same thing in the States, but still a bit of a grey area if you want to give a copy to someone. Any CD I want to play in my car gets backed up first, and it's the copy that I listen to while driving. The RIAA is pretty adamant about not passing copies on to other people, citing the royalties lost to the artists (who make more than enough money from the disc), and the record companies, who are lately crying poverty. Actually, there are a number of artists who like the idea of their music getting around, no matter how it's done, and have no problem with this approach. So there really are a lot of ways to look at this issue.
Which is highly amusing - or at least, it would be if it were not for the obvious holes in this argument (the RIAA, not yours of course).
If it is lost royalties they are worried about, then what about all these bookshops on eBay selling OOP DVDA & SACD for hundreds of dollars/pounds?
Not a single penny of that goes to the original artist, yet these "retailers" get rich on greed.
I mean, take a look at the shocker list. Madness.

As for the labels crying poverty there are reasons this has happened too. I will never forget when my partner got her PPI statement one year, along with their annual book saying how CD sales were down 31% on the previous year - an often quoted figure - but what they do not often quote was the second part of this, that major label releases in the same period were down by 34% - my math says this is an actual increase in sales. The labels try to run as a greengrocers now, where every artist has to make a profit or they get dropped.
No longer are artists developed and nurtured - these days, none of the legends would even get a second single, never mind albums or a career. Bowie went through 5 labels before he got a hit, then another 2 labels and 3 albums before "Hunky Dory" gave him a second hit (TMWSTW did 50,000 units in the US, but rolled over and died in the UK and the "Space Oddity" album (itself a re--issue under that title) sold almost nothing. The Beatles almost did not get signed back in the day, Dylan would not get past demo stage, The Stones would not have been taken far - the list goes on & on. The labels should be running as Venture Capital, not greengrocers.
Further, according to George Massenburg, the fall of the traditional labels also co-incides with the rise of the leveraged buyout, where a company can be forcibly bought and have the debt incurred by the buyer put back onto it for tax purposes - meaning a label that was rich on the first wave of CD suddenly finds itself in debt for millions. Insanity, yet this is somehow legal.

Preserving this Quad legacy is a duty of music fans, in my mind. Again, to give a personal example, we are trying to locate the masters - both multitrack and 1/4" - for The Passions first album "Michael And Miranda" that was on Fiction Records, who got swallowed by Polydor, who ended up as a label in name only as part of Universal. They no longer have this - lost them - and we are hoping the original producer has copies.
Point is, the labels are losing, destroying & wiping this stuff so once those Q4 reels are all gone, most of this stuff will be lost forever in high quality. That would be a crime to me.
Also, it would be a much worse crime than simply making a high grade copy. There are people here who should be rewarded for their work, not criminalized. Take the recent fiasco over the Black Sabbath "Paranoid" reissue - the quad is a feckin' needledrop. So either the label does not care or it no longer has the 1/2" quad masters. The "underground" version is of far higher quality than the recent "official" release. Q8 is not as good (wow, flutter etc - but I have a plan to deal with that too) but still higher fidelity than any vinyl due to separation (SQ is around 3dB/channel in separation* with a pitiful 35dB S/N ratio at the very best when new & unplayed, plus of course vinyl degrades with every play. As does tape, of course, although not as fast.
* - I think this got improved on later, but it was never better than 6dB at the very, very best. Average is still a poor 3dB/channel.

Another problem with the labels is they employ people who are frankly clueless. Most modern CD is unlistenable due to hypercompression, and MP3 is a disaster of massive proportions.
The distortion caused by hypercompression is not obvious to a lot of people (who have grown up with it & think it is how music is supposed to sound on CD, and blame the format as opposed to the motherfeckers who put out this crap. Check out this video, which will clearly show you the massive distortions caused by this practise - and how to prove it to yourself as well. http://www.tcelectronic.com/rome.asp - you want the second one down, "The Loudness Wars" by Thomas Lund. Prepare for a nasty shock. or Two. Psychoacoustic masking stops you hearing this - usually - but it is getting so bad now that even this cannot hide the mess that is being made of our musical legacy.
 

jaybird100

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
1,104
Location
Pembroke Pines, FL
Very interesting, Neil. I thank you. It's a shame the record industry--on both sides of the pond--has deteriorated the way it has. This can also explain why there are a number of artists who are investing their own money in releasing their material themselves, typically on a very limited basis, with availability generally on line. While I'm not a big fan of MP3, it seems that's how these artists are getting their music out there, via downloads. That's going to be the future of the music business. Physical media, such as CD's are going to go by the wayside in favor of downloads, and along with it goes the quality of the sound. People today, especially the young people today, have gotten used to this reduction in quality that they don't care how it sounds as long as they have the music available to them.

I do own an iPod, and it's more for use at work (I sell stereos for what passes for a living these days), and the iPod is a good way to have a wide variety of music available for demonstrating systems. I like the convenience of it, but it's no substitute for listening to my vinyl or my CD's. I've even put music from DVD-A discs onto the iPod, after encoding them in QS to allow the surround sound to be preserved in some way. Playing them via Pro Logic II music mode yields very impressive results. But it's still compressed, and while the average consumer these days doesn't know the difference, I do. I feel like there's a deception going on, but that's just the state of the industry now. People want convenience over quality. It's sad, but you have to roll with the flow.
 

fredblue

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
23,306
Location
London, England
Very interesting, Neil. I thank you. It's a shame the record industry--on both sides of the pond--has deteriorated the way it has. This can also explain why there are a number of artists who are investing their own money in releasing their material themselves, typically on a very limited basis, with availability generally on line. While I'm not a big fan of MP3, it seems that's how these artists are getting their music out there, via downloads. That's going to be the future of the music business. Physical media, such as CD's are going to go by the wayside in favor of downloads, and along with it goes the quality of the sound. People today, especially the young people today, have gotten used to this reduction in quality that they don't care how it sounds as long as they have the music available to them.

I do own an iPod, and it's more for use at work (I sell stereos for what passes for a living these days), and the iPod is a good way to have a wide variety of music available for demonstrating systems. I like the convenience of it, but it's no substitute for listening to my vinyl or my CD's. I've even put music from DVD-A discs onto the iPod, after encoding them in QS to allow the surround sound to be preserved in some way. Playing them via Pro Logic II music mode yields very impressive results. But it's still compressed, and while the average consumer these days doesn't know the difference, I do. I feel like there's a deception going on, but that's just the state of the industry now. People want convenience over quality. It's sad, but you have to roll with the flow.
maybe that's the future!? you've just invented it, jaybird100! QS encoded downloads! :D
 

fredblue

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
23,306
Location
London, England
It's good, but for some reason I can't do it with SACD's. I get hum in the signal that I don't get with DVD-A. Gotta figure out why.
That's odd! I bet Neil Wilkes would know why..!

my own stab in the dark hunch would be SACDs ultrasonic weirdness (that cats hate so much!) maybe having something to do with it!? Or The SQ-info is contained at a frequency DSD resolves as audible hum?!

With CD-4 LP, the carrier for the rear channel info was contained above the threshold of human hearing in the spectrum but maybe some artefact of the SQ matrixing is audible if manipulated in a certain way that only SACD with its weird/clever, depending how you look at it, techno jiggery-pokery, can do..!?

Spooky!! :D
 

jaybird100

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
1,104
Location
Pembroke Pines, FL
That's odd! I bet Neil Wilkes would know why..!

my own stab in the dark hunch would be SACDs ultrasonic weirdness (that cats hate so much!) maybe having something to do with it!? Or The SQ-info is contained at a frequency DSD resolves as audible hum?!

With CD-4 LP, the carrier for the rear channel info was contained above the threshold of human hearing in the spectrum but maybe some artefact of the SQ matrixing is audible if manipulated in a certain way that only SACD with its weird/clever, depending how you look at it, techno jiggery-pokery, can do..!?

Spooky!! :D
SQ info??? Why would SQ come into this? SACD's are discrete, as are DVD-A's. I thought it might be a grounding problem in my SACD player, but I use the same one for my DVD-A discs without any problem. My encoder seems to be working just fine. I'll solve it one of these days. I had great results with CD-4 LP's until my demodulator lost a channel. Can anyone still fix a JVC 4DD-5?
 

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
15,954
Location
Connecticut
I am bumping this old thread as some direction was needed with a few new posts along the way. These are the QQ guidelines.

Please remember that there are many other places around the net that do not have any policies and they can do whatever they like with whatever they like. Here I like to keep it legit. I am not sure if it's worth it anymore, but I don't want this place to be a haven for file distribution.

So, whether you like it or not, or agree with it or not, these are the QQ rules.
 

Quadrifoglio

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
25
Location
Helsinki, Finland
Not in the EU, it doesn't.
Copying is strictly verboten - period.
(I use the german word deliberately.....bloody EU nazis.)
No it's not. And I too realize this is a very old tread, but a valid subject. Also the QQ rules are very good for obvious reasons.

"In the EU", that's a wild and broad statement. Finland has been in the EU for more than 20 years, yet all that time, and still it is perfectly legal to make copies of all recordings you have bought, for your own personal use, for your family members AND for your friends. And this even applies to material legally loaned from your friends or a public library (libraries need to purchase special copies normally for this kind of use). This has been in effect since the late 1960's for music and early 1980's for videos.

In Finland consumers have been forced to pay an extra fee for all recording media, including all kinds of blank tape and CD's and DVD's etc. Those funds collected (and the radio airplay, public performance, use in movies, videos etc.) have been distributed according to international (and national) laws concerning copyrights to the owners of that intellectual property. These organisations here are called "Teosto" (Organisation for creators or intellectual property, music, photos, videos, art) and "Gramex" (monitoring all broadcast material and public events). Unfortunately for commercial radio this has meant that they play more American music, especialy the kind that does not need royalties reported and paid for, instead of contemporary and local or European music.

Even bootlegging a live performance is legal in here, of course an artist may have in the ticket conditions that "any kind of recording is prohibited" but in today's world of cell phones offering better video and audio quality than some semi-professional gear form the 1970´s or 1980´s it's pretty much moot. As long as you are not SELLING the copies of the bootleg recordings you have made yourself, they are 100% legal. IF you would take any money against a copy you would be violating the copyright legislation and you should report and pay royalties to the artist, publishing rights owner etc and the artist and/or publishing rights owner could even prohibit you from "publishing" that material in any form or a public presentation or broadcast use any of that material. BUT they can not prevent me privately playing that material for my own enjoyment, or playing it to my family or friends, no matter how many they are, as long as this "event" is not considered public or as long as I don't receive any money from anyone for doing so. So as long as this happens in a private venue (not open to the general public) or I don't get any money for that, it is perfectly legal.

If I bring some of that material with me to the UK or the USA I might be breaking the local laws there (unintentionally), which again is a little bit crazy, as I don't have a separate system and internal hard drive for my laptop for traveling, so whenever I travel in those countries, I do have "illegal" live recordings on my laptop and I could end up going to jail and having my laptop confiscated, right?

I hardly believe having ripped copies (in MP3, MP4, or MEPG4 form) of the CD's and DVD's I have bought in my iTunes on my laptop would be considered "illegal" in any western country, please correct me if I am wrong regarding some other country than North Korea, ok?

I may be mistaken, but I think anyone who visits Switzerland and has TomTom or some other navigation software in their cell phone, that stores the locations of speed monitoring cameras on highways is breaking the law and could get a severe punishment. I haven't removed it from my phone, but I never use it when driving with one of our cars in Switzerland. Instead I use google maps and monitor the driving speed manually. :)
 

HomerJAU

Moderator: MCH Media Players
Staff member
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
3,100
Location
Melbourne, Australia
I’ve made some DTS DVDs for my car that has a 5.1 DVD player. I can’t drive it to another country as Australia is not (yet) connected by road to anywhere! So no worries with travelling! :cool:
 
2
Top