It's a Sad Situation

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Doug G.

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
2,237
Location
Austin, Minnesota
Tonight, I have been out there reading some old threads about original quad in forums other than this one and it is quite astounding the amount of misinformation/disinformation there is. So many out there, even guys who were around during the initial quad era, who really haven't a clue but blurt crap out, anyway.

Doug
 

Sonik Wiz

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
2,783
Location
Kansas City
Tonight, I have been out there reading some old threads about original quad in forums other than this one and it is quite astounding the amount of misinformation/disinformation there is. So many out there, even guys who were around during the initial quad era, who really haven't a clue but blurt crap out, anyway.

Doug
Well Sir, that's why I don't read original quad threads other than this forum.:sneaky:
 

kfbkfb

800 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
899
Location
Midwest USA
My favorite old school Quad issue:
The FM carriers used for CD-4 carry the rear channels (in one article, the author kept switching back and forth, saying rear channel signal in some parts of the article and difference signal in other parts of the same article [if anyone is interested, I'll post it in the QQ Lib]).

I guess it was still an issue in 1975, F-P-M Quadradiscs had this statement:
"All rear channel information will appear in the front channels in stereo when played on stereo equipment."


Kirk Bayne
 

par4ken

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
1,609
Location
NW Ontario
My favorite old school Quad issue:
The FM carriers used for CD-4 carry the rear channels (in one article, the author kept switching back and forth, saying rear channel signal in some parts of the article and difference signal in other parts of the same article [if anyone is interested, I'll post it in the QQ Lib]).

I guess it was still an issue in 1975, F-P-M Quadradiscs had this statement:
"All rear channel information will appear in the front channels in stereo when played on stereo equipment."


Kirk Bayne
There were a lot of errors in magazine articles, some authors were confused or just didn't know what they were talking about!
 

Beefalo

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
2,726
Location
You should hear Cornholio sing "Lesbian Seagull"
Tonight, I have been out there reading some old threads about original quad in forums other than this one and it is quite astounding the amount of misinformation/disinformation there is. So many out there, even guys who were around during the initial quad era, who really haven't a clue but blurt crap out, anyway.

Doug
Maybe these are the guys writing the lousy quad threads ?

MV5BMjdkMDNkYjMtNTU0YS00YzVjLTk1NmItYWVjOWNmMWFhMTRlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMzM4NjcxOTc@._V1_UY1200_CR...jpg
 

ar surround

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Messages
2,956
Location
New Joisey
There were a lot of errors in magazine articles, some authors were confused or just didn't know what they were talking about!
They have always been, especially in trade type publications. Then the info makes its way onto Wikipedia as a verified source and the misinformation is embedded as gospel…forever.
 
Last edited:

DuncanS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
6,413
Location
UK
They has always been, especially in trade type publications. Then the info makes its way onto Wikipedia as a verified source and the misinformation is embedded as gospel…forever.
In the old days at least the audio magazines used to give you the specifications of the equipment (though even as a teenager I bought them for the adverts to see what I couldn't afford!), now there are no specs, just full of drivel, aka "sounds like the essence of walnuts on a summers day", i.e. this is what we were told the manufacturer wanted us to write so they'd pay for lots of advertising space, and so we don't care if the claims break all the laws of physics :devilish: So now when I get one I just look at the adverts!
 

kfbkfb

800 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
899
Location
Midwest USA
My 1st audio/stereo related mag was the 1972-01 issue of Stereo Review (which I still have), I was and still am influenced by the world view of Julian Hirsch (to sum up, very pro-specifications).

Just recently, in another forum, an answer to my post mentioned Julian Hirsch (I linked to a [good] review he wrote) in a somewhat disparaging way.

One (IMHO) OTT example was this Hi Fi News article about QS written by Sansui:

Occasionally, when answering a surround sound related post in other forums, I post a link to QQ and a suggestion to search/post in QQ for accurate info.


Kirk Bayne
 

Doug G.

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
2,237
Location
Austin, Minnesota
The true believer audiophiles started attacking Julian Hirsch right around the same time they started writing things like Duncan alluded to above. My favorite has always been "... the violins bloomed like fine roses in a garden right before my eyes/ears...". I really did read a very close version of that in a speaker review, years ago. Or was it an amplifier review? Or a turntable review?

Doug
 

DuncanS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
6,413
Location
UK
I keep humming an Elton tune, everytime I see this thread title pop up.
The one that goes through my head on reading the title is 'Mad World' from Tears For Fears '83 album 'The Hurting' (and I often am after reading the cr*p in Hi-Fi Mags).
:unsure: which makes we wonder will we see that album ever in surround?
 

kfbkfb

800 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
899
Location
Midwest USA
I bought my 1st copy of The Absolute Sound in the mid-1980s at a small bookstore in Westport (I confess - I bought it to have a laugh about their prose).

Julian Hirsch would sometimes take on the audio subjectivists in his Technical Talk column in Stereo Review.

I don't recall reading subjective writing about Quad though (other than issues with the quad mix [many times, a classical music mix non-ambience type recording]).


Kirk Bayne
 

Sal1950

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
1,015
Location
Central FL
In this months Stereophile "As We See It" (Aug 2021) John Atkinson writes how Gordon Holt in 1999 was pushing for the magazine to change it's coverage direction of 2ch to multich, believing it was the future of audio. Atkinson rejected Holt's ideas and this difference of opinion is what let to Gordon leaving the publication.
I can only imagine if instead of the magazine's writers preaching that 2ch vinyl/analog is the path to SOTA sound, they had promoted multich with the same exuberance, what things might look like today ? @Kal Rubinson for Editor!
 

Sonik Wiz

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
2,783
Location
Kansas City
In this months Stereophile "As We See It" (Aug 2021) John Atkinson writes how Gordon Holt in 1999 was pushing for the magazine to change it's coverage direction of 2ch to multich, believing it was the future of audio. Atkinson rejected Holt's ideas and this difference of opinion is what let to Gordon leaving the publication.
I can only imagine if instead of the magazine's writers preaching that 2ch vinyl/analog is the path to SOTA sound, they had promoted multich with the same exuberance, what things might look like today ? @Kal Rubinson for Editor!
Indeed!
As I've mentioned elsewhere it was J. Gordon Holt's column in Pop 'Tronics about Hafler vs Scheiber: 4 chs on Disc that alerted me to this thing called quad. Actually that was maybe 1971 & so early on I don't think it had a settled name yet. Holt was a pioneer on this topic, obviously interested.

In another Stereophile column he remarked about going to the latest CES show & the amazing super high quality gear he auditioned. Things were sounding better than ever but at the same time this increase in performance revealed short comings too. Basically he was referring to having a distorted stereo soundfield where all the ambience huddles around the stereo speakers. It needs to be spread around, there needs to be a decoder for stereo. In short he proclaimed " high end audio needs surround sound." Yup, there he said it.
 

par4ken

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
1,609
Location
NW Ontario
Two channel audiophiles are snobs. They STILL insist their two channel systems can equal surround sound in three dimensional presentation.

I think it started out as an excuse for their wives not letting them set up a quad system. :D

Doug
I agree, a lot of the insistence that two channels are enough and the only proper way to listen to music is their justification to not have to spend even more money and of coarse the wife factor. We all need more women like Quad Linda!
 

jimfisheye

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
2,125
Those 'two channel snob' "audiophiles" must absolutely hate live music! All the direct discrete sound sources on a stage firing at them! (Drums, multiple amplifiers, etc) And then reflections in the room itself. Live concerts must be an abomination to them. A Pink Floyd show back in the day with their quad surround system and their joysticks would have been one of the 7 levels of hell to them!

Some folks not knowing things about stuff is all well and good. Especially technical details around audio. It IS kind of weird that it comes out of trade mags in the industry and the mouths of supposed enthusiasts though!

The most triggering to read is the gaslighting with DRM formats though. Mischaracterizing DRM as quality improvement.
 
Top