This could be the ULTIMATE way to preserve the quad recordings (in an analog format of course). Especially the Q8 and Q4 tapes
Quad Linda...Thanks for this enlightening new info....I always wondered why I'd never seen one of these units for sale.
I also have an image of a (equally mysterious...or not) Astrocom/Marlux Quadraphonic Reel to Reel, if I can scrounge enough cash together to replace my recently kaput scanner, I'll add that to the hardware database at some point as well...
Well not quite.The Astocom Marlux, was a cassette with eight tracks, four in each direction. Those would be compatible with stereo and mono cassette machines where a cassette recorded on the four track studio deck would play only two tracks on other cassette machines, similar to playing a Q8 on a stereo 8 deck.
As everybody also knows by now - the cassette portastudios - like the half-speed Talking Books for the Blind and the 3/4 speed background music cassettes both of which use four monaural tracks two in each direction - use equidistant tracks.The tape would only be marginally compatible.
Philips' insistence that all cassettes be compatible with all players, and their patents that assured this, killed the idea of a discrete quad cassette. When you look at the track layout they'd require, and how narrow those tracks would have to be, keeping proper head alignment would be tricky. Also, how effective could Dolby B or C be on such narrow tracks? I would have loved to have seen a discrete quad cassette deck, but it wasn't in the cards.Philips 'main' idea for a 4 channel Compact Cassette was to use a 4-4-4 compatibility matrix like CD-4 used, so that both mono and stereo cassette decks would play back all the channels. Unfortunately, the tapes would have played only in one direction for half the total time - and adding tracks together add's noise and Dolby B didn't provide enough noise reduction to offset the increase in going to quad. The other option they considered was splitting each mono track into two, making the cassette an 8-track medium, but the tracks would be so narrow that the noise increase would have been terrible, in addition to the difficulties in making recording/playback heads accurately with such small dimensions. And a 4-2-4 matrix was out of the question because the cassette format couldn't hold phase and level between channels accurately enough to decode properly. So, Philips simply refused to license any companies from making 'non-standard' (i.e. quad) Compact Cassette decks. This didn't apply to cassette units like the Teac multi-track PortaStudio's (is that the correct name?) because their tapes were never meant to be compatible with existing consumer gear.
Mea Culpa! I stand corrected. Must be a brain fart. At 66, I'm entitled, aren't I? In addition, I'm not sure that I ever returned to this thread until today...
After reading my original post, I realize that it makes no sense. It contradicts itself. So, it is now deleted.
As Nick mentioned, I do recall JVC working on a similar deck. I vaguely recall ('74 ??) seeing it in a JVC brochure, but never in person. And JVC's midwest HQ was in the next 'burb from our store. So, we got to see new products when they first hit the street. We could fill special orders instantly if we drove over annd picked it up.
The late, great Ty (Disclord) has a wonderful post, as well. I recommend you (re)read Nick's and Ty's posts. Ty's knowledge and insights into matrix hardware/software (+more) was astounding! He was involved in the design and beta testing of the Surround Master. His input was invaluable. RIP, Ty.
My better half calls that ... DamnesiaMea Culpa! I stand corrected. Must be a brain fart. At 66, I'm entitled, aren't I?
Philips' intention was that any cassette recording was to be fully compatible with any cassette player. Any variation from that violated the patent and licensing agreements. This Audax deck may have been set up to use all four tracks in one direction, like an open reel tape. If so, it would have gone against the patent and licensing agreements, and Philip's could have prevented it from being marketed.From my post in Tapeheads.net:
http://www.tapeheads.net/showpost.php?p=461097&postcount=3
Specs seem typical of 1972 vintage cassette machines, maybe Philips
and Dolby thought the cassette medium in 1972 was too fragile to
reliably support 8 tracks on the narrow cassette tape.
Kirk Bayne
Any tape deck with a s/n ratio of just 46 dB would be barely useable as a dictating machine - any hifi aspirations for such a device would be laughable!From my post in Tapeheads.net:
http://www.tapeheads.net/showpost.php?p=461097&postcount=3
Specs seem typical of 1972 vintage cassette machines, maybe Philips
and Dolby thought the cassette medium in 1972 was too fragile to
reliably support 8 tracks on the narrow cassette tape.
Kirk Bayne
Mea Culpa! I stand corrected. Must be a brain fart. At 66, I'm entitled, aren't I? In addition, I'm not sure that I ever returned to this thread until today...
After reading my original post, I realize that it makes no sense. It contradicts itself. So, it is now deleted.
As Nick mentioned, I do recall JVC working on a similar deck. I vaguely recall ('74 ??) seeing it in a JVC brochure, but never in person. And JVC's midwest HQ was in the next 'burb from our store. So, we got to see new products when they first hit the street. We could fill special orders instantly if we drove over annd picked it up.
The late, great Ty (Disclord) has a wonderful post, as well. I recommend you (re)read Nick's and Ty's posts. Ty's knowledge and insights into matrix hardware/software (+more) was astounding! He was involved in the design and beta testing of the Surround Master. His input was invaluable. RIP, Ty.
Enter your email address to join: