QS MATRIX , ITEMS OF INTEREST (Billboard 1972-1976)

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
By that time, it became known that the high sales of Q4 reel recorders was due to people building home studios instead of quadraphonic systems. Some company heads got so mad that the company threw out everything quadraphonic they had.

Every Q4 reel system I ever serviced (as a service technician) was in a home studio.
Maybe ,but if I remember correctly it was difficult to try and get Q4 releases , and the selection was limited.
Too bad as I thought Q4 was the best quad system in which to playback and hear quad .
For me personally, I never saw any Q4 tapes for sale in any local shop.
Players or Q4 Decks were available here, but a bit costly.
 
I never saw any Q4 tapes for sale in any local shop.
Correct, I purchased all of mine mailorder. Most from "Barclay Crocker".
Players or Q4 Decks were available here, but a bit costly.
I bought mine from "Kelly's Stereo Mart", it cost about $1700. The Akai GX-630DSS. I bought it for Quad but it had record monitoring capabilities for home studio use. I did make a few such recordings of a friends band, because I had the ability. Home studio use was never my top priority. I used it with 10.5" reels to make long stereo mixed tapes as well.
 
Maybe ,but if I remember correctly it was difficult to try and get Q4 releases , and the selection was limited.
Too bad as I thought Q4 was the best quad system in which to playback and hear quad .
For me personally, I never saw any Q4 tapes for sale in any local shop.
Players or Q4 Decks were available here, but a bit costly.
I saw the Q4 tapes the first year or so. Then they disappeared because they didn't sell.
Those using the Q4 machine for a studio didn't need a Q4 tape.
 
I've never seen pre-recorded stereo reel tapes for sale in a store either.
IIRC, I saw a handful back in the 60s and EARLY 70s. If it wasn’t a record store, it might have been Sears . But they were rare. I had just a couple of them in the day. Once my R2R died and I couldn’t afford a new one, I gave up.
 
Back in
IIRC, I saw a handful back in the 60s and EARLY 70s. If it wasn’t a record store, it might have been Sears . But they were rare. I had just a couple of them in the day. Once my R2R died and I couldn’t afford a new one, I gave up.
Back in the 60's, I remember Harmony Music, in North Miami Beach, having a large selection of 4 track, R2R stereo tapes, going for $7.95 each.They had them from RCA, Columbia, Capitol, and a few smaller labels.
 
Last edited:
After having sold off about 200 quad albums a few years back I was no longer going to play via original hardware, I have reacquired a number of the QS titles. So, no CD-4 but I just bought an AT Shibata stylus/cart for it's tracking, high frequency abilities, less groove wear. Not to start a firestorm, but what do folks find useful, or think of test records as an aid to dialing in a cartridge? Any favorites or no use? I have a couple, old Hifi Stereo Review from 1963, Shure Era IV 1976, but frankly have never dedicated the time to really testing the test record. Are any of the new ones far superior for any reason? Thanks.
 
After having sold off about 200 quad albums a few years back I was no longer going to play via original hardware, I have reacquired a number of the QS titles. So, no CD-4 but I just bought an AT Shibata stylus/cart for it's tracking, high frequency abilities, less groove wear. Not to start a firestorm, but what do folks find useful, or think of test records as an aid to dialing in a cartridge? Any favorites or no use? I have a couple, old Hifi Stereo Review from 1963, Shure Era IV 1976, but frankly have never dedicated the time to really testing the test record. Are any of the new ones far superior for any reason? Thanks.
I haven't found a test record useful for "dialing in" a cartridge. If the cartridge is properly aligned in the head shell, tracking force properly set, anti-skating adjusted properly, you'll get the best from the cartridge. If you can adjust tracking angle, that's icing on the cake. Not all turntables offer an adjustment for that. One little hint... if you have a "grooveless" segment on a record, as few test records have, I've found that if I use a laserdisc (yes, I still have a player for those) to set the anti-skate, I can adjust it more precisely than just setting the anti-skate control to the same setting as the tracking force. Since there are no grooves, it's easy to set anti-skate so that the arm, when lowered to the disc surface, stays put. No movement in, or out. When you can adjust the anti-skate on the fly, as my Technics 1200mk2 does, the adjustment is quick and easy. My favorite cartridge, a Denon DL-110, sounds wonderful after that.
 
Last edited:
After having sold off about 200 quad albums a few years back I was no longer going to play via original hardware, I have reacquired a number of the QS titles. So, no CD-4 but I just bought an AT Shibata stylus/cart for it's tracking, high frequency abilities, less groove wear. Not to start a firestorm, but what do folks find useful, or think of test records as an aid to dialing in a cartridge? Any favorites or no use? I have a couple, old Hifi Stereo Review from 1963, Shure Era IV 1976, but frankly have never dedicated the time to really testing the test record. Are any of the new ones far superior for any reason? Thanks.
Check this thread for some good suggestions.

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...-capable-for-cd-4-playback.34014/#post-685765
 
I have some from the 1950s. Unfortunately, no player for them anymore. They are half track stereo.
If I’m not mistaken, most quarter-track consumer R-R decks will play that recording. I know with my long dead Akai X-1800SD, the tracks were interleaved by playback direction. That meant playback compatibility with half-track, but recordings made on them would be a mess on a half-track stereo recorder.
 
The ones I saw back then were 4 track.
First we had full-track mono.
Then we had half-track mono.
Then we got half track stereo offset heads.
Next we had half-track stereo inline head.
Next, we got quarter track mono.
Only after that, quarter-track stereo appeared.

None of them was compatible with any of the others. Each required a different player.

Ditto with quarter track quad.

That was why I started using cassettes as soon as they went stereo. Stereo and mono were compatible.

And I have been sick of incompatibility in audio products ever since.

Incompatible matrix systems (with each other)
Incompatible CD-4 (can't use older equipment)
Incompatible Betamax vs VHS
Incompatible Elcaset
Incompatible computer upgrades
Incompatible DTS and AC3
Incompatible discrete video audio systems
Incompatible HDTV
Incompatible BluRay
Incompatible Atmos, Aero, and 360

When Dolby Surround because the standard, at least we had compatibility for over 10 years.
 
When Dolby Surround because the standard, at least we had compatibility for over 10 years.
Dolby Surround was compatible with both SQ and QS decoders. All Quad decoders did a much better job than Dolby's official decoder!
Dolby surround was designed for movie soundtracks not music. Dolby surround did a terrible job of enhancing stereo.
 
Back
Top