Quad LP/Tape Poll Santana: Abraxas [SQ/Q8]

[sjcorne]

ok I read all the reviews most are about SQ.
Where is the Q8 reviews. Can some one tell me how the quad mix sounds on Q8

SQ and Q8 are the same mix...the Q8 is more discrete as it hasn't been encoded to SQ matrix and then decoded back.

I have the DTS-CD (which is like the Q8 but with better fidelity). It's very discrete as most Columbia quads are, but it's an early mix that suffers from a lot of gimmicky panning effects.

 

[jaypfunk]

We need a Santana QUADIO box set!!

 

[4-earredwonder]

We need a Santana QUADIO box set!!

Take it up with SONY Japan. The Complete Santana QUADIO catalogue in luscious 7" packaging! http://rockandrollphotogallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/095.Carlos_Santana_1972.jpg

I'd be SO in for that one!

 

[ar surround]

I know, I know. Sorry, kap'n. Still praying that someday we'll get a Quad SACD or Blu-ray audio of Abraxas (and Santana, III etc. while we're at it) which will make all of this a moot point.

Dreams do indeed come true...

 

[jefe1]

At this release rate we could get 5-6 more Santana Quads from Japan next year.........
My wallet is crying. So am I but its tears of joy.

 

[MidiMagic]

The US SQ is a bit lacking on bass. The mix is aggressive, but relies too much on trickery (panning.)

Terrible compared to stereo mix. Lead guitar literally goes missing at times and there is no bass.

Still, I would be really intrigued to hear the Quad master tapes of "Amigos" and "Festival", regardless, not least to hear exactly how they are supposed to sound without the limitations of SQ, etc.

..and yet Catero's earlier "HeadHunters" & "Thrust" Quads were excellent mixes.. makes me wonder if something didn't go awry with their Quad gear out there, or maybe they just gave up trying as Quad limped on and they were committed to Quad (contractually, I mean.. or because the artists themselves, i.e. Herbie Hancock and Santana wanted their work mixed and released in Quad at that time?) but thought "who really cares about this anymore? lets just fake it, maybe no-one will notice!"

SQ made from a 4-track discrete mix will have some problems.

They probably just ran it through the 4-corners encoder and then through the record-production process.

The 4-corners encoder makes the following changes to the discrete mix:

- The images from the sides (LF-LB and RF-RB) are moved from where they were in the discrete mix.

- One diagonal split (LB-RF) is missing, encoded in another direction.

- Very deep bass may be shifted in location.

The record production process also affects the locations, especially in deep bass. When a record is cut, the vertical stylus motion must have less deep bass than the horizontal stylus motion to keep the stylus from jumping out of the groove.

This is why most stereo records have the deep bass centered between the stereo speakers. A special filter is included in the record cutting process to ensure this.

If deep bass is panned on the discrete tape to positions other than center front, it will be attenuated and possibly shifted in encoded position on the SQ record.

It is much better to make an SQ mix with a position encoder or the front-oriented and back oriented encoders. And the deep bass must be panned between the front speakers.

I have "Headhunters" in SQ. I'll have to give it a spin again.

 

[MidiMagic]

I wonder what surround master SQ does with the shifted side encodings and diagonal split.

 

[Sashaaa]

This post is mirrored here which is my in progress rym list of all the surround releases I've heard (still around 100 to go but I'll get there!).

This is maybe my favorite quad mix out there (maybe tomita's stuff is better, but eh). I think it's unique in the sense that it perfectly balances the "maturity" of modern surround mixes and discreteness of good ol' 70s quad mixes. Don't get me wrong, I love extremely discrete and daring mixes (my favorite 5.1 albums are all of the flaming lips' stuff after all), but sometimes with quad when you do things like have drums in the front right and rear left, it's super discrete but it sounds really awkward. That's a bit of an extreme example, but I think y'all know what I mean. It's understandable why some mixing engineers back in the day had some confusing mixing choices like this, the technology was completely new and nobody really knew what exactly to do with it. There wasn't really much like it before.

Anyways, what separates Abraxas from other quad and 5.1 mixes? Well, Abraxas is daring and highly discrete, but also not unbalanced or confusing mixing wise. Whoever mixed this certainly wasn't afraid to put main parts and instruments in the rears such as guitar solo's, but they also weren't afraid to be a bit conservative at times by simply putting the drums and main parts in the front with some extra's in the rear. They knew exactly what to do with the mix at the right time, which I feel like is the main thing that this disc succeeds at. It's that one golden medium for me where it's super discrete, yet immersive and balanced. Abraxas also lends itself extremely well to the multichannel format. With all of the extra percussion and parts, there's plenty of content to put into all of the speakers to span across the whole speaker array.

What about the music though? Well, it's excellent. The whole album is just ridiculously good Latin Rock played by musicians who are way too good at what they do. This album reminds me of Boris' Pink in the sense that multiple times throughout the album I found myself laughing just because of how damn good the music is here. It's got some insane Latin Rock bangers such as the classic "Black Magic Woman", but it's also got some great slow burners such as the almost equally classic "Samba Pa Ti". It's super consistent in quality and has great emotional dynamics. The flow from track to track is excellent too. All killer no filler on this one.

I feel like every time I try to write down my thoughts on something I end up writing way more than I intend haha.

Anyways my ratings:
Music: 9/10
Mix: 10/10
Overall: 9/10

 

[The56Kid]

This post is mirrored here which is my in progress rym list of all the surround releases I've heard (still around 100 to go but I'll get there!).

This is maybe my favorite quad mix out there (maybe tomita's stuff is better, but eh). I think it's unique in the sense that it perfectly balances the "maturity" of modern surround mixes and discreteness of good ol' 70s quad mixes. Don't get me wrong, I love extremely discrete and daring mixes (my favorite 5.1 albums are all of the flaming lips' stuff after all), but sometimes with quad when you do things like have drums in the front right and rear left, it's super discrete but it sounds really awkward. That's a bit of an extreme example, but I think y'all know what I mean. It's understandable why some mixing engineers back in the day had some confusing mixing choices like this, the technology was completely new and nobody really knew what exactly to do with it. There wasn't really much like it before.

Anyways, what separates Abraxas from other quad and 5.1 mixes? Well, Abraxas is daring and highly discrete, but also not unbalanced or confusing mixing wise. Whoever mixed this certainly wasn't afraid to put main parts and instruments in the rears such as guitar solo's, but they also weren't afraid to be a bit conservative at times by simply putting the drums and main parts in the front with some extra's in the rear. They knew exactly what to do with the mix at the right time, which I feel like is the main thing that this disc succeeds at. It's that one golden medium for me where it's super discrete, yet immersive and balanced. Abraxas also lends itself extremely well to the multichannel format. With all of the extra percussion and parts, there's plenty of content to put into all of the speakers to span across the whole speaker array.

What about the music though? Well, it's excellent. The whole album is just ridiculously good Latin Rock played by musicians who are way too good at what they do. This album reminds me of Boris' Pink in the sense that multiple times throughout the album I found myself laughing just because of how damn good the music is here. It's got some insane Latin Rock bangers such as the classic "Black Magic Woman", but it's also got some great slow burners such as the almost equally classic "Samba Pa Ti". It's super consistent in quality and has great emotional dynamics. The flow from track to track is excellent too. All killer no filler on this one.

I feel like every time I try to write down my thoughts on something I end up writing way more than I intend haha.

Anyways my ratings:
Music: 9/10
Mix: 10/10
Overall: 9/10

Great review in anticipation of the new CDJapan 7” release!

 

[Sashaaa]

Great review in anticipation of the new CDJapan 7” release!

Hey thanks man. Yeah I'm definitely looking forward to that and hope that it introduces a new audience to this quad mix .

 

[Greg Z]

My Abraxas SACD arrived from CDJapan today along with Herbie Hancock - Headhunters.
I know what I'm listening to tonight.

 

[Obbop]

Based upon memory . . . LP vinyl output rushing towards the beloved and admired Sansui QRX-9001 with wires scurrying to reach the four speakers planted semi-equidistant to each other in the patter most pleasing to my audio-sensing aspect of my brain.

Various decoding modes used for matrix quad input with all providing a pleasing result. With Black Magic Woman a more-than-pleasing output that sent the senses reeling at times with near-dizziness occurring at times when the guitar swirled around my head traveling my listening room at the . . . speed of sound!!! Wheeeeeee!!!!

Whoever the recording engineer(s) were responsible for the finished output of Black Magic Woman did an admirable job in my inestimable opinion. The entire LP was good but Black Magic Woman is a monument to the possibilities that quad brought to the world back in the 1970s.

 

[Doug G.]

I had to downgrade my vote from a 10 to a 7 because listening to it now and comparing to other SQ records, even the others of Santana, the sound quality is pretty bad. The quad engineers, mixers, etc. kind of messed this one up. Bass is terrible and the sound is hollow in most places with a few exceptions.

Actually, the best I ever heard this album was from a two channel 8-track, years ago. The sound was nice and full with deep bass captured.

Doug

 

[RustyM]