Santana - III Sony Japan Quad SACD (Release date: November 24th, 2021)

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
By the end of 1975 CBS realized that quad wasn't going to achieve mass market adoption, and moved from trying to get everything they put out also mixed in quad to a more selective approach, where only big sellers and marquee names would get the quad treatment. Who can blame them for the change of tack too, how many copies of stuff like Lee Michaels Nice Day for Something or the two Buddy Miles quads made their way to the cutout bins, along with a lot of early CBS quad releases? I think Stan Kavan may have said explicitly that they were moving to this more selective approach on one of those WNYC Men of Hi-Fi shows from 1975, in fact. RCA did exactly the same thing in 1975, the only difference being that they released far fewer quads in '75 and '76, and none in 1977 whereas CBS did a fair few.

The simple (and to me, obvious) reason that they didn't do real quad mixes of Amigos (1976) and Festival (1977) is the number of copies the quad mixes of those albums would've sold simply didn't merit it, especially since they were done at Wally Heider in San Francisco and not at one of CBS's own studios in NY or San Fran, and I'm sure CBS didn't want to pay out to have them done there. I believe by that point Santana had renegotiated his contract with Columbia and probably had sign-off over who engineered his albums (hence why he was recording at Heider's with Fred Catero and not at CBS SF or LA) so they couldn't just send the album down to Dick Bogert and Warren Vincent like they had with other stuff (Tower of Power, Return to Forever, Miracles, etc.) during that period. I think if they'd done these albums at CBS SF with Glen Kolotkin (like Welcome and Borboletta) there'd probably be a much higher chance of getting a 'real' quad mix.

Also bear in mind that during the absolute height of quad in '73/'74, Abraxas, which was CBS's best-selling quad release only sold 250,000 copies to the stereo version's two million, and by 1976, according to industry figures quad sales had fallen off a cliff, so spending $10k (that's about 50 grand in today's money) to do a quad mix of an album represented something of a risk, because do you think they were even selling 25,000 copies of some of those latter-era CBS releases? Based on how rare some of those 1977 releases (Isley Bros, Return to Forever, Maynard Ferguson, etc.) I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't even sell 10,000 copies. I also don't think they anticipated that people would care about, or be discussing this stuff 10 years later, let alone 40 or 50 years later - they were just trying to get a product finished and on the shelves to meet a street date, and if that one didn't work out there was undoubtedly another album by the same artist to record the following year. Someone probably just made a spur of the moment decision based on the balance sheets those years, and here we are debating it all these years later.

It's also worth noting that Al Lawrence, who was the head of CBS's quad program, seemingly quietly left the company either in late '75 or early '76 (he shows up writing studio reviews for an audio magazine in mid '76) so there was really no one at the helm quality control-wise - maybe Santana's recording contract called for a quad version to be issued, and the bean-counters said "we need a quad mix as cheap as possible!" and they got what they paid for. What CBS was doing here wasn't unprecedented either - both of the Guess Who's last two albums for RCA (1974's Power in the Music and 1975's Flavours) .

Fizzy, there's no doubt that you love quad and that you've brought a ton of interesting information here, but your continued insistence in this thread (and many others like it) on ignoring overwhelming, often incontrovertible evidence in favour of continuing to propagate thoroughly-debunked rumors and baseless hearsay (often from outdated print publications) about the existence of supposed quad mixes does the hobby a great disservice. Not just in terms of muddying the waters intellectually, but also by encouraging people to spend their hard-earned money chasing quad El Dorados (not the ELO album) that never existed in the first place. You can't simply wish this stuff into existence - this album never had a real "bad quad mix", the Tommy soundtrack never had a QS release, and Captiol Records never released a dozen QS stealth quads in 1974 - no matter how many times you repeat the story.

This is absolutely a fake quad, unless you believe that using an upmixed stereo source counts as a "bad quad mix." As @sjcorne noted, the quad version is just the stereo version with a reverbed version in the rears, and as this album had a Q8 release there's no grey area where you can blame it on the vagaries of SQ decoding. The same goes for the other "Catero quads" from '76/'77 including Herbie Hancock's Secrets, which I checked the Q8 version myself and posted about in another thread here, and Amigos, which despite being SQ-only has the exact same sound as the other fake albums that did have a Q8 release.


Steely , you using the term "maybe" constitutes that you are speculating when.....on what Santana did with the last two Quad (bad quad) recordings .
Because like everyone else ,we just don't know . Do we ?

FWIW I am not promoting that people should spend their 💰 on anything . An opinion is just that ,"an opinion" .
I believe even you yourself are guilty of opinions .

And bad quad or( good quad ) or not I do like the album Santana -Festival. I hope your not suggesting people should never ever buy something they may like Musically, because that would be doing as you say a great disservice.
I believe most individuals on this forum are wise enough to make a valued decision when seeking out their favourite items from a Band they like .
You want to toss blame on me ? Well sorry I did not mix the quad for Amigos, nor Festival. Try directing your anger for their failures to the responsible labels , please , Steely .
Also I do not like ,and never did like the album Amigos , so that shouldn’t be an issue , and I fail to see why it should be regarding my comments.

Additionally, and more importantly.....when did I ever state the Capitol Records were quad encoded !!? I suggest you reread my comments regarding that article , please .
I think you should find that the opposite is true !


As to the reference to outdated articles ,well pardon me , but all come from the quad era . And they're not my comments but someone who was at the right place ....at the right time .
And usually if not always I'm providing an answer to someone's question .
If you find the article in question , feel free to pipe up anytime . Others have and do .
 
I took out a second mortgage and switched my 2 open CDJapan orders over to DHL shipping ( and btw, CDJapan is not able to combine orders into one shipment....pathetic customer service ...so the $ DHL meter kept running.....), DHL alerted me orders would deliver tomorrow --But - both orders were delivered today !! Now, get me to the weekend......Ive got a lot of music to listen to
 
I took out a second mortgage and switched my 2 open CDJapan orders over to DHL shipping ( and btw, CDJapan is not able to combine orders into one shipment....pathetic customer service ...so the $ DHL meter kept running.....), DHL alerted me orders would deliver tomorrow --But - both orders were delivered today !! Now, get me to the weekend......Ive got a lot of music to listen to

The unfolding saga of MQA~maven MI RICKY ....... $50 extra in DHL s/h fees! Hmmm ..... what I could do with 50 bucks!
 
Steely , you using the term "maybe" constitutes that you are speculating when.....on what Santana did with the last two Quad (bad quad) recordings .
Because like everyone else ,we just don't know . Do we ?

FWIW I am not promoting that people should spend their 💰 on anything . An opinion is just that ,"an opinion" .
I believe even you yourself are guilty of opinions .

And bad quad or( good quad ) or not I do like the album Santana -Festival. I hope your not suggesting people should never ever buy something they may like Musically, because that would be doing as you say a great disservice.
I believe most individuals on this forum are wise enough to make a valued decision when seeking out their favourite items from a Band they like .
You want to toss blame on me ? Well sorry I did not mix the quad for Amigos, nor Festival. Try directing your anger for their failures to the responsible labels , please , Steely .
Also I do not like ,and never did like the album Amigos , so that shouldn’t be an issue , and I fail to see why it should be regarding my comments.

Additionally, and more importantly.....when did I ever state the Capitol Records were quad encoded !!? I suggest you reread my comments regarding that article , please .
I think you should find that the opposite is true !


As to the reference to outdated articles ,well pardon me , but all come from the quad era . And they're not my comments but someone who was at the right place ....at the right time .
And usually if not always I'm providing an answer to someone's question .
If you find the article in question , feel free to pipe up anytime . Others have and do .
I never cared much for Santana "Amigos" nor for "Festival", perhaps if the quad was better I might have a bit higher opinion. As Steely Dave alluded to the albums were done at the end of the quad era, by different people. Perhaps they were faked from the stereo version (rather than from the multis), just to get them out quickly and cheaply. That would seem to be a despicable thing to do IMHO, better not to release them at all! We'll likely never know for sure, unless those involved decide to chime in.

I always liked the sound of The Guess Who "Power In The Music" whether it be a poor quad or faked from stereo, it helps that I really like the material on that one so surround is somewhat of a bit less importance.
 
I always liked the sound of The Guess Who "Power In The Music" whether it be a poor quad or faked from stereo, it helps that I really like the material on that one so surround is somewhat of a bit less importance.


So you liked the sound on The very last Quadradisc Guess Who album ? Of those last two quads , for me it was "Flavours" I preferred , but - not - by - much .
But I'd probably buy them as a DV twofer . That is..... provided they get released as such .
"Artificial Paradise" I'd ignore though , unless Michael Dutton could somehow improve the bland sound and Artificial quad mix . That Q8 I had was atrocious.
 
something curious (to me!) about "Amigos" & "Festival" is that they both saw SQ Quad LP release in multiple territories.. why would this happen with fake mixes.. if the Quads were contractual obligation fakes as suggested wouldn't they have been quietly released in small numbers only in the U.S.A. or something instead of pressed up around the world?

as we know, "Amigos" was issued on SQ LP in Europe (specifically The Netherlands), America & Israel and "Festival" in America & Israel.

also.. Herbie's "Secrets" and "Festival" were released on Q8.. the fully discrete presentation of each Quad on 4-ch tape just exposes the mixes all the more.. why dammmmmitttt, whyyyy would you do thisssssss!! 🤔😂🧐👀
 
So you liked the sound on The very last Quadradisc Guess Who album ? Of those last two quads , for me it was "Flavours" I preferred , but - not - by - much .
But I'd probably buy them as a DV twofer . That is..... provided they get released as such .
"Artificial Paradise" I'd ignore though , unless Michael Dutton could somehow improve the bland sound and Artificial quad mix . That Q8 I had was atrocious.
Yes to "Power In The Music" no to the other two. I would buy any of them if re-released by DV though.
 
The quad mix has the least bass and heft in the low end of anything in my surround collection.
It's shocking.

Bass guitar and drum kit swallowed up in reverb & phasing.
Often mixed to only a single channel.
Had to play the stereo layer to regain my equilibrium.

Surround mix is like taking acid and wandering an amusement park mirrored fun house.
All warped reflections and distorted perpective as I careen from corner to corner in search of thump. 😵
Has Anyone noticed twin lead guitars were buried on track 2 (quad) "No One To Depend On" from 3:30 on?
 
Has Anyone noticed twin lead guitars were buried on track 2 (quad) "No One To Depend On" from 3:30 on?

Welcome to the forum, thanks for the quality initial post to introduce yourself.
I appreciate that you were the first direct reply to offer any validation of my impressions of the quad mix. :hi

I'm trying to be circumspect until more folks have heard it and shared their perceptions.
Not interested in the debates or urination contests that can ensue.

But at least one response has come in over on the poll thread:

I guess I’d not previously noticed the lead guitar disappearing at the 3:30 mark of No One To Depend On. The solo starts in the LF at the 3:00 mark and proceeds to literally disappear at the 3:30 mark when it shifts to the RF speaker. It’s there and can be faintly heard, but that’s about it. It’s the same way on an old quad conversion I have but it didn’t jump out at me like it does now. Maybe I’m noticing it because of the new higher resolution on the CDJapan SACD. Hard to believe it didn’t similarly jump out to Larry Keyes back in the day.

Holding off on a rating until I can digest it a few more times.

:51QQ
 
Welcome to the forum, thanks for the quality initial post to introduce yourself.
I appreciate that you were the first direct reply to offer any validation of my impressions of the quad mix. :hi

I'm trying to be circumspect until more folks have heard it and shared their perceptions.
Not interested in the debates or urination contests that can ensue.

But at least one response has come in over on the poll thread:



:51QQ
I too have an old quad conversion (with same issue), and was hoping that the "buried in the mix guitars" was just an anomaly, . A bit disconcerting because it was this lp, back in 72" that got me hooked on hifi, and music other than Beatles. I heard this lp on a decent stereo, and The twin guitars of Santana and Schon were integral to this song. I just wait for the intensity @ 3:30, and it's missing. I will be listening more carefully for the diminished bass that you pointed out. I'm always glad to see more 5.1/quad/surround releases, but can't deny this has left me wanting much more. Thank you also for your response. I am surprised that more folks haven't noticed/commented on this?
 
Has Anyone noticed twin lead guitars were buried on track 2 (quad) "No One To Depend On" from 3:30 on?

An astute observation Gregor. Which is WHY remixing Guru, Steve Wilson, a fine musician himself, prefers to work with the original artist when remixing their work ....so that omissions/faux pas like this do NOT occur.

During the early days of QUAD when record companies were rushing these remixes to market to show off their new 'kid on the block' I'm sure numerous instruments/musical flourishes were omitted altogether because the engineers were working solo, sans the artist's input....and consequently how many QUAD remixes were ultimately scrapped due to the artist's dissatisfaction with the 'suspect' remix?

One such glaring example was when Capitol Records released guitarist Eric Johnson's AH VIA MUSICOM on DVD~A 5.1. Johnson was so enraged by what he considered a shoddy remix, he asked his label to remove the DVD~A from circulation ... which they did!
 
Last edited:
Which is WHY remixing Guru, Steve Wilson, a fine musician himself, prefers to work with the original artist when remixing their work ....so that omissions/faux pas like this do NOT occur.

During the early days of QUAD when record companies were rushing these remixes to market to show off their new 'kid on the block' I'm sure numerous instruments/musical flourishes were omitted altogether because the engineers were working solo, sans the artist's input....and consequently how many QUAD remixes were ultimately scrapped due to the artist's dissatisfaction with the 'suspect' remix?

I'm not sure how much the artist's input really matters - Wilson had said in an interview some time ago that the artists he works with don't often recall mix/production decisions that were made decades earlier, so it's up to him to figure out how they created a certain effect and replicate it to the best of his ability (and he doesn't always succeed). I'd argue that the mix differences (or 'mistakes', depending on how you look at it) in a lot of '70s quads have more to do with the limitations of mixing technology at the time.

That whole philosophy of 'staying true to the original stereo mix' didn't really exist during the quad era - the remix engineers were free to create a unique interpretation of the album if they chose to. The quad version of "Black Magic Woman" is certainly an example of that, with the swirling pans and delays added to show off the SQ matrix decoding of the day. The Abraxas quad album still sounds pretty surround-y even with the crudest decoder, such as Sony's SQD-1000.

That's not to say someone consciously decided to bury those guitar parts in "No One To Depend On", it's more likely that a fader was accidentally pulled down at the wrong time - remember that these mixes were done completely in the analog domain, with no volume or panning automation. Pulling off a complex mix like this without automation is not a simple task - it could take multiple sets of hands working together on the mixing board to fade all the instruments in-and-out smoothly at the proper moment, time the entrance of reverbs/delays and other effects, etc. To really 'nail it' would require repeat attempts that they probably didn't have time for - you couldn't just hit CTRL-Z to undo your mistake, you had to rewind the tape and start over.

By working 'in-the-box' with a Digital Audio Workstation, Wilson has a degree of control over the mixing process that these guys doing quad in the '70s couldn't possibly have dreamt of. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to mix without standard DAW features like crossfading or breakpoint automation.
 
I'm not sure how much the artist's input really matters - Wilson had said in an interview some time ago that the artists he works with don't often recall mix/production decisions that were made decades earlier, so it's up to him to figure out how they created a certain effect and replicate it to the best of his ability (and he doesn't always succeed). I'd argue that the mix differences (or 'mistakes', depending on how you look at it) in a lot of '70s quads have more to do with the limitations of mixing technology at the time.

That whole philosophy of 'staying true to the original stereo mix' didn't really exist during the quad era - the remix engineers were free to create a unique interpretation of the album if they chose to. The quad version of "Black Magic Woman" is certainly an example of that, with the swirling pans and delays added to show off the SQ matrix decoding of the day. The Abraxas quad album still sounds pretty surround-y even with the crudest decoder, such as Sony's SQD-1000.

That's not to say someone consciously decided to bury those guitar parts in "No One To Depend On", it's more likely that a fader was accidentally pulled down at the wrong time - remember that these mixes were done completely in the analog domain, with no volume or panning automation. Pulling off a complex mix like this without automation is not a simple task - it could take multiple sets of hands working together on the mixing board to fade all the instruments in-and-out smoothly at the proper moment, time the entrance of reverbs/delays and other effects, etc. To really 'nail it' would require repeat attempts that they probably didn't have time for - you couldn't just hit CTRL-Z to undo your mistake, you had to rewind the tape and start over.

By working 'in-the-box' with a Digital Audio Workstation, Wilson has a degree of control over the mixing process that these guys doing quad in the '70s couldn't possibly have dreamt of. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to mix without standard DAW features like crossfading or breakpoint automation.

But your 'assertion' that that those buried guitar parts might have been the result of accidentally pulling down the fader at the wrong time is likewise a random one. Why wasn't the faux pas discovered when they played back the Open Reel QUAD master?????

Absolutely agree, remixing a multi track master in the analogue domain had its drawbacks. But a good set of ears and intimate knowledge of the recording at hand would ensure that faux pas, of which I'm sure this is only a small example, would not likely occur.
 
Back
Top