SM V3 teaser

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

J. PUPSTER

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
8,859
Location
CALIFORNIA (CENTRAL)
The display port idea seems interesting. They charge no royalties and only a 5k membership fee to access the standards according to WIKI:


It would be a nice way to stick it to HDMI mafia! You can get a nice short gold plated display port to HDMI adapter on Amazon for around $8.

Of course there is always the issue of designing and building the electronics to add it, and it sounds like there may be no interest in doing this.
Dave and Chucky have mentioned that this could be a possibility in the future, but not sure where they're at currently on their research of this.
 

gene_stl

500 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Nov 3, 2019
Messages
502
Location
St.Louis
I don't know how big a business the Surround Masters are but I would bet you have to sell a bunch of them to make back even the "mere" $5K membership fees of DisplayPort.

How about lets just stick with analog.
 

DuncanS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
6,296
Location
UK
It might well need an additional processor to format and output multi-channel audio via a DisplayPort interface (then to the DisplayPort-to-HDMI adaptor). But that would push the price up, Involve don't make them in large quantities so the costs are higher. The super pre-amp is where I imagine we'll see it.
 

armyjazzer

Active Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
60
I don't know how big a business the Surround Masters are but I would bet you have to sell a bunch of them to make back even the "mere" $5K membership fees of DisplayPort.

How about lets just stick with analog.
Make it an "option" and charge those who want it. Maybe even make it a limited edition with one run on the assembly line. Take pre-order deposits to fund the lic. cost. Use go fund me to raise the lic. fee and then add it to all the S.M. for everyone. Several ways to do it, if there is interest, but maybe there are only a few of us that are really interested, so that may be the issue.

I have bought a lot of multichannel SACD's, Quad SACD's from Dutton, Blu ray surround quads and concerts, etc., and it just seems like the S.M. belongs in the system with everything else instead of a separate setup. I would like to upgrade the current setup to support Dolby Atmos when replacing the receiver, unfortunately most of the needed funds will be wasted on a receiver with analog inputs to support the S.M. unless I get a receiver without the analog inputs and use the $3k to purchase the speakers for Atmos. It is unfortunate that I will need to decide between upgrading my system to support future technology for music and movies, or spending the money for analog inputs for one device.

Unfortunately the true cost of the Surround Master for some of us isn't the cost of the unit, but the high price we have to pay to continue to use it. The price for me is now $3k extra for the receiver, or around $4700 - 5k for 2 amps and 4 speakers to pull it out of my current surround setup. More if I want to use 4.1 or 5.1 settings.
 

Sonik Wiz

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
2,723
Location
Kansas City
Make it an "option" and charge those who want it. Maybe even make it a limited edition with one run on the assembly line. Take pre-order deposits to fund the lic. cost. Use go fund me to raise the lic. fee and then add it to all the S.M. for everyone. Several ways to do it, if there is interest, but maybe there are only a few of us that are really interested, so that may be the issue.

I have bought a lot of multichannel SACD's, Quad SACD's from Dutton, Blu ray surround quads and concerts, etc., and it just seems like the S.M. belongs in the system with everything else instead of a separate setup. I would like to upgrade the current setup to support Dolby Atmos when replacing the receiver, unfortunately most of the needed funds will be wasted on a receiver with analog inputs to support the S.M. unless I get a receiver without the analog inputs and use the $3k to purchase the speakers for Atmos. It is unfortunate that I will need to decide between upgrading my system to support future technology for music and movies, or spending the money for analog inputs for one device.

Unfortunately the true cost of the Surround Master for some of us isn't the cost of the unit, but the high price we have to pay to continue to use it. The price for me is now $3k extra for the receiver, or around $4700 - 5k for 2 amps and 4 speakers to pull it out of my current surround setup. More if I want to use 4.1 or 5.1 settings.
Firstly I should say I use HDMI for video, not at all for audio. So I'm more than happy with my digital/analog set up as is. I also recognize the validity of Chucky's complaints about HDMI.

But if I am going to take a further position on this I must take yours, that HDMI connectivity is a necessity to open up SM sales to the widest possible audience.

Just going by SOP estimation, I thought $200 additional to a Surround Master might be reasonable for this. And you came with the same thing. It saves money in the long run for someone commited to the SM. Ya know, the more retail outlets Chucky might get this product into the more potential buyers will be dissapointed when they can't plug it into their modern equipment. Or find out they need niche high end $$$ modern gear to do so. I know @GOS would probably be enjoying a Surround Master right now if he could hook it up...

The Fosgate entire line of Space Matrix decoders used the exact same PC board. They simply added or eliminated components to provide the functions for that particular model. Perhaps this could be an efficient way for Involve to keep costs minimized and provide with/with out HDMI.

I also mentioned elsewhere @gene_stl suggestion of using an OEM board for this function. Buy from someone that's already paid the fees & jumped through the hoops.

I'm always hoping the best for Involve's success & am just amazed we have a product like this today. But right now it is certainly a niche product with in a niche. I would expect most music lovers & HT enthusiasts would love to have something better than the usual AVR stereo modes for surround sound.
 

MagnumX

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
458
Location
Ohio
I don't know how big a business the Surround Masters are but I would bet you have to sell a bunch of them to make back even the "mere" $5K membership fees of DisplayPort.

How about lets just stick with analog.
Fine. No digital out, no sale. I'm sorry, but some of you are living in 1995.

What part of most modern equipment doesn't support analog multi-channel inputs anymore doesn't register with some of you? The reason sales will be low are directly tied to the utter inability for 99% of the planet to use the system.

The cost is why I suggested a RCA to HDMI breakout box, which has a MUCH broader appeal than the surround master itself. The idea of using Display Port plus a cheap adapter is certainly a thousand times better than nothing.

I wouldn't be surprised if the few products with 7.1 inputs left don't ditch them in the next few years. There's just not enough mainstream use for them.

Sure, you could argue this system is for old folks that have used quad since the '70s and they have older equipment that can use it, but, then you might as well bury the surround master system along with them as everyone else has moved on to Atmos equipment.

The upmixers (save perhaps Auro which itself is less common) all tend to suck with 2-channel music and so that's where the SM could shine, but who is going to ditch their Atmos receiver to use some old thing off eBay just to try it out? Not many, I'd wager.

I think the Display Port plus HDMI adapter should be given strong consideration or v3 might just be the last version. Everyone else already has one that has the older equipment for it. To get more sales, the target market needs to expand, IMO. While I can currently use v3, that will change if I upgrade to a Monoprice HTP-1. I'd also prefer to keep room correction and delays working either way.
 

quadsearcher

900 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
975
The SM I have is a GREAT bargain for what it does.
Analog will never go away altogether, being that sound and ears are both analog. HDMI standards change. Shielded wire has not changed.
I would rather have an external device to convert multichannel audio to HDMI (when I eventually need it), but I do not need it now, and standards may change by the time I "need" it. I'm talking about 40 years down the road. If I don't make it I know my quad gear will.

Niche within a niche.
But that's just my opinion.

[Hey! Maybe some other company wants to get in on the analog-to-hdmi converter market! Niche within a niche within a niche.]
I've long thought hdmi is a content protection scheme first, and incidentally convenient for consumers, But not robust, especially compared to pro level stuff.
 
Last edited:

MagnumX

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
458
Location
Ohio
The SM I have is a GREAT bargain for what it does.
Analog will never go away altogether, being that sound and ears are both analog. HDMI standards change. Shielded wire has not changed.
Actually, human hearing is much closer to digital in nature than analog. All the signals from the ear get converted to neuron impulses which occur in digital-like streams, although it's not in binary code.

HDMI has added support for newer standards, but it's all backwards compatible. For audio use only, it wouldn't matter.

More to the point, there is no other standard used in most consumer level gear for multi-channel.

It's not a question of whether the SM is a bargain for what it does. If the consumer cannot hook it up to their equipment, it really doesn't matter.

I would rather have an external device to convert multichannel audio to HDMI (when I eventually need it), but I do not need it now, and standards may change by the time I "need" it. I'm talking about 40 years down the road. If I don't make it I know my quad gear will.
40 years down the road? Atmos is here now and quite frankly, it blows quad out the water, eats it for breakfast and craps it out as fertilizer. If you heard Booka Shade, Kraftwerk or Yello in Atmos on my system, you might just want to throw your quad gear in the garbage and light it on fire.

Sadly, most albums are not in Atmos (yet), which is why the older 2-channel and 4.0 and 5.1 surround music is still viable. Much of it can be improved further with Auro-3D upmixer expansion or even Dolby DSU Surround or Neural X in some cases.

Auro-3D has some nice music albums as well that sound like you're really there. Meanwhile, Loreena Mckennit's first major album should arrive any day now in Atmos.

[Hey! Maybe some other company wants to get in on the analog-to-hdmi converter market! Niche within a niche within a niche.]
I wish they would. I searched high and low for a converter. None exist.

I've long thought hdmi is a content protection scheme first, and incidentally convenient for consumers, But not robust, especially compared to pro level stuff.
It doesn't really protect anything anymore since we don't have consumer digital recorders anymore and dumping a movie from a Blu-ray into an MKV sans protection is child's play. I can dump/copy 4K Blu-ray discs no problem. Copy protection is and always has been a joke and harms honest consumers (by being a royal PITA most of the time) far more than pirates. Meanwhile, many of us just want to stream locally off our own servers instead of searching for a movie disc when we have 1400+ discs to look through, let alone 26,000 music tracks.
 

kfbkfb

800 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
846
Location
Midwest USA
Kickbacks from Dolby?
I sort of hate to say this, but I think it's likely Dolby is trying to crowd out other (matrix) decoding systems in MCH receivers (the change of Dolby Surround to something like an all things to all people surround sound decoder, for example).


Kirk Bayne
 

gene_stl

500 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
Nov 3, 2019
Messages
502
Location
St.Louis
The world would be quite dull if we all agreed on everything. I watch movies with simple stereo audio. I would not spend much money on upgrading my sound system for home theater cinema. I intend to have a screen because I am accumulating music content that also has video content ,something I do enjoy. But I don't care about movies very much.

I also am not very interested in streaming. Send money. Get nothing back. The Hahvahd bidness school definition of the perfect business.
If I am at someone's house and hear some streaming that makes me want to get out my wallet , it could change. So far that has not happened.
Same applies to Atmos.

My system is shaping up that it will be a 5.0 system each speaker system quad amplified and subs not necessary. (because all five go low with the L and R able to simulate earthquakes is a scary fashion) There will be 7.x rears that will be full range amplified at least initially. I will pause there. But all five crossover inputs will be analog. There are dsp solutions for this sort of thing but I wouldn't trust my unobtanium midrange and tweeter drivers with them.

The reason for this is demonstrated for the 47th time on the computer I am typing this with. It has started , for no good reason (probably a microsoft update) rebooting itself and trying to update, every single night. I didn't ask it to. I didn't change anything. But suddenly when I want to check what's going on at QQ I find my computer is "we could not install all updates so we are removing changes Do not turn off your computer or you will brick it" So I get to wait until its done and then reboot. I have a very long password and its a pain to enter it. Digital stuff does this shit all the time. Analog doesn't. It usually either works or doesn't. Where I work I experience tons of digital gear that gets alzheimers disease. It will still light up but it doesn't work right. Maybe won't take keystrokes. Maybe if they stop putting microprocessors, microcontrollers and DSP systems into every goddamn thing it will be an improvement.
 
Last edited:

quadsearcher

900 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
975
Actually, human hearing is much closer to digital in nature than analog. All the signals from the ear get converted to neuron impulses which occur in digital-like streams, although it's not in binary code.

HDMI has added support for newer standards, but it's all backwards compatible. For audio use only, it wouldn't matter.

More to the point, there is no other standard used in most consumer level gear for multi-channel.

It's not a question of whether the SM is a bargain for what it does. If the consumer cannot hook it up to their equipment, it really doesn't matter.



40 years down the road? Atmos is here now and quite frankly, it blows quad out the water, eats it for breakfast and craps it out as fertilizer. If you heard Booka Shade, Kraftwerk or Yello in Atmos on my system, you might just want to throw your quad gear in the garbage and light it on fire.

Sadly, most albums are not in Atmos (yet), which is why the older 2-channel and 4.0 and 5.1 surround music is still viable. Much of it can be improved further with Auro-3D upmixer expansion or even Dolby DSU Surround or Neural X in some cases.

Auro-3D has some nice music albums as well that sound like you're really there. Meanwhile, Loreena Mckennit's first major album should arrive any day now in Atmos.



I wish they would. I searched high and low for a converter. None exist.



It doesn't really protect anything anymore since we don't have consumer digital recorders anymore and dumping a movie from a Blu-ray into an MKV sans protection is child's play. I can dump/copy 4K Blu-ray discs no problem. Copy protection is and always has been a joke and harms honest consumers (by being a royal PITA most of the time) far more than pirates. Meanwhile, many of us just want to stream locally off our own servers instead of searching for a movie disc when we have 1400+ discs to look through, let alone 26,000 music tracks.
I like Kraftwerk. I do not have money for Atmos right now. I have what you call quad gear, yet I will not burn it. Is that bad? I think not.
I'm glad you are happy with your stuff, and I'm happy with my stuff. It's all good.

Right on about the futility of hdmi protection, but that is my point. It was protection at one time for a couple years, or rather, that was the intent.
 
Last edited:

armyjazzer

Active Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
60
I guess if an external adapter to convert the 5.1 analog to HDMI ever surfaces I would consider that option, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to materialize.

It seems to me that is a poor option due to more DA/AD converstions. Since the Surround Master is converting the analog stereo to digital to do the DSP needed to create the 4 to 6 channels of audio, wouldn't it make more sense to send the 4-6 channel digital signal out the HDMI/Displayport to the receiver rather than convert back to analog send out rca jacks then in rca jacks to convert back to digital again so it can be sent out HDMI?
 

Sonik Wiz

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
2,723
Location
Kansas City
The world would be quite dull if we all agreed on everything. I watch movies with simple stereo audio. I would not spend much money on upgrading my sound system for home theater cinema. I intend to have a screen because I am accumulating music content that also has video content ,something I do enjoy. But I don't care about movies very much.

I also am not very interested in streaming. Send money. Get nothing back. The Hahvahd bidness school definition of the perfect business.
If I am at someone's house and hear some streaming that makes me want to get out my wallet , it could change. So far that has not happened.
Same applies to Atmos.

My system is shaping up that it will be a 5.0 system each speaker system quad amplified and subs not necessary. There will be 7.x rears that will be full range amplified at least initially. I will pause there. But all five crossover inputs will be analog. There are dsp solutions for this sort of thing but I wouldn't trust my unobtanium midrange and tweeter drivers with them.

The reason for this is demonstrated for the 47th time on the computer I am typing this with. It has started , for no good reason (probably a microsoft update) rebooting itself and trying to update, every single night. I didn't ask it to. I didn't change anything. But suddenly when I want to check what's going on at QQ I find my computer is "we could not install all updates so we are removing changes Do not turn off your computer or you will brick it" So I get to wait until its done and then reboot. I have a very long password and its a pain to enter it. Digital stuff does this shit all the time. Analog doesn't. It usually either works or doesn't. Where I work I experience tons of digital gear that gets alzheimers disease. It will still light up but it doesn't work right. Maybe won't take keystrokes. Maybe if they stop putting microprocessors, microcontrollers and DSP systems into every goddamn thing it will be an improvement.
I think Magnum X was the condoms I used in high school...
 

MagnumX

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
458
Location
Ohio
wouldn't it make more sense to send the 4-6 channel digital signal out the HDMI/Displayport to the receiver rather than convert back to analog send out rca jacks then in rca jacks to convert back to digital again so it can be sent out HDMI?
Of course it would be better that way, but that puts the cost onus back on the SM. I think the Display Port plus adapter option makes the most sense, personally.
 

MagnumX

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Sep 19, 2020
Messages
458
Location
Ohio
I think Magnum X was the condoms I used in high school...
I've used Magnum XL on sites before, which was already taken at AVS (and too small for me diameter-wise anyway). I really got that from the Rollercoaster at Cedar Point of the same name. But it's usually taken these days. I liked Magnum from Magnum PI also so I use VonMagnum at some sites now, but already had MagnumX on AVS for audio so I tried to keep them the same.
 

chucky3042

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
1,980
Hey Chaps

In line with Timbre4's suggestion, lets continue this interesting discussion here:

 

MidiMagic

900 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
906
Sell plug-in accessories and have ports for them to connect to.

My setup is still 100% analog.

The costs of Atmos and of SM are both beyond my means. I'm lucky to have enough to buy a record.

The things I really want:
- QS
- SQ
- DS
- A variable matrix for DQ, EV, and SQ-B
- Variable logic (a control that sets how much logic is applied)
- Cheap enough that I could buy it.
 

Zerochief

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2021
Messages
18
Location
USA
Just ran across this listing on eBay. Conflicting description as it calls out V3, photos are of V3 yet "what's included" section calls out V2.

(BTW the Invoilve Audio website "what's included" section has the same typo, calls out V2)

 
Last edited:

kfbkfb

800 Club - QQ All-Star
QQ Supporter
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
846
Location
Midwest USA
I seem to be quoted (not my post though) in this ebay spiel - I don't have a Surround Master decoder, just an Electro-Voice EVX-4 Stereo-4 decoder that I purchased about 45 years ago. :p


Kirk Bayne
 
Top