Spinners QUADIO Blu Ray Comments

[mandrix]

Well I don't have my disc yet. And the lower dB on the front left is interesting.
But the question is, how does it sound?
@quicksrt seems to think the sound is balanced OK, and we all have different setups, etc so I'll wait until my discs are here before I make any judgements.
Still interesting, though, especially after looking at @fredblue CD-4 waveforms.

 

[inspclouseau]

Well I don't have my disc yet. And the lower dB on the front left is interesting.
But the question is, how does it sound?
@quicksrt seems to think the sound is balanced OK, and we all have different setups, etc so I'll wait until my discs are here before I make any judgements.
Still interesting, though, especially after looking at @fredblue CD-4 waveforms.

'But the question is, how does it sound?' will be delivered today, along with 2 others. Looking forward to tonight..

 

[Matt Wilson]

8
It's all right, with that '70s quad thing of putting the vocals up in the mix and putting the instruments too far back. A good album though.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Am spinning the SPINNERS now and most obvious is the Track I'll Be Around. If you switch to the STEREO tracks, the vocals are MUCH MORE distinct as opposed to the 4.0! And it carries over into ONE OF A KIND LOVE AFFAIR ...the vocals sound recessed in the 4.0 whereas the Stereo Tracks restore them.

Since I don't transfer any of my discs to hard drives and have NO way of making channel corrections I am led to believe that SPINNERS is in need of a replacement disc which supplements all of the corrections other QQ posters have recommended.

Since Adam [fredblue] did NOT note these anomalies on the WEA CD~4 Promotion Disc [the SPINNERS track in question was 'perfectly balanced'] it would further indicate that something was amiss in the RHINO QUAD transfer [???????]

I wll withhold my vote until further notice!

 

[sjcorne]

...that '70s quad thing of putting the vocals up in the mix and putting the instruments too far back.

First I've heard of this? It seems like more often people have complained about the vocals being too far back in the mix on these old '70s quads, at least with past Rhino Quadio releases (Chicago, Doobie Bros, etc).

 

[RustyM]

I boosted the front left channel 6db and enjoyed the 1973 mix. I came prepared!

 

[edisonbaggins]

Since I don't transfer any of my discs to hard drives and have NO way of making channel corrections I am led to believe that SPINNERS is in need of a replacement disc which supplements all of the corrections other QQ posters have recommended.

While I appreciate the sentiment here, I'm not sure it's reasonable for a reissue label to make adjustments to a product based on QQ recommendations.
Though I think that would be cool!
Rhino faithfully put on to blu-ray what they found on the Quad masters. There were no notes guiding any adjustments.
So, on the one hand, I don't think they should be "faulted" for doing that.

On the other hand, they want fans to be happy and for the title to ultimately sell well, so they might have incentive to try an adjustment.
Rather than QQ recommendations, maybe they have an engineer try to match the CD-4 or Q8 levels as closely as possible?

 

[key_wiz]

While I appreciate the sentiment here, I'm not sure it's reasonable for a reissue label to make adjustments to a product based on QQ recommendations.
Though I think that would be cool!
Rhino faithfully put on to blu-ray what they found on the Quad masters. There were no notes guiding any adjustments.
So, on the one hand, I don't think they should be "faulted" for doing that.

On the other hand, they want fans to be happy and for the title to ultimately sell well, so they might have incentive to try an adjustment.
Rather than QQ recommendations, maybe they have an engineer try to match the CD-4 or Q8 levels as closely as possible?

Or make adjustments based on their own ears and equipment.

But I agree—faithfully giving us the quad tapes is all they all required to do. I won’t be asking for a “replacement”. But, of course, if they decided to do so, I certainly wouldn’t complain!

 

[4-earredwonder]

While I appreciate the sentiment here, I'm not sure it's reasonable for a reissue label to make adjustments to a product based on QQ recommendations.
Though I think that would be cool!
Rhino faithfully put on to blu-ray what they found on the Quad masters. There were no notes guiding any adjustments.
So, on the one hand, I don't think they should be "faulted" for doing that.

On the other hand, they want fans to be happy and for the title to ultimately sell well, so they might have incentive to try an adjustment.
Rather than QQ recommendations, maybe they have an engineer try to match the CD-4 or Q8 levels as closely as possible?

Michael, ALL they really had to do was compare the QUAD tape to the Stereo portion on the BD~A and the difference would've been readily apparent. Something was obviously amiss!

So as not to compare apples to oranges, imagine how many QUAD master tapes Michael Dutton has listened to to determine if they are worthy of release? In my memory, none of D~V's many hundred QUAD SACDs suffer from any discernible shortcomings!

And consumers shouldn't have to make adjustments to software which is deficient ...... that should be resolved by the releasing company before the product reaches market!

And it could be something simple like oxide build up on the tape heads ... used to happen a lot in the ole days of Open Reel releases! And we're talking 50+ year old Magnetic Tape Masters where flaking and print through are sometimes rampant!

 

[quicksrt]

Or make adjustments based on their own ears and equipment.

But I agree—faithfully giving us the quad tapes is all they all required to do. I won’t be asking for a “replacement”. But, of course, if they decided to do so, I certainly wouldn’t complain!

I feel the same, but I need to know if the L level issue is more pronounced only on three or four tracks, or the whole disc. I'll make my determination listening rather then just looking at wav.

 

[kfbkfb]

Who would have modified the Spinners quad mix (level wise) - I've never read about the JVC Cutting Center modifying the quad master tapes they received for cutting CD-4 masters?


Kirk Bayne

 

[sjcorne]

I don't find the Front Left to be too quiet, but on at least some of the tracks, the lead vocal is panned about 75% to the Front Right, so it gives that impression.

I don’t recall hearing the lead vocal anywhere other than center front on the quad LP.

 

[Tres Discrete]

Sadly I can only give this an "7". I really wanted to give it more, as 70's R&B is my jam and this is such a great album, but the mixing issues are what they are.

I was not familiar with the album other than the radio hits (of which there were FIVE), but the rest of the tracks are all solid early 70's R&B fare. An easy "10" for content.

But the mix is off, as already mentioned often here, for whatever reason, and it diminishes the listening experience. Personally, I think it's mostly just the choices of the original quad mixers. I don't find the Front Left to be too quiet, but on at least some of the tracks, the lead vocal is panned about 75% to the Front Right, so it gives that impression. Whether that was the choice of the mixer or a mistake they didn't catch, we will never know.

It does also seem that the Rear Right gets louder as the disc goes on.

Whatever the cause, the result is a less-than-stellar mix and on top of that, it's all a bit muddy sounding. I haven't A/Bd it with the stereo layer (maybe that sounds just as muddy too?) but it's all unfortunate as this album deserves better, IMO.

Bummer.
This was probably my most anticipated Quadio yet…have not received mine to date…but the comments on the mix are drowning my enthusiasm

 

[key_wiz]

Not to tell Rhino what to do here, but if they were willing to send out 2 replacement discs because the stereo layer played a couple of tracks in mono rather than stereo in the Chicago set, I would think they'd be willing to rectify this one as well.

 

[JediJoker]

For those curious about the mid-side encoder-decoder plugin, this is how it looks (and it's free, if anyone else wants to toy around with it):

Voxengo make great plugins, including their free offerings. Simple, dated-looking GUI, but good code underneath.

 

[baward]

My beef with this release is the price. Why is it $25 for one album and no extra track in plain 4.0 when there are plenty of other releases in Atmos (or at least new mixes) available on Dutton Vocalion or Super Deluxe with sometimes up to three albums in surround? So 11/10 for the music, 2/10 for the release.

Even worse when it seems like there are technical shortcomings with this release, too.

 

[hi-res_edition]

Help me understand why the front left level adjust would be different from track to track. I am making the assumption that the transfer was made directly from the quad master, which theoretically would have been equally adjusted across all of the tracks. I can understand how the overall level may be incorrect due to the differences in tape machine alignment, but from track to track, that doesn't add up for me. It has been decades since I mucked around with analog gear.

 

[Quadmon]

When I posted a couple weeks ago after I listened to my Q8s I said the Spinners tape was the “weakest “ of the four. So-so songs and mix.

 

[ngv99]

My copy just arrived today and I'm wondering if I should bother opening it or send it back/wait for a replacement...

 

[winopener]

I know that will cause a loss on Rhino, but it is more important to find out what happened that screwed the Spinner release. There's a step in the Quality Control dept that need to be revised in order to avoid these losses.