Sumpthin' Different.. give yer' opinion

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Obbop

600 Club - QQ All-Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 4, 2002
Messages
616
Location
Missouri
Plenty of debate, argument, discussion, etc. over the years about the best quad equipment.

Time for sumpthin' different..... what's the worst, crappiest, lousiest, no-good piece of quad crap you are aware of?

No limits. Decoder, receiver, tape deck, whatever. Get it off your chest!!!!!! Shout out about that piece of crap you owned or heard of heard about.

Yeah!!!!
 
Sheeesh..... do I have to start all the inanity? Leaving myself open for ridicule? What if one or all of you are absolutelty enamored with any quad item sold by Electrophonic? I have seen various compact systems by this firm in thrift stores over the years. I used to plug 'em in, hook up some speakers, and commence a listening test. Every unit I listened to was crappy. Not surprising since even their stereo stuff is high distorion, low power, composed of the cheapest components possible.

I recall a component system by these folks that had an AM/FM radio, a 2/4 channel 8-track player and a selector switch that supposedly evoked the SQ gods to come to life and work their magic. Bah!!!!! The quad output with the SQ decoder was no better than stereo coming out 4 channels, as occurs when A/B speaker selection allows F/R stereo. Fortunately, there was a Q8 in the bin so I tests the tape player. Accckkkkk!!!! It functioned smoothly and was crisp in changing tracks. But, the sound!!!!! Distortion fanatics would have quivered in delight. Normal humans ran in disgust.

Other Electrophonic items I met were equally crappy. Kinda' like politicians; never met one I liked.

Then there's the Fischer receiver I bought for 10 bux at the garage sale years ago. It was in very nice condition and everything worked fine...... except the decoding. I forget the model number but it was a very basic unit. When I selected the surround mode sound came out the rear but it was exactly the same sound as what came out the rear!!!! Until I came across another very similar unit and listened to it I thought that perhaps the my Fischer's decoder was malfunctioning. Nope, apparently not..... the other unit sounded exactly the same.

Then there's the Pioneer receivers I've listened to. Bah!!!!! Almost all had distortion in the read channels. Those units do not age well. And, as for decoding...... Bah!!!!!!!!!!!


 
What about all of that "K-Mart" quad. Simple 5 watt per channel systems with NO decoding and a q8 player built in. I remember names like "Juliette", "Sampo".

What about the stereo players with the "quad" button!!??

You know there were 100's of units like these.........

:-jon
 
Yeah, I knew dozens of people that had these units which were stereos with a speaker matrix. They were horrible. The owners would proudly proclaim them to be quad, and I had to bust their bubble. I suspect that many people that heard these systems never understood what quad was all about, and therefore rejected it. So it's quad, so what! sounds just like my (crappy) stereo! You paid how much more for that?

The Quadfather
 
If they sell it in the Drug Store is it high fidelity?

When I was 14, I owned the brand new Panasonic RE-7750 4 channel receiver, RS-845US Q8 cartridge deck along with 4 shoebox speakers and the wired remote joystick.

Think hiss; the hiss of a tape playing silence between tracks at a really high amplifier volume. That's what the RE-7750 sounded like with nothing running through it! I overlooked the fact that it sounded like steam escaping pipes all over the room, because I had true quad sound after all.

I was a kid and I loved the thing, but better fidelity was coming someday. I'll have an H/K 800+ an 8+ Q8 deck and....
well I did get at least one of each but no longer have them.

Later in that same stretch of time (1974 now), I happen to see both Emerson, Lake & Palmer (San Diego) and King Crimson (Los Angeles) in concert. I was hooked.

So the Panasonic Quad era came to an end when I traded it for my first bass amplifier and cheesy bass. Pioneer SX525 made an appearance, but that was back to mere stereo.

Then in 1998 I started buying DTS CDs and living large again.
 
Electrophonic!! Aieeee! Remember those quad compacts with round speakers? Bet that was a really big assist to the no logic decoders, having the drivers facing every which way! My other choice is a Pioneer half logic (half nelson, half ass, half gun will travel, half you heard the one about...) decoder. Something 210, I think. The song was half over before the gain riding kicked in, adn the dynamic range was from 1k to 10k, and flat as a washboard. You get the idea. An as someone said, all those compact stereos with the out of phaswe "rear channels" and QUAD emblazoned across the face plate! That's about as quad as my grandmother's roller skates! No wonder people felt burned!
Marc
 
Remember all those car stereos with the "quad" button on them? If you hooked up four speakers to them and hit that button, you could hear a change. It sounded different, just didn't sound BETTER! If you put a Q8 tape in your "quad" tape deck, it sounded like crap, because all you got was the rears or the fronts in four speakers. I had to tell hundreds of these people that what they had wasn't quad. To make matters worse, the place I was working at didn't sell quad gear, so I couldn't even offer them real quad, or show them what they were missing.

The Quadfather
 
BSR 4 channel Turntable Record Player 78's

cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISA...1945403946

An interesting concept, but why on earth did they choose that dire BSR (better sound reproduction) turntable mechanism! They were dreadful for 2 - ch reproduction let alone CD-4 !!

The seller is in dreamland with his "buy it now" price.

Enjoy ! :rollin:
 
There was a chilling Fergusson up on UK Ebay in early December (see my posting before in Ebay watch). I really didn't want to find out, although I suspect the amusement value would've been considerable....:cool:
 
It's the sort of thing you regularly see at car boot sales for a quid, week after week- no takers!
:rollin:

 
We used to say "Bastard Scratched my Records" when we mentioned that brand of turntable. I agree they were absolutely horrible, and they went perfectly with Electrophonic "quad" gear.
 
Two words: Matrix Quad. Actually, let me rephrase that to three words, including the word 'passive' before the matrix bit. A tragic variation on the innocent Hafler circuit (which I have some time for -excellent for ambiance extraction), that tried to get 4 channels. Well, sort of. You know the things: it's DIY time: Keep the front stereo pair, stick a couple of extra speakers behind you, and wire them up in series, positives to positives on the amp, negatives on the speakers together. Then bridge the negatives on the amp to a resistor, and link this to the bridged negatives on the rear speakers. Overloads your amp (lets face it -if you're doing things on the cheap, you won't have an amp that can handle the extra load properly), wrecks the speakers through underdriving, and gives just about no separtation...
Need I say more?:eek:

 
Pioneer QX-9900 receiver
Pioneer SG-9500 Equalizers (Run 2 of 'em: 1 front, 1 rear)
Pioneer PL-530 Turntable
Pioneer HR-100 Stereo 8 Deck
Technics 858 Q8 Deck
Panasonic SE-405C CD-4 Decoder

For a starter system (just got into quad about a year ago) it's not too bad. I get very decent sound and with the equalizers, I just drop the 16KHz slider and it takes out almost all 8-track hiss while leaving the highs relatively intact. I really have nothing to complain about!


 
Back
Top