Quantcast

Will I ever be able to hear 4 discrete channels?

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Sonik Wiz

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Kansas City
It’s clear that my posts are from an amateur listener, hence why my question. I’m not trying to chase onto the next sound experience, as my pockets tell me “F*** NO!”. I can see that there are many quad purists in this world, and I’m clearly ignorant to the plethora of ways to experience it. It’s all good, I will listen to my music to the extent of my capabilities and be ok with with. Not giving up about it, and when my pockets tell me “go on... you can but that” I’ll def get it and buy it. Shoot... I just learned about binaural recordings this past week!! What about teaching a newbie on here?!
Me thinks Quix4u was a little over the top? He be gone & I think everyone else in reply has been quite sincere. One of the great things of a "beginner" is we get to discover the magic of surround sound all over again with you!
 

Ben1057

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
7
Location
Washington, DC
Me thinks Quix4u was a little over the top? He be gone & I think everyone else in reply has been quite sincere. One of the great things of a "beginner" is we get to discover the magic of surround sound all over again with you!
I appreciate that... I truly do. At this very moment, I’m currently going through my whole record collection, looking for those quiet, rear channel nuisances that I had never been able to hear in regular two channel stereo. It’s so mind blowing to hear what I had never been able to hear out of a record that is technically a two channel stereo. It’s just the beginning of my experience.
 

furui_suterioo

Well-known Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
197
Location
kgLoks Agenjegleks, gCagliforgnjiga
Me thinks Quix4u was a little over the top?
Lol yes. I actually asked mr. Qx if send me a decoder(just to see what it actually is)but of course he wouldn't. think what he was doing was splitting up the sound into many low voltage signals and then somehow wiring the splits in relation with various mono sums, couldn't get a straight answer, but did get a very long response :)
 

Wagonmaster_91

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 11, 2002
Messages
411
Location
Dallas,TX
Ben, since you are on a limited budget, for the time being I would suggest you hook up the Dynaco adapter. You only need your stereo speakers in front and two speakers (and can actually do it with just one) in the rear. The sound won't actually be discrete, but it will be a surround sound, room filling "fake" quad. The Dynaco circuit sends information in the front channels that is only in the front left or right channels to the rear speakers. Any sounds common to both channels (centered vocals, for example) still appear only in the front speakers. You will want the rear speakers to be slightly lower in volume than your front speakers and I believe the adapter has a volume control for that purpose.
The Dynaco system is really a very simple circuit (requires no electrical power, other than the signal coming from your amp) and can actually be done without the adapter by simply wiring the rear speakers in the way the adapter is doing it inside its box. But since you are new to this quad thing, the adapter makes hook up easier. And it works on stereo sources, so recordings you already own will play fine. You may be surprised just how "quad" some of your stereo records sound when played through this method. Try McCartney's "Ram" or Hendrix' "Electric Ladyland" if you have them.

The Dynaco method was how many of us..umm...oldtimers..got into quad in the beginning oh so many years ago.

You will find most members here on the forum are happy to help anyone wanting to get in on our hobby/passion/obsession of surround sound. Welcome.

Ignore what QUIX4U wrote. I suspect he may be yet another alter ego of O.D. ....(inside joke).
 

Sonik Wiz

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
QQ Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Kansas City
I’m currently going through my whole record collection, looking for those quiet, rear channel nuisances that I had never been able to hear in regular two channel stereo. It’s so mind blowing to hear what I had never been able to hear out of a record that is technically a two channel stereo. It’s just the beginning of my experience.
Yes indeed that's how it's supposed to work! It still surprises me how stereo only people can't hear the difference. In remember the remark from probably way back '74 when I played Money through a full logic SQ decoder for a friends wife. She said "it sounds just like stereo only louder"......

So anyways, with the various decode modes on the Sanyo what have you been using? And what records seem to stand out? Experimented with stereo LP/CD's?
 

MidiMagic

300 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
389
The Dynaco system was a real matrix system, not just "fake quad".

I used the Dynaco diamond in February 1971 for a sound effects system for a stage play. We had ghosts, sounds effects, and voices all around the auditorium. The tape was encoded with a stereo mixer and some special electronics. I later found out that it was the first time anyone had done this with matrix 4-channel.
 

malcolmlear

Active Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
56
Location
Colchester UK
You could always try this for a low budget decoder. It's a fairly accurate passive regular matrix consisting of 3 resistors and 4 speakers. It was my first home built decoder back in the early 70's.
 

Attachments

Dillydipper

Well-known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
149
Complaining about the lack of perfection out of an out-of-date format, when the current improvement is re-releasing the same old quad recodings on SACD or DVD-A or Blu-Ray discs, should tell you...somebody's already got that covered.

Not satisfied with Kraft Dinner? Buy macaroni. Buy cheese. Problem solved.
 
Top