Music: Re: [SurroundSound] Quadraphonic software decoders

Thanks Lokks for clearing that up, and as to commitment, i think i need committing! With 451 releases, and counting - at least 3 a week, i never thought it would have gotten this out of control.

Your idea is certainly an interesting one, although it does pose a problem. I'd not be happy to have a lot of the earlier releases out there as an advertisement of what i'm doing now, the decodes are incredibly accurate in ways that no other form of decoding can emulate.

I'll try and explain. I've dug very into what SQ really is about and, as i mentioned before, it is far more complex than folk realise when it comes to decoding.

The first area that all forms of software decoding (and a certain hardware one) fails to get anywhere near right is the extraction of the rear channels. I've tested every software version and they get nowhere. There is actually only one way to do it, and that's because of the way the encoding matrix was written. Very clever!

The other major area that no hardware or software decoder has ever attempted to deal with is the fronts. It is never discussed and i suspect Columbia wanted it that way. There are those who can't stand to listen to SQ decodes, even when done by a Tate. The reason is because the front channels of every decoder are actually just the raw stereo encoded tracks. It has been impossible to remove the complex phase information that are the rears.

I'm sure i don't need to tell you that having all of this information being played along with the decoded rears causes a 'bit' of a phase muddle, the effects of which colour every aspect of the aural presentation.

After tracking down that naughty phase issue on the Right Rear channel i decided to finally tackle the fronts. Long story short, i've managed to greatly reduce all of the rear channel information by a large margin. The obvious benefits are improved image location and stability, better rendition of low level information like reverb, etc (something that was always a complaint of SQ) and improved separation.

There are other areas that are improved as well, but you get the idea. There is a problem though. It now takes 3 - 4 times longer to do a decode. This has scuppered my idea of doing a mass re-issue of titles which does obviously affect your idea.

The only way around it is a far more powerful computer, but that costs so will have to wait until next year.

So you see why i'm not to happy about making the older titles openly available. What i will do is the afore mentioned demo-disc set and i'll put out a new title for all, again in the new year.

I'm busy doing Christmas releases, so must get on...

My home - IF you go there you MUST read the rules first. I don't reply to questions regarding them:

https://dreamingspiresquadarchive.wordpress.com

If you want to leave a link to find you – it's up to you. I think what you do is very valid; my personal view is that I would let a few of the older quad releases creep into the wild a little so that people may understand your commitment more.

From: surroundsound@googlegroups.com [mailto:surroundsound@googlegroups.com]
Sent: 12 December 2014 09:37
To: surroundsound@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [SurroundSound] Quadraphonic software decoders

OK, have a few minutes before i continue the day job (converting quad material)..

I wonder how a bit, shell I say, "conservative" peace of music would sound using this processing - maybe DSOTM, Steely Dan, Sanatana, Mike Oldfield perhaps - something that was previously decoded too, so we can compare it with previous transfer ?

I have planned a demonstration disc set showing the the decoded versions of tracks from many albums, and the first will be SQ. It will also contain the same tracks so comparisons with other 'decoders' can be made. It has been on the back burner due to the work on the latest process's but i think i will start on it in the new year. I'll post here when it's done. (by the way, Steely Dan releases were in QS)

therefore 16 bit. I wonder how would that compare with vinyl transfer

It would be 'almost as good'. A good, untouched, digital copy is the best option when decoding phase matrix recording.

I am very interested to follow the events "early next year" - what is the best way/place to follow your future developments?

Hmmm... this is a little awkward. There are many who don't agree with the way i have been forced to go in relation to 'my work', plus i didn't come out to advertise 'my wares', so to speak so i'll leave that up to the moderator to decide whether this is the place to mention where i dwell.

My OP was about finding available SW decoder(s) - can you talk about them, or is that part of the upcoming events?

I've been working with Universal records on a project that has possibly been extended. I can't say anymore at the moment, it's all WIP. As to discussing the workings of the process's, i'm no longer inclined to release any information due attitudes from certain sectors who 'know better' but fail to prove it.

In the meantime, what are the best options for decoding CD-4 - today?

Well, surprisingly, at the heart of the JVC 4DD-5 (or one of it's clones) is a good demodulator. Out of the box it's ok, but it can be improved without to much work.

Hope that helps

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to SurroundSound@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SurroundSound-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to surroundsound+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

Pages

Music

Friday, December 12, 2014

Re: [SurroundSound] Quadraphonic software decoders

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive