Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: Quad Remix< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
Ugo Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 5495
Joined: April 2000
Posted: Jan. 26 2005, 08:35

My discs have clear centers, and thus Disc 1 has the remix. I bought the set precisely to have the remix. And yes, it is encoded in quad despite the booklet saying it's stereo. :D

--------------
Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian
Back to top
Profile PM 
Korgscrew Offline




Group: Super Admins
Posts: 3511
Joined: Dec. 1999
Posted: Jan. 26 2005, 09:58

Quote (Ugo @ Jan. 24 2005, 20:54)
On the Sailor's Hornpipe I can hear Viv & the others literally walking around me. :) :)

Proof that it doesn't decode quite as intended, then! Viv ought to stay stationary, centre left (that is, between front and back left - a strange place to have put him, but that's where he is! ).

Still, that does indeed mean that it's reacting to the SQ encoding in some way...Viv's moving round could partly be down to the steering circuitry in the decoder, but let's not go there...
Back to top
Profile PM 
familyjules Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 1156
Joined: May 2004
Posted: Jan. 26 2005, 10:04

Quote (Korgscrew @ Jan. 26 2005, 09:58)
Viv ought to stay stationary

Although in real life he seldom did....especially when he'd "a drop taken".

;)

Jules


--------------
I like beer and I like cheese
Back to top
Profile PM 
Guest
Unregistered





Posted: Jan. 26 2005, 14:42

Quote (Korgscrew @ July 18 2003, 03:54)
Incidentally, if anyone here's at all interested in electronics, there are instructions for building an SQ decoder here - target="_blank">http://people.sabanciuniv.edu/~thomas....sq.html
The basis of it is an integrated circuit, so it doesn't take many components to build...the problem may be actually finding the required IC...

I came late to this thread, but was interested in the above, but the link is dead. Does anyone know of an alternative link please?


On the subject of pro-logic, I seem to remember reading somewhere that you could play the quad mixes but had to kill the center speaker. I don't know if this is true or not.
Back to top
a_r_schulz Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 425
Joined: Sep. 2001
Posted: Jan. 27 2005, 09:54

Seems Thomas has moved - try this link:
http://www.iyte.edu.tr/~thomasbechteler/quadro.html
MC1312/4/5P SQ-Decoder chipset datasheet can be found here:
http://www.datasheetarchive.com/datasheet/pdf/28/282229.html
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
familyjules Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 1156
Joined: May 2004
Posted: Jan. 27 2005, 10:27

Quote (Ugo @ Jan. 26 2005, 08:35)
My discs have clear centers, and thus Disc 1 has the remix.

Yep, same here!  I remember being confused because on another MO site I read that the ones with labelled centres had the TB pt 1 remix and the clear centres had the substituted original mix.

I guess it's all too easy to get all confuzzled when you're talking about an original CD having a remix and a reissued CD having an original mix - it's enough to give one the "whirlies"!

:)

Jules


--------------
I like beer and I like cheese
Back to top
Profile PM 
Guest
Unregistered





Posted: Jan. 27 2005, 13:37

a_r_schulz, Thank you very much.
Back to top
pauken Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: May 2005
Posted: Feb. 10 2021, 19:44

Well, this is a VERY old thread to be resurrecting and there are several other threads of a similar topic but here goes anyway.

During lockdown I've been tinkering with this software:

https://github.com/markmerz/ladspa-sq-sv

which implements  the SQ decoding matrix in software as LADSPA plugins that you can use to decode SQ-encoded stereo recordings to 4 channels. From the authors notes:

Quote
"sq_decoder_nologic" plugin is naive reference implementation for SQ-decoder. It has no directional enhancements and is rough equivalent of early "no-logic" decoders.

"sq_decoder_shadow_vector" is implementation of SQ directional enhancement system "Decoder for quadraphonic playback" patented by Lynn T. Olson in 1977. It seems by vague internet sources, that this system was never actually produced in seventies.


So naturally, I've been using it on my Boxed CDs and the more recent remastering of Exposed and the results are rather good I thought. They're not as clearly separated as the 5.1 mixes from the Deluxe Editions but they're certainly enjoyable listening.

If anyone's interested in having a listen, let me know and I'll make them available. Not sure I should just put a link directly here but if you message me I can send you a link.

It would be nice to one day be able to hear them all in a discrete format and remastered. Supposedly there could be 5 albums in this format:

Tubular Bells (SQ encoded on LP and Boxed CD - discrete quad mix was available on SACD at one point)
Hergest Ridge (SQ encoded on LP and Boxed CD)
Ommadwn (SQ encoded on LP and Boxed CD)
Incantations (quad mix exists somewhere but never released)
Exposed (SQ encoded on LP and CD)

I wonder if the quad master of Incantations has gone the same way as the multitracks that were damaged and/or lost over the years...
Back to top
Profile PM 
shenry Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 54
Joined: Oct. 2018
Posted: Feb. 16 2021, 11:57

Pauken, thanks so much for sharing these with me!

I had always been curious to hear the original quad mixes on Boxed. The mention of this in the booklet in the LP box set was always tantalising to me, but I didn't really have the knowledge to work out how to extract them to listen to, and of course proper quad equipment has long since become unavailable.

So you took these from the CDs, did you? Fascinating. Just goes to show the quad encoding was buried in there all along, despite what the CD booklet says.

I don't really have a surround speaker set up, but I set up a makeshift one by importing all four stems onto my Korg digital multitrack and sending them separately to four different speakers.

Anyway, more importantly, what did I think of the result? Well so far I have only listened to my favourite (Hergest Ridge Part One) and it's a revelation! It's like hearing it again for the first time with fresh ears. I was quite overcome with emotion, honestly.

The 2010 5.1 remix of Hergest Ridge is one thing, and I do like that, but I was never happy with the flashiness and business of it. I always much preferred the Boxed mix (even more than the original 1974 mix), because it it is so mellow and warm and minimal. So experiencing this mix in an immersive way, with the sound all around me, is totally astonishing.

You are right that the channel separation is subtle, and the instruments all bleed across, so there are no massive, showboat touches like instruments in the far corners of the sound field. But the subtlety suits Hergest Ridge to a T, and since a lot of it is washes of organ drones and wordless vocals, it all just wraps around you in a most pleasing way.

Technically speaking, it seems like the two rear speakers are carrying a lot of the pitches at the higher and lower extremes, but that could just be my makeshift speaker setup!

Anyway, thank you so much for sharing this, and I will now have a listen to the rest of the mixes.
Back to top
Profile PM 
pauken Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: May 2005
Posted: Feb. 20 2021, 19:33

No problem, glad you're enjoying them :)

Yes it seems that the SQ encoding is quite intact on the CDs waiting to be decoded. It's been fun geeking out on extracting the quad channels and seeing what it sounds like. I can see (or rather hear) now why quad never quite took off, it's just not very good - the separation and imaging - compared to actual discrete 4 (or 5 or 6) channels.

My first experience of Hergest Ridge was the original 1974 mix off LP and it was a good 5 years maybe before I heard the Boxed mix which initially I didn't enjoy as much because I missed all the extra stuff that he left out of it. Over time though I really got to prefer it for the same reason as you I think, it's much more stripped back and ambient, less busy.

I do quite like the Deluxe 2010 mix and the 5.1 is great but there are a couple of places where I think "Oh No!". In Part 1 the jangling mandolin strumming that's slightly erratic and out of time during the minor key bass solo section that starts at 13'25" is so out of place, I really struggle with it, it really ruins the feeling of that section for me. But other places sound glorious. Ah well.

I'm now messing around with creating stereo folded down versions of the extracted quadraphonic mixes and comparing them with the original undecoded SQ stereo files which is quite interesting. You'd think you would end up back where you started from but the SQ decoding undoes the 90 degree phase shifts which are part of the encoding process and so things aren't the same.

This really has been a fascinating rabbit hole to go down... :)

What did you think of Ommadawn or Tubular Bells in quad?
Back to top
Profile PM 
shenry Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 54
Joined: Oct. 2018
Posted: Feb. 22 2021, 05:28

"In Part 1 the jangling mandolin strumming that's slightly erratic and out of time during the minor key bass solo section that starts at 13'25" is so out of place" ..... YES, I totally agree. That single moment for me is enough to make the 2010 mix unlistenable. I hate it. On the Boxed mix (and the 1974 mix as well actually) it was always a goosebumps moment, the volume dropping away with just that bass playing, with the little tinkly guitar bits and then the sleigh bells coming in.... totally ruined!

Having said that... I quite like the 2010 Hergest Ridge mix in 5.1. It's worth it for the extreme "bouncing around" of all the instruments. It just doens't make sense as a stereo mix.

As to the other quad mixes....

TB is all right... to be honest I was expecting something more dramatic, more like the 2009 surround mix. I was flipping between the stereo mix and the quad mix and there's not much difference at all. Too subtle I think.

I haven't done Ommadawn yet. Will give it a go today!
Back to top
Profile PM 
pauken Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: May 2005
Posted: Feb. 22 2021, 07:14

Oh, while we're talking about Hergest Ridge, these are really worth listening to. Someone else has gone down a rabbit hole over lockdown :)

http://cri.ch/oldfield/HR/
Back to top
Profile PM 
pauken Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: May 2005
Posted: Feb. 22 2021, 07:32

Quote
"In Part 1 the jangling mandolin strumming that's slightly erratic and out of time during the minor key bass solo section that starts at 13'25" is so out of place" ..... YES, I totally agree. That single moment for me is enough to make the 2010 mix unlistenable. I hate it. On the Boxed mix (and the 1974 mix as well actually) it was always a goosebumps moment, the volume dropping away with just that bass playing, with the little tinkly guitar bits and then the sleigh bells coming in.... totally ruined!

I just don't understand how it was a good idea.

Quote
Having said that... I quite like the 2010 Hergest Ridge mix in 5.1. It's worth it for the extreme "bouncing around" of all the instruments. It just doens't make sense as a stereo mix.

I'm considering making my own rendition of it. When the Crises 5.1 mix came out, the quiet section after "Watcher and the Tower" had this awful sampled shaker rhythm all over it and I was sufficiently annoyed enough to make a mixdown to stereo with that section mostly replaced with that from the original 1983 mix. I'm wondering if I can try the same trick with the Hergest Ridge 2010 mix. Hmm...

What would be really amazing is if the record company released stems so we can sort these things out properly :D

Quote
TB is all right... to be honest I was expecting something more dramatic, more like the 2009 surround mix. I was flipping between the stereo mix and the quad mix and there's not much difference at all. Too subtle I think.

Yeah there's not a lot of difference but some subtle bits here and there. Certainly nothing radical. The drums in Caveman are a bit louder which I like. And the stroll around The Manor :)

Quote
I haven't done Ommadawn yet. Will give it a go today!

Let me know what you think.

There's some interesting reading here and links to papers by Michael Gerzon about how unsatisfactory Quad SQ was as a system:

https://www.michaelgerzonphotos.org.uk/commercial-quadraphonics.html
Back to top
Profile PM 
larstangmark Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 1672
Joined: Mar. 2005
Posted: Feb. 22 2021, 12:53

Quote (shenry @ Feb. 22 2021, 05:28)
"In Part 1 the jangling mandolin strumming that's slightly erratic and out of time during the minor key bass solo section that starts at 13'25" is so out of place" ..... YES, I totally agree. That single moment for me is enough to make the 2010 mix unlistenable.

Still, I think it's fascinating to hear those buried parts being brought to the front, because it gives more insight into how the work was done. I always thought those little twinkly sounds in the background was some sort of intentionally obscure overdub (I wasn't even sure if it was a guitar  or a keyboard). Hearing the 2010 mix, I relaized it's a guitar part that didn't work out well, that sounded ok-ish when put low in the mix. It makes HR more human to me! When you're 11 years and listen to a masterpiece by your idol, you can't even imagine there being MISTAKES in there. :)

--------------
"There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste"
Mark E Smith
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
shenry Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 54
Joined: Oct. 2018
Posted: Feb. 23 2021, 04:28

"Oh, while we're talking about Hergest Ridge, these are really worth listening to. Someone else has gone down a rabbit hole over lockdown"...

Oh yes, that's Jan isn't it? I've seen him talk about this on the Amarok message board. Funny how these things cross-pollinate and you see the same people popping up.

I think Jan's remasters are a brave effort, but for my own personal taste they are not for me. I realise I miss the fuzziness of the original 70s mixes. I know Mike has moaned about the poor guitar sounds etc he got on TB and Hergest Ridge, but I just love that slightly muffled, dreamy feel. It's not the same when everything is crystal clear!
Back to top
Profile PM 
pauken Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: May 2005
Posted: Feb. 23 2021, 17:17

Yes they are Jan's mixes, I found out about them via Facebook. I'm not on the Amarok board, where is that?

So, just to go a bit further with this, I've put his remasters of the Boxed Hergest Ridge and Ommadawn mixes through the Quad decoder and the results are rather good. The directionality seems to be better, partly because I think things are clearer and more defined in the higher frequencies and the instruments have a bit more attack. The SQ encoding certainly survived his remastering process pretty well.

Let me know if you fancy a listen and I'll put them with the others :)
Back to top
Profile PM 
shenry Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 54
Joined: Oct. 2018
Posted: Feb. 23 2021, 17:32

This is the message board group I mentioned. Its quite old fashioned, it's all done by email.

http://www.ommadawn.net/mailman/listinfo/amarok
Back to top
Profile PM 
pauken Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: May 2005
Posted: Feb. 24 2021, 14:03

Thankyou, I've signed up.
Cheers!
Back to top
Profile PM 
First_Excursion Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: Aug. 2012
Posted: Feb. 26 2021, 05:13

Quote (pauken @ Feb. 22 2021, 07:14)
Oh, while we're talking about Hergest Ridge, these are really worth listening to...

I listened to the Boxed mix Jyf remaster. It don't think this is an improvement on the Boxed mix. It's taken away that 1970s warmth and restraint that I love so much about the Boxed mix.
Back to top
Profile PM 
38 replies since Jan. 22 2003, 09:03 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >






Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact

Mike Oldfield Tubular.net
Mike Oldfield Tubular.net