Thank whatever gods there be for Greg. So, lemme get this straight: after CD4 had been out a while the manufacturers started selling CD4 rated carts without CD4 styli! Oh, that’s a beaut! I also never knew that AT made the JVC carts. I have had an AT14 for years that I’ve never gotten to play properly (I just found another sans stylus in the ever popular thrift store) but I suspect a bad stylus. I’ve had weird breakup problems with Pickering and now I know why, stereohedron stylus. I’ve also never used the built-in brush with them, the tracking was always poor. I believe the earlier Pickerings did have an actual quad stylus, the 5000 doesn’t. Anyone have a take on the AT 12sa, which is also known as the Sansui SX40, marketed on their “4 channel turntable”? (FR3080, I think)
Subject: Re: Tate 101 Tetrasound Question
That’s an interesting piece, virtually identical to the Tate II with a couple differences, the trim pot input level controls versus the knob and the lack of tape monitor switch, at least on the front. I’ll say its rare! I’ve had a Tetrasound remote I got with my first Tate for years, but never knew what it was from. The SQ decoder on the KR9940 really sucks, it’s a Sony-based system which pumps like crazy, but overlook the matrixing and the rest of the reciever is all heart with a good blast ratio, and the CD4 isn’t bad either if it came with the plug in module. Happy listening, Dude !!!
Thank whatever gods there be for Greg. So, lemme get this straight: after CD4 had been out a while the manufacturers started selling CD4 rated carts without CD4 styli! Oh, that’s a beaut! I also never knew that AT made the JVC carts. I have had an AT14 for years that I’ve never gotten to play properly (I just found another sans stylus in the ever popular thrift store) but I suspect a bad stylus. I’ve had weird breakup problems with Pickering and now I know why, stereohedron stylus. I’ve also never used the built-in brush with them, the tracking was always poor. I believe the earlier Pickerings did have an actual quad stylus, the 5000 doesn’t. Anyone have a take on the AT 12sa, which is also known as the Sansui SX40, marketed on their “4 channel turntable”? (FR3080, I think).
Subject: No collection is complete without…….
Found in a Goodwill in Cleveland: “Cock a Doodle Doo and Mother Goose too”, a 4 record set of children’s gobbledygook, 118 in all, released in, yes, QS regular matrix. On Recar records, released by Telecast Marketing, #PCA-8000, for those who cant wait to find this
gem. Unfortunately, the set I found was way beyond redemption, looking like part of an asteroid shield. Hey, but the hunt is half the fun……
Subject: Re: Sansui QSX-4500?
Ok, Ok, I give up!! What the —- is a QSX 4500???
Subject: Re: No radar light
Right On, Greg. This is an issue (tonearm wiring) that’s frequently overlooked. What good are low capacitance patch cables if the tonearm wiring is choking the signal anyway? I had a similar conversation with a turntable rebuilder awhile back, and it seems Dual actually offered an upgrade kit, at least to their service guys, of the lower cap wiring used in the Q series. Some of these things might be still running around somewhere, this guy had quite a few kits, unfortunately he moved. The wiring didn’t LOOK much different, but apparently they worked.
Subject: Re: eBay
Has anyone tried this? Take out the decoder from a receiver and make an outboard unit?
There was a fellow from PA, who I haven’t heard from or about in years, that was selling exactly that, a Vario-Matrix removed from (what else) a 9001, with new cabinet, power supply, and some kind of “pre- synthesizer” circuit added. Don’t know how many he sold, but I heard from at least one that it was pretty good.
Subject: Re: Reely old
Hey Quadheads, I play my quadraphonic reels on a 3440 which does a decent job. I use an x2000r in my stereo setup which does an excellent job with stereo recordings. My question is can this newer deck be converted to play 4-channel in one direction ? I noticed a few
times on e-bay there has been the x2000m in which they claim will play in 4-channel, do you know if there is any truth in this? Thanks, Daniel
Not sure about the X2000m, but any 2 channel reel with a 4 channel head used for auto-reverse would require a lot of additional electronics, such as playback amps, etc. It would probably be cheaper just to buy another 3440. A few 70’s decks were 2 channel record, 4 channel playback, like Sansui’s SD5000 and Pioneers RT 1020L, but they had all the necessary electronics in place. Except of course you couldn’t record in quad on them, which is just stupid.
Subject: Re: Reel Decks
Is there a source for getting new heads and parts for quad reel decks. Are these things still serviceable? Who makes the better deck..Teac or Akai? I want to find out before I take the plunge. Tab
In My humble opinion, Akais sound better, the GX have a high end you won’t believe. That being said, Akais are hard to find parts for since Mitsubishi bought them out and promptly trashed the entire reel line. However, you can rule out head wear on a GX Akai, they don’t wear at all. These beasts generally run forever, with just normal (rubber and lube)
maintenance. The GX270DSS and higher use all direct drive, so there’s no belts except the counter to get old. If you’re looking for 7 inch reel, GX270DSS is the way to go, for a 10 inch, the GX635DSS or the GX400DSS are superb machines. I’ve owned numerous stereo Akais, and have owned the GX280DSS (the one with the solder problem) the GX270DSS, and the 202DSS for over 10 years, I’ve had the 270 serviced once, and that was a
solder joint that let go probably due to moving. Teac. They use permalloy heads which do wear out eventually, but so far Teac has kept pretty well up on the parts, at least for the A3340 and A3440. These are both 10 inch reel machines, nothing fancy about them
except the multi-synch, but they are a breeze to service, adjust, and work on. I’ve had the 3440 for 13 years, and it’s never given even a hint of problems. I have heard the earlier 2340 was prone to toggle switch troubles, but I’ve never owned one. The main difference between the 3340 and 3440 is the layout, the 3340 was designed as a “QUAD” reel, the
meters and switches conform to the standard 1-3-2-4 layout, the 3440 was designed as a “studio” machine, the meter and switch layout is 1-2 3-4. This can be a little disconcerting at first. But both are fine machines. So, before I get the blabbermouth of the year award, Akai gets my best marks in sound, Teac in Maintenance and parts availability. Oh yeah, Sprague Magnetics carries heads for a few quad reels and can even recondition bad heads if they’re not too far gone.
Subject: Re: Azimuth on Quad Reels
I’m currently digitizing two “Bread” quad reels that are originals (i.e. not dubs from quad reels) and noticed what sounds like pronounced azimuth mis-alignment. I checked my machine with other reels and it sounds fine. I compared it to my CD-4 album and even the album seemed a bit “watery” in the high end. Has anyone else noticed this problem with any of their quad reels? If so, was it a major problem of that time or an isolated occurrence?
I believe its a pretty isolated occurrence. Out of the 50 or so quad reels I have, I’ve noticed bad azimuth on only a couple, but it was BAD! (Allman Bros Eat a Peach comes to mind) With CD4 involved it’s possible that the Master was misaligned on the machine,BUT it was my understanding that reel duplication got the first masters. Hmmmm, somewhere along the chain something went wrong. I’ll have to check my Bread reels when I get home.
Subject: Re: sansui QS500
I an trying to get information on the Sansui QS500. I am looking at buying one for use as a QS decoder/synthesizer. Will this unit be good for this or is there something better out there. I don’t know much about Sansui. Thanks.
Sansui had the best ideas in the early 70s, namely that deriving 4 channels from 2 was as important as developing a superior matrix. Having owned every Sansui decoding unit available, here’s what I can tell you on the QS-500. The same circuitry was used in the QS1, QR4500, QR6500, and the QS100 and 800. It’s a good step above stereo, but pales in comparison to their later Vario-Matrix decoders. The actual separation is very limited, but it does provide a decent sound-field, but does not have great channel localization. To cut to the chase, if you have one, use it till something better comes along, if you don’t have one, wait for a Vario-Matrix unit. We’re talking about 7 db separation compared to the Vario-
Matrix’s average 25.