Quadrophonic Receivers questions...

[culcuhain]

Good morning!
I have my 2015 running nicely in the bedroom. This receiver is destined to the garage where I do a lot of work. I want to replace it and I was thinking about the Quadrophonic receivers. After a little research it appears that the 2 channel receivers will work just fine. The bedroom currently uses 4 speakers, stacked, using the main and remote. The plan is to take the top speakers and move them to the garage and put some bookshelfs by the headboard and the floor speakers are across the room.

Is there a need for the quad receiver?

 

[mcsew2k]

Good morning!
I have my 2015 running nicely in the bedroom. This receiver is destined to the garage where I do a lot of work. I want to replace it and I was thinking about the Quadrophonic receivers. After a little research it appears that the 2 channel receivers will work just fine. The bedroom currently uses 4 speakers, stacked, using the main and remote. The plan is to take the top speakers and move them to the garage and put some bookshelfs by the headboard and the floor speakers are across the room.

Is there a need for the quad receiver?

If your source material is stereo, then I would suggest staying with a stereo receiver. Although the quad receivers can simulate rear ambience, their main purpose is to deliver the four channels of actual quadraphonic source material, like SQ or CD-4 records, or discrete 4-channel out of a reel-to-reel or a modern surround sound system.

Remember that running two sets of speakers out of a stereo receiver is the same as running the speakers in parallel; make sure the total impedance is not lower than what the receiver is rated for. Overcoming this lower limit might be another reason to use a quad amp, so that you can run, say two sets of 4 ohm speakers and feed the amps the stereo source signal.

 

[1tumbleweed]

If your source material is stereo, then I would suggest staying with a stereo receiver. Although the quad receivers can simulate rear ambience, their main purpose is to deliver the four channels of actual quadraphonic source material, like SQ or CD-4 records, or discrete 4-channel out of a reel-to-reel or a modern surround sound system.

I respectfully disagree. Lots of folks are using quad receivers with two channel source material, and getting more out of the rear speakers than just "ambience."

It depends mostly on whether you're using a decent receiver (cough/Sansui/cough) that can do a good job of synthesizing quad from 2 channel source material. No SQ or CD4 necessary.

Of course, whether all that's a good idea for a bedroom system is another question.

As always, just my opinion, YMMV.

Happy trails,
Larry B.

 

[mcsew2k]

It depends mostly on whether you're using a decent receiver (cough/Sansui/cough) that can do a good job of synthesizing quad from 2 channel source material. No SQ or CD4 necessary.

Is the non-Sansui to which you refer not a "decent" receiver or does it just not synthesize rear channels decently? If the later, then maybe I should give Sansui a try, otherwise your comment sounds insulting.

 

[biscuithead]

If you just want the ability to hook up 4 speakers... then stereo is fine. If you want to delve into stereo-times-two then Quadraphonic is pretty cool.

 

[blhagstrom]

Running a quad with speakers placed all around (4 corners) and using synth quad mode, say matrix mode and twiddling with the balance and spatial effects (dimension on Marantz) can produce some very good sound field.

Using a quad to distribute sound around a building by using front and rear outputs is not a good plan. For that, get a good speaker selector switch or actual multi channel whole building distribution amp like the B&K CT-610.

 

[mcsew2k]

With four speakers in the same room it is also nice to have the front/rear balance control that a quad provides.

 

[1tumbleweed]

Is the non-Sansui to which you refer not a "decent" receiver or does it just not synthesize rear channels decently? If the later, then maybe I should give Sansui a try, otherwise your comment sounds insulting.

No insult intended, but it's fairly well-known that nobody put the care and engineering into synthesized quad the way Sansui did. It was easy for others to add two channels, accommodate switching and/or a demodulator for CD4, plus SQ with or without logic circuitry, but almost everyone else did nothing for the RM/QS system other than the basics. Sansui ruled the roost...and still does. See what a restored QRX-9001 goes for these days.

Happy trails,
Larry B.

 

[previd01]

I happen to love the Marantz Quad recievers. I have a 4230 in use in my man cave. It only has 12 WPC in the 4 channel mode, but when used with the correct speakers, it is wonderful (Stephens Trusonics and some small Pioneers from the 70's). I tried the model 4300 in the same application, but it was just too powerful, so it's collecting dust. Note; I had to rebuild all 4 output sections and do the usual stuff to get it operational, but it has been in service for over 5 years now. If you have never heard one of these things, you're missing out. And, they are beautiful!

 

[sKiZo]

Can't imagine life without quad, and it's not as complicated or restrictive in setup as some might think. You'll get the fanatics that INSIST on four identical speakers placed equidistant and at 90 degrees in all axes from the primary listening position, but that's pure bs. I use big boxes up front, with two sets of Bose compact speakers (161's and 201's)on the back, as well as a set of Gekko flat panels, routed through a Dynaco Quadraptor (haffler effect box). Call it ... sexophonic sound. Incredible depth ... but I digress.

My true quad source material is limited at best. I DO have a quad RR, but that's been collecting dust for years. Vinyl labeled QS, SQ, or Discrete totals maybe 25 disks. That's about it. Then again, ALL of my stereo source gets channeled through the quad receiver. Rock and pop is primarily on the SQ setting unless I know for certain that it was QS encoded. Symphonic and jazz gets the HALL synth treatment. My receiver also does SURROUND and CD4, but surround is too busy for me, and CD4 is just too much BS to get it right.

So, as far as the argument that quad has no purpose, that's also BS ... try it ... you'll like it!

PS ... alternate speaker setups ... basically, experiment, and go with what sounds good. I also have another set of speakers I can put into play about 15 feet behind the listening chair ... that's eight speakers total, and those are blended with the pair wall mounted to the sides of my ears, and the ceiling mounted pair just behind the listening chair for incredible depth.

(And yes, the Sansui QRX series receivers were state of the art, incorporating the TOTL decoders that could handle anything quad gracefully, with no addons required. Not saying Marantz and the other mfgs were bad - just not as flexible or technologically advanced. Still a damn fine sound.)

Oh. One overlooked advantage of a quad system ... you can run an entire house off the speaker taps! I've got one full quad room, and three other stereo rooms all running off the one receiver.

Oh oh oh. Fun fact ... a LOT of the 70s and early 80s albums were encoded in QS or SQ, whether labeled that way or not. The formats played back well in stereo, and it was no extra effort as most studios had the encoding equipment available. Quadraphonic Quad has a list of hundreds that qualify. So, you may have a lot of quad material and not even know it.

 

[culcuhain]

And now in my house sits a 4070 amp that is in dire need of cleanings and some pre-amp to main amp jumpers (reason why it was bad)...it does not have the added decoders but still has discrete... will be fun!

 

[smokenguns22]

Can't imagine life without quad, and it's not as complicated or restrictive in setup as some might think. You'll get the fanatics that INSIST on four identical speakers placed equidistant and at 90 degrees in all axes from the primary listening position, but that's pure bs. I use big boxes up front, with two sets of Bose compact speakers (161's and 201's)on the back, as well as a set of Gekko flat panels, routed through a Dynaco Quadraptor (haffler effect box). Call it ... sexophonic sound. Incredible depth ... but I digress.

My true quad source material is limited at best. I DO have a quad RR, but that's been collecting dust for years. Vinyl labeled QS, SQ, or Discrete totals maybe 25 disks. That's about it. Then again, ALL of my stereo source gets channeled through the quad receiver. Rock and pop is primarily on the SQ setting unless I know for certain that it was QS encoded. Symphonic and jazz gets the HALL synth treatment. My receiver also does SURROUND and CD4, but surround is too busy for me, and CD4 is just too much BS to get it right.

So, as far as the argument that quad has no purpose, that's also BS ... try it ... you'll like it!

PS ... alternate speaker setups ... basically, experiment, and go with what sounds good. I also have another set of speakers I can put into play about 15 feet behind the listening chair ... that's eight speakers total, and those are blended with the pair wall mounted to the sides of my ears, and the ceiling mounted pair just behind the listening chair for incredible depth.

(And yes, the Sansui QRX series receivers were state of the art, incorporating the TOTL decoders that could handle anything quad gracefully, with no addons required. Not saying Marantz and the other mfgs were bad - just not as flexible or technologically advanced. Still a damn fine sound.)

Oh. One overlooked advantage of a quad system ... you can run an entire house off the speaker taps! I've got one full quad room, and three other stereo rooms all running off the one receiver.

Oh oh oh. Fun fact ... a LOT of the 70s and early 80s albums were encoded in QS or SQ, whether labeled that way or not. The formats played back well in stereo, and it was no extra effort as most studios had the encoding equipment available. Quadraphonic Quad has a list of hundreds that qualify. So, you may have a lot of quad material and not even know it.

What Marantz Quad receiver do you have?
And exactly how many speakers?
Are you running quad on both Main and remote?

 

[The Fuxtor]

I have a HK 75+ quad receiver which gets used in my main living room. The reason I went quad was to be able to control one set of speakers volume. The house has a set of in ceiling speakers over the eating nook but I wasn't super happy just running them but the wife enjoyed using them?? So I compromised putting some floor standers at one end of the room and ceiling speaks all hooked into one unit. Now I can use the joystick balancer and nicely balance the sound for the whole area!

 

[sKiZo]

??

From the same post you quoted:

(And yes, the Sansui QRX series receivers were state of the art, incorporating the TOTL decoders that could handle anything quad gracefully, with no addons required. Not saying Marantz and the other mfgs were bad - just not as flexible or technologically advanced. Still a damn fine sound.)

Oh. One overlooked advantage of a quad system ... you can run an entire house off the speaker taps! I've got one full quad room, and three other stereo rooms all running off the one receiver.

And yes, I had a Marantz quad way back then but soon switched to Sansui, more for that warm Sui sound, but also from not wanting to deal with plug in modules and the like. Don't get me wrong - the Marantz was quite nice, but ... personal preferences and all that. Couple QR and QRX units later, finally scored the TOTL QRX 9001 and after a full restoration, I'm pretty much done searching for perfection. That's got it all, and does everything exceedingly well.

PS ... I have SIX speakers on the "A" position. Big boxes on the front, and two sets of wall mounts on the back. I put a pair of Bose 161's directly overhead and sligttly behind the main chair, and a pair of Gekko flat panels about mid wall directly to the side. I also have a pair of Bose 201's about mid wall and 10 feet back from there, driven using a Dynaco Quadrapter. Those can be switched into the Sui's "A" rear channel array for ambiance, or left in two channel for stereo listening in that room. Two other rooms are driven in stereo mode using the "B" speaker outputs.

Sounds complicated, and it is, but it was fun getting everything to work well together.

 

[Chrisxo55441]

I have both a Marantz 4140 quad amp and a Sansui QS-1 quad synthesizer, ive read that the Sansui vario- matrix synthesizer which is based on their QS decoder does a better job of it than the Marantz Vari-Matrix synthesizer but having listened to both with stereo records its like 6 of 1 or a half dozen of the other to me. just my 2cents

 

[Chrisxo55441]

It only has 12 WPC in the 4 channel mode

This something to keep in mind if you get a quad receiver the speaker output usually drops when using in quad. my 4140 is 70 watts per channel in stereo and drops to 25 watts per channel in quad, so make sure it will drive your speakers

 

[smokenguns22]

This something to keep in mind if you get a quad receiver the speaker output usually drops when using in quad. my 4140 is 70 watts per channel in stereo and drops to 25 watts per channel in quad, so make sure it will drive your speakers

When you go to 70x2 stereo mode, have you hooked up a set of 8 ohm speakers to both main and remote and ran them simultaneously ever?
Just wondering if this would be too much strain running a set in living room and another set on back patio in 70x2 mode hooked up to main and remote fronts

 

[Chrisxo55441]

When you go to 70x2 stereo mode, have you hooked up a set of 8 ohm speakers to both main and remote and ran them simultaneously ever?
Just wondering if this would be too much strain running a set in living room and another set on back patio in 70x2 mode hooked up to main and remote fronts

when my 4140 is in 2 channel mode all 4 speakers are still playing that is the way it is designed, the LF & LR are combined as are the RF & LF . it also has main and remote switches and another set of 4 speakers can be added and played simultaneously so up to 8 - 8 ohm speakers can be played at once as per the manual but only 4-4 ohm speakers at once can be played . i do have slide controls for front and rear speakers i would assume i can slide all the way to front and just have 2 speaker stereo or remove 2 speakers but i havent tried it i dont really use it for stereo ive got plenty of others for that. so yes i have had 4 - 8 ohm speakers playing simultaneously in 2 channel mode and have never tried 8.

 

[smokenguns22]

when my 4140 is in 2 channel mode all 4 speakers are still playing that is the way it is designed, the LF & LR are combined as are the RF & LF . it also has main and remote switches and another set of 4 speakers can be added and played simultaneously so up to 8 - 8 ohm speakers can be played at once as per the manual but only 4-4 ohm speakers at once can be played . i do have slide controls for front and rear speakers i would assume i can slide all the way to front and just have 2 speaker stereo or remove 2 speakers but i havent tried it i dont really use it for stereo ive got plenty of others for that. so yes i have had 4 - 8 ohm speakers playing simultaneously in 2 channel mode and have never tried 8.

Do the quad functions still work on front panel when in 2x70 stereo mode on back panel?

 

[spicer]

I have a HK 75+ quad receiver which gets used in my main living room. The reason I went quad was to be able to control one set of speakers volume. The house has a set of in ceiling speakers over the eating nook but I wasn't super happy just running them but the wife enjoyed using them?? So I compromised putting some floor standers at one end of the room and ceiling speaks all hooked into one unit. Now I can use the joystick balancer and nicely balance the sound for the whole area!

Nice HK receiver and excellent derived rear channel from stereo sources. Bridgeable too for more power. Joy stick works good, great idea for overall balance control. In my opinion very nice receiver.