Quadraphonics is NOT a novelty.
Doug
That is your opinion, and you seem to have misunderstood my point. For the detractors- that is all they will see in a quad system is the novelty of it. Would you buy a Predicta television set? Why? if the price right I would. But it is after all just a TV set from 1959/1960 One of the Sony ultra space age TV set/stereo matched set (the silver ball styling)? Why? Again if the price were rtight for me, I would; but it is after al,l just a stereo and TV set that had the same basic silver ball design. Those items mentioned, their popularity when new, and even now, often is clearly the novelty of them. The Predicta still suffered from some of the design shortcomings of the basic Philco design with the added complication of the cabling, but it is unique in spite of the NTSC signal format having been abandoned. Therefore it is a novel item.
Novelty is not to to be mistaken for the whimsey or cheapness those and many of the Kuba offerings exemplify whimsy over practicality. Quad was not whimsy, although some quads did have some whimsey in their designs.
The reall issue is the media that is currently available caters more to Prologic systems than to the old quad systems. The quad 4 track players (often disguised as 8 track players) were catering directly to the quad audience, but it was a format that was largely doomed due to the shortcomings of the tape cartridges tightening up. But they took full advantage of all 4 speakers, and no synthetic signals were needed because it was how the tape tracks were recorded.
From the standpoint of current technology- it is largely a novelty only because the decoding was largely abandoned/orphaned. This is not detracting from the quality of the amps themselves, and they do sound a bit better in synthesizing the rear channels from a 2 channel signal than a true "Prologic" surround does (with respect to the un-encoded 2 channel input). I have had both types of systems, and my nod goes to the older quad systems in fact because they do create a better spatial effect with the right music, and the right setup when it is just a 2channel signal.
But the point remains, the only quad encoded vinyl and tapes are what was produced initially, and not currently. And in that respect, it is like the old Ediphone- only the Ediphone is low fidelity today, and no one is producing new material on Ediphone cylinders- Although it would be humerous if a group like Metallica did release a few songs on wax cylinders. Which truly would be a novelty item.
Quad is only a novelty because it is an orphan format- nothing more, nothing less. And that should not be viewed as a negative comment on the technology, nor negative commentary- it is just an observation. Quad is not the ultimate in audio evolution by today's standards, but in it's day it was TOTL.
A couple months ago someone had posted a thread where the quad encoding systems were discussed at length with links to articles. It was a very informative thread.
A better example might be a Saturn car in the US. There is nothing wrong with the cars themselves in and of themselves, but over time there will be fewer of them and 60 years from now they will be as rare or rarer to see them in running condition than the "Kaiser Darren" would be today. And it is that rare status that makes them a novelty, and it was an innovative car too. Novelty does not indicate cheapness in any way- go see what the Darren is bringing these days at auctions.
And as for Ediphones- they are highly sought after and bring decent money, but compared to modern and even 50's vintage, or 30's vintage Hi Fidelity- the Ediphone has crappy audio reproduction.
Not to mention in my initial post- opinions are like belly buttons...Only I think you read something into the word "Novelty" that was not inferred nor intended. No offense taken, and none to be inferred- I just want to clear the air to avoid confusion
After all- How many angels CAN dance upon the head of a pin anyway?
