What Does Q vox mean?

[Metalcreature]

I was thinking of purchasing a receiver with Q vox, what is it, and is it any good? Sorry for the stupid question, just curious.

[TheNomadicSoul]

Wasn't that some sort of old fake "surround sound" feature? Or am I thinking of something else?

[LesPaul666]

I heard of "Q-sound" which is a spatial expander popular on recordings from 10-20 years ago, but never heard of "Q-Vox".

[Metalcreature]

Wasn't that some sort of old fake "surround sound" feature? Or am I thinking of something else?



I think thats what it is, but im not positive.

[Metalcreature]

I heard of "Q-sound" which is a spatial expander popular on recordings from 10-20 years ago, but never heard of "Q-Vox".


Wow, ive never heard of that either. I need to get out more. lol

[TheNomadicSoul]

What receiver are you going to get? Something used I'm assuming? I haven't thought of "q-vox" in ages...

[Metalcreature]

What receiver are you going to get? Something used I'm assuming? I haven't thought of "q-vox" in ages...


Its a Realistic Sta-90. I think its 45 watts per channel. It seems like it would be a really good receiver.

[Metalcreature]

Its a Realistic Sta-90. I think its 45 watts per channel. It seems like it would be a really good receiver.


Yes its used.

[quadjoe]

Q-vox was Radio Shack's proprietary quadraphonic synthesizer, though I suspect that it used either a Hafler circuit or contained a very basic version of the Sansui QS chip (also known as RM for Regular Matrix). Sansui didn't require a manufacturer to pay them royalties as long as they didn't use the QS logo. Radio Shack never really got into the quad fad very deeply, and they only offered a handful of products. Many of their receivers were built by Pioneer, and were acutally pretty good. The unit you're looking at will probably be a decent stereo receiver, but I doubt that you'll like what the Q-vox (also known as Quatrovox), will do to you're stereo records for the most part, although it may decode the ambience info off some discs respectably. The good thing is that you don't have to use it.

[LesPaul666]

Q-vox was Radio Shack's proprietary quadraphonic synthesizer, though I suspect that it used either a Hafler circuit or contained a very basic version of the Sansui QS chip (also known as RM for Regular Matrix). Sansui didn't require a manufacturer to pay them royalties as long as they didn't use the QS logo. Radio Shack never really got into the quad fad very deeply, and they only offered a handful of products. Many of their receivers were built by Pioneer, and were acutally pretty good. The unit you're looking at will probably be a decent stereo receiver, but I doubt that you'll like what the Q-vox (also known as Quatrovox), will do to you're stereo records for the most part, although it may decode the ambience info off some discs respectably. The good thing is that you don't have to use it.

Wait a minute here. I think I used to have a little white 4-way 'Pseudo quad' RCA speaker-splitter from Radio Shack when I was a kid in the '70's that was called Quatrovox, or something like that!

[quadjoe]

Wait a minute here. I think I used to have a little white 4-way 'Pseudo quad' RCA speaker-splitter from Radio Shack when I was a kid in the '70's that was called Quatrovox, or something like that!

Right you are! IIRC, the little white box was just a simple Hafler circuit which I believe sold for less than $20. They just added the circuit to some of their receivers in a response to the quad craze in the 70's.

[terra1]

QVox

I assume you mean Quatravox.

Description from my Realistic STA250 owner's manual:

Built-in Quatravox provides simulated 4-channel sound for your records, tapes or another stereo signal ... just add a second set of speakers to enjoy this 4-channel effect.

It had a switch in the back you could turn the effect on or off.

It really does create a kind of simulated surround effect. Kind of like televisions with fake surround you do notice an expansion in sound field. It just sounded fuller is the best I can describe it.

Great for special effects comedy albums like Firesign's I Think We're All Bozos on this Bus and spacey instrumentals like Tangerine Dream Phaedra and even Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon.

I believe mine was rated continuous power 44w @ 8 ohms but I remember it put out some nice sound. I had their 12 inch Novus speaker for front and back smaller 8 inch something ... small apt but sounded great and lots of fun.

I wish my receiver still worked.

[Metalcreature]

Q-vox was Radio Shack's proprietary quadraphonic synthesizer, though I suspect that it used either a Hafler circuit or contained a very basic version of the Sansui QS chip (also known as RM for Regular Matrix). Sansui didn't require a manufacturer to pay them royalties as long as they didn't use the QS logo. Radio Shack never really got into the quad fad very deeply, and they only offered a handful of products. Many of their receivers were built by Pioneer, and were acutally pretty good. The unit you're looking at will probably be a decent stereo receiver, but I doubt that you'll like what the Q-vox (also known as Quatrovox), will do to you're stereo records for the most part, although it may decode the ambience info off some discs respectably. The good thing is that you don't have to use it.


Thanks for all the info! So you are familiar with this particular receiver? When you say decode the ambience from cds, what do you mean by that exactly?

[Metalcreature]

QVox

I assume you mean Quatravox.


It had a switch in the back you could turn the effect on or off.

It really does create a kind of simulated surround effect. Kind of like televisions with fake surround you do notice an expansion in sound field. It just sounded fuller is the best I can describe it.

Great for special effects comedy albums like Firesign's I Think We're All Bozos on this Bus and spacey instrumentals like Tangerine Dream Phaedra and even Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon.

I believe mine was rated continuous power 44w @ 8 ohms but I remember it put out some nice sound. I had their 12 inch Novus speaker for front and back smaller 8 inch something ... small apt but sounded great and lots of fun.

I wish my receiver still worked.

I wonder if it will improve the sound of cds.

[quadjoe]

Thanks for all the info! So you are familiar with this particular receiver? When you say decode the ambience from cds, what do you mean by that exactly?

Actually, by discs, I meant records. I heard that receiver years ago, at a friends home, and I also listened to one in a RS store. It sounded very nice.

The Quatravox is basically a Hafler circuit, which takes out of phase sounds in a recording and places them in the surround speakers. So things like echo end up behind you. Also, if a lot of overdubbing was done on a recording, some of that information could be placed in the surround speakers, if the dubs are out of phase with the main portion of the recording. At least, that's how it was explained to me, back in the day. I imagine it will work for CD's as well, there isn't any reason why it couldn't, as far as I know.

[Metalcreature]

Actually, by discs, I meant records. I heard that receiver years ago, at a friends home, and I also listened to one in a RS store. It sounded very nice.

The Quatravox is basically a Hafler circuit, which takes out of phase sounds in a recording and places them in the surround speakers. So things like echo end up behind you. Also, if a lot of overdubbing was done on a recording, some of that information could be placed in the surround speakers, if the dubs are out of phase with the main portion of the recording. At least, that's how it was explained to me, back in the day. I imagine it will work for CD's as well, there isn't any reason why it couldn't, as far as I know.


Sounds like it would sound better than 2 channel. I just dont want to lose that 2 channel full sound in the process. Will that happen?

[Metalcreature]

Actually, by discs, I meant records. I heard that receiver years ago, at a friends home, and I also listened to one in a RS store. It sounded very nice.

The Quatravox is basically a Hafler circuit, which takes out of phase sounds in a recording and places them in the surround speakers. So things like echo end up behind you. Also, if a lot of overdubbing was done on a recording, some of that information could be placed in the surround speakers, if the dubs are out of phase with the main portion of the recording. At least, that's how it was explained to me, back in the day. I imagine it will work for CD's as well, there isn't any reason why it couldn't, as far as I know.


Oh yeah, i also wanted to ask, do you have to have 4 speakers hooked up for this effect, or will 2 work?

[terra1]

I wonder if it will improve the sound of cds.



The Realistic manual says LP, tapes any stereo signal ... it was written before CDs, but as quadjoe says it shouldn't matter because it is just a signal processing gimmick ... it should work with any stereo signal.

Here's another reference I found:
http://www.amsky.com/~cirkuit/media/surround.html

... off center sounds are "pulled" farther off center; second, it adds a pleasing ambiance to the sounds in the front speakers even when no third channel is encoded. This is exactly what Radio Shack's Quatravox four channel simulator did. If you happen to have a Quatravox it will decode surround sound.


I will add that I have had other receivers and CD players with various signal processing buttons (jazz, dolby surround, etc), and none of them really gave me the nostalgia I remember about Quatravox. It really sounded and felt more like 4 channel instead of just 2 front with 2 rear as echo.

It may be my memory, but it just seemed the sound was fuller. Of course the sound technically won't be as clean as in just stereo, but it was a dynamic ambient effect.

[terra1]

Sounds like it would sound better than 2 channel. I just dont want to lose that 2 channel full sound in the process. Will that happen?

If it's like the STA250 I had, there should be a switch on the back you can turn Quatravox On or Off.

[terra1]

Oh yeah, i also wanted to ask, do you have to have 4 speakers hooked up for this effect, or will 2 work?

As the manual states, it is intended for use with 4 speakers to get the Quatravox 4 channel effect.

I never tried it with just 2 speakers. But as I said, you should be able to turn Quatravox On or Off with the switch in the back if there is a weird effect with 2 speakers.

I don't have an SACD player so I don't know how the new 5.1 surround sound SACDs compare.

[Metalcreature]

The Realistic manual says LP, tapes any stereo signal ... it was written before CDs, but as quadjoe says it shouldn't matter because it is just a signal processing gimmick ... it should work with any stereo signal.




I will add that I have had other receivers and CD players with various signal processing buttons (jazz, dolby surround, etc), and none of them really gave me the nostalgia I remember about Quatravox. It really sounded and felt more like 4 channel instead of just 2 front with 2 rear as echo.

It may be my memory, but it just seemed the sound was fuller. Of course the sound technically won't be as clean as in just stereo, but it was a dynamic ambient effect.


Excellent feedback on this subject. So you do indeed need 4 speakers for the effect. Ill probably just go with the 2 channel till i can get another pair of speakers.

[Metalcreature]

If it's like the STA250 I had, there should be a switch on the back you can turn Quatravox On or Off.

I dont think it has that switch. But this Realistic STA-90 Is really nice actually. I think it was built in 77-78, and is 45 watts per channel.

[terra1]

I would be surprised if it doesn't have a switch to turn Quatravox off.

I believe it was promoted/advertised as 88 watts per channel stereo if two channels were used.

It was with 4 speakers that it technically goes down to 44 watts per channel.

And mine was 44 watts but it really seemed pretty robust for me as my first "real" stereo instead of an old suitcase sized record player I had.

I played Hendrix, Alice Cooper, Slade, J Geils Yes, and they all sounded fine at vaious listening levels. I remember my landlady had to knock on my apartment door to turn it down. Lucky I was by the door or I wouldn't have heard her.

The power on switch made a kind of thump sound when turning it on/off so don't be surprised if it does that.

In fact a Yamaha I got back then only had 44 watts per channel but it also put out decent sound. It was just before the great Triple Digit Wattage Wars. At some point you might push it to clipping with certain speakers if you like to blast your neighbors, but it's a great starter.

[terra1]

May be more than you need, but here are some tips from my owner's manual (my actual speaker set up was more like Figure B and had the rear speakers slightly askew (the left rear was closer to the front speaker than the right rear -- but it sounded fine):

NOTES FROM OWNER'S MANUAL

The built-in Quatravox lets you hear sounds from your stereo records (and other stereo sources) you've never heard before. By just adding a set of stereo speakers to the QUATRAVOX speaker jacks and setting the rear panel switch ON, this special circuit simulates 4-channel sound.

Most stereo recordings contain ambient (reflected) sound which an ordinary stereo system loses. Quatravox plays these sounds through the added rear speakers and actually recreates the acoustics of the studio or concert hall. The degree of 4-channel effect varies with the type of music you listen to and the way it was recorded.

QUATRAVOX

The built-in Quatravox circuit provides simulated 4-channel sound from almost any stereo signal. To utilize Quatravox, you must connect a second pair of stereo speakers to the Quatravox speaker jacks on the rear panel -- and then set Quatravox switch on the rear to the ON position. Now, play your stereo sound source. The Quatravox circuit will recover some of the ambient sound from the original recording and will process it to the speakers connected to the Quatravox jacks: these speakers should be placed to the rear of your listening position.

The usual rules apply. Normally speakers should be 6 to 8 feet apart. You may want to angle speakers toward you for better tweeter dispersion or stereo. If bass is too boomy move the speakers away from walls or elevate them.

Quatravox Speaker Placement

Where you put the speakers is more critical with 4-channel than it is with stereo. So before you settle on one position try several others -- either those illustrated or ones dictated by your listening room.

The theoretically ideal position, one speaker in each corner of a room with the listening position in the center is shown in Figure A. Since this arrangement is inconvenient in many home installations you may want to modify it. Figure B represents the situation in many homes. The listener faces the two front speakers while the rear rear speakers face each other.

Figures C and D produce a different type of sensation, Instead of being surrounded by sound, the two rear speakers create a sense of depth -- as if you were sitting in the audience at a live performance. Depending on the size of your room and the dispersion of your rear speakers you may want them to face you or to face each other.

There are almost an infinite number of satisfying speaker locations for Quatravox, so if one of these doesn't suit your needs invent your own.

[Metalcreature]

I believe it was promoted/advertised as 88 watts per channel stereo if two channels were used.


Are you talking about the Realistic STA-90? Wow, i didnt know it was that powerful!?