 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Different logic applies. posted by Frank. on March 03, 2004 at 10:56:45:
I have to agree that DVD-A had a lot more market potential at the time it was initially conceived, but the market simply did not respond to it for a number of different reasons:- DVD-A's were marketed to the DVD watching home-theatre-in-a-box crowd, however they cost more than a two-hour music DVD and contain 30-45 minutes of surround music without the visuals. People looked at value for money compared to the DVD and it wasn't there.
- SACD was marketed to audiophiles from the beginning (all major classical and jazz labels are SACD strongholds), which was the primary reason for starting with stereo SACD and then moving towards surround sound discs (strike of genius by Sony).
- SACD realized that the only way to get non-audiophiles into a new audio format is by providing a hybrid CD layer. Many folks that bought hybrid discs will eventually get into SACD when hardware prices drop sufficiently (Sony just announced a $149 player).
The hybrid strategy is probably the strongest element and does seem to pay off for Sony. While 20 million SACD's were sold until the end of 2003, the projection for 2004 is 100 million SACD discs!
-wolf
Follow Ups:
I have to agree that DVD-A had a lot more market potential at the time it was initially conceived, but the market simply did not respond to it for a number of different reasons:
- DVD-A's were marketed to the DVD watching home-theatre-in-a-box crowd, however they cost more than a two-hour music DVD and contain 30-45 minutes of surround music without the visuals. People looked at value for money compared to the DVD and it wasn't there.> > We agree fully on this: the market didn't respond **yet**.
However:
DVDA was **not** marketed to the HTIB crowd.
They don't cost more than a two hour music video and can even contain up to 3hours and 22 minutes of 24/96 multichannel music. (Tacet's Peter and the Wolf just set a new record)You don't know if it's about people looking for value for money.
It looks more like a retail bottleneck. The people don't buy from specialty hirez sections.sacd suffers the same fate.
< < <- SACD was marketed to audiophiles from the beginning (all major classical and jazz labels are SACD strongholds), which was the primary reason for starting with stereo SACD and then moving towards surround sound discs (strike of genius by Sony).
> > >
Wrong, it was Philips insisting on multi-channel, not Sony.
< < <- SACD realized that the only way to get non-audiophiles into a new audio format is by providing a hybrid CD layer. Many folks that bought hybrid discs will eventually get into SACD when hardware prices drop sufficiently (Sony just announced a $149 player).
> > >
There are $99 usd DVD Video/Audio players, so whats the point?
< < <The hybrid strategy is probably the strongest element and does seem to pay off for Sony. While 20 million SACD's were sold until the end of 2003, the projection for 2004 is 100 million SACD discs!
Don't hold you breath. Do the math, do you see a significant ramp up in titles of at least a five fold to get from 20 million to 100 million? In fact Sony Music is ramping down in comparison with last year...
Wake up, these sales figures are just marketing blurps.
20 million discs produced doesn't mean 20 million discs sold.
A lot of those are probably stuck at the retailers.Frank
his Sony / Philips player is about to croak out anyway.Nice strategy, but poor execution.
Eric
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
