|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.98.38.115
Am I wrong or just being pessimistic? I have been an enthusiastic supporter of SACD and to a lesser extent DVD-A (and now DualDisc). I think the lack of support by software manufacturers has finally gotten to me. Is it me or has even the participation on this site specifically with regards to new information just about dried up and died? No new titles to discuss? No new topics or developements? Am I just having a bad hair day here?
Follow Ups:
I will tell you why, most younger buyers think mp3 sounds great, they rip cd's from the web, hip hop in SACD please, new pop that is electronic sounding why even bother, SACD won't improve poor production. Crap in crap out.Look at major recording Artist they have a hard time getting there songs on the radio today, you have 3 choices, rap, country and classic rock / oldies stations. Why because about three or four major companies own most of the radio stations and use a set format, disc jockeys are card readers now, the music is programmed to a format, one state DJ told me the play about 375 of the same songs and rotate them between time slots.
Most Classical music is having a hard time even getting a recordings contract because sells are so weak! Jazz is the same unless it soft corporate jazz. I.E…. fluff.
Jazz and Classical have natural over tones, real recordings using real instruments etc. So who buys the better audio equipment baby boomers, which still buys music the baby boomers, if records companies were smart they be focusing on the biggest buying group in America, yes the baby boomers?
They still focus on the 18 to 30 years old group, well that was true once when the baby boomers were that age group, they were the mass buyers, of course like all big businesses they still follow the old school of thought on marketing, which no longer is valid.
The heavy releases in Jazz and the Classics SCAD is because they are viewed as the buyers of the above music, and for the most part still care about the quality of the recordings.
Sony shortly will combine with RCA/BMG when that happens look out, most RCA/BMG recordings are now being released in DSD, most remastered at Sony..nuff said!
All this talk about SCAD dieing is missing the point, well recorded music is dieing the masses are accepting lower standards on quality music to began with, now a fast down load at .99 a song, if you add it up they are paying more for the downloads the what a cd would cost new. I have a friend who brags she has 750 songs on her I-Pod and takes it with her where ever she goes. That is the problem; add the loss of sells and revenue to a records company.
We as audiophiles are a minority; we argue among ourselves while we let this hobby die, who listens to music anymore, it all background noise; the Bose wave radio is a huge seller for Bose, why? Because it sounds good enough for most people.
SCAD, DVD-A or what ever format improves recorded music will suffer if all you look at is sales, we audiophiles are about the only ones who are still willing to pay for well recorded music, this is not a Sony, BMG or any other corporate made problem, it where the consumers are not spending there money on anymore. I won’t even mention the down loading problems of recorded music.
They are rather buy a DVD movie to watch on their new Plasma / LCD Screen with 5 speaker package, why because it is fresh and a new idea that is hip today.
Write a letter to the record company, get involved, those who bitch about SACD not making it, is missing the point, it making it with a certain group, the majority think I-Pod sounds good enough!
ME!!! (to modify a very old joke)I really don't care whether SACD becomes a mass market format. I never thought it would. I don’t care about the fact that rock under 30 years old isn't on SACD. I only care that there are enough jazz and classical SACDs to keep me happy. Yes I like geriatric rock music as well as the next boomer. But if I can't get it on SACD there is always vinyl Even if they stopped producing SACDs today (which they won't) I'd be very happy with my investment. With over 2400 SACDs to choose from and new ones coming out every week, I not going to run out of albums to buy anytime soon. SACD has a strong future as a niche format.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a niche format. Ask any vinyl guy. In fact the niche format encourages better sound quality as the companies who sell SACDs are selling to an audience that cares about sound quality.
I have been contributing to this column since the first SACD players came out. About once every three weeks there is the obligatory SACD is dead post. The future of recorded music isn’t SACD, or DVD-A or Dual-Disc, or Blu-Ray or any other new format. It is the computer. The only ones who haven’t figured that one out are the record companies.
But vinyl was being called a dead format long before SACD was even a gleam in a Sony scientist’s eye. And here we are seeing steadily increasing vinyl sales. SACD is the same.
In fact guys, this may come as a shock to you but high-end audio is a niche format. Most of my non-audiophile friends think I’m nuts when they realize how much I spent on audio equipment. And I didn’t even get a new TV to go along with it!!! Heck, they might be right. After all, this is the asylum…
(nt)
I don't know about the death of SACD, but I do feel like it has been rolled into an empty emergency room and yet we wait for some assistance. Why do I say that?I have been listening to a inexpensive Sony DVD/SACD player the CDP NS755V and can tell you that when you play the SACD layer on it and compare it to my Jolida JD100 with the same disc in RedBook, the Jolida wins hands down. Some may say that is not a fair fight, but I believe that the improved high-rez format should account for something, but if it does, it is not enough to overcome a poor anolgue back end of the Sony 755V. I have asked Chris Johnson of the Parts Connexion about a mod for the front 2 channels of this player.
I think this is why the new high-rez formats have not taken hold with the general public...they can't hear any difference with DVD-A or SACD on lower priced players. As we all have read in verious publications, including I believe Stereophile, that you may be better off buying a great redbook CD player than in a lesser Universal player just to be able to play the new formats. The Norah Jones SACD is a case in point brought out by John Marks of Stereophile. Just copying the redbook into SACD is NOT an improvement. "Say it ain't so, Joe," they asked of the great Shoeless Joe Jackson of the Black Sox baseball scandal. This is an audible and verifiable endeavor this hobby of ours.
The Sony with its 12 bit 108 MHZ video chip is good, so all is not lost. Maybe SACD was really more about copy protection after all. Although I'll bet through an Esoteric, Musical Fidelity, or Linn player the SACD experience is great.
I just don't see enough software to justify a jump to $5-$10 K for a player. If you can afford to have one I'm sure it is one great experience. I have heard the less expensive universal Denon's in modded form and they are very, very nice and great bang for the buck.
It's all pop/rock - no classical, no jazz. It seems that while jazz and classical SACDs have small sales compared to pop SACDs - say Elton John or Nektar(?) - they do have significant sales compared to their jazz/classical CD counterparts.
That relative comparison seems to draw labels into issuing more and more classical SACDs at the neglect of pop/rock/rnb/nu jazz, making SACD a niche market. Pity.
It's you. Do you have all 2500 SACDs?
Here is how much I have spent on hirez (SACD and DVD-A) over the last four years in A$If I spent any more, I'll be broke!
Spending per year
Year Total Percent
------------------------
Unknown 0.00 0.00%
2001 303.10 4.38%
2002 1,975.93 28.53%
2003 2,498.45 36.08%
2004 2,147.52 31.01%
TOTAL 6,925.00 100.00%
.
...so inclined. I don't break out my SACD's, DVD-A's, and CD's, but since virtually all of my purchases these days are SACD's (mostly) or DVD-A's (some) the fact that I have a category under "Personal - CD's or Records" suffices. I've had it for ove fifteen years in my budgeting software. Not hard, if you care to know.On the other hand, it's one of those things perhaps you'd not rather...... :-(
Harry
.
Unless in her case it is a tax write off?
Not everyone is cut from the same cloth.
n
...the CD may be in danger, with internet downloads becoming the major source of music for those not afflicted with our audiophile bug. There will always be a niche for high resolution audio (audiophile vinyl, SACD, DVD-A, whatever else follows) as long as there are audiophiles willing to buy the products.
> Am I wrong or just being pessimistic?You are pessimistically wrong. SACD is alive and new titles come from a lot of records company. I think SACD is a little niche inside the big entertainment business but it has an important reason to survive: audiophile's love to listen always to the best.
I realize that there are people here who believe that no other genres -deserve- to exist, but really. It's over for any genre but these two.
Late last fall, I got 3 Elton John SACDs, 2 from Robert Earl Keen, 1 from Keane (the band), 1 from Nine Inch Nails, and 4 from Can. Eric Clapton came out, but I didn't get any of those. Now in January, a Carpenters SACD has shown up, won't buy that either. So dumb though it may be, I suspect that new titles will continue to show up at Tower. I don't know what they will be.Yes there are more new classical titles. And yes, when you look at the dozens of reviews of new music in a magazine like Mojo or the Wire, it is not coming out on SACD. But that's life.
Classical music is a deep field. If you like one kind of music, you can learn to like others as well. Maybe, instead of complaining about what's not available on SACD, you can explore what is available. There is a lot to explore now. Dvorak's cello concerto on RCA is coming out tomorrow. I've seen this on original vinyl for anywhere from $75-150. If the SACD won't be as good as the vinyl (my exepectation), it will be close and will cost 12 or 13 dollars.
... Yes, I'm a "20-something"; but please don't think that I shun Classical and Jazz just because it's older. Not at all.I have trouble with the 'accessibility' of Classical and Jazz: as in, I really don't know what to look for -- Music is supposed to emotionally affect you, right?
I've taken some random shots at the genres; put in a disc, and have just, try as I might, failed to have been 'moved' at all by what came out of the speakers.
They've left me with a feeling of, "Oh, this must be for folks who want to analyze their system..." rather than be touched by the music. (Hold on before you criticize!)
Now I would concur that perhaps I simply do not know what recordings to look for. Or perhaps I'm just not educated in the qualities and nuances of classical and jazz. (I admit, I am not.)
Perhaps I need to sit down with an afficionado of both genres and get a bit of schooling; I'm open to that!
But in the long run, music either 'does it for you' or does not. Isn't that what it's all about?
I'd love to be able to get into more hi-rez recordings. Maybe at some point I'll figure it out with classical and jazz. I just need to meet someone who's willing to help me on that front, share what they like about it, versus ridiculing my 'lack of culture'. Until that time:
.... I have to admit, Oct/Nov./Dec of 04 was my biggest SACD buying spree, ever! With the Clapton, Elton John, Keane, NIN,Mark Knopfler, (and I'm sure there were more) - it felt like things were going well.
But I do kind of feel, nonetheless, that this was a bit of a swan song for the format, at least for the pop/rock genre.
I *firmly* believe that UMG is out of the game; unceremoniously. I don't think they're even going to let us know.
Sony, who has always been on some sort of psychedelic compound in their choice of SACD releases has equally as strangely, given up.
I think the majors are seeing hi-rez releases as counter to their interest in the long run. The high quality analog outputs are out there, encryption and watermarking or not. They don't want to give away the master tapes. CD is already "too much with too little" for the average Joe.
... Unfortunately I'm involved in the 'lossy' industry a bit, and that's the future. Hi-rez doesn't fit into the iPod plan.
I think we'll see a slight resurgence of "hi rez", in a way, down the road, as 96/24 AAC, (still lossy, however.)
Meanwhile, I'm getting my hands on a Tascam DV-RA1000 - if I can. (So far, that keeps getting pushed back, as well. Nobody has seen one yet.)
I *was* in contact with Philips about SACD authoring facilities and software regarding the recordings I do, but they mysteriously stopped responding. (I thought it was just the new years holiday - but it's a bit late for that now.)
All we can do is hold on and see. But the unanimity on this board has never been so strong in its doomsaying conjecture. We used to have a few squawks here and there; now, unfortunately, we almost have a unified chorus singing SACD's final dirge.
I just wish someone who knows one way or another would throw us a bone. If they want to forget about the audiophile/hi rez community, there isn't much we can do about that. But they could, at least, say goodbye.
Classical music is a tough nut to crack. A small minority of people ever come to appreciate it. You probably can't just put on a random title and expect to enjoy it- could you pick a random pop title and expect to enjoy that?The best advice I could give you is if you are lucky enough to live near a classical radio station, just start listening to it regularly. That's all. You'll hear something you like and you can read about it on the Internet and little by little you will educate yourself on the composers and their work and their place in the historical context. And if, for example, you hear Goldberg Variations by Bach and it strikes your fancy, you will find 3 versions on SACD (maybe more I don't know about). I still listen to the radio every night when falling asleep. It never gets old.
As far as "this board has never been so strong in its doomsaying conjecture", for one I don't see it, just the usual complaints from the usual complainers.
This one really sounds good. Nicely showcases her beautiful voice. Wonderful songs (well, a couple of duds) and a fine disc. I'm surprised you are passing on this one.
Regards,
Geoff
Never in my life have I been a regular listener to any radio station that played the Carpenters. It is the kind of thing that plays on the radio station my dentist plays when they work on my teeth. To each their own, but I have too much music to listen to already. The Carpenters might get played once, then they'd be put away and never listened to again.
Bob Dylan, Rolling Stones, Elton John, and several so on, what are these? Classic or jazz?
There is nothing on the horizon for any other genre in SACD.
Do you think any of present artists (who?), in any genre, deserve to go on hi-rez discs? To listen what?
And become a mainstream format. I don't think anyone on this board ever thought that was likely to happen anyway. I think SACD will likely survive, but it will remain a niche, like vinyl (again, this is probably not a controversial position). Since we can have universal players that play so many different formats, I would imagine that there will be continued hardware support, even from Sony. I would think that Blu-Ray players would similarly play SACDs - and of course Blu-Ray offers another opportunity to package DSD in another format. I have to think that these new video formats figure into the plans of the music content providers (and possibly their hesitation). We'll see.If it is true about UMG, then it will be a real disappointment because no one else appears to be releasing rock titles. I've been on this board for a long time and have always remained optimistic, but the UMG news would be a real blow. I enjoy and buy classical music, but I still listen to more rock than anything. If I were in the market for a new player, I would scale back the purchase considerably unless I were more focused on classical titles. For classical music lovers, the news appears to be very good. Go to SA-CD.net and click on upcoming titles; almost all of them are classical.
There is nothing wrong, of course, with being a niche format. It may be a good thing for us, the music lovers and audiophiles. I would think conventional wisdom is that quality would be better at a higher price. Hopefully smaller labels will license SACD versions of titles from the majors (having given up themselves) - following the vinyl model. It would seem that if this were the case we would still get titles, albeit at a slower rate and probably even fewer new releases (and certainly not contemporaneous). I don't care whether I can buy discs at Best Buy or similar and would rather patronize the Internet stores anyway. But I would agree (for the first time in a while) that things have apparently taken the turn for the worse (for non-classical releases). It is not dead, for sure. But for grand dreams of single inventory hybrid releases - nah.
I will tell you why, most younger buyers think mp3 sounds great, they rip cd's from the web, hip hop in SACD please, new pop that is electronic sounding why even bother, SACD won't improve poor production. Crap in crap out.Look at major recording Artist they have a hard time getting there songs on the radio today, you have 3 choices, rap, country and classic rock / oldies stations. Why because about three or four major companies own most of the radio stations and use a set format, disc jockeys are card readers now, the music is programmed to a format, one state DJ told me the play about 375 of the same songs and rotate them between time slots.
Most Classical music is having a hard time even getting a recordings contract because sells are so weak! Jazz is the same unless it soft corporate jazz. I.E…. fluff.
Jazz and Classical have natural over tones, real recordings using real instruments etc. So who buys the better audio equipment baby boomers, which still buys music the baby boomers, if records companies were smart they be focusing on the biggest buying group in America, yes the baby boomers?
They still focus on the 18 to 30 years old group, well that was true once when the baby boomers were that age group, they were the mass buyers, of course like all big businesses they still follow the old school of thought on marketing, which no longer is valid.
The heavy releases in Jazz and the Classics SCAD is because they are viewed as the buyers of the above music, and for the most part still care about the quality of the recordings.
Sony shortly will combine with RCA/BMG when that happens look out, most RCA/BMG recordings are now being released in DSD, most remastered at Sony..nuff said!
All this talk about SCAD dieing is missing the point, well recorded music is dieing the masses are accepting lower standards on quality music to began with, now a fast down load at .99 a song, if you add it up they are paying more for the downloads the what a cd would cost new. I have a friend who brags she has 750 songs on her I-Pod and takes it with her where ever she goes. That is the problem; add the loss of sells and revenue to a records company.
We as audiophiles are a minority; we argue among ourselves while we let this hobby die, who listens to music anymore, it all background noise; the Bose wave radio is a huge seller for Bose, why? Because it sounds good enough for most people.
SCAD, DVD-A or what ever format improves recorded music will suffer if all you look at is sales, we audiophiles are about the only ones who are still willing to pay for well recorded music, this is not a Sony, BMG or any other corporate made problem, it where the consumers are not spending there money on anymore. I won’t even mention the down loading problems of recorded music.
They are rather buy a DVD movie to watch on their new Plasma / LCD Screen with 5 speaker package, why because it is fresh and a new idea that is hip today.
Write a letter to the record company, get involved, those who bitch about SACD not making it, is missing the point, it making it with a certain group, the majority think I-Pod sounds good enough!
Why isn't every single CD in Tower records an SACD? Why does it still cost 3 times as much to press a dual layer SACD / CD than to press a single layer CD? We should have parity by now, why not? After all a Dual-layer DVD Video disc at first cost almost twice as much to press as a single-layer DVD, however after just 2 years it cost EXACTLY the same to press a Dual-layer DVD as a single-layer DVD. And now even single layer DVDs are pressed on Dual-layer blanks. So by now an SACD/CD hybrid should cost the same or just pennies more to press than a CD? WHY HAS THIS NOT HAPPENED. This is the ONLY thing keeping Hybrid SACD from wholesale replacing CD.The 5 Phases of Sony's Plan:
1) Phase One - Expensive "high end" SACD players and 2 channel stereo recordings aimed at audiophile's.
2) Phase Two - mid price hardware points and introduction of Multi-Channel recordings.
3) Phase Three - entry level hardware price points and lower prices for software.
4) Phase Four - Parity in pressing costs to allow wholesale replacement of CDs with SACD / CD Hybrids.
Phase Four is still not here, why have pressing prices not come down as predicted by Sony? What is holding up Phase Four? Is Phase Four impossible? Does anyone know?
I too believe SACD will survive as a niche format, but it could have been a whole lot more!
I have not heard this business about SACDs costing three times as much to press. That may be true, but I haven't seen the figures. And wouldn't that amount to just a few cents, anyway?
A hybrid is 2 single layer disks. Assume the SACD layer costs as much as the CD layer (even though it probably costs more). So 2 layers costs twice as much to start. Then there is some cost to laminate the two layers into one hybrid. A factor of 3 makes sense.
Sony's plan seems to be to keep in the market $300 SACD players that sound no better then their redbook counterparts ( why, I can't figure) and be too slow to not drop redbook/only versions from the shelves. It makes you wonder if they had a marketing plan at all.If they had made 2 players in the $300 to $500 range that sounded as good as a very good redbook player they would have had something. Mullti-channel SACD was not enough smoke and mirrors to cover up poor analogue output stages and poor trasfers to SACD. Any 2-channel shootout proved that.
We will continue to wait and see what Sony really wants to do with this format. I am pleased that more titles are coming out from new sources, but we 1%'rs who make up high end buyers are not enough $$$ to make a very big difference.
I somehow wish that someone would have tried 24 bit/88.2 as the high rez recording format as standard and distributed it on dual sided discs that would have allowed easier truncation to std CD RedBook. Heck, I'd have taken 16/88.2 which I've heard some prominent recording enginners tried and liked very much.
I really think that you're on to something here, - but if I may take it a couple of steps further:1. The CD buying public is changing, - the RIAA has priced themselves out of the traditional teenage market. That market was the biggest. This "war" is one that the industry will lose, kicking and screaming, they are going down.
2. Us older people, - 35 and up, - are the new buyers of an overpriced product and we don't want to listen to anything NEAR the current pop scene. We also are the diminishing few who will listen to music as the only activity and for its own sake. So, - what this means is that our product market is re-issues of old, tired, broken pop artists, plus Classical and Jazz: Elton John, the Who, the Doors, the Stones. Bands that copy those bands like Train, Wallflowers, Matchbox whatever, - will also see some benefit to releasing hi-rez material.. And, - these expensive re-issues may even cause these old folks to come out of retirement, (see Cream).3. Because the recording industry monopoly is really stupid and draconian, - they WILL see two things that are contradictory in nature: A). Older people are buying more and more music so they should be given more (possibly hi-rez) offerings of THEIR music. B). The rest of the record buying public wants CHEAPER, lower quality, products.
4. For the purchase of media, something that's not downloadable for an IPOD, - the future of SACD is really not so dire; as our sons and daughters music will increasingly be acquired by not purchasing a physical product, but downloaded...
5. CAVEAT: Even our generation should be concerned about the fact that many of us have never, and will never care about a quality playback system, - even if we want to reminisce about those Van Morrison days....
Every week the best selling CD sells 200,000 or 400,000 or 600,000 units. Most weeks this is r and b or rap. The old folks are not, in general, buying 50 Cent, The Game, Chingy, Usher and all the rest of the hot sellers.The main music market is, as it always has been, teenage to young adult. The old folks are still a minor niche. I don't know how kids buy CDs at these prices, but somehow they do. Big numbers week after week. You know, kids also drive the first week movie numbers, and movies don't cost much less than a CD.
Every once in a while, a Baby Boomer oriented title like a Beatles set sells big. And every once in a while, a band like U2 crosses over to the elder market. But that's rare. The big seller for this week will be The Game, produced by Dr. Dre. Projected sales up to 600K.
I have no cause to argue as I'm not following too closely...The last time I looked however, it showed a significant and continuing drop in sales in the "youth market" and gains in the country and re-issue market, ie us older folks buying more than we used to....
Maybe we've peaked, maybe teenagers are coming back....
...that we'd see a hybrid single inventory phase in. Back in those heady days there was talk of 'every' CD player having SACD capability, and every new release being hybrid SACD.Now, though, I'm even worried about it as niche. I don't want to believe that the UMG drop is true, but I think it is. There really, really, is no other explanation for it.
What's our other choice - DVD-A? No; DVD-A is gone, too. DualDisc is the last hurrah for hi-rez, and it isn't even that - it just can be. (Say goodbye for 192/24 forever.)
A few years from now, I see both of these boards being merged again, for one. And we'll be perking our ears at every possible revival of a hi-rez format after the death of DVD-A and SACD.
Maybe DAD will make a comeback. I don't know. it doesn't look good. The record co's were looking to make some sort of killing on this, banking on the whiz-bang factor of 5.1.
5.1 didn't take off. So with it dies high resolution.
Get the titles you can. Get a backup player. You'll be glad you did, in a few years.
Hopefully the blue formats will hold SOMETHING for us: DSD or 192/24 on either of the blue formats would at least open up the POSSIBILITY for audiophile labels to put titles out if they so choose, riding on the coattails of mass market adoption of these formats.
This, however, has been a short, strange trip, but a fun one.
It got me listening to music again. It would be a real shame for things to peter out. Especially when it seems like we continue to get more high-end options for players.I'll never forget going to NY for the audio show, sitting in the Sony room and having the presenter tell us that he had a surprise artist for us. Without any additional comment, he then proceeding to play some Stones. It was exciting. Probably the high water mark. Oh well. I guess I'll need to invest in a TT if I want to hear rock and roll.
Your statement is just not true.Go back 2 years and read the shit I took, inlcuding being banned, for correctly predicting what came to pass with SACD.
I'm always puzzled by the contradictions in your statements and actions. As I recall, you made lots of statements about Best Buy pulling down displays and clerks who told you that SACD was dead. Lots of "sky is falling" stuff. But you continue to buy SACDs, buy new players....over and over again. Why do you keep investing in a dead format? Especially one where you can't hear the difference between the redbook and dsd layers? Do you buy stocks that you think will decline in value? And now you've correctly predicted something? What? That SACD is dead? Has that come to pass? If the UMG news is correct, then it will be a real blow, but SACD will certainly not be dead.What I was trying to express is that while we all understood the stated goals of single inventory (still, a brilliant idea with the hybrid disc), I don't think that there was a significant belief that this would actually occur. Replacing the CD was and is a lofty goal. And - in my opinion - I don't think that anyone seriously thought that was going to happen. Perhaps I'm wrong. But whatever - the thing that troubles me is that rock software seems to be drying up. Such a shame after the Stones, Dylan, Clapton, Police, Peter Gabriel, Elton John and other smaller releases that we've seen just recently.
.
No, you said SACD was dead ad nauseum after most of your trips back from Tower or Best Buy, and that amounted to a troll.Some of us, myself included, postulated that if record companies lined up behind SACD and released key segments of their catalogs as hybrids, it would be a way to force transparent adoption on a mass market level. Of course, we knew that was a big "if". Unfortunately, we'll never find out whether that scenario is plausible.
You, others here echoed Sony's line that it would happen, and it didn't: plain and simple.
I have always maintained that it was unlikely SACD would become successful as a mass-marketed format. I mapped out the way that would have to happen: support by the major labels and releases of key catalog segments on hybrid SACD. Transparent adoption by the masses. And at some critical juncture, stop producing the CD layer on SACDs and remove red book discs from the shelves. I have always been very honest that we were not seeing the requisite steps to make that happen, although I was encouraged by the Stones ABKCO titles and the Sony Dylan titles. It seemed like a couple labels were beginning to take the path I had been describing. But I never, ever said SACD would be a mass market success. I said it could be. And indeed, if the path was followed and the adoption was wider, if the recession and 9/11 didn't come into play, if you DVD-A guys didn't confuse the marketplace with two formats trying to do exactly the same thing, maybe that would have happened. We'll never know.
Right, find fault with 5.1 and the DVD-A supporters - rather than Sony for trying to impose a proprietary technology on the marketplace yet again - "Perfect profits forever." - and failing yet again.
The DVD-A working group had problems agreeing on specs and rolling out product. They screwed up regardless of SACD. And my point about DVD-A was only one of many that you choose to ignore--why focus on that?
As opposed to a correct prediction, which in reality it was. You are left either claiming I did not predict it, or it ain't dead. I will let this thread drop as a COMPLETE waste of time. And as Jazz Inmate's pathology ALWAYS demands he gets the last word, he can have it, unfettered by correction.
< < < And become a mainstream format. I don't think anyone on this board ever thought that was likely to happen anyway. > > > >That's not some were touting on this forum 3 or 4 years ago.
According to some, Hybrid discs were supposed to replace CDs altogether (or a majority of them) - so regardless if you care about SACD or not, a disc on the store shelf would offer both.
Take a look at the archives and you'll see it.
The whole concept of hybrid discs making a difference in the mainstream never made much sense to me. And it looks like the labels realize that it will never happen.SACD is struggling to survive - even in the niche that it's in.
Well put me in the camp that was wishing that the hybrid approach would work.
Sadly, it doesn't seem to have reached that mainstream level of effort by the big labels.
Maybe its just me, but just look at HDCD. There are still many releases of HDCD's today, and many audiophile players with HDCD capability. Sure, most people have no clue what HDCD is, but it's been around for around a decade now and it's still alive. It may be just a niche market, but I think that's what SACD should become. SACD is, IMHO, the next HDCD. DVD-A on the otherhand has died or at best is flopping around on shore, with DualDisc either gonna be a moderate success or a complete failure.
IBSmiester
Open Your Ears....
I do grant that this page as well as the general asylum have become boring, but I would not blame it on sacds.
No other genres are being released anymore.
take a look at http://www.highfidelityreview.com/. The reviews that are most read (left under) are almost all non-classical. The interest for pop/rock is there but the releases are minimal. The only good thing is that my medium budget sacd player is also a pretty good dvd player...
.
with the kind of sound you listen to (that's not really music, is it?) you might as well buy b0s3 crap? It would not be the first time some self appointed 'i now what good music is' classical music lover (now that's real music, can't you hear that!!) would tell me that.
Now that the rant is over (just a short one) SO WHAT! (i really do not feel the need to convince other people that pop/rock can improve with high-res right now, or that violins sound even more like screaming cats on sacd than on a normal cd-)-)
If pop/rock listeners are interested in Hirez (which can not be copied 1:1 at the moment) and are willing to buy it, sell it to them! If they are wasting money on sacd's, that's their choice. Just laugh and put on a nice record/cd/sacd/dvd-a/dual-disk/mp3 (maybe one of the 1001 different releases of KOB)
Frank (listening to low-res Rush on the radio)
I've listened to many genres on SACD--SACD shows its strengths most *clearly* with acoustic music, whether it be orchestra, jazz, or, er...acoustic.
.
We're about two inches away from the 'anything current is crap' assertion.
...most of the big hit records and big hit artists' catalogs that the Baby Boomers would like to see re-released on hi-rez are owned by the big record companies, and are still their biggest sellers on plain old CD.On top of that, most of them aren't worth releasing on hi-rez anyway, due to bad sound quality.
Don't know how long you've been following these boards. I got my SACD player in July 2000 and found these boards around the same time. Your post, in more or less the same words, has been a constant refrain.There was a time when about the only game for SACD software was Sony and Sony pretty much stopped their releases. That was a time when worry was justified.
I guess it depends what you like. I've seen a few new Pentatone releases over the last couple weeks. The LSO Live Verdi Falstaff just showed up at Tower. There was also a new Arvo Part choral release on Hyperion. Meanwhile, some 40 great recordings from the Philips/Decca catalog are now available from Japan and I'm trying to figure out how many I can afford to order this week (there are 8 on the list that are must-haves for me). And next Tuesday, 10 more RCA Living Stereo titles come out. Compared to the dark days when I would see the same tiny display of the same Sony titles at Tower for months at a time, there are new titles every week at Tower now. Not many, but a few.
To be very realistic, the large majority of music that I like does not come out on SACD, so CDs and some LPs are still the bulk of buying and listening for me. But there are plenty of SACDs coming out that I like.
Agreed. The SACD releases in 2005 seem very heavily weighted towards Classical Music with some audiophile and jazz titles as well.For fans of those musical genres, it will be a good year.
I tell you why, most younger buyers think mp3 sounds great, they rip cd's from the web, hip hop in SACD, new pop that is electronic sounding why bother, SACD won't improve poor production.Jazz and Classical have natural over tones, real recordings using real insturments etc. So who buys the better audio equipment baby boomers, who still buys music the baby boomers, if records companys were smart they be focusing on the biggest buying group in america, yes the baby boomers.
They focus on the 18 to 30 years old group, well that was true once when the baby boomers were that age group, they were the mass buyers, of course like all big businesses they still follow the old school of thought on marketing, which no longer is valid.
The heavy releases in Jazz and the Classics is because they are view as the buyers of the above music, and for the most part still care about the quality of the recordings.
Write a letter to the record company, get involved, those who bitch about SACD not making, is missing the point, it making it with a certain group, the rest think I-Pod sounds good enough!
Sony shorty will conbine with RCA/BMG when that happes look out, most RCA/BMG recordings are now being released in DSD, most remastered at Sony..nuff said!
Classical music was dead on CD, but regained life on SACD.Classical music interest is rising, especially opera, but most people had all they wanted on CD.
So sales went down, and the majors gave up on classical.
With SACD there is a market for new versions of all the standard classical works, and medium size labels like Telarc make a living from that market.
As wealth increased in the world, the general market split up in many segments.
We used to have 78, then LP/EP replaced 78, then came CC tape, and later CD.
Today we have still LP, MP3 has replaced CC tape, we have CD, Hybrid SACD, DVD Audio, DVD Video music and harddisk.
Our choice is wider, each combination of format and music find enough buyers, or it dies.
Why should just one format dominate?
Today LP sales increase, kept alive by dance music and DJs.
MP3 takes care of the young with little money, CD dominate the cars,
SACD takes the classical music market, DVD Video Music take the live concert market, and harddisk rules the rich people market.I like to see SACD living an audiophile life, without level compression, without multi miking, without soloist emphasis, without deep bass removed, without needing to become a mass market compromise.
Nicely stated! LP's are useful and cheap and still must be equalled by all and any digital format. I just think cassette still has utility for car and home with high end deck and metal tape and for spoken voice/FM sources.I listened last PM to "Point 5 (half track mastering) Teldec DMM pressing RCA Red Seal, Rubinstein/Reiner cond. Chicago LP ca. 1956 stereo 3 channel vs. SACD RCA Red Seal, Cliburn with same forces ca. 1962 3 channel SACD stereo track in same hall. Different recording engineer but same general team. Admittedly different, but they were interestingly so as the LP was sonically very smooth and realistic and palpably real but the impact of the SACD was intensely more in the bass and timpani and percussion. But the whole hall ambience and color of the piece was preserved and similar in both. Rubinstein played it better btw IMO--Reiner is Reiner and CSO was great in both (Rachmaninoff PC 2, 2nd movement).
yes, CC tape lives on for cars and own recordings, I was thinking mostly of current sales of prerecorded items.A source, I wish had lived longer, was prerecorded open reel tape,
offering the sound of LP without the clicks and scratches.I have just ordered the Van Cliburn SACD and I hear from your comments, that it is worth waiting for.
I have the van Cliburn original RCA mono LP, and the SACD. I have only had a cursory comparison, but LP still has something extra. But my SACD player function is only fair in my universal Pioneer Elite DV47Ai with Burr Brown DAC's in 2 channel audio, cheaper ones elsewhere.I agree with R2R, and was thinking that after my post. I have a dead Tandberg 9041X which powers up but freezes immediately thereafter. It might be as simple as drive belts, but I fear not. On the Tape Trial, I posted a few comments that VCR tape is fine if you have a good old vintage VCR, such as my JVC high fidelity ones. Pretty good. I use that for shows which come on at the same time each day or week, using the timer function and get 6 to 8 hours of the show on one tape. Quite good fidelity, but never head to head against my Nakamichi 682ZX with metal tape or other sources.
but you can't make him buy SACDs instead of plain CDs. Your average person doesn't know that SACDs exist, and if he did know, he wouldn't care.Audiophiles are split into a few camps: vinylheads; CD-is-just-as-good-or-better-heads; and SACDheads.
But audiophiles, even all of the camps combined, are insignificant to the majors. Sony made more on the Spiderman film, even after losing the lawsuit to Stan Lee, than they did on their entire music division. So why should they care about a format that accounts for less than 1% of their unprofitable music division?
The main hope is the small labels. But on the downside, note that Audio Fidelity has given up on SACDs.
a dead format. Luckily, since it is digital, the discs, (i.e., the msuic) is still here and sounds as good as it did when SACD was beign propagated\promoted.
So, yes its dead, Chet sure sounded great last night, And Soular Energy on right now sure sounds good. My two favorite "Ray" s are now gone.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: