CD...then the SACD...all over again

Yeah unfortunately, Rlwainwright is right (no pun intended) - even though it's hard to wait when a CD comes out, that seems to make the most sense.

It's the same thing with LPs. They release the CD, then 6 months later an audiophile label will press an LP of it.

I agree with your point though - if it's a hybrid why not just release the hybrid and that's it. I guess they're looking for the extra money.

Rob

Schipo,

I'm sorry to hear about your afair of the heart. I wouldn't make that trade. I'm at the tail end of dealing with that.

The only solution - Who said being an audiophile was money efficient. Be patience or pay more money. LOL

I get my SACDs at Fry's electronics. There are a few that are above $20, but most of the ones I get are $17, which is $1-2 above a redbook CD. I just bought a telarc for $17 yesterday.

Rob

Oldpet,

Some people use hard drives as the source. I'll let them comment on that. I was refering to the general public though if you were asking about my statement. Most of the people I know don't have seperate preamps.

Rob

No one has come up with an answer to my question yet: If everything is moving to embedded hard disks (ipod, etc) which will be downloaded from the internet, then why would blu-ray or any other "disc" format be the next big thing?

Rob

Justin time,

My question was for discussion purposes. I have no desire to go through the hoops of contacting Sony to ask them about future formats. I was addressing the mentions of Blu-ray being the next big thing. I don't see any disk format being the next standard for music mp3 players are the most convenient for the general public.

I would assume that blu-ray will be for movies and everything else will be moving to hard drives like they are already.

Rob

Justin time,

Well we agree then that most audiophiles enjoy LPs (it’s my favorite) and SACD (although I hear a lot of them afraid to make the plunge due to the obvious uncertainty – so maybe it should be LP and redbook).

We disagree about the future however. MP3s are not only big for portable music, but at home as well. Most people that I know (non-audiophile) have a huge amount of music on their computers and they burn them onto discs to bring in the car (some file share illegally, some pay $1 a song). What would compel these people to buy a blu-ray disc if and when it comes out for music? Remember quality is an issue only to us. They can pick the songs they want (so they wouldn’t have to buy disc with 15 songs for 2 songs that they like). And what would Sony’s or Philip’s motivation be to release something that only audiophiles seem to care about?

Oh, we also agree that logic and reason have nothing to do with their ultimate decisions which would render my argument above moot ;)

Rob

Justin time,

I don't have an Ipod, and I don't use my hard drive in my hi fi system. I was talking about the target market "most of the population" for Sony, Phillips, etc. to make products that the market will demand, and that demand will be based on features and convenience (e.i. popularity of Ipod).

I dissagree with you about why DVD's eliminated VHS. DVD's are much more convenient (no rewinding), they have more features, they last longer, are smaller, more durable, etc. Beta max was better quality than VHS. but no one seemed to care.

As for me I like LPs, SACD and CD. I just see no reason why the mp3 format and whatever else betters that won't continue for the general public. Why would they need a newer type of CD?

Good debate by the way Justin time.

Rob

Justin time,

You're right debate wasn't the right word.

I would assume for movies (especially with HDTV looming) HD DVD will fill the need for the higher resolution TV sets possibly - although, I don't think the average movie watcher cares much - it's usually the home theater buff.

I don't think the general public will demand higher resolution music unfortunately though. But there will always be quality stuff for audiophiles to listen to no matter what format is next. So, no worries anyway.

Rob