Jmslaw, I brought this up on another thread and I do believe it a factor. But I think that a bigger reason that SACD has not been as successful as hoped lies in the software. Sony continues to try to dominate the software market for SACD and it seems like it is hurting them in the hardware end. I think they nedd to flood the market with software at prices that can compete better with the redbook cd. In doing this they would reach more people, creating a bigger pond, if you will. I think, maybe they don't do this because now they control the software and the hardware, and they fear if SACD becomes as popular/affordable as redbook they can no longer dominate the market. If the software becomes more prevelent you will see more high end companies jumping in the pond. I think right now the high end manufacturers are playing safe, like many consumers, maybe afraid to bet on a format that is not yet established. Software is the key, IMO.
Too snobbish for SACD as it exists?
Perhaps I am wrong, but I get the feeling that the reason SACD players have not been as successful as hoped lies with the fact that the very persons for whom the benefits of the higher resolution format are appreciable are hesitant to put a Sony, Marantz or Pioneer product in their systems. A product like Krell, CJ, Levinson, etc.,while usually significantly more expensive than the aforementioned "mid-fi" brands provide the purchaser with a certain cache and a greater level of satisfaction, albeit sometimes a psychoacoustic contribution to the listening experience. I, personally, would be more willing to spend more on a quality SACD player from a true high-end company, however elitist that may sound, even knowing that I may be paying for diminished returns. I just wonder if there is a large pool of high-end consumers waiting to see what marquis companies will introduce before they commit to the format.