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.
jmslaw

Showing 1 response by nealb

Did Sony do something like this with Beta? I know they tried to control something hardware or software and it bit them in the butt. Apple made the same mistake with it's source code. MS opened it up and crushed despite the fact that Apple was in many ways suppior at the time. Sony should learn from it's own mistakes.

I went into a highend store in Wilmtington De the other day and wanted just to here a SACD player and I was brow beaten to the point were I backed out of the store. I asked about Sony and they scoffed. They dropped names like Accuphase and DCS. They then proceded to bath me in digital jumble mumble. I think high end is not ready for a $1000 Sony DVP-9000 or SCD-777es sound better than there 20K DCS system. Perhaps its growing pains.