Why SACD,DVD-A are already DEAD


I think it's time to really look at this issue as it stands today,in a clear rational way that takes into account the varied market forces which are the true determinates for any new formats sucess or failure.
SACD IS ALREADY DEAD PERIOD!
Why you ask?Well for the following reasons:
1.It's been about 2-3 years since the introduction of SACD and look at position it's in, in terms of SOFTWARE AVAILIBILITY and MASS MARKET AWARENESS.
Take the pathetic lack of titles,not only that, but look at the artists that are chosen as SACD releases,Yo Yo Ma,Kind of Blue,(for the upteenth time)Muddy Waters etc,etc.This is no reflection on the artists but only on their limted MASS MARKET APPEAL.Who was the marketing genius who decided to re-issue this material to captivate and generate a MASS INTEREST to this new format.You need a MASS MARKET BASE for any medium to succeed.
2.As has been stated before in other forums(stereophile for one) why would the average person shell out $25 HARD EARNED DOLLARS for one of these titles?Why?What are the advantages to the average listerner.it COSTS more,it's an artist in a speciality genre comparatively speaking(jazz,blues,classical vs. pop,rock,techno)it offers no physical advantage in terms of storage,packaging,and not only that it requires a NEW player!
If you wanted to consciously destroy this new format you could'nt have done a better job than Sony has already done.
3.Given the current state of the music industry ,their major concern right now is to halt the proliferation of the MP3.What major label is going to go out and spends tons of $ on P&A(publicity,advertising)and also re-tooling their cd manufacturing plants to output SACD'S as efficently as CD'S?Right now their is NO MASS MARKET AWARENESS of SACD,it's a fact ,we live in the hermetically sealed world of the audiophile culture.Most people don't even know about HDCD,GOLD CD'S,MOBILE FIDELITY DISC'S!
Look at the history of the 8 track tape,dat,mini disc,beta and you will see that SACD is right on track for a quick burial.
3.In order to suceed you need a medium that offers a clear cut advantage over the existing technology.Other than some sonic advantages(even that's not a slam dunk as many would suppose)What does the average person get besides A HIGHER PRICED CD?
5.For those of you who have purchased these players
thinking that if the SACD revolution doesn't occur then at least I have a player that does cd's better than most players,well you're probably right in that it will out perform an AVERAGE player.But think about it ,Sony is making a player to maximize their new format NOT the CD.There will be some compromise on the cd playback chain, As the price of the SACD player drops so will the manufacturers concern with producing great sounding cd playback.Parts,build quailty will most definetly suffer.
DVD-A IS ALREADY DEAD PERIOD!
Why you ask?Well for the following reasons:
1.Again it's basically MARKET AWARENESS,SOFTWARE AVAILIBILTY AND THE COST OF THE DVD.
2.Why would the AVERAGE person buy a dvd-a disc for $25 and ignore theCHEAPER CD VERSION!.Well if that person owns a terrific sounding surround set-up then sure that person will most probably buy one,but that person doesn't represent the mass market.Sure DVD video has had tremendous growth but it's the video (movies)that'sdriving the market not the ability to play music.My theory is that dvd -a won't take off for basically the same reasons that SACD won't.MASS MARKET AWARENESS,COST OF DISC,COST OF CREATING A SURROUND SETUP FOR MUSIC,COST OF GETTING A DVD-A PLAYER.Since dvd is already in place as an excellent video playback medium,I think the cost of the disc will be a major hurdle for the average person.Watermarking will be the hump for the audiophile,besides the fact that the proper engineeering of these surround disc's will be crucial to audiophile acceptance of this format.Idon't think either of these issues will be resolved in the near future,or even at all.
WHAT SHOULD YOU DO NOW?
1.The current technology for cd players and cd engineering has progressed significantly in the past 3 years.My advise is to buy a good high end cd player right now!There are plenty to chose from ,be prepared to spend $3-$6 grand,but also be prepared to hear your cd's sound GREAT not good but really ,really GREAT!
Let's face it life is short ,the players are out there, start listening and buy one(no I'm not a manufacturer or salesperson)and start enjoying the hundreds or thousands of cd's you already own.
To all those vinylphiles,I think you face similiar problems.limted software,mass market REJECTION.and old technology which needs a significant $ expenditure for great sound,not to mention the care and maintance required to keep these puppies sounding tick and pop free. I think of vinylphiles as one would think of vintage car hobbists,it's cool if you don't mind the fuss(I doI think the old maxim that lp's sound better than cd's is becoming meaningless.good lp on good system =good sound. good cd on good system= good sound.Ironically I think vinyl will prevail over sacd and dvd-a,it's a small club but it has a history behind it that will guarantee it's longevity.
So IMO cd's and vinyl for quite some time ,both require some cash outlay for a really good playback but it's the NOW and that NOW will be around for at least the next 10 years.
joeavid

Showing 5 responses by twl

SACD will succeed because the companies that are producing the music want it to. The lesson has been learned by the music comapanies that if they don't copy protect their product, they can't stop "piracy". The new formats are copy protected, in their digital form, and that is the goal. They are not about to let MP3, Napster, and all that happen again. Also, the Sony patent on CD is running out, so that is going to get the phase-out treatment just like vinyl did. All the new players will have CD and SACD capability so you can play the old and the new. But, you won't digitally record the new. The music companies and the big electronics industry dictates what we will listen to and on what format. It is a top down structure. We will get what they decide to give us. In the case of SACD, I'll take it. Anyone who can't hear the difference between CD and SACD is deaf.Just play the Tubular Bells disc on a good redbook player and then on an SACD player. If you don't hear the difference, then take up golf, or some other hobby. I do not bemoan the demise of CD, as it was technically flawed from the outset. All of this audiophile hocus pocus over the last 20 years was simply trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. And remember, none of the audiophile griping affected the market dominance of CD after a few years. It was shoved down our throats whether we liked it or not. Yes, a few of us stayed with analog. My prediction is that SACD will provide the "Trojan Horse" of copy protected software that the industry desperately wants. We should just be glad that they are giving us a little "sugar", in the form of higher resolution, with the poison of copy protection. Copy protection was coming anyway. So at least we will get a little better sound along with it. IMHO.
I still think analog is better than everything so far. I don't have a turntable setup, but I used to have a very good one and I hear the difference. I think SACD is next best. I have some CDs that I think sound quite good. However, I have a difference of opinion with some posters on this thread about the strength of the big corporations. We will surely see what the outcome is. All I really want is a good sounding format to succeed. I have an SACD/CD/DVD player, but if SACD does not succeed, I do not really have a problem changing over to whatever does. I agree wholeheartedly with the posters who complained about the lack of SACD software. I have found only a few that I really wanted out of the whole list. I don't really know why they haven't been more forthcoming with alot of titles. I do think, though, that the copy protection issue will drive the future format winner. And, whatever we get, I hope to God that they don't decide to do some kind of copy-protected compressed crap like MP3. If all they worry about is mass consumers, then that's what it might be. And even though some posters do not agree, if the new format is all that is produced, then that is what everyone will have to buy. You can't buy something that the record companies don't make, if you want commercial pre-recorded music. And if they decide to do that, the sales to the generally dumb public will provide the revenue needed because, as we can see with this Rap stuff and such, they will buy anything. And they will pay $25 a copy for it because that is what they all will cost. I don't know the answer, but I sure know the problem. I hope it comes out good for us in the end.
According to a salesman at Crutchfield, SACD car players and walkmans are coming this summer. BTW, I have experienced the opposite type of listener fatigue as the others mentioned. When I listen to SACD, I am relaxed. When I listen to even good CDs, I notice a tenseness, especially in my shoulders because that is where I usually tense up from other stress. When I put on Weather Report(Heavy Weather)SACD, my shoulders just relax and I feel like I am listening to a vinyl album - almost. Just my observation. Another thing I am noticing here on this thread is that many of the SACD doomsday predictors talk about not wanting to buy new software, or they have big money invested in Linn,Audio Aero,or other megabuck CD players. Could it be that they don't want SACD to succeed because of their large vested interest in the CD format? Just a thought. Also, there is the usual resistance to change that may be showing up here, too. I listen to both CD and SACD regularly. I think it is easy to tell that SACD sounds better. I welcome the new format and I really hope that they come out with more titles quickly. I can listen to CDs all I want on the same player as SACD. My CD collection is not obsolete and it will sound just as good as it ever did. I will buy an SACD player for my car. The comparison reminds me of when I was buying a turntable and some people told me that direct drive was the best. It was obvious to me that good belt drive sounded better. Everyone laughed when I spent thousands on a Linn analog setup, and they all had Technics DD tables. It can't be better, they said. But more information got into the system and resulted in better sound. If there is more music information on SACD, which there IS, then the result will be heard out of the speakers. I really don't see why this is so controversial. If anyone wants to jump on me about the comparison, I will say that, given equal quality of players, the SACD will outperform the redbook CD. If you want to campare a Linn CD12 to a $199 cheap SACD player to confirm your predisposition, then by all means delude yourself. But, on a level playing field, SACD is better. I think it's funny that some say XRCD is great and then they don't like SACD. That is like saying, I like Ferrari, but only the mid priced line. Not those better ones. To each his own, but this is my humble opinion.
Bufus, the industry is so worried about bootlegging that they are going to extreme measures. I recently read an article online about how they are having pow-wows with all the major music publishers and consumer electronics companies trying to decide how to stop stuff like Napster. They have even bought special software from the government, which was only supposed to be used by law enforcement, to spy, track, and even hack into websites that they suspect are violating their copyrights. This is an industry that is overcome with paranoia about this subject, which is why I believe that any new format will have some kind of protection built in.