Sweet Vinyl Sugarcube - I Want It!!!

@sbrownnw - No question the entry fee is on the high side.  In Sweetvinyl's defense, I will say they have pretty much built a new product category from the ground up.  Yes, I know there are competing de-clickifier programs, but, AFAIK, none of them are as automated as the Sugarcube, in stand-alone boxes that do not require a computer, and the algorythms Sweetvinyl developed took a long time to get right.  I would suggest that for the extra $1000, the SC-2 is a better deal for those digitizing their vinyl, at least it will be once all the functionality is complete.

I got a break on the price via the Indiegogo campaign, but even so, it is still a big ticket item in the context of my modest system.  I would say it is worth it, although without a lot of the promised functionality that has yet to be implemented, it is borderline.  But once these functions are installed (firmware updates via the web), it will be an indespensible part of my rig. 

I don't know what their plans are for the future, although I believe a pro version, which might be more along the lines of your SC-.5, is planned eventually.

According to one of the main guys at Sweetvinyl, sales are good.  I think once the SC-2 is fully functional, which at the pace they are going could take another year, it will be a very hot seller.  I would also anticipate some audio reviewers to write about it once the software is fully implemented.

I continue to make excellent digitized recordings via my SC-2 into a pro-sumer CD recorder.  It's a lot of fun to take an old, beat-up, garage-sale LP, clean it, and then get a pristine rip using the SC-2.  There are some bugs in the control app for Android, and as a beta tester, I am working with Sweetvinyl to report these issues.  They have been hard at work ironing out the kinks.  Once they finish that, they will focus on the SC-2's automated track-splitting, better metadata retrieval, the ability to send digitized files to a networked server, and more control over the recording options (level, balance, resolution, etc.).

This thread really piqued my curiosity and trying to understand the motivation for using such a device. Do you folks actually prefer the sound of a digitized LP over an off the shelf CD version or streaming of the same music, or you have a large collection of LPs that are not available as CD or can be streamed from services like Tidal, etc.? By far most of the LPs that I own are available in the Tidal catalog and for those that aren't I just listen to the LP. Digitizing vinyl never crossed my mind thus this question.

@kalali - I enjoy spinning vinyl, and if I could, I would play the LP rather than the digitized version.  But that's not always easy to do.  I have to find the LP (harder than it sounds in my house), clean it, and flip it over in the middle.  Sometimes, I just want to play my music with the press of a button or two, or in a room other than where the big rig is.  Since I started digitizing my vinyl and cassettes (insert laughter here), I have spent much more time listening to my collection of music than pondering what I want or do not want to hear.  I started ripping my collection to a server in 2011 (finished all the CDs, now working on the vinyl).  The convenience of a music server is so conducive to focused music listening that I usually end up doing that.  My rips are not perfect, or even as good as the vinyl, but they are not too bad, either. 

As for the "shelf version" of the LP on CD, I have two issues.  One is that I swore back in 1984 that I would never give the record companies the satisfaction of selling me my entire record collection a second time.  I am that cheap.  So I went and bought a Thorens TD-166MkII in 1984, a big ticket item for me in those days, which I still have and use today (slightly modded).  I figured this West German-built 'table would last, and I was right.  The second reason is, yes, indeed, I have yet to hear a regular CD of an LP that I own sound better than the CD-R I created from the LP, even on my very modest system, and that was prior to getting the SC-2.  I find I get better dynamics, detail, warmth, soundstage and an absence of digital harshness from my digitized vinyl than almost every CD I own of the same recording (I have a few).    My DAC is pretty good, but hardly SOTA.  It is comparable in quality to my vinyl source, I think.  So, that's my attraction to digitizing vinyl.

Then there is my 45 minute to one hour commute in the car, each way.  Having music in the car keeps me sane as I fly down the Garden State Parkway at 10 to 15 miles per hour each day.  Previously, I had a 6-disc in-dash CD changer, but now use a cheap and cheerfull FiiO file player.  It takes me about 2 years to work through my entire music collection during the commute (and that doesn't count the yet-to-be digitized vinyl, of which there is a lot).  When you have a lot of music, it's good to cycle through the whole collection this way, because you rediscover stuff you've owned for a long time but haven't listened to in a while.  Plus, I hate repeating the same music too often.

The SC-2 makes digitizing vinyl easier, faster, cleaner and more accurate.  Or, at least it will once it is fully functional.

So, I hope this answers your questions.

@miner42 - I hear you.  I told one of the principles of Sweetvinyl that had the SC-2 only digitized, track-split, added metadata and sent the files to my networked server, I would have gladly bought it without the de-clickifier processing.

At retail, I don't blame you for waiting.  At the Indiegogo price, it was too tempting to me to pass up.  I am fairly confident that Sweetvinyl will see this through and succeed, though.