Is SACD a dead format?

It's hard to disagree with what has been written.

It also no longer seems to earn the same level of debate that it once did.
I suspect it may still survive as a niche Audiophile corner of the market.

The reality I often stated for myself seems to be true;SACD simply does not exhibit the sonic differences to attract potential converts to the format.
It failed to convince me for a variety of reasons and I don't think Sony helped themselves their marketing strategy seemed seriously flawed and quite a few discs just didn't deliver.
Of course others have found different but their impassioned stances on the format seemed to have faded to silence.

That's the tragedy really-technically it should have delivered with time to develop the format.However the whole approach seemed so flawed it just makes you wonder why it wasn't launched or supported in the right manner as it must have taken time,money and effort to develop.

I think some mistakes are being made in the above statements.

One has to accept that many people interested in Audio didn't find the sonic differences in SACD. Yes,maybe some of our systems aren't revealing enough,maybe some of the discs didn't do the format justice.
But this is not just the average Joe this is people INTERESTED in audio.
Failure to capture them has been more of a problem.

Anyone can make their own value judgement but my $800 SACD/DVD through my $3000 amp into my $3000 speakers left many a listener baffled as to what the advantage SACD gave over CD on the same Sony machine.
Play a normal Redbook on my $3000 CD player and it was no contest.

I said it at the time and got laughed at-you couldn't even find a SACD player in the same price range as my Ayre CX-7 to even try and adopt the format here in the UK's third biggest city and arguably 2nd biggest hi-fi city.

DVD's success was down to an instant improvement in replay and met mass acceptance-now if SACD could have made even a smidgen of that impact it might have survived too.

It didn't pass the basic test because Sony didn't make sure the early discs revealed it's superiority.

Nobody would turn their nose up at superior sound if it was realistic to enjoy it.
And for those of us more interested in the music than the reproduction then SACD never got out the starting blocks.

Mmmm but isn't there a big problem with the availablity of music?

Surely the point is to hear ALL music in it's best reproduced state rather than being left with what niche labels can deliver?

Or maybe it doesn't.

Cinematic Systems if you were actually switched onto music rather than gear you'd realise how silly your CD has had it's day theory.

Do you actually buy any music?

Cinematic but what music are you actually buying?
Ooops none..you are too busy selling gear.

Take the recent DVD-A REM releases-have you ACTUALLY LISTENED to the stereo 24/96 mixes?The one I heard was worse than the CD version in the same sleeve-wake up and listen please before posting.

As for reality-well in the record shops I frequent everybody is walking out with CD's not DVD-A's.And where does downloading/compressed formats feature in your half-arsed view?DVD-A players are crushing iPod sales no doubt.

Knife to a gun fight?
I get up too early in the morning for you sonny.
:-)

Take it from me DVD-A's future is no brighter (actually less so)than SACD.

Having posted before you got back in Cinematic your claim of 70 CD's bought in the last three weeks contradicts most of your argument.

Now why didn't you buy 70 DVD-A's?

Jayctoy-I'm not anti-SACD-I have a SACD player,the Sony NS900V.My music reviews site also has a SACD section.

You are right I haven't heard a great SACD machine in detail.My Sony which cost $900 new did get decent reviews.There are plenty on here who agree with my sonic experience of SACD.I did hear the Linn Unidisk-on a quick listen I wasn't that impressed.
Anybody making this arguement seems to forget the damage mediocre players and bad pressings have done to the format amongst those interested in audio reproduction.

I have said it before if I could afford the Emm Labs/Meitner stuff I'd be in there.

I am perhaps different in that your 100 SACD collection I would probably buy that in a 8-10 month period-of all the records I enjoyed last year ONE was released on SACD.
That's what kills me.

I enjoyed my debates with Rsbeck but without being arrogant my stance that SACD would only survive as an Audiophile niche product is looking more and more likely.

Tbg-interesting post until you made this statement... "I have more cds, sacds, hdcds, and LPs than I could ever listen to in the remainder of my life and given the quality of new pop music, I care little whether it is ever available in hi-res."

It surprises me how somehow so switched on and open could make such a close minded and imho inaccurate statement.

Tbg yes it was :-)

I actually don't think it's anything to do with,it's an outlook, a philosophy even.
There is more to current music than the chart stuff-indeed I spend as much time discovering music from all era's as well as keeping an eye on the current trends.