SACD 2, the fatter, stingier SACD. Boo, get off the stage. |
Tireguy, more accurately Audio Revolution says Sony execs deny sacdII is in the works. Here is the exact quote...
"Dont count Sony and the SACD camp out. Respected executives inside a major record label talk of the possibility of SACD II a format that addresses many of SACDs formatic problems. Sony representatives strongly denies SACD II exists or is in development." |
It doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Sony to be pushing their DSD mastering/editing equipment to the audio industry (where they really make some $$$) only to pull the rug out from under them AND the consumers who have bought SACD players up to this point. I still think Sony is ahead on the hi-rez curve when it comes to marketing and the issuing of SACD titles. When I first bought my player at the end of 2002 there were only about 6 titles I wanted to own. Since then they have realeased approximately 6 more (Pink Floyd, The Police, Peter Gabriel, Deep Purple, etc.) That's not too bad for the 8 months I have owned this player. Meanwhile, in the DVD-A camp, they started out with about 8 titles I wanted and that number is now up to about 9 during the same period of time! Only 1 title released that I care to own in the last 8 months is fairly pathetic. Hopefully, this is all just a bad rumor but I'll wait to see how it all plays out. Anyone remember DIVX? (me neither) - Tony |
Rumor has it from Audio Revolution, that SACDII is a rumor..... Let's wait till September to see what if any thing actually happens.. At this point ANY theory is just speculation based from a rumor. |
If Sony doesn't make SACD 2 backwards compatible with today's machines then they lose my business. I have no problem not supporting a company that doesn't support the customer. Luckily I have the Pioneer 47a so the machine won't be a total waste... |
I am probably in the minority, but I have chosen to buy a Richard Kern modified SCD-1 that works wonders for both CD and two channel SACD formats. The DVD player in my home theater setup includes a DVD player that supports multi-channel SACD. When I upgrade the DVD player, I hope to find a reasonably priced unit that supports both DVD-A and SACD. Any additional capability added to either format that doesn't reduce the quality of the audio is OK with me. As far as backward compatibilty, I trust that Sony understands the need to maintain the trust of those who have already adapted this new format. I cannot afford and have no intention to attempt to put in place a surround system that equals the quality of what I now have in place for my two channel stereo playback.
Jeff
Jeff |
The more I think about this thread the more I think this SACD2 could be a good thing. I am guessing that for any digital medium to become 'viable' it will have to have mass market apeal. So what if SACD & DVDA sound better (closer to analog) if you can't go into a record store and be overwhelmed with choices. Who would have guessed only five years ago that almost every house, apartment, trailer, hell even alot of SUV's would now have a DVD player or two. Therefore video & multichannel in my opinion are the key to wide accaptance and popularity of the medium (along with backward compatibility to Cd players at least initially). The fact that high end customers get greater resolution recordings is just a bonus. |
Boy, I have to agree with Kana813, it's far from over. I tend to see DVD-A marching forward technically while Sony is always reacting to the DVD-A camp, constantly trying to out maneuver them. Besides, 99.9% of the recording studios do all their recording, editing and mastering in LPCM. And 24/96 or 24/192 sampling is all the rage. SACD is nowhere in sight at the recording and mixing stages. Accordingly, except for a few obscure exceptions, what I see is a choice in PLAYBACK technology, not recording technology.
Sonically, I'm not sold on SACD playback either. At first I thought it was great thru my Sony 9000-e DVD/SACD player. Good bass, great midrange. But after a couple of months extended listening I found myself bothered by a certain something in the high end. A thickness & lack of "air" that made the presentation less involving. What really shocked me was when I compared the CD layer of about a dozen hybrid SACDs played back on my Muse Model 9 Signature to the SACD layer on the Sony. I always prefered the CD layer thru the Muse, especially in the high end. More open, transparent with noticably more air, detail & delicacy. I got exactly the same result when auditioning a 777 and SACD-1. Interestingly, when I compared the 9000 with the Muse using some Classic Records DADs, I got a closer result. I still much prefered the Muse but the Sony sounded more integrated and coherent when playing back the DADs.
This was a couple of years ago, but it left me thinking that there is a problem with SACD in the high end. Smooth yes, involving ...no. I actaully prefered CD in the high end and definately prefered the DADs over the SACD format at that time (and within the context of the equipment I had available though).
I can't wait for Classic to release the new disks! |
An excerpt from the article..."Current stand-alone SACD players will not be able to access any video material simply because of their lack of video playback circuitry..." Unbelievable. This will also further blur the lines between DVD-A and SACD to the point of there being no significant difference between the two formats.Multimedia is here to stay, those who don't like the idea can simply not turn on their TV, but it will be nice to have the option. Any fan of The Band will tell you watching the "Last Waltz" on dvd is a nice change from merely listening to the cd. |
Anyone who thinks SACD sounds better than DVD Audio has probably not heard a DVD-A or DAD played back on a decent
digital system like the Muse or MSB.
FYI- Classic Recordd will soon release 24/192 DADs. The Classic 24/192 DVD-A discs will be Universal DVD discs in the sense that they will be designed to play on both DVD Audio and DVD Video players. This will involve filling the audio title set with 24/192 data and the video title set with 24/96 data. These discs will therefore also play on universal players that support SACD and DVD Video. The transfers will be done using a specially designed battery powered 24/192 Analog to Digital converter designed by Kevin Halverson of Muse Electronics from original master tapes mastered by Bernie Grundman. Classic Records anticipates the release of 12 titles in 2003.
The game is far from over.
Suggest you also read Digital System Wars at
http://www.iar-80.com/ |
It's far from clear whether SACD2 discs will play in SACD1 players. It's very possible they will NOT, because the upgraded copy protection will have to depend on something in the player. If SACD1 players can play the new discs then there's no added security.
So: your new multi-thousand $$$ SACD players may be useless with the new generation of discs. |
I agree with bld63. That is clear. The Sacd format is better than Dvd-a sonically. That is clear.(CES proved that)Sacd is for us, Dvd-a with video is for mainstream. Dvd-a is inexpensive relative to Sacd to produce. This has always been my worst fear. If Sacd were to ever switch to include video and add enryption layers to match Dvd-a, who do you think would win the format war. Take it one step further and one can see that if the formats are providing similar features, the Sacd quality is a good bet to take a hit. Why do you think Dvd-a is inferior? Just as Sacd is approaching vinyl(there is a unit reviewed to be on a par or better), we get this setback. As for the equipment issue, If there are two more levels of encryption included in the new players, it would mean that sometime in the near future, the newer cd's will not play on the old players. The biggest joke on me is that I am upgrading my new player(modifier receives it tomorrow). I am thrilled with plunking down $600 on a player whose Sacd component is, in my eyes, obsolete!! I think I shall retire my audio addiction and renew my wife addiction. Sony cannot make us incompatible!!! |
SACD 2.....better known as the RIAA seal of approval.
Budrew, after looking at my post, that should read they have it backwards Sony/Phillips and not you.
Sorry about that. |
I have always thought the only reason SACD (and DVDA) have made it this far is copy right protection for the record companies. The fact that they sound better than Cd's (while a bonus) is certainly not going to assure the success of either media. |
Does it mean though Sony already have doubts about SACD breaking through? |
As long as they don't make me use a video monitor to navigate the disk or compromise sonics, they can include as as many pictures on the disk as they like. |
Pleasing audiohpiles and making money are not mutually exclusive... |
Another concern is wiil the new copy protection built into the new hardware affect sonics? |
It is bad news if all new recordings will be in SACD-2 and you'll need another new CD player to decode it. |
Actually, I think Budrew has it right. Sony is searching for a market in which they can reap licensing benefits from their technologies. SACD is nothing more than that, and the bet was that more than just audiophiles would take to the format. To this point that gamble hasn't paid off, and Sony is looking for a new marketing twist that will push SACD into the mainstream. Whether this really is the future of audio/video entertainment remains to be seen, but the direction certainly allows them to stay competitive with DVD. |
This is nothing to worry about at all. It is actually SACD 2.0 vs. SACD 1.6 which is currently out. |
There is already a space set aside on the SACD layer for text and graphics, so it wouldn't require anything else to suffer. |
I could not open the referred to article. Any suggestions. Thanks |
Who needs it. If I want video with my music I'll buy the DVD. |
No, you have it backwards, without audiophiles, sacd would not exsist.
Average joes are still not buying sacd's, and putting a picture on the screen is not about to change that.
If you need further convincing, check the dvd-a sales.
My thoughts are, if there is video or picture stills, or whatever on the disc, then something has to be downgraded like resolution, or possibily no redbook layer.
Either of these two things will deter sales of hardware and software.
As far as the first gen players being compatible to sacd software and current software being compatible whith future sacd 2 hardware....i don't see this as being a problem. |
They don't care about audiophiles. They're in business to make money. To do that they need a wider audience. It's very simple. |
