2. digital
  3. 1039430683

The plight of SACD....

Venturing into a local Audio Supermarket chain the other day...I found the latest advancement in digital audio relegated to a cheesy Kiosk in the very back of the store...complete with a Bose cube set-up...and the new Stones hybrid of "Got Live If you want it" (a dismal live recording regardless of format) blaring to a very disinterested public...no wonder average Joe aint buyin'...

Even with Sony "dumbing down" SACD/dvd players to the sub $500 level...without the software catalog to support it...and with the majority of the public A)satisfied with current redbook sound and B)not possessing even moderate midfi audio sytems to hear the sonic benefits...it appears SACD is going to be the next DAT commerical failure...ditto for DVD-Audio...these new products are not "market driven"...they are being forced on consumers...

The majority are not audiophiles let alone audio enthusiasts...accurate or improved sonics do not play an important role in their lives...redbook became dominant because its main competitor at the time was not the LP but the pre-recorded cassette...a dreadful format made worse by Dolby B...the Compact Disc won out but any digital format at the time would have...it offered convenience,portability,and eventually...compatability...

As someone who has invested a small amount in a SACD player and software...and was one of the first on my block to have a CD player...I have waited almost 20yrs for a digital
format that gives a hi-end analog system a run for its money...that day is both here and gone...I predict that SACD will remain a fringe format...similiar to DAT...in that
it will live on in professional applications...and have a small loyal following that truly appreciates its greatness...heres to hoping Im wrong...
128x128phasecorrect
phasecorrect's avatar
phasecorrect OP
2,013 posts
 
I would have to agree with TWL..as someone who is contemplating returning to vinyl...I am kicking myself for selling all my pristine wax and TT years ago...I was young and dumb...and bought into the "perfect sound forever" campaign...a computer chip that transfers analog into a numerical sequence and them back again to form a "digital reproduction" of music is both complicated and not needed...I am beginning to be more cautious of technology these days...the latest advancement does not equate to an improvement...and even if it does...as is the case with SACD...there is no guarantee it will succeed...If SACD doesnt even make a dent...I will return to the fussy,sometimes equally frustrating analog world...but like everything else in life...there is no free lunch...you have to "work" in order to reap benefits...
budrew
467 posts
 
Sony is a mass market company and as such I doubt they want to support a niche market. The mass market probably won't adopt SACD because getting the most from each recording is not what they want and the high end market seems ambivalent about SACD. It will most likely not be a big money maker for Sony. They might license the technology out to niche producers, however, and give it up themselves. If you look back, the progressive steps that were taken were all very different. Reel to reel, LPs, cassettes, compact disc, even MP3s now, all of these are physically different, therefore a perceived advantage and afr easier to market. SACDs are just not that different and therefore less compelling (to the masses anyway). but even within the other formats there are variations, different tape materials, different types of LP pressings, that did not require a new type of machine to play them. A turntable plays any kind of LP. I think some people get turned off because SACD requires a wholly new machine, yet it's the same old format (the compact disc). The paradigm shift isn't perceived. And who wants two CDs of each album: one SACD for the home and one non-SACD for the car?
2ms
1 posts
 
Once SACD players are the same price as redbook players (which they almost are already) and the volume of SACDs becomes substantial, then it will basically be dumb to buy a redbook player. Once people have SACD players, they'll buy SACDs (instead of redbook cds) whenever the music they want is offered. I hardly see how SACD could fail.

DAT was different. DAT players didn't play CDs and people couldn't play DATs on cd players. There are no such reasons for consumers to opt for redbook players over SACD players. Most new SACDs are hybrid cds (so people don't need to buy dupes for different players).

Also, the multichannel has got to be seriously seductive to those with ht systems.
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
TWL, I pretty much agree with your comments; I took exception to your first post as it seems every time this subject comes up, inevitably there is a post paying all hail homage to the LP.

As for your classifications, as I said, I mostly agree. I would consider myself as someone who wants the most out of my high end, but I certainly do not want to deal with LP’s and/or a TT to do it, others enjoy doing so, this I understand. SACD disqualifies itself, for me, do to lack of hardware and software. This leaves me with CD, so I have a nice CD player for the format that works for me.

I do not subscribe to the theory that it is my, the consumers, fault if SACD fails.
jrwr7
211 posts
 
Hey 2ms,

I have an HT/music system and I find no such seduction in the idea of having to buy, or in most cases re-buy, a whole new collection of music. I'm having a good time discovering re-mastered CDs, MOFIs and the like to help enhance the enjoyment I get out of my CD based music system........John
More to discover