Why JVC XRCDs are so expensive?

One likely culprit is volume. Since the audiophile disc market is so small, JVC has to spread its fixed costs, like remastering, over many fewer units. But I wouldn't discount the idea that pricing it higher makes it seem better. (But an audiophile would *never* fall for that, right?)

And many of the JVC remasterings are available on other labels for something closer to mass-market list prices. This is a classic market segmentation move. You charge a high price for those folks who buy their CDs from, say, the Music Direct catalog, and a lower price for people browsing the bins at Tower Records.

Tuna: You're comparing apples and oranges. XRCD is a mastering process. SACD is a medium. An SACD can sound great or lousy, depending on how it's mastered. I predict that someday JVC will come out with XRSACDs, which will sound demonstrably better than run-of-the-mill SACDs. And cost more.

Sorry, cd, if I put more into your brief post than was there. I'd expect that a well-mastered low-resolution disc will always be better than a not-so-well-mastered high-resolution disc. I'd also expect that two identically mastered discs, one CD and one SACD, would sound remarkably similar.

The trouble with comparisons to date is that there's no way to know whether you're really comparing identical masterings. It takes very little tweaking to make two otherwise identical recordings sound quite different. Even when you've got a double-layered disc with DSD and Redbook versions, you can't be sure that somebody didn't nudge something somewhere. Some people have even suggested that record companies may intentionally tweak the sound of SACDs to make them sound dramatically different. I'm not so conspiratorial. All you need is one engineer to say, "Hey, this sounds good, let's try it."

Laoyuap: I don't know why Telarc lowered its prices on SACDs. Maybe they think the extra volume of sales will more than make up for the unit loss, or maybe they're just trying to move back inventory. I tend to assume that when a company like JVC prices a product, it knows what it's doing. Doesn't mean they're always right, but it is their business.

To your other points, the 40-minute CD is not unique to JVC. A lot of jazz and pop CDs have added bonus tracks or alternate takes, but many others haven't. Obviously, such additions would be less appealing to the classical market. And they would increase the licensing fees JVC would have to pay.

There are a lot of things on the market that cost more and aren't really any better. XRCDs, as a general rule, are better. Whether they're worth it to you is a personal judgment. I'd certainly recommend that you try out the XRCD version of a few old favorites, just to see.