2. misc-audio
  3. 1019050212

Why SACD,DVD-A are already DEAD

I think it's time to really look at this issue as it stands today,in a clear rational way that takes into account the varied market forces which are the true determinates for any new formats sucess or failure.
SACD IS ALREADY DEAD PERIOD!
Why you ask?Well for the following reasons:
1.It's been about 2-3 years since the introduction of SACD and look at position it's in, in terms of SOFTWARE AVAILIBILITY and MASS MARKET AWARENESS.
Take the pathetic lack of titles,not only that, but look at the artists that are chosen as SACD releases,Yo Yo Ma,Kind of Blue,(for the upteenth time)Muddy Waters etc,etc.This is no reflection on the artists but only on their limted MASS MARKET APPEAL.Who was the marketing genius who decided to re-issue this material to captivate and generate a MASS INTEREST to this new format.You need a MASS MARKET BASE for any medium to succeed.
2.As has been stated before in other forums(stereophile for one) why would the average person shell out $25 HARD EARNED DOLLARS for one of these titles?Why?What are the advantages to the average listerner.it COSTS more,it's an artist in a speciality genre comparatively speaking(jazz,blues,classical vs. pop,rock,techno)it offers no physical advantage in terms of storage,packaging,and not only that it requires a NEW player!
If you wanted to consciously destroy this new format you could'nt have done a better job than Sony has already done.
3.Given the current state of the music industry ,their major concern right now is to halt the proliferation of the MP3.What major label is going to go out and spends tons of $ on P&A(publicity,advertising)and also re-tooling their cd manufacturing plants to output SACD'S as efficently as CD'S?Right now their is NO MASS MARKET AWARENESS of SACD,it's a fact ,we live in the hermetically sealed world of the audiophile culture.Most people don't even know about HDCD,GOLD CD'S,MOBILE FIDELITY DISC'S!
Look at the history of the 8 track tape,dat,mini disc,beta and you will see that SACD is right on track for a quick burial.
3.In order to suceed you need a medium that offers a clear cut advantage over the existing technology.Other than some sonic advantages(even that's not a slam dunk as many would suppose)What does the average person get besides A HIGHER PRICED CD?
5.For those of you who have purchased these players
thinking that if the SACD revolution doesn't occur then at least I have a player that does cd's better than most players,well you're probably right in that it will out perform an AVERAGE player.But think about it ,Sony is making a player to maximize their new format NOT the CD.There will be some compromise on the cd playback chain, As the price of the SACD player drops so will the manufacturers concern with producing great sounding cd playback.Parts,build quailty will most definetly suffer.
DVD-A IS ALREADY DEAD PERIOD!
Why you ask?Well for the following reasons:
1.Again it's basically MARKET AWARENESS,SOFTWARE AVAILIBILTY AND THE COST OF THE DVD.
2.Why would the AVERAGE person buy a dvd-a disc for $25 and ignore theCHEAPER CD VERSION!.Well if that person owns a terrific sounding surround set-up then sure that person will most probably buy one,but that person doesn't represent the mass market.Sure DVD video has had tremendous growth but it's the video (movies)that'sdriving the market not the ability to play music.My theory is that dvd -a won't take off for basically the same reasons that SACD won't.MASS MARKET AWARENESS,COST OF DISC,COST OF CREATING A SURROUND SETUP FOR MUSIC,COST OF GETTING A DVD-A PLAYER.Since dvd is already in place as an excellent video playback medium,I think the cost of the disc will be a major hurdle for the average person.Watermarking will be the hump for the audiophile,besides the fact that the proper engineeering of these surround disc's will be crucial to audiophile acceptance of this format.Idon't think either of these issues will be resolved in the near future,or even at all.
WHAT SHOULD YOU DO NOW?
1.The current technology for cd players and cd engineering has progressed significantly in the past 3 years.My advise is to buy a good high end cd player right now!There are plenty to chose from ,be prepared to spend $3-$6 grand,but also be prepared to hear your cd's sound GREAT not good but really ,really GREAT!
Let's face it life is short ,the players are out there, start listening and buy one(no I'm not a manufacturer or salesperson)and start enjoying the hundreds or thousands of cd's you already own.
To all those vinylphiles,I think you face similiar problems.limted software,mass market REJECTION.and old technology which needs a significant $ expenditure for great sound,not to mention the care and maintance required to keep these puppies sounding tick and pop free. I think of vinylphiles as one would think of vintage car hobbists,it's cool if you don't mind the fuss(I doI think the old maxim that lp's sound better than cd's is becoming meaningless.good lp on good system =good sound. good cd on good system= good sound.Ironically I think vinyl will prevail over sacd and dvd-a,it's a small club but it has a history behind it that will guarantee it's longevity.
So IMO cd's and vinyl for quite some time ,both require some cash outlay for a really good playback but it's the NOW and that NOW will be around for at least the next 10 years.
joeavid
bbtuna
96 posts
 
Twl,

I agree that the industry wants to find a way to protect CDs but these are the same folk who made available to the public CD burners. Made them cheap enough to put in every PC made in the world. As for protection, DVD video was protected but now recordable DVD players are becoming standard equipment on PCs. Regardless of the format, someone will find a way to re-record it. After all, they make copies of those CDs for resale right? That means the copier already exists, it just isn’t cheap enough for the consumer to buy it…yet. I think you would be 100% right if all the electronics companies were owned by the software companies but thankfully, that has not happened…yet.

I don't think the manufacturers are so hot on the new format, if they were, we would see thousands of new CDs sporting the format.

Vinyl didn’t disappear because the bad men at the top made it disappear, it is because the average joe/jolean couldn’t see the value in analog and CD was sooo much more convenient and so much better than cassettes (the other option). Vinyl was already losing to cassettes and CDs were so much better than tape it was a no brainer choice. Just like DVD is superior to VHS, nobody is forcing DVD down anyone’s throat, the fact is, once someone sees DVD they never want to go back. The SACD story is not as compelling. Although everyone I know who is an audiophile says SACD is better than conventional 2 channel, the difference isn’t so clear to joe/jolean. We hear the difference because we are trained. If it was blow-you-away better, where no person could deny it, like DVD vs VHS, then we wouldn’t be having this conversation. So vinyl lost because it was a pain to maintain for the consumer, not because the executives decided to thrust it upon an innocent unassuming population.

Yes, the big guns try and drive things to a degree but they have to rely on the public to respond. They have hyped this thing for 3 years and the mainstream, the real money, isn’t buying it. Now, I haven’t even mentioned the extra costs involved with multiple channels. No, the road is too long and too rough. SACD/DVD-A is not going to make it. I will bet you a CD of my choice in my format vs one of your choice in your format, what do ya say?
joeavid OP
47 posts
 
If your premise were correct then we would have a much,much larger inventory of copy protected sacd's as we speak.Not only that, but we have seen a recreation of the overnite vinyl phase out of the mid 80's happening to cd's...didn't happen! Just because the patent runs out doesn't mean that all the cd manufacturing plants will automatically switch over to making copy protected cd/sacd hybrid disc's.In fact that is the least likely scenario due to cost conversion, the need to jack up the price of this new cd.and the need to buy a new player.(audiophiles would revolt at the thought of buying a decent hybrid player to hear this newly corrupted medium and their copy protected cd's) I think you can already see that the majors are very,very careful about copy protecting cd's right now because of the backlash that will and has occured from the patent holders of the redbook standard,i.e. any cd w/copy protection will and should be labled as not conforming to the cd standard.
And also remember that sony is by far THE largest and most sucessful electronics manufacturer. Do you really think that a sony/philips patent will just walk out their door?As for SACD vs. CD it all depends on your ears and your equipment.Just because T/bells sounds better to you on sacd doesn't mean that holds true for everyone.I can find cd's that will blow away sacd disc's that's all personal taste nothing more .
ninja
48 posts
 
If you think SACD is high res you need to get a new cd player! Its just another mass market gimmick. I do think DVD-A is high res but the gain is not worth the price of the disc!
trelja
3,223 posts
 
Bbtuna hits on a lot of good points.

SACD and DVD - A have failed(I feel OK in saying that) because they offer nothing to 99.9% of the public. Neither offers the improvement over vinyl or cassette that the CD offered. DVD - V vs VHS is analogous to CD vs cassette. It only took 15 more years.

How does the sonic superiority of SACD over CD come across on a boom box? How do you justify a 5.1 channel DVD - A in an automobile?

Unlike Kevin Halverson, I feel that the failure is the direct result of not duking it out in public. The rest of the world decides what is a success, and what is a failure. They pay the royalties, we just exist on what can be gleaned from the already available. We don't keep companies like Sony in business. It's the DVD players, the tvs, the phones, the ...

The foolish companies involved target both mediums at us. We, the lunatic fringe are left to decide which of the two high resolution formats is to be deemed the chosen one? It is incredibly stupid.

Audiophiles are not interested in players from the likes of Sony, Philips, Technics, and Toshiba. We buy Audio Aero, Cary, Linn, Musical Fidelity, and the like because they are able to make their machines sound better. Which is all that we are really interested in when it comes to this hobby. But those companies only venture into new technology when they are confident the medium is established and it offers good value. Good value for the companies and the audiophile consumers. Just look at companies like Musical Fidelity and Audio Research. They could have produced an SACD or DVD - A player, but they instead produced CD players instead.

If the powers that be want either of these formats to succeed, they need to do one thing. Put out the software that will create the demand for the hardware. That means rather than Miles Davis and Muddy Waters, they need to sell Britney Spears, The Backstreet Boys, Ja Rule, Mary J. Blige, NSYNC, Madonna, DMX, No Doubt, etc. in only SACD or DVD - A. At CD prices. THAT is the music that sells. They would be amazed how many people would then line up at Best Buy for a high resolution player.
clueless
763 posts
 
TWL, I hope you are right. SACD is better and I hope we at least get there. However, unlike Scott, I've taken the full plunge in the multi-channel department and now have 27 speakers (that's 22.5) in my living room.

Sincerely,
I remain
More to discover