2. digital
  3. 1082689468

High-end Universal...Why? ?

I don't understand why we're still talking about the "age of uncertainty" and the need for a universal player. After the death of DVD-A, those with high-end universals are going to look upon the vestigal circuitry in their machines with the same obsessive disdain as they would a reptilian tail sticking out of their own rear ends. You know who you are. : ) I humbly suggest using your $4 to $12K and buy an SACD player.

Sure, many people's favorite music isn't out on SACD, but that's a ubiquitous problem whenever formats change. There are many Lp's that never made it to CD. Why will SACD win over DVD-A? Let's take the surround camp: even if 50% bought DVD-A and 50% bought SACD, (it's actually 3 to 1 SACD over DVD-A), you also have 2-channel high-rez camp buying SACD also, swinging the vote even further in latter's favor.

A disclosure: I own an SACD player.
jdaniel18ee
gthrush1
241 posts
 
Sampling rate of 2,800,000 (SACD) versus 96,000 (DVDA)! C'mon, man DVDA is not dying, I'd argue that it was still-born in the first place.

If DVDA were a priest, music would be an altar-boy...

bld63
109 posts
 
SACD is easily the best digital audio format available today but after 5 years or so probably 90%+ of the general music buying public doesn't know it exists or even care. It has been my experience that new releases are more readily available on vinyl than SACD. Unless Sony becomes a little more liberal with licensing and more aggressive with new hybrid releases I fear that SACD will remain a high-end niche like MFSL or DCC. Right now I can't see SACD ever becoming a mainstream format (which I find very frustrating). So I'll take my 4 to 12k and use it toward CD or vinyl playback.
rlwainwright
1,904 posts
 
Ignorance is bliss for you guys, I guess. So be it. But remember, the audiophile tail does NOT wag the industry dog. DVD-Audio *may* succeed despite the poor roll-out of the product. And SACD *may* succeed if "regular" folks see real value in a high-res recording. However, most people I know don't care a bit about it - they don't listen as closely as we do, and they *never* will.

Frankly, based upon what I've heard on the various formats, I'd place my money on DTS as the eventual winner - sound good enough for the masses, multi-channel impresses most everryone, *every* DVD player supports it, and you can have full-motion video as a bonus. I'm bettin' both DVD-Audio and SACD dry up and die within 3-5 years...

-RW-
uppermidfi
277 posts
 
I am very fond of my tail and do not appreciate your mockery of those different than yourself. This is by far the most blatant tailism I have witnessed on AudiogoN and I think an apology is due to all of us for your lack of feeling, consideration, and understanding. If we were Christians or any of the fundamental sects you would be able to abuse us all you like as it is currently politically correct, but to single out those with tails is beyond the pale. Were you abused at sometime in your life by someone with a tail, a parent, a teacher, a priest? Why the hatred?

Anyway, you are preaching to the choir! It is people who never frequent places like AudiogoN and buy mainly from Circuit City, Best Buy, Pep Boys that you need to convert. Most people don't care one wit about the quality of musical reproduction. Most people don't listen to music they just have it on.

They are not going to buy a DVD-A or SACD player. CDs are already perfect sound forever, why should they care? No one who thinks CDs sound good is ever going to buy a format that actually has the potential to sound good. They are sheep.
More to discover