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 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.
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
I still think analog is better than everything so far. I don't have a turntable setup, but I used to have a very good one and I hear the difference. I think SACD is next best. I have some CDs that I think sound quite good. However, I have a difference of opinion with some posters on this thread about the strength of the big corporations. We will surely see what the outcome is. All I really want is a good sounding format to succeed. I have an SACD/CD/DVD player, but if SACD does not succeed, I do not really have a problem changing over to whatever does. I agree wholeheartedly with the posters who complained about the lack of SACD software. I have found only a few that I really wanted out of the whole list. I don't really know why they haven't been more forthcoming with alot of titles. I do think, though, that the copy protection issue will drive the future format winner. And, whatever we get, I hope to God that they don't decide to do some kind of copy-protected compressed crap like MP3. If all they worry about is mass consumers, then that's what it might be. And even though some posters do not agree, if the new format is all that is produced, then that is what everyone will have to buy. You can't buy something that the record companies don't make, if you want commercial pre-recorded music. And if they decide to do that, the sales to the generally dumb public will provide the revenue needed because, as we can see with this Rap stuff and such, they will buy anything. And they will pay $25 a copy for it because that is what they all will cost. I don't know the answer, but I sure know the problem. I hope it comes out good for us in the end.
Re: Rlwainrights question about CCR CDs. The new re-masters were done using JVCs 20Bit K2 technology which is just PART of the XRCD process, but the new CCR CDs sound much better than the old originals. I emailed Rl.

The new CCR CDs should be available in just about any full service music store, but please note that they are not specifically an XRCD disc. The XRCD technology is actually a "process" used from beginning to end to produce these superior CDs.

This is an interesting topic to kick around but nobody knows the outcome for sure-- I just hope it sounds good. I also hope CDs will be around for years to come. I've heard SACD on a good system and was not particularly impressed-- but no CD to do a direct comparison. The BEST digital I have ever heard is Jacintha's new XRCD2 on my own system. Cheers. Craig.