Did you gys read on the H-ROM on this very forum. I had not even heard about it - but for this forum. Looks like it will store 300GB with existing Red Laser. Transfer rate is 20MB/sec.
Adds to more confusion from a consumer point-of-view. |
zeisels: I have written to Gramophone on several occasions about their reviewers' habit of NOT mentioning the quality of the SACD layer on hybrid discs. A recent issue of the magazine did have a major feature on SACD, which I found promising.
I don't know what equipment Gramophone reviewers (or BBC Music ones for that matter) use when listening to CDs. Andrew Everard told me about a year ago that the magazine was attempting to equip all reviewers with high-end gear, but judging from some recent reviews, that does not apear to have happened. |
Eldartford,
Actually Vynil is the next step for Sony after Blue ray fails - it will be there next big thing.
I guess I got my y and i mixed up.
LONG LIVE SACD and DVD-A. |
Robm321...Vynil??? I guess you mean Vinyl, aka LPs.
Kings claim to rule by divine right (until deposed). I support the republic of DVDA, the people's choice. |
Long live SACD - Vynil is King and SACD is runner up. |
I compltely agree with an earlier post...as for mass market adoption of all formats the decisive factor is one of convenience in terms of flexibility, portability, maintenance and storage. Redbook did not "win" over LPs due to sound quality and outside of the high end, SS amps dominate tubes. SACD is destined to be a niche product but I am not complaining (well not loudly that is)...just need to manage our own expectations of title availability etc.
By the same token I do agree that hard disk based systems are next area where we will see the most growth in adoption. Its in its infancy and there needs to be a lot of development. But in terms of what it offers in terms of the values that the mass market wants, it is definitely a major step from all others. For the audiphile then, I think at least for my own purposes, I am happy with my Meitner gear for redbook & SACD while I wait for much more development of hard disk based players and related technologies to develop. The writing, I think, is on the wall. |
SACD and DVDA have obvious potential for sonic superiority over CD which, unfortunately is not always realized when discs are mastered. But this sonic improvement, vs a well made CD, will not be obvious unless the playback system is good, if not "high end".
The feature that SACD and DVD offer which is obvious to everyone is multichannel. No only is multichannel given little attention by the press, but it is also subject to a great deal of negative talk by audiophiles who think that their stereo systems are the ultimate. Well, let me tell you that we old guys thought that our monophonic systems were the greatest, and there was a lot of stupid resistance to stereo when it was new. Sure there are some ridiculously mastered multichannel disks. But there are also many good ones.
The future of SACD and DVDA depends on multichannel. There is one big market, autos, where surround speakers, the big stumbling block, already are standard equipment. That's good. If you want SACD to survive don't trash multichannel even if you personally intend to stick with stereo.
. |
Zeisels -- you;ve actually got a very good point! The lack of interest isn't due to lack of sound quality.
But then how many indirect sales reps (i.e. reviewers, etc) have a goodish multichannel (or 2 channel) for that matter... |
We who love classical music and have enjoyed the fruits of both remastered analog recordings, say from Pentatone and RCA Living Stereo don't find there to be any disappointment with the sonics of SACD.
In the classical market, I find the trouble is probably with a lack of interest on the part of record reviewers who (this is Grammophone) will review the redbook layer of an hybrid SACD and mention that its an SACD. They don't apparently even have the gear to listen to SACD in stereo much less in multi-channel. Stereophile has about two classical reviews per issue and never have they reviewed an SACD in that section. There is something called Music in the Round devoted to multi-channel but that is not even a monthly feature. Absolute Sound does much better with several SACDs reviewed by their classical reviewer each month. But with this kind of inattention from the magazines, how is the public to become aware of the wonderful sound now available from multi-channel SACDs? .... And I am here to tell you it is truly amazing! My home setup sounds like I am in a concert hall when I play good recordings which means anything by Telarc, PentaTone, Harmonia Mundi, Hyperion, Tudor, and several others that should but don't come to mind immediately. |
I agree with Phasecorrect as regards Sony's purpose. I can't imagine they would spend a penny on audiophile wants and desires but did create a scheme to keep the copyright money rolling in. Remember, the coypright on redbook CD ended 2-3 years ago and Sony stopped getting a cut on every CD sold.
I, too, agree with the Rolling Stones SACD catalog. It is the best sounding CD transfer I've heard which is saying nothing since the original discs were unlistenable. The new hybrids are barely acceptable and it's possible the original tapes suck. The Dylan catalog could have been done just as well by high res. redbook. Not a reason at all buy into SACD.
By the way, I borrowed another SACD player ($1,500.00 Sony) over the weekend and found it's reproduction a little 'phasey', a bit diffuse. High frequencies sounded somewhat like plastic, kind of like the old Acoustat speakers (which I owned and otherwise loved, except for their power hungry nature). |
In many respects...marketing, distribution, and even sonics...Sacd has been a major disappointment(or at least the discs I have purchased),,,many of the established artists have not been remastered in years and were never recorded in true DSD(and recorded poorly to begin with ...Hello Stones...and to be blunt...I feel as if SOny is playing a "Smoke and Mirrors" game that has more to do with copyright protection than improved hi-fidelity///at any rate...there will be other hi-rez formats that stand a better chance of longevity..... |
Gawd, SACD has been around only four years and we're already scrounging like analog addicts. (Actually, I could easily be one as listening to good analog makes good digital sound uninvolving. I gave up turntables 6 years ago when CD playback got so good. There is still something fascinating about the whole vinyl experience and there is actually lots and lots of new stuff available. Just saw a movie the other night which had someone giving another an old record. The person receiving it laughed and asked, "Do they even make things to play these on anymore?" The record giver also laughed and said, "No I guess not. Sorry."
And some of you Audiogoners want us to follow Hollywood polictical philosophy! |
Go to a CD shop that sells used CD's
You might be surprised what you find.
I have found several used and mint SACD's for $9.99
From what I recall,Best Buys SACD's usually are ~ $14-$18 |
I've been to the Virgin Record store in Orlando twice in the last year and it was hopping. Last time I stood in line behind 10-12 people but it was in a tourist area. Same thing with Dearborn Music even though I usually go in mornings during the week. However, I've noticed local Borders' music sections are quite empty. Problem I have with on-line is the lack of ability to browse. Virgin has such a hugh selection that I always find things that I didn't know existed or stuff forgotten years ago. Maybe someone can tell me how to cruise through Amazon finding stuff I didn't know about or had forgotten. Same reason I don't use NetFlix anymore - too damn difficult to scope out the available movies.
My local store sells some SACDs for $15.00 but it seems there are manufacturers who still think the format is worth $25.00. |
|
Tower Records in Harvard Square is now selling many "current release" SACDs for $14.99. So now many of their SACDs are actually less expensive than the same recording on CD. Usually stores will discount the price like that when they're trying to get rid of something. Having said that I've never seen this big store so empty. You'd think that everyone was purchasing their Jazz or Classical CDs on Ebay or Amazon. |
For bundy and you all, i have a recently acquired pioneer dv47ai and my system is hugely better than anyone i know. i have upgraded to affordable (junk to many of you rich guys) gear consisting of a roksan kandy ka i III and whatmough p31 with a subwoofer and lousy old 32 inch panasonic tv. but i am having trouble finding any sacd or dvd a i really want, except to try a diana krall or a few cd's from DGG or Sony.
Any rec's for this old audiophile classical and jazz buff? |
I checked Amazon for the make of SACDs and they charge $22.95. Also checked another brand which Dearborn sold for $22.95, Amazon had for $20.95. I have no idea what Best Buy sells 'em for or if they even carry 'em. Don't shop there much as it's one damn ugly place. |
I'm not surprised that your friend's store isn't moving SACDs. Why would anyone pay $24.99 for a disc that they can get at Best Buy or amazon.com for $14.99? |
On that price thing...yep, I just saw a bunch of SACDs in Dearborn Music for $24.99. Again asked manager (who is a friend of mine) if they are selling any better, he said absolutely not. Said the "high res" discs have been moved three times throughout the store, each time to a less traveled and more out of the way place since they simply do not sell. He keeps them because Dearborn is and has always been an excellently stocked store but, at this point, they are simply "space takers". |
Robm321: You ought to send a resume to Jay Leno. |
It's quite likely SACD (or to a lesser extent DVD-A) will never find its niche with audiophiles because we all prefer vinyl, given the choice. However, SACD is definitely going in the right direction because:
(a) it's less of a compromise than CD sound,
(b) music recorded on DSD today (it could well be the medium of choice for the majority of studios) transfers naturally to the SACD format which means less to go wrong from instrument to disc and
(c) SACD shares a lot of what makes CD so popular: convenient size and durability.
Technically SACD has a lot going for it but its financial sense is less clear and it may well die from underinvestment. |
If that is tha root cauze of everythingg evil -- does that makee spel checker our saviorrr.??? |
I think the root cause of everything bad today is that people are becoming more and more machine like. A few years from now and most people can't even spell the word conscience. |
Yes, I've listened to a good SACD system and some SACDs are recorded badly some CDs are recorded badly and some vinyl is recorded badly. What was the point of comparing a well recorded SACD to a badly recorded LP? Where were you going with that?
To my ears SACD does sound better than CD - it is very impressive. But Sony isn't gonna make its numbers selling SACDs to audiophiles -- and non-audiophiles don't care about small sound improvements (they won't notice it oh their systems anyway - so IMHO (ok maybe not so humble) SACD is dying.
I hope I'm wrong. I am tired of cleaning my records. But at this rate by 2020 maybe SACD will line the shelves of record stores... or will it be DVD-A or a newly invented product????? |
|
|
Robm321, if you read the post closely I said in some cases that SACD sounds better than vinyl. As you are aware there are many poor pressings of vinyl and some exceptional recorded SACDs. I have a large collection of vinyl, well over 8000 lps and over 20K in my analog playback system so I can appreciate vinyl. All I was saying is that SACD sounds wonderful, hell in some cases my car radio sounds better than some of my records.By the way, have you listened to SACD in a good system? |
SACD sounding better than vynil -- wow a revelation -- everybody stop making turntables and tone arms something has trumped vynil! we've arrived at the perfect format. Convenient and better sounding than any other format. Sorry Desmond but you've lost credibility with me with that comment.
So no use arguing. |
I was on the fence about SACD untill I found myself owning about 50 hybrid discs. I purchased a modest priced player(3K, talking Audiophile now)and was quite impressed with the format. To my ears there is simply no question that SACD is a better sounding format than cd. I have a very nice Audiomeca Mephisto 11.X CDP and almost without fail the SACD player sounds more musical. I don't think that vinyl has anything to do with the acceptance of SACD and I don't understand why people keep using vinyl as a reason not to listen to this format. I also have a high end analog system and while it sounds quite good SACD in many instances is comparable and sometime better sounding. I really wonder how many of the detractors here have listened to a good player in their system. Yes the catalog is limited, no I don't think it will replace cd but take the time, auditioned a good player in your system. Make an informed decision. |
Viggen: I appreaciate your assessment of yourself as sometimes a gear lover and sometimes a music lover. I am definitely both. I jumped on SACD in the last year when several of my favorite bands' music was remastered (Police, Stones, P. Gabriel, Dylan, Miles Davis, Monk, etc.). I now have about 70 SACD's and enjoy them. The music lover side of me loves them because the music I love sounds spectacular to me--like I never heard it before. The gear lover side of me decided to buy an Exemplar modified Denon 2900 so that I can get the best of all worlds. The motivating factor for me is definitely the fact that so many of the artists I love have been remastered. If that were not the case I doubt I would have jumped in with both feet. |
For me, hi-rez format never lived. I never bought into it because none of my fave bands are available on them. This is coming from someone who definitely think redbook software is the weakest link in my system. Redbook technology itself is not that bad. I can still be totally enthralled by a well recorded redbook software and especially if its on HDCD.
I've always thought of myself as more of a gear lover than a music lover. This discussion made me realize I am more of a music lover relative to a gear lover. If I was a gear lover, I would have jumped on the hi rez format despite it not having any content in my opinion. But then I realize that I actually welcome the challenge in trying to build a redbook friendly system. So, maybe I am more of a gear head after all. |
It's fun to talk about them, isn't it? |
DVD-A and SACD don't fit in anywhere. For audiophiles, they don't sound as good as vinyl, for normal people (non audiophiles);) they don't have enough selection and most people don't care if it is a little better than normal CD (like audiophiles do) and as Uncle John pointed out downloadable digital music is going to dominate the future because of ease and continued sound improvement.
You want proof. What year did DVD-A and SACD come out? (several years ago) Look on your local music retailer's shelves and see how big that section is. Usually a four foot by four foot section in a warehouse sized store full of CDs -- Insignificant. Do you really think they will dominate in 5 or ten years from now? If so, that's what they were saying 5 years ago. At this rate, they might have an isles worth of SACD DVD-A by the year 2020. But by then something else new and better will come out. You do the math.
Records have been around for over 100 years and are still being used by audiophiles. The sound quality of Vinyl has yet to be matched.
So, I'll ask again where does SACD or DVD-A fit in? |
SACD and DVD-A are both dying in my opinion. They are both transition formats that over the next several years will be replaced by the next hi-res format, whatever that may be. I can't see either becoming a niche market because, unlike vinyl, digital music is going to continue to evolve and improve well into the future, making existing formats obsolete. |
Both AAC and MP3 can sound very good or very bad depending on the bit rate. You can't just say one is better than the other. In my experience, ripping a CD to 320kbs MP3 VBR sounded indistinguishable from a CD. At 128kbs, both formats sounded harsh. |
Co-incidently, I just got a CD today with 10 iTunes. A friend made it from her home computer and contains just some pop songs. They sound pretty darn good! However, Janie says the selection from Apple is pretty limited. Anyone have any other legal downloading services they use and like? |
>> Uh oh, Radknee...the SACD crowd will put a contract on you
I support SACD, own an SACD player, and buy SACDs :-)
>>everything she played sounded harsh with no bass to speak of
Like I said, Apple's AAC files are almost indistinguishable from CD -- unlike MP3s.
Then again, if these MP3s were downloaded illegally via file sharing, got knows the quality that went into the original encoding.
BTW, Wilson audio did a test at CES (you can read this in TAS) where they setup 2 systems -- one with their speakers, and one with another manufacturer's speakers. The system with the other manufacturer's speakers was using state-of-the-art digital gear and amplification. Everyone listening to the 2 systems thought the Wilson system superior -- surprise, the digital front end for the Wilson system was an Apple iPod ;-) |
Uh oh, Radknee...the SACD crowd will put a contract on you.
By the way, I was at a graduation party two weeks ago and the DJ was using an MP3 file to play music. Apart from the inability to mix songs, everything she played sounded harsh with no bass to speak of. Lots of people (none audiophiles) were complaining about it. I've not got much experince with MP3s but if this is how they sound, God help us. |
>> The average consumer wants convenience and my best guess is that digital satellite radio, MP3's, iPods, and the like are the mass-market future.
Apple's iTunes uses AAC audio, which blows away MP3s. I've compared identical tunes from original CDs and a CD-R burned from an AAC file -- it's VERY hard to hear any difference. Also, playing digital music from a hard drive eliminates jitter. |
Good post...Mp3 puts new music out to large audience.Seed enough ground and you get a crop of future music lovers. A cross section of them will most likely pursue hearing beloved tunes in higher resolution formats.I started w/45's then later had Turntable and reciever and casette both auto and home.It has always been the music I loved that drove me,not the format.If Ipods,satellite,ect or hot,then it bodes well for all.Thanks for that touchstone.
Yep records have large multi-decade history,and remain a presence with multiple levels to market to still. HiRez is still fruit on the vine,with very little bottled. Word has it that a summer campaign for HiRez is about to be launched.Many familier talking heads in the media are supposed to tout it in soundbites and short puff peices.
Like Gabbro said,mass consumer wants convenience first.
Il cuore desidera che cosa il cuore desidera. |
I read an article in a popular magazine recently that stated how MP3 has changed music for the better the way that CD's changed it 20 years ago. I believe it was in Runner's World, and the article was about a different topic - but I have seen similar comments in other places. The average consumer wants convenience and my best guess is that digital satellite radio, MP3's, iPods, and the like are the mass-market future. Flattening/compression of a soundstage is not a trait that is detectable in a car or on inexpensive home audio systems/boomboxes. I am interested in sacd, but ... |
Vinyl and turntables have "cache". SACD doesn't and unless it shows up in dozens of movies and TV shows (portrayed as something cooly retro) it never will. I borrowed an $800.00 Sony SACD multidisc player over the weekend. Sounded thin with unnatural high frequencies. Good transparency, however, it's at the expense of body and just plain "realness". Never got a sense of real people playing real music. Maybe I need to get a much more expensive player... |
They said vinyl was dead 20 years ago and quess what, it's still here! So much for "disruptive technology" and "Moore's Law", eh? |
Twenty years, huh? Guess they never heard the terms "disruptive technology" or "Moore's Law". Twenty years ago (1984) the interner as we know it, didn't exist (and I had a room full of vinyl and a three head cassette deck). Twenty years from today, you'll be hard pressed to find someone who remembers what SACD even was, or why it was. Sorry, but that's a rather biased opinion from the SACD community. I ain't buying it, SACD is the walking dead. |
From the SACD conference in Hong Kong.......
"In spite of new media on the horizon, SA-CD is likely to remain to highest resolution audio format for maybe twenty years. This from the people whose role it is to promote Blu-ray. Those hanging out for something "better" may want to look into cryonics." |
$2,800.00 transport, $1,300.00 for DAC. Also use a $500.00 Marantz SE multidisc as transport which sounds 90% of CEC trans. I understand your point but since I've already got these things, and they sound terrific, I have no intention of starting over. Just on principal, I also have no intention of buying "Kind of Blue" one more damn time. The Sony sounded nice, not as good as my redbook system. I could also spend a bunch more for an amp, speakers, wires, etc. but I just won't. Got better things to do - Hawaii, new car, early retirement (yay!!), etc. If I could find a $1,000.00 SACD player that'd beat by CD system, I'd buy it. |
How much do your reasonable good transport and DAC cost? I have seen many try to beat up $500 SONY SACD player by several K red book player. It is not a fair fight. Dollar to dollar, give it a chance! |
"I socialize where the action is..." Sorry, but I don't visit www.hotdormbabes.com so maybe I am missing the real action. Hey, is Amazon making any moeny yet? I mean on music? Last I heard (a couple years ago) they had closed a number of warehouses and 1/2 the customer service department. That's when I noticed a real deterioration in service from them and I only now use them or any other internet store as a last chance provider. That is, except for Red Trumpet, Music Direct, etc. but then I can actually call them and talk to a fellow human.
By the way, my wife loved using garden.com, toys.com, mothernature.com but somehow or another they went belly up when the internet nearly collapsed. Maybe I should catch up on economist Lou Dobbs' space.com, but hey!! They're gone, too! Another $85,000,000.00 up in internet smoke.
I do have to admit that SACD and DVD-A will end up being niche markets with possibly every limited releases. I'm still waiting for The Beatles, Hendrix, etc. etc. etc. to be released on real quality editions. Although, Red Trumpet has the Japanese Beatles CDs which sound damn good, but then, my old, stupid, slow moving "local store" (whose owner is a 30 yr friend) can order them for me and will do so over the phone. Then I get to drive my sports car (which I enjoy immensely), pick them up, eat at a good restaurant or grab some take-out, maybe even relate to another human being in a normal physical why (you know, eye to eye contact, etc.). May even check out the latest vodka or a new tequila addition in my favorite liquor store. Might see my neighbor and her beautiful 3 yr old daughter or her husband's new bicycle, might be inspired driving up to my house to enjoy the flowers, help my wife pull a few weeds, make a quick summer dinner, sit on the rear patio and see if the raccoons will come get our leftovers. Not "where the action is" but a damn good life nonetheless.
Oh yeah, my DAC and CD transport sound pretty damn good, as good as the $800.00 Sony SACD player I borrowed for 4 days a year ago. Maybe I'm missing something but if so, it ain't bothering me. |
>> Both CD replay and the quality of remastered Redbook discs have increased beyond recognition.
The reason they have is because recording studios are using hi-rez recording methods, like DSD, 192/24 PCM.
Whether SACD, DVD-A survives or not there will be high-rez music available for the masses, especially as digital technology accelerates, hard drive capacity goes up, flash ram prices come down.
At some point in the not-too-distant future you'll probably be able to download a full album's worth of hi-rez audio to your credit-card sized iPod with a terrabyte of flash RAM on your Walmart GigE connection to the internet ;-) |
