Looking back...as someone who was initially very enthusiastic about the format...it just wasn't the quantum leap consumers were told...and on average mass market gear even less so...they attempted to establish the format with Dylan and Stones reissues...but backed of the marketing as not to confuse consumers...both these reissue series sound stellar in DSD and PCM...as both artists catalogs had not been remastered in any format for years...the first hurdle was getting past DVD- A which they did...but markets and technology change quickly...and with downloads, ipods, itunes, etc...and no video capabilities...SACD got left behind...ironically...blu ray...on the audio side...is very similiar to dvd a which sacd supplanted a decade ago...wow
Any hope for SACD?
Is there any hope at all for transferring more music, especially classic popular music, to SACD?
I mean, so many audio companies are investing so much in R+D for the hardware, but, to me clearly, there is huge bang for the buck in having an SACD version of the recording.
For example, the recent Carole King Music SACD is incredible, with a totally natural image density and rock-solid soundstaging (qualities I hear in most SACDs of long-familiar albums). Is there no economic justification for this? You get so much for so little. I wish the audio companies would band together to fund this. It sure would make equipment demos sound better.
My little system at home with SACD trounced the quality of even the megabuck systems at the NY show a few weeks ago, including all the vinyl demos to my ears. (My EMM XDS1 helps, but my Sony 5400 on SACD is also quite fine.)
It just seems like such an incredible waste that SACD is dead or dying and nobody in the audiophile or larger music community is talking about this. Does everything have to suffer at the invisible hand of the profit motive? This is an artistic pursuit fundamentally, and you might as well always show all the paintings in the world behind blurry glass. It's a crime that, say, the Beatles aren't available in SACD or any HiRez format.
I mean, so many audio companies are investing so much in R+D for the hardware, but, to me clearly, there is huge bang for the buck in having an SACD version of the recording.
For example, the recent Carole King Music SACD is incredible, with a totally natural image density and rock-solid soundstaging (qualities I hear in most SACDs of long-familiar albums). Is there no economic justification for this? You get so much for so little. I wish the audio companies would band together to fund this. It sure would make equipment demos sound better.
My little system at home with SACD trounced the quality of even the megabuck systems at the NY show a few weeks ago, including all the vinyl demos to my ears. (My EMM XDS1 helps, but my Sony 5400 on SACD is also quite fine.)
It just seems like such an incredible waste that SACD is dead or dying and nobody in the audiophile or larger music community is talking about this. Does everything have to suffer at the invisible hand of the profit motive? This is an artistic pursuit fundamentally, and you might as well always show all the paintings in the world behind blurry glass. It's a crime that, say, the Beatles aren't available in SACD or any HiRez format.
- ...
- 34 posts total
- 34 posts total