SACD Dominates Recommended List

SACD's biggest threat is to vinyl.
For a little over $1,000, one can purchase a SACD player that approaches the sound of $10K vinyl systems (TT, pre-preamp, cartridge). SACD gives 3 times the playing time, no pops, no need to flip, can use in your car, multichannel, etc.

Vinyl will not die overnight. I'm not going to get rid of my vinyl, but may never buy another record. My two boys will never buy vinyl.

The CD with its circa 1980 technology will last for at least another 10 years, but will be attacked from all fronts: MP3, Windows Media, SACD, DVD-V, DVD-A, and mini-discs to mention the major ones. It's popularity is on decline.

CD supporters remind me of DOS supporters. "Why should I buy Windows? It costs more, I have all this DOS software, and I really can't see a big improvement. It's only Microsoft trying to make more money."

The CD will decline in popularity--every format does. Each of us needs to decide when and which new format to hitch to. Many people will wait until the last minute. Many people are still using DOS and OS/2.

Nicely stated both Onwhy61 and Ken. I agree to keep moving forward and support progress. I also agree that the sound quality to the average person is not great enough for the masses to support the technology outright. What I'm hoping is the trend seen here on Audiogon of people purchasing the SACD machine for the improved DVD video, join that with the "latest" cd player and as stated often bring the price to $15.00 at Best buy and I think there is strong potential. The marketers of SACD, Sony/Phillips had better get to work though. The window of opportunity is open but for how long? And if the software manufacturers think one or two disks per label per month is going to attract flies, well then I understand why I'm not in marketing.
I love my SACD player on "redbook cds, on SACD I find it amazing, so I'm a huge supporter, I just wish they would speed up the software so this thing grows.

I reckon the evolution of source components is likely to be broader than is suggested here. I believe the plum that the likes of Sony, Microsoft etc are after is the open standards set-top box - the network computer in the home that will be as ubiquitous as the TV and which will be part of the digital TV you buy in a few years time. Rupert Murdoch is losing millions a month on his various Digital Broadcast Satellite ventures and is lumbered with truck-rolls and funding set-top boxes that obsolete quickly. The economics say a player that can deliver pay TV to an open standards set-top box that is already present in the home will do better. TiVO and Replay TV tried to get there and failed and Playstation 2 is a poor attempt. What makes it really hard is the lack of a standard for the middleware layer. What did it for the PC was IBM and what can do it for the set-top box is Microsoft, and the X-box. It may be a few years away, but companies like Sony and Microsoft will try to find that device that people will buy in large numbers that allows them to play DVDs on the TV, CDs, SACD perhaps, play games on the TV, surf the net on the TV, play games over the net on the TV, and whatever - that also includes the bit extra that will allow reception of Digital Broadcast Satellite and Video on Demand and interactive TV over say DSL. If they can get something like this to sell like hot cakes, then they will own something valuable. It may be the middleware standard (like owning DOS was valuable to Microsoft in the last two decades), or it may be owning some patents on some valuable parts that need to be in the overall equation. If Sony can make a big thing of SACD so that it needs to be in the package then the royalties will flow. They will obviously want the Playstation standard to be in there too. So how do they make sure SACD is in it? One way is make sure it is in Playstation 3, win this race with Playstation 3 and license it as a package. Another is to make a lot of consumer buzz about it so that having the SACD feature in the package can be a differentiator from say Microsoft's set-top box play. I am not sure I understand all of the possibilities here, and I am not sure SACD is a major part of this picture for Sony, but I wouldn't mind betting that it does fit in this picture. And I reckon that this is what is being raced for - not us audiophiles. But some market acceptance and hype from us wouldn't hurt.

SACD is a success. It will survive.
-
The only question is to degree. Is it going to stay a niche audiophile product, or will it move into the main stream?

Frankly, all Sony needs to do is release all new material in hybrid SACD and reduce the price so that the street price is about $15. This is very reasonable. HMV already sells Sony SACDS for $18.42 (no tax or shipping if you buy 4), and Elusive Disc has a special this week for $18 Sony SACDs.

Recently, Virgin Records (Oldfield's Tubular Bells) and EMI Records (Europeon pop singer Sarah) released their first SACDs. The software is improving. Also take a look at Sony's Upcoming SACD release listing (www.sonymusic.com/sacd). In the past it typically contained 2 or 3 items. It now has about 8-10.

I think the market has moved on from where it was in the 80s. I think it is more prepared to be sold on a new technology because it is simply the next step. The whole PC thing changed this. If I feel compelled to invest in a new piece of exciting gear that that does lots of things like I outlined above, would I risk buying the one that does not play SACD, even if I am not sure that I value the quality difference? I think Sony's strategy is a little flawed, but they have good reasons to persevere and I now reckon they have a good chance of success with SACD.