SACD - a new life? (1 Viewer)

[Brian-W]

it's frustrating to see such hardware support but so little in the way of software. It seems we were getting more releases more frequently 2-3 years ago versus now. Argh!

 

[KurtEP]

I don't really follow the release schedules. However, since Borders has started carrying a lot of classical SACD's, my collection has tripled, all in the past six months. There is a pretty significant amount of classical available on SACD. I'd agree though, that in rock, the format seems to be all but dead. Pity, too. I'd love to have Aja and a few more select Pink Floyd albums for the collection.

 

[Thomas Newton]

The labels may realize that now. What I think it really was, was a battle to shove copy protection / DRM down the public's throat (just like with SDMI). The labels probably hoped there would be a forklift upgrade from CD (similar to the forklift upgrade from LP to CD), and naturally, companies salivated at the prospect of collecting the associated format royalty streams.

This backfired and now hi-rez audio is a niche.

 

[PeterTHX]

Not really.

The lack of releases is what hurt it.

Software sells hardware. If each and every major release had a SACD version/layer then more people would have been aware of it. A handful of past releases won't cut it.

 

[dany]

What good was the hardware when how many years did it take for the players to have a half a$$ BM? Some still dont have much of one.

 

[Marc Colella]

I'm gonna sound like a broken record, but in a time where CD sales are continually dropping and MP3 sales are increasing, why would improved sound quality matter to people?

They could've made every single CD release a hybrid SACD, but it wouldn't have made much of a difference as the vast majority would still be playing the unprotected CD layer or moving over to MP3s.

Had SACD been released instead of CDs, then it would've been the default standard today as it would offer major benefits over cassette/vinyl. As it stands the only benefit that SACD offers over CD is improved sound quality, and most people won't notice and/or won't care.

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are headed down a very similar path, but will fair better as the market for people who care about improved video quality is larger than those who care about sound quality.

 

[KurtEP]

Always keep in mind that you don't have to have the entire market to be profitable. You just (to simplify) make more than you spend on the format. The world is a big place. Everyone wants to kick the ball out of the park. Yet, there's still room for someone who wants to make a modest profit selling SACD's to a small market, such as classical, instead of selling millions of them to a market that doesn't care (mainstream pop).

 

[Marc Colella]

No doubt.

There are many companies that do fine selling products to niche markets. I have no problems with a niche product, and in some cases I prefer it as usually quality standards seem to be higher (as opposed to something that's mass produced).

I think Sony initially wanted SACD to be a widespread product as their license on the CD format was running out and the fact that they were using hybrids to try to push the format. It didn't take that long for them to realize that it just wasn't going to work out, especially after the MP3 revolution was starting.

 

[Eric_Connelly]

I keep hearing rumors Apple will soon announce lossless audio downloads.

My system at home is hardly top 'o the line but you'd need to be deaf not to hear the difference in MP3 to CD much less SACD/DVD-A.

I tried to listen to some MP3's and just can't. Honestly I don't hear a whole lot of difference in my Logitech 2 channels in the office and they do sound decent for the $100 they were. Even in my car with MB Quartz speakers I need to be at 320kbps before its even listenable.

You need to hear good sound to want good sound otherwise your point of reference is what you hear.

Very few people apparently figure out on their own what is missing.

A hi-res standard based on the new HD formats is what will help the most since it will be more common place.

Its a a lot of money to listen to DVD-A and SACD properly. How many of you don't have analog bass management on your systems? If you don't have analog bass management your missing most of the experience. So on top of the receiver your looking at min $350-$400 to just handle bass management between the manager and cabling.

That is not something a lot of people are willing to do.

 

[BartJY]

Eric,

I’m somewhat new to this forum so please forgive my question.

When you refer to bass management are you talking about an AV Receiver that separates out the bass from all the speakers at a determined Hz and sends it all to the sub-woofer? Is that Bass Management?

And as for SACD players are concerned, when you use the six analogue audio outputs from the player into the AV Receiver it still uses Bass Management and manipulates the Bass as suggested in the above part of this post?

 

[Phil A]

When you take the analog outs of the player and put it into the AV Rec'r some rec'rs may have bass management but in doing so re-converts the analog signal to do the bass management in the digital domain. Some players have bass management but such bass management is usually very ltd. (e.g. a single crossover frequency that may not be optimum for all situations) and it too may re-digitize the signal. The signal when it is read is in 'dsd' and then gets converted to analog so making it go thru the conversion process again (especially in a product designed for HT) is not going to do wonders for the sound. In my main system, I define all my speakers as full range (my main speakers are and I have stereo subs crossed over at 22 HZ and a sub for the center and one for the rears). That is my solution.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

"I'm gonna sound like a broken record, but in a time where CD sales are continually dropping and MP3 sales are increasing, why would improved sound quality matter to people?"

Marc, you are right if thinking about SACD being a replacement for redbook. But one can argue SACD is doing very well among audiophiles in classical music. I think a niche market exists for better quality sound. It may be 2% of the market or less but done well could be profitable for many companies.

Perhaps Warner is thinking the same thing with DVDA and LP in the Because Sound Matters campaign. I think LP has particular appeal since so many young people are embracing it.

 

[Eric_Connelly]

Bass Management, my favorite subject

The short is that the SACD/DVD-A concept is built around 5 channel audio, not 5.1. They expect you to have 5 full sized, full range, speakers to listen to it properly. The problem is none of us have that, at least the majority don't. So you get mud out of the back small speakers unable to reproduce the full range sound, same with the center channel.

There is no bass channel in most recordings.

I invested about 5K into my setup about a year or so ago and popped in my first CD. It was OK but nothing great. I then popped in a DVD-A and found it highly lacking also. SACD didn't work at all because I was not using analogs.

So I went and bought analog cables. Sounded much better but something was still missing.

I did some checking and found out about the statement above about being designed around 5 full sized speakers.

Outlaw Audio used to sell an item called an ICBM, or a analog bass manager. I bought one to these, $250+$180 for their cable kit and now it sounds right.

Its purely analog and you can change the cross over for each speaker, it pulls the bass from each channel and creates an LFE where there was not one before.

Its incredible. Its also fantastic for stereo too.

I've played around with my Yamaha RXv-2600 for hours upon hours with all the digital doo dads and nothing comes close to the sound of the analog ICBM cross over.

I posted a message on another forum regarding digital bass management. The best response I was given was from someone with far more money in their setup than I who used a simple 2.1 channel crossover unit to keep it all analog.

Its a huge difference and its also got me stuck. I want to upgrade but until I can find a digital bass management system that is equal to what I have I'm hesitant to do so.

Bass management is a huge problem since there seems to be a problem with all the SACD/DVD-A/HD Audio spec's where the bass channel, if there is one, is -10db.

Its one of those things unless you know what your missing you may not think your missing it at all.

 

[LanceJ]

Eric: the NHT "Controller" preamp has a 7.1 input with analog b.m. (reviewed here), though it is a tad more expensive than the ICBM.

I agree that b.m. issues have - and still - plague both hi-res surround formats and is another deterrent to adopting these formats for many people. This slightly important aspect should have been standardized from the day both formats were rolled out. Instead, EIGHT years later the consumer is still being left to figure out what works and what doesn't. So I am not surprised more & more labels are releasing their surround music on the dvd-video format via Dolby or DTS* because these formats always work correctly.

* if anyone has heard a DTS-CD and wondered why it sounds so much like a CD despite using a lossy format, that's because it uses a data rate of 1200kbps! On a dvd, DTS can use up to a 1500kbps rate. Then there's the DTS96/24 format, still lossy, but includes more samples and an extended frequency range.

 

[Danny Tse]

Bose announces universal player for car....

http://www.bose.com/controller?event...stem/index.jsp