Will you stick with hirez audio? (1 Viewer)

[Doug Otte]

Lee, I agree w/ you, too, on this point. Even if SACD fails (Rachael, I agree w/ your opinion of Sony on that point), DSD is here to stay and will slowly insinuate itself into the recording profession.

Doug

 

[Paul.S]

Lee et al.:

First of all, the references to DVD machines and Blu-ray are irrelevant to the specific context of what I'm referring to herein, which is the Sony SACD player market and the absence of a Sony uni. Although there may well be a stronger general case to be made WRT "Sony's track record on hardware [being] good," I disagree with that statement with specific regard to SACD, especially WRT to the absence of a uni in the line.

Second of all, Lee you know damned well that this latest product announcement that you have linked to is not representative of Sony's SACD efforts over the past two years or so. This issue was discussed by many in the Why DVD-A and SA-CD cannot succeed thread, to which you of course were/are a contributor. Its also ironic that the TWICE Sony product announcement you provided a link to offers many points that support my critical position with regards to Sony's support of SACD. To wit:

"The company launched five new SACD/DVD-Video players and changers to expand its selection to seven from three in the premium ES audio series, the mainstream HiFi audio series and the mainstream video series." I don't understand the math here (5 new players + 3 existing = 8? -or- 5 new players + 3 existing in each of three product lines = 14?). I think the former is the case. Regardless, my point is that Sony should have been releasing this number of new players over a year ago when many of us were scratching our heads as to why there was not a wider range of new SACD/DVD-V machines.

"In ES series receivers, the company moved to a two-year product cycle and showed no new models." This got me speculating that maybe Sony was on a two-year product cycle for SACD. If so, I think that was stoooopid.

If Sony can do the DVP-CX777ES--an ES series 400-disc SACD/DVD-V changer with RS-232--they ought to be able to do a universal equivalent of the DVP-N577SD (and at about the same $130 price point). I think the precursor to this unit has been around since nearly the dawn of the format.

Ironically, what I am arguing for (especially a Sony uni) represents the same kind of "trickle down"/price reduction progress we see in other aspects of this new product announcement (adding HDMI output for the first time to a DVD player that also plays SACDs; introducing upconversion of 5.1- and 6.1-channel sources to 7.1; introducing "component-video upconversion in one [receiver] model and Dolby Pro Logic IIx in another model" in the HiFi series for the first time; "all multichannel receivers now feature Dolby Digital EX/DTS ES 6.1-channel decoding, which now starts at $199 instead of $299"; "The new three-SKU lineup of Dream Systems incorporate Dolby Digital EX/DTS ES for the first time").

If they can make all that kind of (too slow) progress (in terms of price reductions for wider implementation of largely other companys' technology), I would think they could have introduced a uni player by now.

But after all, we are talking about the same company for which the following applies: "Because all three [receivers] feature five-channel amplification, a powered speaker must be connected to deliver the EX/ES back-center channel. Sony doesn't provide a matching speaker for that application, however." Ha!

-p

 

[Rachael B]

I don't see how anybody can argue that Sony's lack of a uni hasn't hurt them, I think only the degree is at issue. I vaguely remember another Sony honcho saying they might make a uni more recently. I linked to it via a forum, maybe this one? Seems like it was atleast a year ago...?

Just look around, there used to be so much chat about the Sony 9000ES on forums. BTW, it's the player that helped me get intrested in SACD. There is so much less about the 999ES that replaced it. Everything's the Pioneers and the Denons most of the time. If it's a uni, people are on about it.

I'd sure love to see acurate figurs of uni sales against the backdrop of same for 999ES. It just looks like Sony is getting beaten on this front. I know appearances can be decieving but that's how it looks.

The truth is out there, sum-whar...

 

[Lee Scoggins]

In a tough market often firms stretch the product development cycle to save costs. As long as they make good products and support them, what's the problem?

 

[Paul.S]

Lee:

I said:
The problem is evinced by people on this Forum--the very caliber of music- and technology-savvy consumers that Sony should court--have been largely left asking, "Where's the beef?" It does not make sense, when trying to grow a new format, to put new hardware on a two-year cycle. It does not keep the product in the consumers' eye/mind as a hot, new, desireable commodity. Most of us, from cars to audio equipment, are used to seeing new product lines on an annual basis.

Absent that, Sony should have made an announcement, say on their Website, stating when they would introduce new SACD players. Instead, they've had a scattered, poorly-presented array of multiple sites showing older models.

-p

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Cars are a different business and are healthy enough for this while consumer electronics and music have been seeing very tough times. Sony is sort of an audio company on the hardware side that "straddles" the mainstream and the high end. Many high end companies do not release products but every 4-5 years. Sony has been doing a very good job IMHO on the flagship models. The SCD-1 and SCD-777ES (which I own) held ground for a few years as the format got established but the past few years we have seen several high end ES models introduced annually. The 9000ES is a great product by audiophile standards and designing and building these things take time. It's not like a Pioneer 45 which gets modified slightly to be a 45A and then a 47A where volumes are highers and changes are incremental. The lower end of the DVD Sony line has seen new models every year I believe, 18 months at the latest. So all things considered I think Sony has been fine on the hardware side. Plus there some 60+ SACD compatible players now out so it's not like selection is limited for consumers. Sony now has a current $149 model and a current $3K model with many models in between. Plus, Sony offers many HTIB solutions that almost always have SACD playback in them.

I agree that Sony should do more on the software side.

The larger issue is hirez adoption. I think you in the quote above seem to imply that product introduction was important. My view is that this is most at one of many factors. You have marketing problems from a fractured support group of labels, you have initially lack of coordinated big software albums, you have an issue with not issuing hybrids early on, you have an issue with not educating the sales guy in the store so he can explain the benefits, and so on...

 

[Paul.S]

Lee (et al.):

I said:
If it was not clear or seemed only an implication, let me clarify: I feel product introduction was extremely important. I think an argument could be made that it set the stage for many less-than-stellar situations that have followed, some of which you mention later in your last paragraph.

-p

 

[Will_B]

I wonder how the Seattle/Boston DualDisc test went? I've wondered if SACD and DVDA are being abandoned in favor of a nationwide DualDisc rollout.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

That's a very good question. I have heard anecdotal evidence that the test in Boston did not go well but there has not been anything official.

I personally would prefer that things get sorted out on the next DVD format, whether that be BluRay or HD-DVD.

I am still dreaming of one format for movies, hirez music, and computer data storage.

 

[Justin Lane]

I heard the opposite. The tests went well, but as many of the discs were sold on Ebay, it was too hard to determine acceptance in the particular markets. A sale is a sale however, and maybe the record execs should focus on that fact instead of how the sale took place (i.e. brick and mortar stores are no longer the only sales option in today's world...welcome to 2004 record labels).

J

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Justin,

Who told you the tests went well? Were there any official statements?

I'm curious because some friends in Boston said the product was not moving...

 

[Paul.S]

I went and read that story and have to add my .

"This involves the question of whether a high resolution audio disc with three separate versions of the same material (in this case CD Stereo, SACD Stereo and SACD Surround Sound) requires the payment of one "mechanical usage fee" or several to the music publisher of the material on the album."

This is an interesting development/issue that I'm sure the label's lawyers are debating with talent's/the publisher's lawyers. The label will probably argue that only one fee is necessary regardless of the medium (or mix). The publisher will of course feel differently. I surmise the issue is exacerbated with a record like Dangerously In Love. I don't have it, but I suspect it is not unlike many contemporary r&b/hip hop records with multiple producers who produce the songs they wrote for the record. If each of those producers owns/controls their own publishing, this issue makes for a potentially much more expensive licensing situation than, say, a Don Henley record on which mainly Cass County (his publishing entity) is involved.

Good grief, Charlie Brown. I wonder if this is why we've seen a lot of titles announced only to see never released, especially with DVD-A. Its akin to the rights clearance issues, especially for music videos, impacting DVD-V such that a lot of supplements that appeared on the LD are not on the DVD of many movies.

On a different note, does anyone else share my ridiculous hope/fantasy that the The Shawshank Redemption score (its a Sony title) would be re-released as an SACD in conjunction with the theatrical re-release and 10th anniversary DVD of the film this fall?

-p

 

[Rachael B]

Somebody over on the Steve Hoffman forum had trouble getting a Dualdisc out of his car player. That doesn't sound promising...

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I do. A terrific film all around and I would love to have the score in hirez.

 

[Paul.S]

This is a long-standing problem/issue for artists in the music business (and actors in the movie business), especially minority artists.

If part of what has been going on over the past 5 years with hi rez delays and cancellations is label lawyers playing catch up and modifying artist deals to reflect new mixes on SACD and DVD-A, then that process is taking too long. It didn't take this long for even Fox to get on board with DVD and apparently make some of the basic contractual modifications necessary.

-p

 

[Steve Meskell]

One major problem that has popped-up is the Pioneer firmware upgrade for the 563A. As a owner I do not like the prospect of shipping my player to the mid-west. And to top it off people seem to be getting different answers from Pioneer cust. reps. as far as where to send, if a disc will be availible so we don't have to ship the unit and if a firmware update is availble. Between the cracking SACD's, the almost certain push backs of release dates and player updates, it's hard to stick with hi-rez...but I will.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Excellent point.

I work daytime in both technology and finance, really the intersection of the two. My background leads me to wonder why the labels can't give clear percentages of cash profits to the artist...wouldn't that be a better way to do business? Would it not incentivize them to produce more cash so they could keep more cash. I'm not sure that is really the case today as much. The contracts could anticipate new formats at agreed upon percentages. Maybe a new format could cause a new agreement on royaltees from that new format as an alternative. I think the lawyers are making life far too complicated.

 

[Paul.S]

This is a complicated issue--I know from my years of working as a legal assistant in the entertainment business. One could argue that basing recording artist compensation largely on % of cash profits (of course, the label would argue for using the net not the gross, and as the joke goes "there is no net") instead of the # of units sold incentivizes the label to (continue to) lie about whether or not an album actually made money or not. There's an egregious number of precedents in the entertainment business wherein artists/profit participants have had to sue record labels or movie studios who were arguing that such and such album or movie didn't make any money after moving some remarkable number of units or achieving some boffo b.o. numbers. The Buchwald v. Paramount case immediately comes to mind.

-p

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I'm familiar with this as well. Why not put all sales into an Special Purpose Vehicle or trust and give the artist equity in that. That might solve the problem and provide incentives for the label to keep down costs.

 

[Paul.S]

Lee, you mentioned:
Seriously Lee, where'd you hear this skinny? What titles are purportedly "in the works"? Rumored street dates?

'Fess up!

-p