SACD.. huh? (1 Viewer)

Mark R. Ososkie · Sep 7, 2002

Right. I've been looking into SACD..now, i *really* dont understand why you're all engaged in the comparing of SACD players, purchasing them..when theres maybe 40 CD's that can be listened to, covering a very broad range of music.
IMO i would *never* support a standard that has one release every month, and considering the price of SACD players, it seems to me just a huge joke being played on consumers...
/edit: Please read my second post in this thread before replying, thankyou.

John Royster · Sep 7, 2002

Mark,

Go pick up a cheap SACD player (180 bucks I believe), slap in 1 or 2 of the 1000 titles out there (I believe) and see what you think.

It truly is awesome.

-edit- not a joke to me. I honestly feel it is the best thing that's happened to audio since the CD.

KeithH · Sep 7, 2002

Mark, I see you are new here. Trolling is not looked upon favorably here. If you don't think you were trolling, try to tell me that you were not looking to stir the pot.
Trolling:

Mark R. Ososkie · Sep 7, 2002

1000 title? hmm
Well, i'm checking http://interprod5.imgusa.com/son-403/home.asp and their list is decent, but not nearly 1000.
I would pick up a SACD player to try one out, but there isnt one cd on that site that i'd even consider listening to. I think the main thing that turns me off to SACD's is the fact that the type of music i enjoy will not be offered in SACD format at all, second being the insane price of "good" SACD players, and third being how often titles are actually released (whether they appeal to me or not).

Mark said:
Quote:

I said this because on sony's website, i only checked multi channel sacd first, not noticing the regular list. I see that on the link posted above, i guess i was wrong, we're looking about 600 titles or so. I said one release a month because i only saw this list at first.

KrisM · Sep 7, 2002

Maybe 40 CDs. One release a month?
Methinks somebody likes to exagerate, or can't do simple math. your numbers are way off.
If you don't like it, don't buy it.

KrisM

KeithH · Sep 7, 2002

Mark said:

huge joke being played on consumers...

Seems to me like you think you are smarter than those of us who have adopted SACD. You took an antagonistic approach to "start a discussion". Antagonism will not win you points here. Face it, your initial post amounts to nothing more than trolling.

Click to expand...

Mark R. Ososkie · Sep 7, 2002

Keith, please calm down. I'm sorry if you believe i was trying to start a flame war, but this was not the case. It seems to me that you are the one flaming me, and if you cannot stop crapping on my thread i would appreciate it if you left. The reason i think it is a "huge joke being played on consumers" is the insane price of some SACD players, and the limited amount of titles available.

Rob Rodier · Sep 7, 2002

Whhhoooaaa,

First off, I think you should be able to post your feelings, whatever they are.

Post evidence, to back up your perspective! "don't buy" can be translated to "ignore the post"

Should we really just be blowing smoke up everyones ass about how great the purchase they just made is?

So...

SACD players are cheap! And they all play redbook cd's. I don't see how this holds any water. Most high end SACD players are said to have excellent red-book playback. Think of it as an additional + to an excellent standard cd player. That is what most of us did.

-rob

Jeremy Little · Sep 7, 2002

The reason i think it is a "huge joke being played on consumers" is the insane price of some SACD players, and the limited amount of titles available

That is almost a direct word-for-word quote of what I once said about DVD players in late 1997 (like November). The quote was something like, "DVD is cool but the players cost WAAAAY too much and there isn't shit for movies out there." Less than 9 months later, I had my first one. I now have nearly 200 movies and have had 3 players and 2 game systems that play them. To me, this is a moot point this early on. It may never catch on to the extent that DVD did, but I believe it is too early to discount it now.

Click to expand...

Jagan Seshadri · Sep 7, 2002

When CDs first came out, how many titles were there compared to the LP?

Frankly, these high-resolution consumer audio formats (SACD and DVD-Audio) only came about because

1) CDs were getting ripped and put into MP3 form.
2) (specifically for SACD) Sony and Philips no longer earn royalties for each CD that is sold, so they needed to come up with a new royalty scheme.

Frankly, most people's sound systems are too cheap to play CDs back properly let alone SACDs. I am not one of those people - I love music and great sound, so I am glad that SACD and DVD-A exist.

What about high-resolution video (HDTV)? That could be also seen as a scam to sell television sets. In the end, nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything. I'm buying into hi-res audio because I feel rewarded by the sound.

-JNS

Doug_B · Sep 7, 2002

is the insane price of some SACD players

Most SACD players are reasonably priced, whether integrated with a CD player or a DVD player. Yes, there are some that are rather expensive, but this is no different than with the CD player market in general.

It probably would be a low risk proposition to go down to a dealer and listen to the format on a moderately priced unit, and to the extent possible, with other equipment that mimics your own system as much as possible. Even if you don't like any of the titles, at least find out if the format has merit to your ears on a system comparable to yours. If you don't think it does, then listen on a higher end system as well. At this point, it does not appear you have enough (if any) first hand experience to question others' opinions of the format; your tone can definitely be taken as "pissing on" the SACD adopters. There are more constructive and respectable ways to question this SACD "conspiracy".

Doug

Click to expand...

Rob Rodier · Sep 7, 2002

Great post Doug

-rob

Mark R. Ososkie · Sep 7, 2002

Jagas, i believe this is a bit different than DVD or HDTV, considering that, like you said, most people cant and never will be able to hear what the format really has to offer. The average consumer has better eyes than ears, so they can see a noticable difference between DVD and VHS, or a regular cable signal compared to a HD signal. This is a bit different imo, considering its audio..which alot of people wont spend alot of cash on. You wont go to best buy or CC and see the same amount of $3000 pairs of speakers and receivers as you would RP and Plasma TV's.

One format will reign supreme, SACD or DVD-A..the industry wont support both for a very long time. Your average consumer would have to buy a SACD player to play SACD's, whereas most people already own a dvd player (for dvd-a).

Then you take into consideration the amount of titles being offered on SACD, which is very few..

What i'm saying is i dont see SACD lasting very long, so i feel that everybody who has bought sacd players are going to be screwed. Either the format will die the way betamax did, or still be produced but only in limited quantities and only limited titles still available..

Another problem is the audio industry as a whole. Hollywood is made up of a handfull of very well known companies who have the money to risk on new formats such as DVD, whereas there are ALOT of different record labels who do not have the resources to invest money into producing cd's in three different formats, cd, dvd-a, and sacd..

Doug, at a local hi-fi store i have had the chance to listen to a few SACD's, and even though they were not by a performer i particularly liked, they DID sound VERY nice, and i would definitely pick up a SACD player if there were more titles available or i saw the format lasting a long time.

Also, i'm a 17 year old kid, so i'm not that good yet at coming up with more "constructive and respectable ways to question the SACD conspiracy".

Rob Rodier · Sep 7, 2002

Also, i'm a 17 year old kid, so i'm not that good yet at coming up with more "constructive and respectable ways to question the SACD conspiracy"

LOL

Go Canes!

-rob

Click to expand...

Mark R. Ososkie · Sep 7, 2002

LOL

Go Canes!

hmm?

Click to expand...

John Royster · Sep 7, 2002

Mark,
I'll agree somewhat on the limited titles. But it is a very new format. We are hoping that it will gain momentum just as other formats did. Some failed, let's hope this one doesn't.
As for me, I just received my 555es player for less than 600 bucks. SACDs are literelly blowing my mind and to boot redbook CDs sound pretty darn good as well. I came from a top of the line adcom CD player and have been impressed with the 555s playback in that respect.
If one doesn't really get into the music and uses it for background noise SACD might not be for you.
So in summary - I'm waiting for new titles but at the same time totally enjoying my collection of 1500 CDs plus a few SACDs. Your post did make me want to jump through the monitor and grab you, but I hope I came across a little more kind.

Luis C · Sep 7, 2002

...but there isnt one cd on that site that i'd even consider listening to. I think the main thing that turns me off to SACD's is the fact that the type of music i enjoy will not be offered in SACD format at all, ...

Just out of curiousity Mark, what genre of music do you typically listen to?

Click to expand...

MikeSRC · Sep 7, 2002

Also, i'm a 17 year old kid . . .

God, I didn't need to hear that. I've got CDs older than that. :wink:

Click to expand...

Joe Cole · Sep 7, 2002

Also, i'm a 17 year old kid . . .

Come to think of it so do I. How depressing.
And they still sound good, well as good as they did 20 years ago.

Click to expand...

Spencer J · Sep 7, 2002

Mark:

So what if there are relatively few SACD titles currently available? Do you intend to replace your entire CD collection on SACD? If so, you're sadly missing the point.

It's a fact that many of the SACD's currently available are landmark albums, regardless of whether or not you (at 17 years) realize it. SACD is as close to listening to a 2-inch master tape as most of us will ever get, and you shouldn't poo-poo it just because you can't find the latest release from Korn (or whatever else)on SACD.

Based upon the the pathetic mixes of most current albums, you probably wouldn't want to hear too many of them on SACD, anyway.

If you want rock and roll, The Rolling Stones are now available on SACD, and they've been doing it better than anybody for almost 40 years.

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

SACD.. huh? (1 Viewer)

Stunt Coordinator

Screenwriter

Stunt Coordinator

Second Unit

Stunt Coordinator

Supporting Actor

Supporting Actor

Supporting Actor

Screenwriter

Supporting Actor

Stunt Coordinator

Supporting Actor

Stunt Coordinator

Screenwriter

Stunt Coordinator

Second Unit

Second Unit

Grip

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Similar Threads

Forum statistics