Are "boomers" the key to high resolution audio? I think so... (1 Viewer)

[Lee Scoggins]

Thanks Phil.

Look at this quote:

"Those from 40 to 60 form the largest single group of people purchasing music," says Jeannie Novak, president & CEO of Indiespace, which pioneered the online distribution model for independent music products in 1994. "Through the '90s, they took a larger share of the market than the younger group."

Pretty good justification for Super Audio's boomer-based strategy.

"Many mature music lovers are still faithful to the hits they grew up with. In August 2002, seven of the 10 best-selling albums of all time were recorded between 1968 and 1982. The Eagles' Greatest Hits is number one, Pink Floyd's The Wall; is number three, and Led Zeppelin's Untitled (IV) is number four. And compilation records, such as The Fabulous '60s, have been more prevalent and more heavily advertised of late, says Proffitt."

hmmmm....these bands look familiar...

 

[Darryl]

One wonders what the total sales of metal groups are as a percent of total sales figures...

Not the genre with the most sales, but there's obviously enough demand to support a niche market...and a much bigger niche than hi-res has managed so far. Like the rest of you, I hope "so far" are the two most important words in that sentence.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I hope "so far" are the two most important words in that sentence.

Me too!

 

[Carl Miller]

Actually from the music industry point of veiw it's a valuable barometer. Is not easy to sell a Hi-rez disc to someone that probably own the disc in several other formats.

I agree somewhat. But if there is one album which is both incredibly popular and historically known for its sonics (even in its original vinyl release)it is DSOTM. This, I think makes Dark Side the perfect choice for a hefty amount of gauranteed sales and in that respect a no brainer.

I think this can be seen over the years with the album always being chosen as a showcase for allegedly improved formats...The Quad, the MFSL etc.

Where I do agree, after rethinking it thanks to your post is in the release of the Stones and even moreso, Dylan. In that respect, classic as they may be, some of the Stones and most of the Dylan catalog would need a push from the format in order to convince people who alrady own the albums, to buy them yet again.

 

[Rachael B]

Lee, I remember Sony's print ads for SACD back in '99 with the promise of hybrid discs. I got SACD in 2000 and after buying 5 Sony single-layer discs I found out about the other labels...the ones actually doing hybrids. My first hybrid was AudioQuest's BLUESQUEST SAMPLER. I've been both peeved and amazed that Sony choose to push single-layer for so long.

They better get some more capacity if that's what is holding them back. The discussion here leads one to believe that nearly everybody is disgruntled with the title selection out there.

It bewilders me that Sony has released so little classic Santana. Are they afraid that would aid his present career at another label??? Que? Boz Scaggs and Edgar Winter made Columbia big money, no releases. They're releasing those B-team albums by James Taylor soon and passing up far more intresting options, my oppinion... Their catalog is about the size of Texas and Alaska. It's real easy to bitch and moan about what they do release when there's so little variety outside of Miles Davis and James Taylor and now Bob Dylan too on their label.

Uni players are starting to pop up like mushrooms and folks want some variety of hybrids to play on 'em! Sony needs to hit a higher gear. I mean, for me, I've lately considered spending my SACD money on vinyl instead. There's a better variety on vinyl and SACD is 5 fingers old.

I think SACD could breakout in the next year or two but the selection has to get way better. Normally I'd be in favour of dragging Britany behind a pickup truck but if she can help build the format, release the wench! Best wishes!

 

[LanceJ]

Lee: Warner is subsidizing dvd-audio? Never heard that one. That's weird because dvd-audio is an open format, meaning no one owns it.

Please elaborate.

LJ

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Ok, I can be dense at times, but unless Rachael's reply was not a joke, then no one has really responded to me.

However, I guess I do want to mention that I don't have 5 speakers that I could stack up and carry all at once. I do have 2 floorstanders, as every audiofile should.

My CD changer also has an optical out, and I can get 5.1 from that, or I could use both fronts and my 'B' pair if I wished.

And I haven't looked them up, but if the SACD's of Dylan are his early albums, then anything more than mono is just outright wrong. Here's one guy, sitting down on a chair with a guitar and a harmonica. One mike carries it all. I do hope that they aren't spliting the sounds up on that. That's nowhere near 'real'.

Glenn

 

[Phil A]

Glenn, some of that has been covered in other threads. I'm guessing I don't care for around 85% of the multi-channel mixes out there for the reasons you describe. I do go to see live music and I don't hear instruments and voices from behind the listening position. Every SACD has a discrete stereo mix which played back with appropriate hardware is certainly more realistic than CD. Many DVD-As also have a discrete stereo mix as well. When multi-channel is done right it sounds wonderful.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

Mr. Tan needs to provide a royalties breakdown. According to Meridian (and I expect them to know exactly what the royalties are for MLP) it's US$0.04 per disc that uses MLP. Since the claim is being made by someone with a vested interest in SA-CD, I'd like to know where the other 90% of the royalties are going.

I'm curious if this point of view is truly your own. It seems to me you're just adopting Kawakami's point of view.

... The other reason to begin with catalog is a marketing consideration. If you look at records sales by demographics the only age group wholse album-purchasing is actually on the rise is the older, so-called Baby Boomer generation. Boomers make up the largest concert-going audience as well. ...

Cheers,

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I'm curious if this point of view is truly your own. It seems to me you're just adopting Kawakami's point of view.

It is my point of view, modified slightly from what I heard David say at a conference. The data provided by Phil and my own reading of the Bronfman Warner purchase provided additional clues into the solution...I am a business strategy consultant by background (I used to work for McKinsey) and I like to breakdown complex problems and try to find a reasonable solution. That's largely what I am doing in my day job in launching a new insurance company. What is attractive about the music business is that there is so much pain and so little profit that we have an environment ripe for bold, new directions.
______________________________________

My view also includes fixing the A&R problem by redoing artist contracts to give them a piece of equity in their own production and limit labels large upfront fees which tend to wipe out profits entirely. If you look at audiophile labels, you will see that they keep costs low by managing the artists payments more tightly but can still provide generous royaltees. I would like to see music venture capitalists invest in artists just like VCs invest in tech. That way we will have smaller, independent, more local, more quality artist development. The when the artists gets big enough the music VCs cut a new deal but keep a share (along with the artist) of the cash flow stream from sales revenue at the label. In short, I think it would be advantageous to promote artists that are more loosely connected through A&R people.

I am formally working on a presentation about the above idea for some music executives. I will report what I learn in some later thread, probably in 2004.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,

I said

I'm not sure what you mean here.

Well, let's do the math together then...

.40 per disc royalty for DVD-A claimed by Ying Tan
.04 for MLP (if used), .04 / .40 = .1, or 10%
.36 unknown .36 / .40 = .9, or 90%

So where is the remaining 90% going?

With respect to "your position" on SA-CDs place in the market, would you rather I use "paraphrase"? That's what you're doing is paraphrasing Kawakami's point of view.

Cheers,

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Those are probably the agents, which I, and many others, have figured that are getting the majority of the take.

Phil, how (when done right) would this sound better? I am still blindly going with having the band directly in front of me.

A room can have screwed up acoustics, but those sounds really aren't 'wanted' anyway. I can set my receiver for different listening modes (concert hall & such) but those are really changing the sound from its original freqs. and volumes.

In a perfect world (Ok, that is a stretch ), you would be hearing the correct sound as it came from each instrument. If they were to say, take certain sounds from a guitar and move them to the right sat. speaker it would now be an artifical mix.

True, it may sound great, but I would tire of it quickly, knowing that it just wasn't real.

Just my thoughts.

Glenn

 

[Phil A]

Glenn, many classical discs capture the hall ambience in the rears. There are other discs out there that enhance what is coming from the fronts and make it sound more realistic. You do not hear them as separate sources from the listening position when your system is set-up properly. Some things that come to mind off the top of my head (and are not all inclusive) are "New Favorite," "Blue Country Heart," on SACD and "Guitar Noir" on DVD-A. There are others as well. There are certain types of music I can appreciate what they have done in the rears and don't take away (from me personally as others have different tastes) are "DSOTM" and "Avalon." They are far different from using the surround modes on a processor on good discs. That being said, I've already stated that on about 85% of multi-channel discs I have heard, I prefer the 2-channel. If you get around the DC area send me a note.

As for the $0.40 royalty cost for DVD-A discs, I am not sure where that came from. John gave the MLP portion. I believe from what I have seen that the DVD-V portion was as high as $0.075 in prior years and will be around $0.05 going forward (believe I saw those in Toshiba press releases). There is also this, which also gives some intersting number on CD vs. DVD duplication: http://www.iodra.com/news_stories.php?news_id=4

So I think the $0.40 number is high in summary. What I want to know, and I'm not criticizing Warner, since they have their pricing pretty close to CD range is why the rest of the cos. are gouging us on DVD-A pricing when it gets to the retail level. I personally could care less about anything except the quality of the music (extras, video crap, etc.) and that is my biggest gripe besides the interface of selecting 2-channel vs. multi-channel given my tastes and preferences. And I am supposed to be the target market (it is nice to be the target market but I get a bit tired of getting coupons for stuff like denture adhesive)? The music industry should not wonder why it is hurting when they come-up with products they can extract a little premium on and they get overly greedy and perhaps don't even give the target market exactly what they desire.

 

[LanceJ]

I'm not connected to anyone; the following are just educated guesses. FYI: Twenty bucks is my absolute top limit for a dvd-audio. But I don't expect this format to be as cheap as a CD since it requires special--& still relatively rare--recording/mixing facilities and specially trained recording personnel to create them. And you get a lot more "stuff" on them compared to a CD.

Here we go........

Warner's cheap dvd-audio prices--no surprize, they're a huge company so that economy of scale concept is at work here. And they have their own dvd pressing plants (well, they did until Cinram(?) bought them).

Universal--about the same story as Warner.

DTS Entertainment--AFAIK, much smaller than Warner and all they release is surround music, either on DTS-CD or dvd-audio. So, they have no money flow from regular sales of CDs or video dvds to help pay their bills.

AIX Records--same story as DTS. And, AIX uses high-end gear and techniques to record their music, which I'm pretty sure doesn't lend itself to lightening-fast production/release schedules (i.e. no quick return on investment). Their titles are an exception to my $20 rule--AIX is a really small company; in fact the owner Dr. Mark Waldrep said here once he maintains the company's website himself. Other members have said he often times answers the company phone himself to take orders. Now that's a small company!

Silverline--their prices seem to vary but I haven't seen any above $18. They have a huge dvd-audio catalog; maybe this helps keep their prices down. And their sublabels, Myutopia & Immergent, also sell regular CDs so that probably helps keep dvd-audio prices down also.

Capitol/EMI--I have no idea why their discs can cost so much. I've been wanting to buy REM's Document but no way am I paying $23 for it.

BMG's Elv1s dvd-audio--at my local Best Buy this disc costs 24 bucks. Elvis or not forget it! Another disc I would buy if $20 or less.

LJ

 

[Lee Scoggins]

why the rest of the cos. are gouging us on DVD-A pricing when it gets to the retail level

I think is a fair criticism of DVDA, many discs are quite expensive-many at $25 per disc. They should be declining to SACD levels as volume has grown. We certainly saw this with redbook CDs and the introduction of the Mercury Living Presence discs at $10 and later Naxos....

In any event, as production capacity builds we should see economies of scale drive replication costs down. I don't mind paying $2-4 extra for hirez content as well, particularly is the mastering was done well or there is a pure PCM or DSD chain used.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Their titles are an exception to my $20 rule--AIX is a really small company; in fact the owner Dr. Mark Waldrep said here once he maintains the company's website himself. Other members have said he often times answers the company phone himself to take orders. Now that's a small company!

For quality work like AIX, we should be glad to pay a premium just as I am happy to pay a premium for Chesky and Reference. However, these must be the exception or there will not be more than a small niche for the hirez formats as consumers will perceive a "lack of value".

 

[Justin Lane]

I think is a fair criticism of DVDA, many discs are quite expensive-many at $25 per disc. They should be declining to SACD levels as volume has grown. We certainly saw this with redbook CDs and the introduction of the Mercury Living Presence discs at $10 and later Naxos....

The DVD-A pricing argument is not really valid, as Lance has pointed out. Aside from EMI who has not put out a ton of discs, you can get discs from Warner, Silverline, DTS, BMG, and Universal for under 20 bucks and many times at $13-14. Naxos titles retail at $15, so you can usually find these online for $11-12. So-called audiophile labels on both formats price gouge, charging $20-25, which has always been the case.

Actualy when you think about it, DVD-A pricing on the whole is significantly cheaper than SACD. Check out Circuit City orDigital Eyes for accurate pricing levels. You can grab many Warner DVD-A titles for a mere $12.49 or lower, which is better than CD prices in many stores.

J

 

[Lee Scoggins]

You can grab many Warner DVD-A titles for a mere $12.49 or lower

Hmmmm, I have never seen DVDA pricing this low in my local retail stores. I think my Donald Fagen DVDAs were $20-24 at Best Buy.

 

[Phil A]

Lee, some of the Besy Buys have not marked down old inventory and do have $22.99 Warner discs on the shelves. EMI I beleive is $25 list and places like Besy Buy charge $20 for the ones I've seen in the store. As noted above, BMG is charging a premium for Elvis. They (BMG) don't have lots of other titles out there I've seen, this site, although only updated to the end of April - http://www.greatgig.com/quad/dvd-a-list.html shows the one BMG title, so I'm not sure what their general pricing would be. BMG is more of a fence sitter when it comes to hi-res at the moment. I've not heard anything on Silverline I would consider as great. I've heard a few that I would term half-decent to pretty good and the rest are not even good CD quality. So of the major studios, EMI has put out the most DVD-As and if those numbers are correct are pretty much being pigs.

Universal has just started getting DVD-A software out the door and from what I've seen they are not doing what EMI does price-wise, except for the fact they seem to be putting the same software out on both formats. While they may be testing the waters, I don't see the need to run and out and buy another copy of what I have. They should make a decision and do one or the other (it is OK for a Chesky to do both) as on the majority of stuff in their catalog, I would just wait to see if they follow-suit and release it on SACD for a couple of bucks cheaper (as appears to be their pattern). I would have no problem buying the DVD-A if I knew that was all there were going to release. I have good players in each format. I generally have enough music and movies laying around to catch-up on anyway. Yes I can understand why an AIX, Chesky, etc., can extract a premium. Perhaps if DVD-A ever gets enough software available we will see what the costs they can get it out to the marketplace for. CES is around the corner as whatever fall-out there is from the Warner music sale.

 

[Phil A]

I buy lots of software from different places. It is simply not a factual statement that Circuit City online is cheaper most of the time for DVD-As vs. SACDs. The Foo Fighters for example is $13.99, many SACD pre-orders or new releases are $12.99. For those that value the extras other than the music, it may seem like a bargain for a $1 more. I've already stated that I personally place no value other than the music and the qualities of the recording and would just as soon them be left off. If I want a concert DVD-V, I would buy one.

In some cases DVD-A software can be had at real bargains such as what I noted in this thread where I got 2 DVD-As for $17.71 - http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=171003

DVD-A production costs will be more as noted above due to menus and non-music content and so I would expect that they would list for more, but given the choice of walking into Best Buy and getting a Universal SACD for $14.99 or a DVD-A for $16.99 I personally would take the SACD every time. If I loved the group and wanted a music video, they have those as well at around the same price point as the DVD-A, sometimes a drop more and sometimes a drop less.