*Dark Side of the Moon* on SACD! (1 Viewer)

[John Kotches]

Mike,
Value add, value add, value add.
Where exactly is the value add for an SACD release hybrid or not?
If your contention that the majority of PF fans don't own a DVD player (a shakey one at best) is accurate where is the value add in yet another stereo remastering???
In my best Yoda voice, I say:
"A tricky question, that is."
Better sonics don't sell recordings to the general public.
Would Santana's Supernatural sold any better if they hadn't compressed it to death? That's just one example I've chosen.
Regards,

 

[Al B. C]

Quote:

I certainly ain't a marketing genuis, but I haven't even seen simple promos like that, anywhere.

 

[KeithH]

Well, this discussion hasn't gone exactly as I had hoped, but I do understand and respect the nature of the debate. I would love to see Dark Side of the Moon released on both SACD and DVD-Audio, as I feel that both high-resolution formats have a place and I want to see both succeed in the marketplace. Dual releases of high-profile titles like Dark Side of the Moon would be great. In the end, I will buy any high-resolution discs of Dark Side of the Moon that are released. For now, I will take the SACD. Hopefully a DVD-Audio disc is in our future too.

 

[Alex Shk]

DSOTM has been around for so long, it could attract sales from even disinterested fans (yawn). My own spin - - The SACD hybrid factor is only important if there is a market for Floyd fans for ANOTHER 16 bit re-mastering of this all-too-many-times-remastered classic (yaaaaawwwn). If we are going to discount the audiophile community, how many people want, need and desire another 16 bit CD layer re-mastering of this title?? Removing the hi-rez layer, of either hi-rez format, is there are market out there to have this title re-mastered?? If it only came out on a redbook CD, I wouldn't dump my current copy just to get the new one.

So - not owning an SACD or DVD-A player these are my options:

The SACD release will give me access to a re-mastered 16 bit version (yaaawwnnn). I wonder if it will be better or worse than what is already available. I will probably pass - my current copy is adequate.

A DVD-A release will give me access to the multi-channel mix thru my DVD-V player (and possibly a 2 channel dts mix). Not hi-rez, but at least it offers me an option to hear something that I haven't heard before, a new way hearing something that (quite frankly) is a little old and crusty, with some green mold showing around the edges. I would probably buy the DVD-A.

Just the opinion of someone who has heard and likes both hi-rez formats, and will own neither until the dust settles a bit.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

If the disc is a hybrid in a standard jewel case (like the Stones), it will sell fairly well but 99% of the people who buy it would not be buying it for hi-res or surround.
If it were DVD-A, it would sell much worse, but more people will hear it in surround than if it were released SACD-only.
If released SACD-only, it will sell the worst of all, and have the fewest listeners in surround. But audiophile Floyd fans will be happy, with most of them listening to the new stereo remaster.
There is some overlap between the surround-music advocates and the audiophile advocates. But this SACD release will only serve the latter market well.

 

[Mike Knapp]

If we are going to discount the audiophile community, how many people want, need and desire another 16 bit CD layer re-mastering of this title??

Why discount the audiophile community? That is the target audience of SACD to begin with.

As far as value added....I would now have a disc that I could listen to in a hi-rez format in my home and then throw it into the car or at the office and have it work there too. That aint happening right now with DVD-A

All this hinges on a hybrid release however.

Al,

If you think you will hear the difference between DVD-A an redbook quality on a HTIB (other than the extra channels) then we must re-think this discussion. I dont think that HTIB systems were quite the playback system the DVD-A manufacturers had in mind when creating their hi-rez format.

Mike

 

[Michael St. Clair]

EMI have adopted the SQ system for disc issues. As with all matrix systems it has specific limitations.
...
The requirements were a discrete master for tape systems, and an encoded SQ master for disc transfer. It was thought that two separate remixes would be the ideal situation, for in that case each system could be used o its fullest capabilities without compromise on account of the other. However, there might have been such huge differences in quad effect between the two that they might have been incompatible with each other musically; for example, in the effect of following disc and tape cartridge.
...
Another considered alternative was to remix to discrete and SQ simultaneously. This would have presented a considerable demand on machinery, especially as many other tape machines would be in use for quad echo delay, automatic double-tracking (a technique using a fast delay) and so on.
...
It was eventually decided to work with one discrete four track tape and monitor it in such a way that assured a reasonable result for both systems, in other words bearing in mind the compromises in the subsequent two-channel processing.

It is interesting to see that the original Quad mix was compromised for the not-so-discrete nature of SQ encoding used for vinyl releases.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

There's no question that SACD has been more effectively marketed. Superior marketing does not equal superior product.

In the case of Super Audio it does. I've listened to live mike feeds and DSD eats hi-rez PCM.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I'd rather use my excellent 25th anniversary master (that I like better than even the japanese Harvest release which I have now sold) that I have (like virtually every audiophile Floyd fan) and use that in the car and/or at work, and leave the new hi-res version at home.

I have the UK Harvest pressing which is even better. And don't get me started on the sonically lacking MSFL...
I personally want to hear the Quad mix which is how the band expected it to be played. But I can understand the record labels wanting to reach more people. If we get a hybrid, I am buying two so I have one for the car.
As I have said many times before, it is very possible we will get both formats. John disagreed with me on this point before, but seems to have changed his mind.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I have the UK Harvest pressing which is even better.

Sold that one years ago as well. I find the 25th Anniversary release better than any previously released version.
After coming to my own conclusion, I read a magazine interview with the producers of the Shine On box stating that no previous version of DSotM on CD had come from the original masters.
Of course, not everyone will prefer the same version. Not everyone has the same paradigm for critical listening. I suppose the same may be true for hi-res formats.

 

[Jordan_E]

What is it about Pink Floyd and formats that brings out the ire in everyone? Whatever format DSOTM comes out on I'll be jumping on with both feet. I'd rather have a DVD-A available, as I just got the QUEEN Greatest Hits vol. 1 for Christmas and I must say it sounds dang good just in DTS.

 

[John Kotches]

Lee,
You said this:

The ONLY way to get a multi-channel version out that also can be played on CD players, thereby maximizing the average Pink Floyd fans satisfaction, is Super Audio.

I disagree, but I'm not restating my reasons a fourth or fifth time. If you haven't gotten it by now, you aren't capable of grasping the concept.
Regards,

 

[Al B. C]

Al,
If you think you will hear the difference between DVD-A an redbook quality on a HTIB (other than the extra channels) then we must re-think this discussion. I dont think that HTIB systems were quite the playback system the DVD-A manufacturers had in mind when creating their hi-rez format.
Mike

HTIB owner's money spends just like everyone else's. Believe me, Sony, Warner, Universal and whomever will bend way over to pick up those dimes.
They would all rather have the masses in tow, not the audiophiles.

 

[Alex Shk]

If you think you will hear the difference between DVD-A an redbook quality on a HTIB (other than the extra channels) then we must re-think this discussion. I dont think that HTIB systems were quite the playback system the DVD-A manufacturers had in mind when creating their hi-rez format.

I was not referring to HTIB systems, and I don't listen on one. I have supplemented my primary stereo rig by adding rear and center channel speakers and independant decoding equipment. Although this rig also serves as my "home theater", my primary purpose was to hear the surround mixes that were put on those early dts CD's.

Maybe I was wrong to eliminate audiophiles from my example, surely they are the ones who currently own DVD-A and SACD players. If they are the primary market for this release - then I say make it a single layer SACD. You won't hurt me, I won't bother purchasing the title at all until I have an SACD player.

Simply said - I WILL NOT BUY THIS ON SACD AS IT HAS NO VALUE ADDED - - - FOR ME. I also believe (and here is where I may be dead wrong)that there is no great public audience waiting for a remaster of this title. It has been done several times on the commercial level , and also has several independent audiophile releases. Sure - the Stones hybrids sold, but that was a catalog untouched since '87 - and generally regaded as inferior. Many think DSOTM can sound better, but no one ever said it sounded awful. The Stones catalog was dreadful.

So until I upgrade my equipment, a DVD-A release would be of interest to me, and an SACD would not. That's just me.

 

[Brian-W]

Value add, value add, value add.
Where exactly is the value add for an SACD release hybrid or not?

John, you need to acknowledge that everyone has a different view point of what really is "added value" and what they're willing to pay for it.
Granted DVD-A generally has some pretty pictures and a video or two, but is it worth an extra $10 (my latest purchase "Queensryche" was $26.99 at Tower)? Sure, maybe to the die-hard fan it's worth it, but to me as a casual listener, that "added value" amounts to minus $10 out of my pocket.
I see many DVD-A are finally dropping to sub-$20, but again, we come back to the definition of what is value added and who it appeals to.
For me, videos and pretty pictures I can play on my DVD player and watch on TV is not something of interest. So your value added argument doesn't account for my purchase.
Hybrid SACDs are added value items that I am more than willing to pay for. I could care less that I can't watch videos or song lyrics. What I do care for is that:

• I can take my hybrid into my cars which all have CD players (not DVD players)
• I don't have to have room for two identical copies of the same album but on different formats on the shelf
• I can rip favorite music tracks into my iPod to listen to at work
• If I don't have my iPod, I can listen on my computer with headphones

Granted that list is geared towards redbook audio, but the reality is it's going to be a looooooooooooooooong time before there is even decent support and penetration into the consumer market of either high-resolution audio format.
So buying an album today knowing that I have a higher resolution audio track for future equipment upgrades is something I am willing to pay for. To me, that is "value add", and it is to many of my friends and associates.
That in no way discounts DVD-A, but as Lee pointed out (and it's just painfully obvious), the DVD consortium is now acknowledging it may have blundered by not going the hybrid route to begin with.
Oh, and if I get a multi-channel recording, great. But the hybrid disc is truly value add for me.
And SHAME ON SONY for touting this feature and not supporting it. I'm glad others have been.

 

[Brian-W]

And one further argument for the hybrid disc. Ask ANY consumer (not audiophiles) whether they'd rather have:

• 5.1 sound
• playback on all DVD players
• 2 high-resolution formats
• supplemental features like videos and/or lyrics, trivia, whatever
  ---> OR

 

[Kristoffer]

I am very tempted by buying a SACD/DVD player or a stand alone player because of this
All we need know is the wall, Echoes, Meddle and so on...
And maybe some Radiohead SACD to boot...

 

[John Kotches]

Brian,


I'll say it one more time, in case I haven't been clear -- a new stereo remaster for CD (which is what the average consumer would have for playback) is all that's there for DSoTM on SACD, assuming the release is hybrid. I see no value added for consumers if that's the case.

If it isn't hybrid, it's even worse.

I can rip favorite music tracks into my iPod to listen to at work If I don't have my iPod, I can listen on my computer with headphones

As far as ripping for your iPOD, it really depends. I have mixed experiences with DVD-ROM drives. Some literally puke on hybrid SACD media. They can't read the DVD-ROM layer, and they don't refocus to the CD layer.

When that happens, you're left ripping via analog, if you can figure out a way to get the data into the machine for loading into the iPOD.

It also kills your ability to listen on headphones.

Regards,

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Yee-Ming said:

I'll say it one more time, in case I haven't been clear -- a new stereo remaster for CD (which is what the average consumer would have for playback) is all that's there for DSoTM on SACD, assuming the release is hybrid. I see no value added for consumers if that's the case.

How can you say this if the multi-channel tracks include either (a) the first ever Quad release in hi-rez or (b) a new surround recording of the album?
Come on John. A hybrid with a new MC version would be dynamite! even a new hi-rez remaster would be dynamite!
Let's count our blessings and look forward to March.

 

[Justin Lane]

sub-$20 price points

Brian, this is the worst argument yet for choosing SACD over DVD-A. The vast majority of DVD-A discs have a 17.99 retail price and can be found from 13.50-14.99 online at most places (Circuit City, DVD Empire, etc.). Queensryche is one of the few higher priced DVD-A, and is the exception, not the rule.

Other then the Universal SACD releases, many are at or above the $20 price points. Just look to the new CCR discs for example. These discs will set you back $25 a pop. When it comes to price, DVD-A is generally cheaper.

J