Has ABKCO lost their mind on the Stones SACDs? (1 Viewer)

[Paul.S]

Craig:

Good grief, Charlie Brown. Are you going to return it and try to explain to them what it is that should have been sent to you . . .?

-p

 

[Craig Oberg]

Yep, it's going back.

I explained the situation and they
understood, but I was told it would
be nearly impossible to make sure
I get the correct one because of the
SKU being identical.

I have a few more discs coming from
J&R tomorrow and from Overstock I'm
waiting for Hot Rocks, More Rocks,
and the singles set.

I'm crossing my fingers.

 

[Max F]

J&R is still processing my order for Let it Bleed and Aftermath (man, they are SLOW), but i'm not too hopeful now. Looks like Let it Bleed will not be SACD for sure. Guess i'll be sending that back and looking around town.

 

[Josh Simpson]

I don't know that I entirely agree with this. The reason I didn't get into SACD was just because there were enough "must have" albums in the format for me... Not to bring up another group in a Stones thread, but release The Beatles albums in SACD's and I might've jumped at that. I would much rather have albums in SACD than in Dualdisc... but I feel Dualdisc and their "enhanced stereo" tracs on the DVD side is what we're mainly gonna get.

 

[Rachael B]

...so, after all this, is ABKCO sane and fit to stand trial?

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Sony subsidized these discs. No more subsidy, no more SACD.

Sounds pretty sane to me. ABKCO would be crazy if they kept these as SACD, since virtually nobody buys them for that reason.

 

[Max F]

There's alot of folks running around trying to buy them for that reason now!

 

[Paul.S]

I disagree. They're obviating one of the prime benefits of single inventory hybrids. Furthermore, it sets a terrible precedent and confuses collectors to maintain the same SKUs.

Unless it is markedly more expensive to strike SA-CDs than standard CDs, I think this stinks. I think we've been around and 'round on this issue but what is offered by the labels should not always be dictated by what most mainstream consumers think they want. Hybrids are sublime that way: hi rezzers can get their fix, and mainstreamers can stay blithely oblivious.

-p

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Guys,

You do understand that Sony has pulled the plug on pop/rock SACD here? The experiment is over. CD won. Nobody cares about SACD other than audiophiles, and we don't count. We aren't big enough to be a pimple on the ass of the music industry. There's no reason to give away free, unused SACD layers to the general public who doesn't give a crap, it's an unprofitable proposition. All it does is drive up the production cost of your CDs. The fact that the mainstream consumer stayed oblivious, or at least uncaring, is the problem!

They aren't replacing these discs with two inventory titles. Just like with Dylan, they are killing the SACD and only the CD will be available.

 

[Phil A]

I have to agree with the above, although I am bigger than an ass pimple While the costs are likely not significant in total, places like circuitcity.com where prices are generally reasonable, have the hybrid at $2 more per disc. Sony has already licensed the Byrds initial album to Mofi and that's the way we'll likely see future releases.