Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Lee Scoggins, Jan 17, 2003.
From High Fidelity Review:
About 91,000 units per title, worldwide.
How many purchasers bought them because of SACD? 1%? 2%? I'd love to see a survey. Everybody I know 'offline' who bought some of these reissue discs did because they were remastered CDs.
15,000 copies of the Elvis DVD-A were sold to people who knew they were not CDs.
Which is more impressive?
Does either format really have anything to crow about at this point? Does hiding an SACD layer as a trojan horse to CD buyers count as any kind of success in terms of the adoption of the format?
Four years of SACD, and the format is literally hidden on releases, the public doesn't know what the format is, and subsidies are keeping the software side of the market alive?
All I see is a lot of spin doctoring.
I did. I got my SACD player a few days ago, and explicitly bought some stones reissues because of SACD. I even replaced some existing favorite CDs with SACD versions (DK and O'Brother). In a week, I must have bought 7-10 SACDs. Music is wonderful again. However, you are correct, that most people probably did not buy them because of SACD. However, the release of hybrid discs could be a boon to SACD, in an unexpected way. A lot of people are using their DVD players as CD players. If they buy a combo or universal player and throw the SACD in, and hear the improved sound (assuming they have it hooked up right), they may begin to investigate the format more.
I know a few people who bought Elvis by mistake thinking it was a CD since it is in the same size case. One does not even have a DVD player. A good portion also bought it for the low-res 5.1 mix and use in a DVD player. A few percent of a couple of million discs sold still comes still comes to a large number of discs. Being hybrids, with the notations inside, people will become aware of SACD and down the road when it is even more std. in hardware they will have the oppotunity to sample it. As more mainstream hybrids like the Stones become commonplace, it will boost the format. I was at a seminar last night where Linn reps brought the proto-type (pre-production models will be done in about 4 weeks and the player will be available around April at somewhere between $10-15k) universal player show at CES. The Linn reps indicated they wanted to a player that will be able play all formats but that as of the moment everyone is signing on to SACD and at the moment, without a shot in the arm sometime in the near future, DVD-A is headed south in a hurry. That is one of the reasons why there are no major announcements about forthcoming software. The next year should be interesting as to where both formats are headed and whether either of them will gain more mainstream acceptance.
I bought the Stones remasters foremost because they were SACDs... before I even owned an SACD player! And people I know, online and off, were/are fully aware of this.
It's a single-inventory solution for those of us who care about hi-resolution and those of us who don't. Couldn't be simpler.
As George says, music is wonderful again. I just got back from Tower with another armload of SACDs for the weekend (25%-off sale going on right now!). With the exception of the Peter Tosh SACD (an early release), all my purchases today were hybrids. Not that it matters to me... it just so happens.
I have no doubt any longer that SACD will remain viable. I'm even starting to change my mind about it possibly going mainstream. In fact, the only problem I'm having is restricting my impulses to buy every SACD I want, as there are at least a hundred current discs on my to-buy list... and the floodgates are only now truly opening!
I am DVD-A and SACD capable and am a fan of both formats!
However, I don't delude myself into thinking that The Stones reissues selling 91,000 copies means anything for SACD...and certainly not anything for SACD today.
Since certain members crap on every other thread here with various format war rhetoric, I'm certainly not going to hold back on sprinking some objective reality into appropriate threads.
I work in an office where the average age is 40+, and many people bought Stones reissues and they don't have any idea as to what SACD is. Those of us who belong to the HTF and use the music area are on the abosolute lunatic fringe as far as society as a whole is concerned.
The previous discs have been stinking up the store shelves with their horrendous sound for over 15 years. The Stones are one of the most popular rock bands of all time. 91,000 isn't a surprising amount of copies to sell for a given Stones remaster CD. I would have expected no less if they were released CD-only with the same amoung of marketing and promotion.
As for me, music has been wonderful for a long time. I've been collecting vinyl and CD for what seems like an eternity, and there are tons of discs available that sound leagues better than the nasty original ABKCO Stones CDs.
Well, for whatever reason they're selling, they're sure as hell selling. As SACD consumers, it's been a boon for you and me. "40 Licks", as a collection of music, is as irrelevant to me as "Hot Rocks", and unless you're suggesting that it's outselling the ABKCO remasters specifically because it lacks a hi-res layer, then I don't get its relevance in the context of this discussion either. (You really think the old discs are shit? You don't mean the London CDs, do you?)
This makes me wonder about the possible sales figures of DSOTM. If the Stones haven't had any remasters whatsoever until now (?), but DSOTM has had a number of re-issues over the years, then *why* would the general public buy *this* DSOTM? Two million copies of the 22 'new' Stones albums is a nice figure, but I wonder how that compares to all the re-issues of just one Pink Floyd album? Anyone have those numbers? This '2 million copies' figure is a great way for Sony to pretend that SACD is a growing force, but I just don't think that so-called momentum will continue with DSOTM. I mean, it seems like DSTOM has a re-issue every three years... Rob
More evidence of DVD Audio's feeble show at CES: From Positive Feedback:
Speaking of hi-rez sales figures.....are there any numbers besides the 2 million Stones & 15,000 Elvis albums? I've looked around on the internet for some numbers but couldn't come up with anything. I'd be very interested to know how other titles are faring... Rob
There certainly is a difference. DVD-A is a new format, and anybody buying a title to listen with higher resolution or surround on DVD-A, regardless of which section they are playing, is different from somebody buying a CD title. CD is 20 years old, is low-res only, and is stereo-only. Somebody buying a DVD-A disc to listen to in any fashion is showing interest in something new; there is nothing new about the CD format.
For the record, I am basically format neutral.
I have no bias, and it is quite obvious that, from a software perspective, SACD is looking better at this instant in time than the other format. As far as my own purchases, they are based purely on the artists and there are many titles from each format that I am looking forward to buying.
I am not the spin doctor, but there are some here. Just like the children who go into videogame forums online and argue that their Sony is better than Nintendo, and so on.