Rolling Stones Hybrids Sell 2 Million! (1 Viewer)

[Lee Scoggins]

From High Fidelity Review:

Kawakami then provided a progress report on the Rolling Stones Remastered SACD series. In this series, 22 Rolling Stones were issued in the U.S., Europe and Japan as single inventory, Hybrid Stereo SACDs. Kamakami noted that in his most recent conversation with ABKCO Records President Jody Klein, worldwide sales of the Stones SACDs had topped 2 Million copies through the end of 2002 with a 50/50 split in terms of sales in the U.S. and the balance of the sales in Europe, Japan and other markets. He said that doing tie-ins with the Stones' recent concert tour and marketing aimed at both Baby Boomers and Teens had led to both groups turning out to buy these SACDs.

This will almost assuredly lead to more acts jumping on the Super Audio bandwagon.
I think this relatively HUGE number for a remastered series in a very tough recorded music year is very meaningful. It is also strong evidence that Sony's strategy to put remastered titles on hybrids to reach a larger audience is working.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

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.

 

[george king]

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.

 

[Phil A]

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.

 

[Rich Malloy]

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!

All I see is a lot of spin doctoring.

All I hear is a lot of great music!

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Rich,
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.

 

[Rich Malloy]

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.

First of all, it's over 2 million copies!

Secondly, I didn't think the sales success of the Stones SACDs meant terribly much either... until CES! Now, it seems that hybrid SACDs that will serve as a single-inventory solution has become the model going forward. I'm reading between the lines of the announcements, but I don't think it's wise to underplay the significance of the Stones SACDs on the industry. I truly believe that absent the success of those discs, EMI would not have changed hi-res horses, and "Dark Side of the Moon" would be a DVD-A release instead.

Likewise, the 15 Bob Dylan titles announced for SACD will not follow the model of the "Blonde on Blonde" single-layer disc released last year. Rather, they will be single-inventory hybrids just like the Stones SACDs (no CD-only reissue), and they will be mixed into the bins with all the other discs.

The Stones hybrids didn't "save" the format, but their success as regards SACD is not simply so much "spin doctoring" IMO. I think it's a bigger deal than we've generally acknowledged over the last few months.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

First of all, it's over 2 million copies!

Which averages out to 91,000 per title. 22 titles.
'Forty Licks' has sold 3,000,000 and is still selling like wildfire. The ABKCO reissues aren't selling because of SACD. They are selling because they are The Stones, and the old discs are shit.

 

[Rich Malloy]

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?)

 

[robertLP]

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

 

[Lee Scoggins]

*why* would the general public buy *this* DSOTM?

Well, to get surround sound for one and to get the best possible mastering for another. I guarantee that Pink Floyd fans will buy it even if they don't have a Super Audio player or plan to get one. $14 is not too much to spend to get the best copy of one of the best-selling albums of all time. Will all fans of this album buy if they don't have hi-rez capability? Likely not but the core fans of the group will likely turn out in droves and lord knows what great extras they might have in store for the 30th anniversary...

 

[Lee Scoggins]

More evidence of DVD Audio's feeble show at CES:

From Positive Feedback:

My first impression is that the two main forces I kept continuously encountering where (guess what?) VINYL (!!!) and SACD. SACD, of course, Super Audio CD, was pretty much the talk of the town – DVD-A was no where to be seen in hardware, except for the odd one-two dusty collection at the CD/Vinyl parlor. Isn’t it ironic, that the good old vinyl disc has now outlived pretty much 2 of the main forms of distribution? The first one of course being the good ol’ Compact Cassette, the second being the CD. Yes, I believe the CD has pretty much a limited shelf life here on out – it will be gradually replaced by Hybrid SACD’s which where all the rage and talk of the town during the show (incidentally, Terre Haute is welcoming the addition of a Hybrid SACD factory where they will be pumping out these beauties for some time to come). Look for aggressive titles from all walks of life errr… music (Peter Gabriel, Pink Floyd, etc…).

 

[Brian-W]

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?
All I see is a lot of spin doctoring.

All I have to say is WHEN DVD-A starts doing Hybrids, I see people who slam SACD (regardless of whether they own SACD or not) spin-doctoring those sales as "Hey DVD-A is really kicking ass!"
The same arguments for SACD sales vs. the hybrid issue are no different than DVD-A sales and those buying it because it plays on DVD-Video players
Let's give it a rest already...

 

[robertLP]

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

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Quote:

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.

 

[Justin Lane]

All I have to say is WHEN DVD-A starts doing Hybrids, I see people who slam SACD (regardless of whether they own SACD or not) spin-doctoring those sales as "Hey DVD-A is really kicking ass!"

For whatever reason a few individuals on this board have agendas to push the format of their choice to no end until blue in the face. Many times it seems they like sampling method used more then the music itself. For these individuals I feel very very sad. They are missing out on some great music out there on the format that is not to their liking for whatever reason.
J

 

[Justin Lane]

By the way, 91,000 copies per title (I am sure it was more lopsided to a few titles) is fantastic in today's market.

I am not really up on record sales numbers but is 2 million copies sold across 22 titles a good showing? We have to assume that the sales were heavily slanted towards Hot Rocks which is one of the top 100 selling albums of all time as well as their more popular albums such as Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed. I am sure a number of the other titles were probably below the 91,000 title mark by a wide margain. This may show the record studios that the top sellers continue to sell well, while the historically low sellers still sell that way regardless of remasterig or a hybrid layer. This could mean we will only get the bigger titles remastered in the future if the returns are not there for lesser titles, especially in the current climate of the recording industry.

Does anyone else have information on sales of remasters put out by bands similar to the Stones? Regardless if these discs are Hybrids are not, I wonder if Sony/ABKCO has recouped their money from the sales or if they have yet to break even. Turning a profit still remains an important part of business. Anyone out there versed in sales figures and what could be considered break even points for record sales?

J

 

[Lee Scoggins]

For whatever reason a few individuals on this board have agendas to push the format of their choice to no end until blue in the face. Many times it seems they like sampling method used more then the music itself. For these individuals I feel very very sad. They are missing out on some great music out there on the format that is not to their liking for whatever reason.

Justin,

I hope this is not directed at me since it is a very false description of my activities. Yes, I am a huge DSD fan because it allows me as a recording engineer to get closer to capturing the realism of a musical performance. I also respond about Super Audio's success when I see interesting titles coming out and want to inform people about them. I talk a lot about sampling method because it allows the saxophone on Sonny Rollins to sound more real.

Also, a couple of things bother me about this comment. If you are directing this at me, then mention my name or the name of others. This sort of blind attack is not really encouraged on the HTF. Secondly, just because one likes SACD and is not afraid to say so and defend it, does not mean they are against the other format. Most of us here have BOTH formats. I even think there is not a direct format war - these formats cut across two different types of users for the most part.

I have SACD, DVDAudio, a dedicated 24/96 DVD player (and collection of Classic Records discs in this format), and I use an Alessis to record live events in 88.2khz hi-rez PCM. I may be the prime example of someone neutral to formats from a use standpoint.

Its all about the music for me!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

This could mean we will only get the bigger titles remastered in the future if the returns are not there for lesser titles, especially in the current climate of the recording industry.

I disagree with this. If it is a back catalog like the Stones or upcoming Dylan series, most of the titles are likely to be done at once. I know a classical music mastering engineer and he says that it is the same in that business as well. It is easier to do everything at once, less expensive, and often easier to market as a set, since that has the extra appeal of offering a complete collection. The record labels are very excited, if you talk to people in the industry, with using DSD because it is considered a strong archiving format due to great flexibility in downsampling to variety of formats. So labels are incented to archive and create better masterings at the same time. DSD was originally created for archiving reasons but Sony/Philips thought audiophiles would like the vastly improved sound.

 

[Justin Lane]

I use an Alessis to record live events in 88.2khz hi-rez PCM

Be honest, I bet you are wishing everyday that you are using a DSD rig instead .
J