Sony Single-layer SACD's, beancounters, and the slow new release list or lack of such (1 Viewer)

[Ken Groulx]

Yes, I was very happy with the Dylan discs, unfortunately, rap, classical, and jazz aren't my thing. I'm a rocker/soul/alt.country man myself, and there hasn't been much of that from them. Ironically, the one disc out of all the ones you mentioned that has any interest for me - The Thorns - is unavailable in Canada as a domestic release. HMV was the only place that would order it for me - at $45. I already have the CD; between the US/Can. exchange, it wasn't much better getting it from Amazon, so this one I went without.

Ryan Adams' Rock N Roll SACD has not been made available by Universal Canada up here either (why I have no idea).

 

[Rachael B]

Justin, it's funny... A local place, The Disc Exchange, where I shop sum-thymes, has little notes taped on the most of the SACD's except the Stones and Dylan. I've explained to the manager the various flavours of SACD's and SA-CD's but stille they get mixed up sometimes when they write their notes. I took a Coltrane hybrid up to the counter for relabeling, a new note, because their disclaimer said it would only play in SACD players.

They're learning, but your and my stories are such good examples of S-L market poison. Why would a sane corporation let it go on for years? Back to marketing 101, yes way! Best wishes!

 

[Rachael B]

Ken, now that's more like the Canadian SACD Lament that I'm used to. The new Ryan Adams is an afwully nice disc. I take it you don't live near Windsor or Detroit!

 

[Ken Groulx]

I'm actually about three hours away from Windsor/Detroit, but that is quite a hike for a disc. I love Ryan Adams, too. :frowning:

 

[Michael St. Clair]

FYI, the excellent Dylan hybrid discs are available through Columbia House. Even with the fullfillment titles and the shipping/handling costs, you can get the average down to less than 4 bucks a disc.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

The brilliance of the idea is that some albums may not be deemend to have a large enough audience or the expense may be great. Licensing to the boutiques opens up a different distribution channel with different economics.

 

[Rachael B]

Phil, if dual-program software is such a legal problem, then why was Sony participating in the DualDisc experiment? Just a thought....

 

[Phil A]

Rachael do you honestly expect anyone to figure out Sony's reasoning. My theory on the dual disc experiment is that they were trying to sabotage DVD-A (with minimal cost to them) by further confusing customers. This is the same company who has developed good sounding (or looking) formats in the past (for its time) such as the 'L' cassete, Beta, minidisc. Their camcorders have not always followed what the rest of the industry does either. I've noted these discussions on other boards as well as the article. I don't know how much truth there is or is not to it. The fact is that they have not been releasing much SACD software (not that Warner has been doing much for DVD-A but over the last several months it would appear that they are now releasing more than Sony - e.g. Neil Young and other stuff - if Warner is doing a trickle and Sony less not encouraging for hi-rez). The dual disc thing was on a trial. Perhaps the business model for large scale releases on a particular format is dependent on royalty payments to artists and they may need to get it straight before they start releasing more stuff? Who knows. Just offerring some info and some opinions which may or may not be right.

 

[Ken Groulx]

I agree that licensing undoubtedly does work, particularly for lesser-known and more obscure artists, but it'll just make hi-rez even more of an esoteric product than it already is if it means never being able to purchase them at brick and mortar locations, and at exorbadant costs. My licensing comment was based upon a high-profile artist - The Boss. (That said, I can't really believe Sony will ever license anything out, no matter how popular the artist is).

Honestly though, I'm not concerned with what Sony does or doesn't put out anymore; no one there is listening to us anyway. You can only reiterate their faults, and complain for so long, before just becoming tired of it. And I am.

Cheers,

 

[Steve Meskell]

Lee,
Mr Hoffman has done wonders with 2 ch SACDS but even he would admit he is unconfortable mixing surround. It was reported that Elliot Scheiner has done a 5:1 mix of "Moondance" when will we see it....who knows?
Sony's output of their Pop/Rock catalog is a joke. I would love to have more Billy Joel SACD's. I love the 2 that are out there and when I play his video collection and hear the 5:1 mixes I curse the powers that be for not having this music on SACD.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Well I hope that Sony can convince Bruce to let them do it. His contract is said to be holding up the process so perhaps we should be blaming Bruce and his managers instead of Sony. We simply don't know what Sony has done...maybe they have done all they can.

 

[Sathyan]

Not that I know enough to disagree with you but isn't Miles Davis a Sony (Columbia) artist? JVC Victor has released remasterings of Walkin, Relaxin, Workin, Cookin and Steamin on XRCD (which IMO blow away the regular CD releases)

P.S. I would like to hear what JVC could do with SACD/DVDA.

 

[Justin Lane]

A large portion of Miles' work was done for Columbia, but he also recorded for Prestige as well as Warner in his later years (hence the Tutu DVD-A).

The five titles you mention however were done for Prestige/Fantasy. Originally Fantasy did not mind licensing out their material to labels such as JVC for the XRCDs and Analogue Productions and MoFi for SACD's of some of the same titles mentioned above. They have since decided to no longer license out their material, and put out their own SACDs. The titles they have licensed out are usually for a limited time, so after a window of some sort SACD rights will revert back to Fantasy.

So to answer your question, no Sony did not license out those titles for release on a different label.

J

 

[Lee Scoggins]

We might be able to find artists where a license deal did occur at Sony, but even without Sony there are numerous licensing deals in place. LP production has been very popular of late and many LPs get pressed by specialty companies.

One would think that even if the economics were not there for Sony it might lower its costs (maybe say take no immediate profit) so boutiques could come in and license fairly easily some major titles. Sony would still get the SACD royalty and great brand exposure for the format. I'm not sure why they don't do this.

It often seems that David Kawakami and his team, as good as they seem to be, are a very small force within the organization. Clearly Sony's Super Audio output is very disappointing.

 

[Mike Broadman]

Just to add to what Justin said, Miles' recording career went something like this:

His first recordings as leader were for Blue Note, where he made Birth of the Cool and a bunch of singles, now on CD as Vol 1 and Vol 2.
After that and up until 1956, recorded with various labels, mostly for Prestige/Riverside, where he recorded with various "All-Stars," Milt Jackson, Monk, etc. He also formed is first steady band, later known as the "first quintet" with Garland, 'Trane, Chambers, and Philly Joe. Due to Trane's odd style, Chambers' youth, Garland's light touch, and the shakiness of their first record, everyone wrote them off until they got better and took the world by storm, giving Miles a lot of clout in the business. Columbia was ready to sign them but he needed to release 4 more albums to fulfill his contract with Prestige, so he took the band into the studio for a few days and cranked out Cookin', Workin', Relaxin', and Steamin', now considered some of his best work. Then Miles went on to Columbia for 30 years.

These albums have been re-released by many: Prestige has done two versions of each, JVC put out a couple on XRCD, DCC did gold versions of each, Analogue Productions did an SACD of Cookin', and MoFi did a Workin' SACD (both very highly recommended). Now Fantasy is releasing stuff themselves and have started with a Relaxin' SACD.

Anyway, as for the licensing stuff, whatever gets the titles out. The only thing I could see a problem would be the costs, as some boutique labels charge a lot while Sony's prices are usually fair.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Mostly agree but remember the smaller labels may have fewer unit sales tp spread the costs out over. My experience has been that boutique labels (I've seen two up close) can often record far more cheaply as well as product artwork and legal contracts cheaper.

I still balk, however, at paying $31 for a MoFi disc at my local Tower which kills me since they usually do such a great job. I gotta believe the MusicDirect owners drive Ferraris.

 

[Steve Meskell]

No M/C No sale for me

 

[Justin Lane]

I agree with this for the most part, but when dealing with jazz titles 40-50 years old, the multitracks required to do a proper multichannel mix many times are not there, or not in a condition conducive for remastering. In these cases, a good Hi-res stereo mix is perferable to no release at all, or a faked multichannel mix.

J

 

[Rachael B]

How many folks think that the accountants are the primary reason that Sony isn't issuing squat? That's what I think.

 

[Rachael B]

Steve, shouldn't you take this on a case by case basis? I'd proably balk if Pink Floyd's THE WALL was 2-channel, but for most jazz, country, rock, and R & B catalog titles, 2-channel is fine by me. I quesstimate that over half of the M/C mixes that I've heard drove me to the stereo version anyway.