Will SACD/DVD-A ever gain wide mass appeal? (1 Viewer)

[AaronD]

In the end, I'd like to see SACD win out. The reasons are mostly user interface, I mean what were they thinking when developing DVD-A? Requiring a tv in order to play audio discs just isn't very smart. It's for this reason that I think DVD-A will never become mainstream. Look at places people play CD's -- Cars, Portable, Home, etc. DVD-A only really works @ home and people aren't going to want to be restricted. They get this convenience with CD's now, so why should they switch to something that isn't going to give them what they all ready have?
SACD on the other hand, has promise. It doesn't require a video monitor and can have a CD layer. PERFECT Right? Wrong. Sure, conceivably you could play an SACD in a car, portable, or at home... But you can't right now. :frowning: The solution to this is to put the CD compatibility layer on EVERY disc produced. *poof* You've now got the ability to use your shiny new SACD everywhere you want and when the portable and car players come out you're all set. For some reason Sony has decided not to include the cd layer for whatever reason...
IMHO, the record industry would love to replace the CD because it's so easy to copy. Sure, they're trying with their copy protection schemes but they've got serious issues with those as well. So, I think if they're really serious about copy protection they'll eventually rally behind one of the two formats and I hope it will be SACD.
Sony and Philips would hate to lose the CD royalties they're getting now. I think if Sony ever gets serious about replacing the CD format with SACD they could easily do it. All they would have to do is drop the price of SACD's to the exact same as CD's and make sure they all include the CD layer...Then have their labels release EVERYTHING in this manner. Then magically, a year later you've got this huge installed base of SACD *capable* media. This would make it easier to casually sell people SACD playback gear, afterall they've already got the SACDs. Sure, sony might have to subsidize the effort for a while but thats very short term. If they sell enough software this way eventually people will start wanting SACD playback gear... And once they have the gear it'll be a lot easier for other labels to justify the extra cost of SACD releases and that means *royalties* for sony/philips... *poof* You've now continued the royalty stream they had for CD.
In the interim the dual layer discs they release could use one of the better copy protection schemes if they really wanted... I'd be less objectionable to them if they included the high quality SACD layer.
-Aaron

 

[ReggieW]

I agree with much of what I'm hearing here, but we must keep in mind that I know MANY people who consider DVD-A's ability to hold video content a plus not a handicap. Audiophiles might not like it, but the ordinary non-audiophiles I've spoken with who have DVD-A players like these advantages. I know many will disagree with me here, but I do not believe that DVD-A was ever engineered TO REPLACE REDBOOK CD's. As already pointed out here, it's to impractical, and only a given number of people will have multi-channel/HT set-ups in their home to utilize all of the advantages of DVD-A. I to have complained about the TV utilization scheme, but again, this is how the DVD-A interface was designed from the start, and I doubt if they'll be changing it anytime soon. DVD-A players do appear to be more plentiful than SACD players, and there are probably quite a few J6P's who already unknowingly have the format in one of their DVD-video players. It is my hope that both formats will continue to co-exist, but sadly, I have never had much faith in Sony to maintain interest in new formats (Beta, minidisc, etc.). This could be different, but we'll all have to wait and see.

Keith,

I would like to see a DVD-A player on the market that is more dedicated to audio than video (where is the DVD-A equivalent of the Sony SCD-1?). The Technics A-10 was close, but it appears that we've yet to get another DVD-A player which is more dedicated to audio. The Denon 9000 looks promising, but not many of us can afford it. I for one am anxiously awaiting the arrival of a DVD-A player with bass management that is more dedicated to playing DVD-A's than DVD videos.

Reg

 

[KeithH]

Reggie said:

The Denon 9000 looks promising, but not many of us can afford it.

Agreed. Of course, the Sony SCD-1 still sells for around $2800. My concern regarding high-end DVD-Audio players is whether incorporation of video circuitry will always lead to compromises in construction of the audio section.

 

[Justin Lane]

The only way I see either format grabbing a definite foothold is if:

1. In the case of SACD, the majority of new CD releases are dual layer giving people both versions at one shot.

2. The prices come down just a bit on both the software and hardware to be inline with conventional CD pricing.

3. There is acceptance in the mobile sound industry through both aftermarket and OEM makers (fat chance, new cars are still sold with cassette players)

Until this happens, both formats will be destined to be strictly a niche product.

J

 

[Mark Hobbs]

Most people don't move to new formats because of improvements in quality. They do so because of convenience and/or features.

People migrated to tapes because you could record and they are portable. Then to CDs because they improved portability while making it much easier to choose a track. The fact that CD quality is better than tape is just a bonus to most people.

VHS suffers from the same problems as tapes. The whole rewinding/fast forwarding is annoying. That and the extra features offered by DVD is what motivates people to buy a DVD player.

People want recordable CD and they want recordable DVD. I'm not sure the mainstream is demanding any more quality at this point, which makes me think DVD-A and SACD will always be niche markets.

When you consider that many people are now downloading MP3s and creating CDs instead of buying them (without ever even considering quality), paying $30 for an SACD vs. creating your own for the cost of a blank CD-R is not going to help increase the acceptance of SACD.

 

[Philip Hamm]

I'm beginning to think that neither SACD nor DVD-A will ever be more of a niche product for audiophiles.

I sure hope that's true! I'd hate to see DVD-A and SACD suffer the same fate as mass-market CD, mega-compressed EQed recordings that don't even begin to approach the fidelity the format has to offer.

I suer hope DVD-A and SACD never get much bigger than LaserDisc was for us video enthusiasts "back in the day".

 

[ReggieW]

I sure hope DVD-A and SACD never get much bigger than LaserDisc was for us video enthusiasts "back in the day".

...I concur Philip. Don't get me wrong, there are definite benefits to SACD/DVD-A going mainstream (lower prices, more titles released, etc, but I just feel that we already have a good thing going here for those who appreciate quality music. There are also many cons to going mainstream. Look at DVD-video: The appearance of many widescreen films in non-anamorphic full-frame, and the large studios propensity to ignore great films like Belle Du Jour (see the controversey in software section) for proper presentation, but instead reserve SE treatment (and quality tranfers) for big-budget mainstream films (and sometimes bombs like "Bubbleboy"). Like your example used with redbook CD, the studios begin to place less of an emphasis on quality when J6P jumps in the fray, sadly.
Reg

 

[TheLongshot]

I suer hope DVD-A and SACD never get much bigger than LaserDisc was for us video enthusiasts "back in the day".

The problem, Phil, is that if it doesn't, it will be almost worthless to me, since most of the artists I listen to will never be on it. I'll be stuck with the choices of Jazz, Classical, and the occasional mainstream title, all of these a very small part of my musical collection. Most of the artists I listen to barely have record deals, much less than the ability to make DVD-As or SACDs.

I do think it is long odds for either format to be a mainstream success, but I do think that "the record industry" may be key in it being a success, from the standpoint that they want a secure format for delivering music. Both of these formats provide for that.

I wouldn't mind getting into some of this stuff, since I have a POS CD carosel and I would like to replace it eventually. Problem is, there isn't a lot I want in these formats, and what I want is spread across both. ELP's Brain Salad Surgery is on DVD-A. Oldfield's Tubular Bells is on SACD. The new Rush is rumored to be comming to DVD-A. Journey and Billy Joel are on SACD. Probably others will be released on both formats. Makes it tough to buy without having a universal player for both. I'm still waiting for one...

Jason

 

[KeithH]

Jason and Philip, you both make excellent points. While there is potential for these high-resolution formats to be pillaged to some degree through mass marketing, I would like to think that the record labels will not raze them. There is a lot of good that would come from these formats gaining acceptance with the masses such as a plethora of software, so I certainly hope it happens. I am skeptical, but I can hope. Finally, these formats are already being screwed with in their infancy. In my opinion, the majority of the multi-channel mixes available are rather poor in that they are gimmicky. I have no reason to expect things to improve.

 

[tony randall]

The biggest disappointment with SACD is that Sony does not put out SACDs in hybrid format. Other companies do, but why wouldn't the company that has the vested interest in the success of SACD do it?

I'd be more willing to pay 20-25 bucks if the darn thing would play in my car or my portable. I'd like to think I'm not alone here.

On a separate note, I was perusing the DVD-A at best buy and they had some DTS 5.1 discs mixed in. Do these play in a CD or a DVD player, or both?

 

[KeithH]

Tony, the DTS CDs mixed in with the DVD-Audio discs at Best Buy can be played in CD players, but only via a digital output. This is because CD players, of course, only pass analog signals in stereo and do not possess DTS decoders. As you can probably surmise now, these discs can be played on DVD players with built-in DTS decoders via the 5.1-channel outputs and through a digital output to a pre/pro or receiver with a DTS decoder.

I have heard it said that the reason Sony has not moved forward with hybrid SACDs because the technology is rather new and there are not enough pressing machines available to meet Sony's manufacturing demands. If you think about it, Sony is going to press many more copies of an SACD title than is Telarc, Chesky, or any other smaller, "audiophile" record label. Also, I read awhile back that Sony had concerns about the reliability of the hybrid disc manufacturing process. As a result, Sony was not ready to produce hybrid discs at an early juncture given the relatively large volume of SACDs it had to produce. I imagine Sony was concerned that if the hybrid pressing process were not robust, Sony could fail on a large scale. Aside from financial losses that would be incurred from all the "coasters" produced, that's the kind of bad press Sony could not afford in launching a new format. I am not sure if any of this is absolutely true, but I can understand it.

 

[Thomas Newton]

DTS CDs can be played via analog outputs, if you enjoy destroying your speakers and/or your hearing!
Seriously, putting DTS surround sound onto a "Red Book Audio" CD is a rather large hack. You're using the parts of the disc that would normally store PCM stereo to store arbitrary digital data that does not look like any normal sound. This is so that you can recover the data from the digital output of the DTS-ignorant player.
You're also hoping that allowable Red Book error rates / error correction won't munge the arbitrary data beyond all recognition. Red Book audio CDs have less error detection and correction information than CD-ROMs, on the theory that error correction is not as important for audio. So a DTS decoder presumably must handle a bitstream that is not as reliable as the one a computer would see coming off a CD-ROM.
But I take it that the system works.

 

[Rachael B]

Tony, I don't know if DTS is putting all the same ttles an mixes out on their "DTS Music Discs" that used to be on their DTS CD's, but be warned that some of their remixes are sonically wacko. I have the DTS CD of Edgar Winter's JASMINE NIGHTDREAMS and thank goodness my pre will mix it down to stereo! Guitars behind you, silly sounding pans, it's like they let a drug-crazed 15 year old in the control room, me thinks!
I think DVD-A and SACD are a much better idea than DTS CD's or "music discs" because you can play the former two in multiple ways. Well, except Sony's SACD layer only discs. Sony should be flogged for their single layer SACD's! Best wishes!

 

[Philip Hamm]

Maybe the real reason that Sony is having problems with hibrid discs is that they're manufacturing them in their old LaserDisc plants.....

 

[Brian Shannon]

I was very close to buying a Sony CE775 SACD player at the clearance price. I too am forced to conclude this format along with DVD-Audio is simply not going to catch on.

 

[Kevin_W]

I too agree with Patrick on the MP3 issue. In a time where we can download freeware programs and then download some artist's album for free, we are training today's generation that 128bit is the norm... and even sometimes being touted as "near-cd" quality.
Its a shame that this is how it is. But unfortunately SACD/DVD-A is going to have a hard time in trying to convince the general public that its worth its sticker price and the hardware investment when MP3's are everywhere for free... and at "near-cd" quality. :frowning:
Kevin

 

[John Tillman]

Well, I have a business degree and I remember taking some marketing courses, but I can't figure out what they are trying to do. It is clear however, they are not going for mass appeal.

Does it mean failure? No, but it looks like they want a niche market for now, and they want to hose the younger market as retribution for stealing product via mp3.

 

[JaleelK]

I too agree with Patrick on the MP3 issue. In a time where we can download freeware programs and then download some artist's album for free, we are training today's generation that 128bit is the norm... and even sometimes being touted as "near-cd" quality.



Its a shame that this is how it is. But unfortunately SACD/DVD-A is going to have a hard time in trying to convince the general public that its worth its sticker price and the hardware investment when MP3's are everywhere for free... and at "near-cd" quality.

It is a shame because multichannel SACD and DVD-A is so superior to stereo, both formats are awesome in what they are able to achieve sonically.