Why haven't audiophiles enthusiastically endorsed the SACD?

[audio amateur]

Well, I asked a question, and got answers - and attitude. Strange thing about those of us who post threads on audio-based websites: everyone has his own opinion, and anyone who disagrees is just plain wrong. All too often one issue creeps in and is ignored, and that's the price of the equipment in question.

...

Well, it's been fun and I guess at this point it's best that I, and my adversaries, simply agree to disagree.

I think you're being a little harsh on everyone. Everyone, (including you) will defend his/her equipment naturally.
I don't think elapsed Ajani etc have tried to be negative, IMO they've pointed out very valid points.

When Elapsed claims the sound is better on his Naim CDP than his 400 buck SACDP, you'd think maybe (if SACD is such a better format) the sound quality would compare? obviously that is quite a huge price gap so perhaps not.
I don't believe anyone is saying that SACD is not technically better than CD (and perhaps even vinyl, if you exclude vinyl freaks).
Vinyl is an experience in itself, and most people are so drawn up in the process that they're willing to give up a little SQ (crackle & pop, S/N ratio etc) for the experience. And, after all, vinyl is ANALOGUE (not trying to do a pixie here ). No sampling here is there? So in this respect, you could argue it will always be superior to digital media.
If SACD was more common (more titles available) and a little cheaper, my guess is it would be more popular. Only it was born in a relatively bad time, and has never really evolved beyond classical releases.
Okay, I think that's all I have to say. Good day everyone

Oh, and don't get too wound up about this. After all, it's the music that counts