SACD vs DVD-A (Business/Marketing reason)

[JSE]

JSE! You just wait until I git a hold of you........I'm gonna.....I'm gonna...oooo I'm gonna tell you that you were half right. SACD is not quite dead, and I do not think it will die. I think it will be the audio side of BluRay. DVD-A is dead IMO, and I never thought it would survive. As you know I was never a supporter of DVD-A because to these ears it still sounds like digital audio. I was hoping the SACD would take off, but it didn't happen. I thought Sony would agressively push this format, and they did not.

So JSE, you can stand on the edge of the barn and crow, but you only get half as long to crow. LOL

I can live with that. Do you think Blue Ray will have the same acceptance problems as SACD and DVD-A?

JSE

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I can live with that. Do you think Blue Ray will have the same acceptance problems as SACD and DVD-A?

JSE

If they release these formats with the same piracy fears they had for SACD and DVD-A it WILL fail. If they release these formats with a requirement that that player be connected to a phone jack, it WILL fail. I one side of my hopes both fail, so they will stop all of these protective steps that make the formats inconvient to use.

[JSE]

If they release these formats with the same piracy fears they had for SACD and DVD-A it WILL fail. If they release these formats with a requirement that that player be connected to a phone jack, it WILL fail. I one side of my hopes both fail, so they will stop all of these protective steps that make the formats inconvient to use.

If Sony stays true to their track record, Blue Ray is history!

How many truly successful formats has Sony ever had? Mini Disc, Beta, SACD and their theater surround system never really caught on. Although I think Beta might make a late surge? I don't really have a lot of knowledge in this area but it seems like they are always the loser in format wars. I could be totally wrong though.

JSE

[sam9]

Wow, this is a heavy statement. I can easily tell a DVD-A 5.1 track from a DD 5.1, especially sense I know exactly what to listen for. Dolby Digital is not a music codec, and that is apparent before DVD-A. Dolby Digital sounds hard, has a digital glaze that is very audible, lacks air and openess, and doesn't handle the timbre of acoustical musical instruments very well. IMO there is far less difference between Dts and DVD-A, than DD.

The biggest potential deficite of DD5.1 is the way the center channel is treated. Call it automatic gain riding foe lack of a better term. Very few music production use the center channel. I'm not sure why, but they don't. Maybe they figure a lot of us use a phontom center anyway, maybe they don't feel, confident on how it should be used. If the center channel were present, DD5.1's treatment of would probably be identifiable. As for "digital glaze" etc - I'm not very good with all those audiophile adjective because I find it so hard for people to use them consistently. Anyway, I do not hear them and if that means I've got a tin ear so be it.

Actually, I've been trying to hear "digital glaze" ever since I bought my first CD player and so far all I've found is recordings made in the vinyl era that in the early days of digital were poorly transfered to CD. In fact the best thing about SACD and DVD-A is it has provided motivation to go back and do a good remastering.

[Wireworm5]

I've always admired Sony for their leadship role in inovation and invention. The Trinitron tv if I remember correctly, they did not jump on the conventional tv bandwagon, but instead took their time and developed a better tv. Then Beta, cd, sacd and now Blu-ray. Unfortunately with their desire to capture the market with their superior product and not share their technology these expensive formats were out manoveured by inferior product marketing
In the past you paid extra for the Sony name, and in the case of my car stereo not necassary a better sound, you knew at least you had a reliable product. Not anymore its seems to me their quality control has slipped. I fear sacd, Blu-ray will fail for the same reasons as beta, only this time with the added lack of reliability of Sony products, which once was a proud name.

[Dolby]

JSE - you can play SACDs in your car, rip to MP3 and play on any CD player, because most SACDs have the CD layer which enables all of this. Also, as you mentioned, there is no monitor required for SACD, which makes is very convenient! As point out, it's got a multi-channel and stereo track - which is perfect for 2 channel audiophiles. In summary : it's convenient, plays everywhere, and has all the mixes to make everyone happy. Theoretically, it's better. Hence why I think SACD should have 'won' the format war easily - had everything been done correctly on Sonys part,

As Sam9 pointed out, the DD5.1 track does sound the same as the DVD-A track. The reason? Speaking for myself, I have an AV system with mediocre equipment. I'm sure on this level of equipment it is difficult to tell the diference, but as one movies up in the hi-fi world, the differences will be obvious. Again, had I know the sounded so identical, I would have kept my standard DVD player and not bought into DVD-A.

[JSE]

JSE - you can play SACDs in your car, rip to MP3 and play on any CD player, because most SACDs have the CD layer which enables all of this.

So..... why not just buy the CD or MP3 to begin with? You and I and other "audio enthusiasts" can see the benefit but like I mentioned earlier, the general masses don't want an SACD that can only be played on a SACD player even if they can rip it to MP3 where it becomes just another MP3 quality music file. Why spend more to get the same thing? Again, I'm saying this from a general consumer's point of view. Most people don't care about Hi Rez because they are completely happy with their CD and MP3 music. That's were SACD and DVD-A fail. If it ain't easy, consumers will not embrace it. One day the industry will realize that it really is not about the ultimate in sound but rather the ultimate is convenience and value, for most.

Now, if there was one universal format that included Hi Rez,standard redbook and maybe even video plus you did not need a special player all at the same price as a CD, then maybe it would be widely accepted. But, we all know Sony and other makers are to gready to let that happen.

JSE