Implications of the 'Format War' Re SACD Availability?

OK, We're only too painfully aware of the lack of availability of a huge portion of recorded music on SACD due to the backing of a competing format DVD-A by a substantial segment of the music industry, most noteably WEA whose tremendous catalogue contains many, many things we would love see put out on SACD.

I don't hold out too much hope for 'Universal Players' mainly because of the inclusion of Video circuitry which, IMHO compromises ultimate audio reproduction when included in the piece, let alone ergonomic considerations. Have you noticed the lack of dedicated " AUDIO ONLY" DVD-A players? I do believe the DVD-A camp have a totally different agenda as to the target market for their product. I think that they are aiming at a substantially wider demographic than the SACD camp and let's face it, they're probably going to get it by following that tact.

So, where does it leave the segment of serious music lover's like many of us who are committed to and believe that DSD and SACD are the way to go?
How are we going to be able to access the many many titlesthat we really desire but unfortunately are owned by lables the are part of the DVD-A camp?

The only near term soultion that I can see is the licensing of these titles by companies like Steve Hoffman's and other small dedicated 'Audiophile Lables' to produce these in the SACD format. This begs the following question:

How much political opposition is posed by the DVD-A backing labels to the dedicated 'Audiophile' companies wanting to put out the relatively small production runs (comparatively) of their properties on the competing SACD format?

 

It all comes down to what the consumers want to buy. After all, in the Hong Kong market, even WEA is issuing SACDs along with Sony, BMG and Universal ! (See the Yesasia.Com SACD section at http://us.yesasia.com/en/brPrdDept.aspx?did=3255&section=music&code=c& for a look).

 

So, you're implying that those of us who think that high-resolution PCM is the way to go are not serious music lovers?

Yes, DVD-A has the interface annoyances that is turning off "audiophiles" from the format in favor of SACD, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater! It's all a matter of preference, and I'll take high-resolution PCM over DSD any day, even if it means I have to stand on my head to get the discs to play. What really matters is the music, and for me, hi-res PCM provides an exquisitely clear window unto the music.

At the same time, I love DSD, for what it is. It provides for an exceptional (albeit colored) musical presentation. I am happy with both formats. I just hate having to come to DVD-A's rescue every time someone feels the need to attack it. There is so much flawed perception out there and people are willing to swallow it rather than take the time to sit down and listen to both formats themselves and reach their own conclusions. I hope that people reading this will not rely upon perceived "popular opinion", my opinion, or anyone elses opinion. You really need to give both formats a chance, firsthand. At least, that is what I would think any "serious music lover" would do.

I think "serious music lovers" will accept both formats and find a way to play them both. If space and money are tight, buy a universal player. If you've some leeway here and feel a universal player can't do both formats justice, then buy a dedicated player for each.

You will probably not see a DVD-A audio only player. It kind of defeats the format. However, there are players out there that you can switch to "audio only" mode. The video circuitry is isolated within the unit and can be electronically decoupled at the press of a button.

Keep an open mind, for crying out loud, and enjoy the friggin' music no matter what platter it is served up from!

 

Re: Re: Implications of the 'Format War' Re SACD Availability?

Woa! Woa! Cool down there Vex, I fully agree with what you say. Hey man, you could have saved yourself 'rant composition time' had you taken the time to read what I posted:

The highlighted words above are meant to convey my intentions. Sorry if you mistook what I said. Of course there are just as many if not more 'serious music lovers' who have chosen DVD as their preferred medium. Hell, if you like Edison Cylinders who am I to argue? You made YOUR choice, shouldn't we be allowed to have ours and state our choice without people taking offence?

The object and concern of my post is to highlight the frustration of having two competing systems and also the frustration of those of us who have chosen SACD, for whatever reason, being denied the huge catalogue of especially conglomerates like WEA.

These companies WANT to create a division in the Audiophile/Consumer community. Through some warped thinking they feel by doing so, it will help further each of their causes.

 

The folks over at AA all have their bowels in an uproar because it appears as if Sony has discontinued ALL of its audio-only players. That's right... even the sacred cow XA777 is now limited to what's in the Sony warehouses and in stock at dealer show rooms, or so they are saying. Henceforth, it is speculated, all of Sony's models will be combo CD/SACD/DVD (video only, of course) models priced for the mass market (where Sony belongs?), and, thus, leaving the audiophile (and pseudo-audiophile) markets to other interested manufacturing parties.

Is this a good thing? Probably yes if you are one who believes the likes of Linn, ARC or c-j should join ranks with Classé and Accuphase to build over-priced but marginally superior products to the SCD-1, SA-1 and SA-14 precedents. Probably no if you are one that likes his/her music in multiple channels (that is, of course, unless these kinds of companies buck their own marketing data that suggests the majority of serious listeners still prefer two channels - and by that, I mean the kind that won't bat an eyelid at dropping $10K or more on the model they want). But it won't happen overnight if it happens at all. While the number of SACD software vendors continues to grow, it's probably going to take a little more than the Rolling Stones catalog to pique the interest of any such potential builders - perhaps the announcement that RCA would be rolling out 10 of the very best Shaded Dogs in the SACD format would be considered good news.

As for colorations in SACD software, that's a new one on me. Compared to the few DVD-A titles I've had a chance to hear, they appear to sound even more neutral.

 

If true, I'm glad I got my player now.

 

Who's speculating all models will be CD/SACD/DVD? Are you sure we aren't discussing the discontinuation of STEREO ONLY models? Most new models seem to be STEREO/MULTICHANNEL but not necessarily video.

 

No matter how "serious" you are about your audio, you MUST be aware that there is a generation weened on video music, video games and video tapes that make no distinction between visual and audio home entertainment.

And yes - there IS high end video - progressive scan DVD players with high rez 16 X9 monitors, sattelite high rez broadcasts - there is even a new high rez video tape format that apparently makes DVD's look like a blur.

My point is (and it is with some sadness that I state this), I think the future of the HIGH END (it bears repeating for emphasis - the HIGH END), is in combined audio/video home entertainment systems. I REALLY beleive that when our kids grow up and become doctors, lawyers, janitors and theives, our audio only systems will look like '78 RPM Victrola's with the speaker on the tonearm to them. After all - no matter what the future holds, I still envision that many will live in apartments, where the ability to have separate audio and video rooms would be extremly difficult. Maybe we should all begin to think of the NECESSITY of some sort of "monitor" on our audio systems....

 

Don't be sad - my system is a combined audio/video system - if it is done right it doesn't need to make any compromises and at the end of the day that may be the definition of the High End.

Flexibility, quality and enjoyment can co-exist

All the best - Andrew

 

No, tangent, the 775, 222, 555, XA777 (all MC machines) as well as the SCD-1 have all been discontinued (so they say).

Uncle Al, you paint a gloomy picture for the future of hi-end audio. I certainly hope you aren't correct. (We don't need no stinkin' 5 speakers in my listnin' room.)

 

The above point could be a whole different thread. I remember a discussion I had with one of the primary VJ's in our area when Video Music became so popular. Even though she made her living and reputation based on Vid-Music she agreed with my point of view at the time and , one I still hold that, Video in many cases detracted from the music. Musicians were forced to become Actors and mug for a camera in a discipline that they were neither trained for nor necessarily adept at. Nobody wanted a "boring depiction of a band standing there just doing there thing. The most insideous by product of this was the "robbery of the imagination" similar to when you see a movie after reading a book. When you read a book you tend to develop the characters in your own imagination from the description the author provides. These characters in many cases are pictured in your mind based on your own past experience and people you have known. The same with music. I want to form my own 'picture' of what's being played. I have always done so and don't want to change now.

I prefer (this is my own preference and in no way meant to cast dispersion on other peoples choices) to keep my music audio and video somewhat seperate although in the same room and sharing parts of the same system. The DVD player is used for MOVIES ONLY, although it's audio feed is into the preamp and, when watching DVD movies use my 'audio speakers' for the movie sound. When watching cable I use the TV's speakers. It's my opinion that combining both audio and video circiutry on the same chassis can only detract fom the audio. If a component doesn't have to deal with a way to isolate audio and video it is that much ahead. It can be done rather successfully but at what cost? There has to be one.

No argument with your last points although to sum up all I can say is what you are talking about may well come to be in the future but quite contrary to what someone has said, at least in my opinion:
The future is NOT now.

 

Can't argue with that

In my system I have in the A/V part a seperate DVD transport, Surround decoder/preamp and 5 channel amp with speakers.

The Audio only system has cd and vinyl source, pre-amp and power amp and front speakers.

The audio pre-amp also has a unitary input so when that is selected in just passes a signal through and the A/V pre controls all volumes. So when I listen to Audio I am only using the Audio system - all the DVD paraphanalia can be switched off and to watch a film I just change the input on the pre and switch on the video extras. I couldn't think of a more purist way of doing it.

All the best - Andrew

 

I’m waiting for a universal player that will play both SACD/DVD-A in DSD/PCM. I’m sure by the time the 3rd generation machines are on the shelves affordable machines will be out there and there will be enough software out there to justify the expense.
I think the biggest hurdle will be the “consolidated” record companies and their catalogues and the perceived profit potential for the new formats will be the determining factor for how many titles are available on any format. I think this fall will be the test of consumer acceptance with Stones and other notable catalogue offerings and some new SACD/DVD-A players on the market.

 

khorn,

I've just re-read the last part of your initial posting in this thread, and would suggest the following regarding licensing from companies that haven't and possibly won't begin releasing titles in SACD (WEA for the most part).

I think it will be very difficult for any company - let's use Analog Productions as a hypothetical example - that wants to license some title for release in the SACD format simply because they could not afford the required fees. If you hadn't noticed, the old MoFi was beginning to show evidence of this factor by the quality of the titles they had chosen for their last few months of production.

Although the record companies may have some axe to grind with paying the royalty to Sony for the SACD format, they're still bottom-line oriented, and will jump at the chance to make some clear, guaranteed profit. They won't let politics get in the way of such an opportunity. But the reason we haven't yet seen CSNY or Fleetwood Mac or (name your own WEA-owned property) in the SACD format from the likes of Analog Productions is simply that they cannot affort it. I have heard it said by certain folks who do license recordings from the majors that they have to be very careful about the titles they choose, as there is GENERALLY a 10,000 copy minimum for each song that's chosen. That doesn't sound like a whole lot of copies, but I would suggest to you that there probably has not been a single SACD to sell in these kinds of numbers so far.

Perhaps the forthcoming Rolling Stones SACDs will do so on their very first day, but then it's most likely that only a small fraction of these will be used in SACD players. But they aren't being licensed by a small concern either: they're abkco titles being distributed by Universal. I'll bet you'll even see these in Wal-Mart.

I've owned two SACD players for over a year now, but have become very selective about the software titles I've bought. To date, I have only 60 titles, and will be buying only two of the Universal titles that will be released later this month, and perhaps three of the seven APO titles (I won't be buying the Stones or CCR titles when they are released). That's it. Over the past month I have bought only one - the Antill Coroborree. Just be patient and thankful that things are happening as they are.

To Alan T: I wouldn't be holding my breath for the introduction of too many universal players this coming fall. Clearly Sony will not be offering any of these, so that leaves Pioneer, Panasonic and Sharp with maybe one model each.

 

If any of these formats are going to survive there will have to be universal player that can play almost any disc. I would be happy with a Pioneer/Panasonic SACD/DVD-A in the $350 range and I will not mess with high-rez until such machine materializes. I really doubt any of the majors are going lease any high-rez material under their control especially the money making “classic” back catalogue were the artists have some say of how it is issued and how royalties are paid. As you pointed out, a small company would have hard time making the minimums and high-rez issues such as higher list price and multichannel mixes would only complicate that.

 

Actually that's not true. One of the Jacintha SACD titles has sold 20,000 copies and the Royal Wedding Music on PentaTone Classics has sold 100,000 copies.

So at least some of the SACD titles out there are moving !

 

I agree. I have been saying for a while now that as much as I love to see things like The Rollingstones' catalog and Creedence and Miles Davis' Kind of Blue and what not released on SACD, that is all old music that has already been released in numerous formats a lot of which I already own several copies of and may or may not be willing to hand over more of my cash to purchase again. What I want to see in the SACD format are more new/current releases like the new Indigo Girls album and the forthcoming Oasis release which is already out on CD and to be released on SACD on the 16th of July; or perhaps the latest Cowboy Junkies ablum Open released in 2001 and released on SACD by Rounder/Zoe in 2002. I have to admit that although I have chosen the SACD format over the DVD-A format (I cannot agree with Vex when he talks about SACD being more coloured, I have found the opposite to be true, although in some cases the difference may be extremely slight but hard to compare ultimately as there aren't any releases I know of that are in both formats) there are releases in that format that I wish I could see appear on SACD like Natalie Merchant's Tigerlilly and Bjork's latest release Vespertine. Now those are the sorts of things I want to see on SACD.

As for Sony, I don't think they should drop all of their audio only SACD players. I think it would be a sad day for 'audiophiles' everywhere. IMHO, Sony makes the greatest units out there and neither Linn nor Accuphase ar any of the others out there can touch them IMO. Those units are mainly reworkings of Sony's architectures anyway and may yield some minor differences. AS far as the whole multichannel debate, I think those companies would be very unwise to turn their backs on it. This is the way music is moving and no amount of whining or pretense will stop it anymore than Stereo was halted by those in the Monaural camp. I personally thought that I would be more interested in the 2 channel side of things so when I purchased my player, I invested in an inexpensive 5.1 system because I figured I might as well use the capability if I'm going to be paying for it, but when I heard some of the things that can be done in multichannel mixes and came across a multichannel mix I actually prefered to the stereo one (Peter Tosh's Legalize It) I regretted having a lower quality 5.1 set up. Don't get me wrong, my set up which consists of 5 Cambridge Soundworks satellites w/ passive sub-woofer and a Sony STR-DE475 5.1 receiver/amplifier sound really good for something that only cost about US$450 altogether, but it's not the best, obviously, and is inferior to my Stereo setup. But still, I like it. The sound of the Cambridge Soundworks is very tolerable, if a bit boosted and slightly harsh in the high-end, and I am now converted to the possibilities of 5.1 (the Gaudeamus Sacred Feast SACD is another multichannel mix that I love) and would definetely consider upgrading my existing gear to be more on par with my stereo gear.

 

I have been waiting far far too long for an upgraded version of some of the Stones titles 'specially Beggars Banquet. The CCR stuff has gone through numerous upgrades even those by Steve so the difference probably won't be as great as what we expect from the Stones' titles. Still, Cosmo's Factory on SACD........

 

Indeed. It's well known that the ABKCO stuff is generally pretty bad, and despite all the praise given to them, the London CDs are pretty spotty too - some good, some so-so. I mean, not only do some of the London CDs not sound great in general, but they have fade-ups as well. Heck, the London CD of "Got Live" is faded out between songs!

Now, *some* of the London CDs are good/great, but then again, a few of the ABKCO discs are as well. And, as a whole, both sets suck...

 

I almost like the optical track on JLG's work better!

 

What's all this talk about Sony stopping the release of dedicated SACD players??

Over here in Europe they are still releasing new replacement models, they have already release the 680QS and will release the 780QS as well. Both are dedicated machines.

For the people interested in a nice "universal" player, check out the new Marantz 8300. I've read some very positive things about this player.

 

I think we will have to wait and see how this plays out in the US market. But Sony and Philips were very clear early on that their high end SACD players were meant to be "statement players" to get the format started.

As other audiophile market audio firms plan and deliver high end SACD players, it wouldn't surprise me if Sony and Philips focus on $1000 and under mass market products and leave the SACD high end market to others. Then they wouldn't be competing with the SACD licensees.

But Philips does retain a ownership position in D&H Holdings which owns Marantz along with Denon. So they will participate in that way in the higher end SACD players such as the Marantz SA-12S1 and SA-14.

In the meantime, there are some deals out there on Sony and Philips SACD players (Philips SACD-1000 for $795 vs. $2,000, etc.). So now's a good time to take advantage of that and check out the players !