Why make SACD hybrids CDs ?

Despite the $ value placed on a disc, the music is for listening to. I have been playing CDs and Hybrid SACDs in my car for years with no ill effect.

 

What if you want to listen to the same album in a car as well? And in a pocket CD player when going somewhere? Would it be cheaper to buy a single layer SACD and a red book CD? Or just hybrid SACD?

 

(emphasis mine)

And which chip would that be? How much did it cost? And how much did Sony want in licensing fees?

You clearly don't know anything about this, so why bother posting?

Philips/Sony actually played a master stroke in the SACD vs. DVD-A battle by offering SACD to existing CD licensees at the same royalty rate, i.e., it was free to existing licensees. All they had to do was buy the Scarlet Book specifications. New licensees needed to pay the buy-in, as would any new CD, DVD, Blu-Ray, etc. licensee!

 

There are NINETY new titles coming at Acoustic Sounds, over at MOFI I have 8 preorders, and can't keep up with the new release announcements.

 

1. Sony did not sell VHS to JVC. JVC developed VHS and JVC was owned by Matsushita/Panasonic (the other big electronics company besides Sony and Philips then) at the time and Sony didn't want a standard, nor wanted 4+ hours recording for sports. Panasonic and JVC did, as did most in the industry. Sony was obviously wrong in the market place.

2. SACD did not take off beyond a niche because: DVD-A/SACD format war, most people don't care about better than CD fidelity (see iPod), nor wanted to repurchase a collection that seemed OK to them. Doesn't mean that SACD doesn't have value to people who like sound quality.

3. CDs are a ubitquitous standard format like LPs or cassettes or DVDs. Meaning most people have them and they are compatible. SACD is not, it is a niche. A hybrid SACD will play on non-SACD players (Blu-Ray, DVD, CD players) well after the SACD format is long gone in support.

4. While an SACD cost more to make than a regular CD, it isn't much to press an SACD vs. a Hybrid SACD. Gold CDs also cost more than standard ones. i.e. Hybrid SACD and Gold CDs both cost more than regular CDs which aren't used for AF or Mofi. Hybrids seem like everyone wins.

 

Practical Example: How else would I get to listen to Steve Hoffman's (soon to be released) remastered "Close To The Edge" by Yes, since I don't have a SACD player?

 

It's easy if you try...

 

Just curious, which costs more to make (licensing etc included), SACDs or vinyl LPs?

 

Can play it on my home system as SACD. Or play it in my vehicle as regular CD

 

I think sometimes hybrids encourage listeners to cross over to SACD: I had several remastered hybrids (Dylan, Stones, etc.) before I had SACD capability, so it piqued my interest to get into the format.

 

Oh, definitely. I would've never gotten an SACD player - and subsequently purchased some non-hybrids - if I hadn't already amassed a good collection of hybrids. The hybrids almost certainly allowed people to create SACD collections the painless way and then push them to get players...

 

I only got an SACD player last year but I've been buying hybrid discs for years. Dylan, Stones, CCR, Sam Cooke, Animals, anything. I'm glad that I bought them when I could because all SACD pressings seem to go out of print after a short while. I enjoyed playing them on my CD player and now I enjoy listening to the high resolution layer. I'm glad now that I didn't settle for the cheaper redbook-only CDs.

 

I don't recall single layer SACD's ever actually costing less to the consumer than hybrids. About the only single layer SACD's you see now are from Japan, and those are super pricey. I wish they were all hybrid. I want a well mastered SACD layer for home listening and redbook layer to use as a source for my own compilations for the car.

 

Because they haven't yet come out with viny/SACD/CD hybrids.

 

I guess you were not buying in 2001-4 or so. The non-hybrids were ALWAYS cheaper - pick any label. Sony, Red Rose, verve, impulse! Maybe 4-6 dollars cheaper.

Probably so.

 

I was, but I don't recall that being the case. When I first started buying, the Sony single layer SACD's were priced as premium products while I thought the hybrids (like the Stones) were priced like regular CD's. But its been a decade, so I can't say for sure. What were the first hybrids?

And if that was the case, $4-6 extra for a well mastered redbook layer that I can rip to my computer for convenience or use as a source for comps would be well worth it imo.

 

I don't know, but I do know that for some reason I *thought* ALL SACDS were hybrids. I've been holding onto my copy of Peter Gabriel's "So" SACD for years unopened. Looks like I'll finally get to hear it in a few weeks (thanks Santa). I've been looking at that SACD for years while drooling and unable to listen.

 

I'm not sure I entirely agree. Sony single layers were usually something like $19.99, and early hybrids from the small independents were about $25. However, that situation changed with some of the hybrids released by the majors that were priced the same as CDs. Sometimes this was a function of the SACD carrying the CD identifying code (e.g., Aerosmith's Toys In The Attic which was mis-priced as $9.99 at Tower -- NB, this is also a reason why SACD sales were often reported as very low!) and sometimes it was down to pressing volume (Pink Floyd, Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, Elton John, etc.). Until places like Circuit City and Best Buy started to clear their SACD sections out, the price of the Sony single layers stayed at the $19.99 level.

 

Why didn't you just buy the European hybrid (SAPGCD 5 / 07243 5 83080 2 0)?

 

OK, then let's go back to what agentalbert said, which was what I was trying to explain was incorrect:

I don't recall single layer SACD's ever actually costing less to the consumer than hybrids.

 

Oh, you mean bad use of the apostrophe, it should be SACDs!?!

Yes, his statement is incorrect in the context of single-layers compared to hybrids from independents like AudioQuest, DMP, etc.

 

And if you remember the first batches, and I am sure you do, that's exactly what we had. Sony on the one hand, and AudioQuest, dmp, Telarc, GrooveNote on the other. My $4-6 was a pretty good estimate.

 

I probably never looked at the independents as they weren't releasing anything I was interested in. Did some of them release the same title in both single-layer and hybrid form? If that happened, yeah, I would expect the hyrbid to cost more. I just don't recall the price of SACDs seeming to increase when hybrids (like the Stones and Dylan and Elton) became the norm over what they cost when there was just the Sony single-layers to choose from.

 

Exactly...

 

Not that I can remember.

No, they were well priced - but came a bit later than the first and second waves.