Why is SACD not really succeeding?

[w.e-coyote]

Does anybody have insights into why SACD is not really taking off? The price should not be the issue since CD and SACD prices are quite close. In terms of hardware availability there are quite a few players out there that can deal with SACD.

So why are only about a thousand new titles released per year?

 

[dvda-sacd]

Because the average consumer is not demanding high resolution but MP3, DivX, etc.

 

[Johnd]

And the average customer knows little about high res audio, let alone critical listening. They just want to jam w/ their mp3.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Does anybody have insights into why SACD is not really taking off? The price should not be the issue since CD and SACD prices are quite close. In terms of hardware availability there are quite a few players out there that can deal with SACD.

So why are only about a thousand new titles released per year?

Probably for the same reason CD sales have slowed since the advent of Napster. People just aren't interested in a library of large round plastic discs. Furthermore, many don't have the equipment to really take advantage of the format.

 

[markw]

Here's a currently running thread that echos the same questions.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23220

 

[westcott]

Another reason is that bass management can be a real pain using analog connections and usually fall short of the capabilities of a decent AV receiver.

If everyone could use a single digitial connection, I am sure that it would be far more widespread. But, as usual, the music industry has cut off their nose to spite their face.

 

[Sleestack]

I have one of the few pre/pros that allow bass maanagement of SACDS and DVD-A. Does make a huge difference. Personally, I am very happy with the expanding collection of classical and jazz SACDs.

 

[outsider]

as so many have said before, the average consumer isn't concerned about quality, they are concerned about convenience.
Personally, I haven't been too impressed with SACD. Sure, it's an improvement over standard CD, but it seems minimal at best.
Plus, I really find multi-channel music annoying once I get past the "wow" factor.

I've actually been considering piecing together a vinyl system.

 

[ironlung]

Same reason HD video will be just as populuar. The majority don't give a hoot about quality!

 

[shokhead]

Poor BM in players for sure but sacd and dvd-a isnt for joe blow,its for us as a small section. Also 2 formats and sacd crap selection unless you like classical and jazz. I dont and thats why even though i have a sony,i only have 2 sacd but 10 dvd-a for the dts.

 

[ejreiss]

Do you think it will be extinct in the near future. I have been putting together a new system and would like to incorporate a sacd player. It would be a shame if it was another laser disc fad.

 

[shokhead]

I think its still here for now.

 

[dvda-sacd]

Do you think it will be extinct in the near future.

No, I don't.

Since Blu-ray Disc supports 5.1-channel PCM up to 192kHz sampling rate and 24-bit resolution, DVD-Audio is becoming an obsolete format. However, Super Audio CD is a pure audio format and the only one that utilizes Direct Stream Digital.

Cheers!

 

[FierceTIMbo17]

Same reason HD video will be just as populuar. The majority don't give a hoot about quality!

Very incorrect hd dvd/video is get bigger and bigger by the day, soon it will be huge in not too long a very common thing reason for this anywhere you go nowadays you can somewhat experice hidef tv walmart bestbuy even sams...however there are few places for the average consumer to truly hear the difference sacd makes and most of the places the average consumer will never step foot inside.

 

[WmAx]

SACD's only compelling feature is the multi-channel ability. In every other way, it is a step back from CD.

1) No feasible way to archive it to a PC for versatile use.

2) No feasible way to rip the digital data and convert to a format for use on portable players.

3) No universal digital output feed to use on your choice of DACs or other digital input selection devices.

4) DSD is not proven to have any real-world advantages over PCM. DSD only entails more expensive and additional purchases for engineers to buy specialized mixing desks. In reality, most convert DSD to PCM and back to DSD after editing, defeating any supposed advantage the DSD was supposed to have in the first place. Quantifiably, DSD has lower resolution than PCM(even less than CDs), once you get into the treble band.

5) SACD and DVD-A do seem to have one advantage that is real besides multi-channel: They are not so often compromised on purpose as CD releases. You can find examples of SACDs and DVD-As that are superior mixes/masters as compared to the CD versions, as the CD versions are almost always mixed to sound the loudest, not to sound the best. Note: the CD layer on a SACD is usually the same master as the regular CD, where as the SACD layer is usually a different mastered version.

-Chris

 

[w.e-coyote]

Is title (number of ...) availability an issue as well?

 

[FierceTIMbo17]

Is title (number of ...) availability an issue as well?

i dont believe so there are almost 4000 sacds

 

[dvda-sacd]

4) DSD is not proven to have any real-world advantages over PCM. DSD only entails more expensive and additional purchases for engineers to buy specialized mixing desks. In reality, most convert DSD to PCM and back to DSD after editing, defeating any supposed advantage the DSD was supposed to have in the first place. Quantifiably, DSD has lower resolution than PCM(even less than CDs), once you get into the treble band.

Pyramix converts DSD into 32 bit / 352.8 kHz PCM, what preserves the original quality of 1 bit 2.8MHz DSD signals.

"The damn closest thing to Analog since Digital was invented..."

http://www.merging.com/2002/html/pyradsd.htm

You can see how the Esoteric X-01 gets a DSD noise floor lower than 44.1 kHz PCM, even above 10 kHz frequencies, because of ultrasonic filtering.

http://stereophile.com/thefifthelement/205fifth/index3.html

Besides, I don't agree less noise means higher fidelity.

 

[dvda-sacd]

DSD versus PCM

Direct Stream Digital (DSD) increases the resolution of music by more closely following the original waveform of the music. If you look at these pictures, you can notice 192 kHz PCM does not approach the analog signal but the 1-bit pulse train of DSD.

Analog 10 kHz square wave -> http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_051.jpg

10 kHz square wave sampled using DSD -> http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_055.jpg

10 kHz square wave sampled using 192 kHz PCM -> http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_054.jpg

10 kHz square wave sampled using 44.1 kHz PCM -> http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_052.jpg

DSD to 192 kHz PCM comparison -> http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/surround2002/images/show_images/image_056.jpg

 

[ironlung]

Very incorrect hd dvd/video is get bigger and bigger by the day, soon it will be huge in not too long a very common thing reason for this anywhere you go nowadays you can somewhat experice hidef tv walmart bestbuy even sams...however there are few places for the average consumer to truly hear the difference sacd makes and most of the places the average consumer will never step foot inside.

I hope so BUT....There was a day in the not to distant past that the public owned more HDTVs than MP3 players.

Draw your own conclusion. Do people want easy, handy sound and video that's "good enough" or do they study the details in their viewing/listening room?

I am drawing my conclusion from what the average walmart shoppers track record has been so far.

I would love it if I'm wrong.