Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Not only do the player prices need to be lower, the software must also be competitive in price with CDs. Most people will accept the higher quality, but they don't really want to pay for it.
Last week we asked about the relatively low-resolution MP3 format. Now let's get your opinion on ultra-hi-rez: the Super Audio CD.
SACD will only gain acceptance as people hear music they like played back in the format, something that is much more likely to happen with more available software. Hearing a demo disc is noteworthy, but not compelling to the point of purchasing. If you had a choice labelled More Titles AND Cheaper Titles, that's what I would have picked. They need to retail for $19.95.
In addition to lower prices and greater software availability, SACD needs to add multichannel capability. The delay in marketing DVD-A due to the hacking of CSS gives Sony and Philips a window of opportunity. According to reports I've read, the release of DVD-A will be delayed six to nine months. If Sony and Philips move quickly to incorporate multichannel as well as introducing a low-cost, under-$1000 player, then I believe that SACD will become the dominant high-resolution format.
The new format will have to totally the existing CD format. I don't think music stores will be willing to carry both formats, much less three (DVD-A). Even if the newer players are backward compatible, the general public won't be buying the new machines, so stores will have to carry all formats. This just doesn't seem like a plausible scenario to me.
Lower cost all across the board i.e. electronics+software. You might think that MP3 or something similar didn't exist when CD was launched so there's a different competition turf. That's why the number of players if cost is lower won't be high enough for it to catch on. Sales figures of DVD tell you Home theater is here to stay and is an easy sale on a family budget to get a DVD than a dedicated audio like SACD.
Most people think CDs sound great; the promise of better sound won't be enough to generate mass consumer sales. Multichannel may be enough of a hook. In any event, continued format wars could kill the whole thingwe need cheaper universal players.
There cannot be mass acceptance without mass market players that the masses will buy. That is, ones priced like consumer machines but which differentiate themselves sonically sufficiently from the current CD format as to be an improvement over the current CD formats which is clearly and immediately discernable by mass market consumers. Without a significant mass market acceptance, the SACD will remain an audiophile only medium, and will eventually fail due to the economics of manufacturing a product which is higher in cost than the current, competing product, and which is produced for a very narrow market. Unfortunately the success of SACD depends less on the high-end audiophile than the mass narket consumer music buyer.
When I hear something of higher quality than my current discs, then I will switch, IF many titles and players are available at reasonable cost (comparable to current technology). Multi-channel sound would be a key feature; the 74-minute playback time would not need to be increased, but I wouldn't be averse to smaller (3") discs if the players remained backward-compatible.
We need universal players that can play all formats. Since we are going to get them, I think SACD can survive. As to whether it'll do well, it probably has as much chance as DVD-audio since the masses don't seem to care about sound quality.
I think it will take a combination of lower prices (players and software), and a wide assortment of software. I think the best bet for success will be universal playersthat is, units that will play SACD, DVD-A, DVD-V, and, of course, CDs. Unfortunately, I don't think it will ever be the predominant source. But one can hope.
As DVD-Audio goes back to the drawing board to develop security against pirating, they are wasting time getting the product out to the public. Only an extreme small amount of people will fill their whole hard drive to copy 1 movie over a day. SACD should jump at this opportunity
It's true, the "masses" don't care about audio quality. But Sony can probably make them buy it anyway! They have a huge back-catalogue to draw on, lots of "hot" new artists, and an enormous marketing budget. Before long, Sony's DVD players will likely all support SACD, and when manufacturing costs come down, they can phase out CDs in favour of hybrid SACDs. Whether the average consumer cares or not, they will be buying SACD hardware and software. And I expect the surround-sound aspects will become a draw for many. Last of all, Sony has a lot at stake financially, because their royalty agreements on the CD format run out shortly (or so I've read), and they want the royalties from SACD to replace that lost revenue stream. As far as I can see, =that= is the real reason for them pushing a separate format.
The prerequisite for the SACD to win popularity would have to be a wider selection of titles. This, combined with lower player prices, should do the trick. Since the SACD format is compatible with the CD format, there should be no reason why the popularity of the SACD shouldn't win ground. Eventually, more and more titles published in SACD format should raise the awareness of the masses, leading to a greater number of SACD players being bought, leading to an increasing number of titles released in SACD format, leading to . . .