Vote

They are both going to survive in the short term. After that, I wonder if the Vivendi/Universal deal could tip the balance in favor of SACD, if they make their catalog available in that format. In any case, I can see a situation with audiophiles and professionals adopting SACD and the public using DVD-A. Déjà vu!

Silly question. Without hearing them, who can judge? Is there really life on Mars?

Most people bought CDs because they didn't have to rewind them.

SACD is two-channel and targeted for audio gurus. DVD-A may require the use of a video monitor and is luring folks in with multichannel audio. As much as I think DVD will do well as a format, I don't see DVD-Audio expanding beyond infancy. SACD, on the other hand, will appeal to everybody who is fed up with CDs without adding a video monkey to the wrench.

There is a larger market for DVD-A, as the sales of DVD players with DVD-A capability is up. Also, the DVD-V format is already widely accepted, therefore people should be more accepting of DVD-A.

They will both survive. Sony has gotten a foothold in the "high-performance CD" area with SACD due to the absence of DVD-Audio software. However, because of the high cost of the machines and the high cost of the discs, SACD and DVD-Audio will be a niche (audiophile) market. John and Jane Q. Public will NOT spend over $1000 for an SACD or DVD-Audio (or "universal") player and $25 or more per disc. Indeed, the public is balking at paying $17.99 and $18.99 for "standard" CDs.

They both have to disappear. People will not opt for a $2000 digital audio player simply because it sounds better to those of us with supersonic hearing. What people need are more advantages in a new system, such as: increased music time on the disc, portability, affordability, and compatibility. Neither format has any of these, and by the time that they do, we'll have newer, better formats.

Multichannel SACD and Multichannel SACD is my only interest. I hope both succeed, however I have no interest in 2 channel music anymore. I invested in 5 symmetrical channels and have been forever converted to multichannel. We really haven;t had any multichannel recordings made for DVD-A or SACD yet, so save your judgements on multichannel until a PROPER multichannel recording is made from the ground up and played back on 5 symmetrical channels in a good room.

They have no chance of becoming a mass medium unless they are backward compatible and unless the price comes way down.

DVD-Audio has to win because people are going to buy DVD players anyway.

Aren't there better things to talk about these days then SACD and DVD in the audio world? This is getting a bit boring.

The audiophile market cannot support a format on its own. If a poor-fidelity medium such as MP3 can be so popular, I don't see what chance SACD has. SACD's only hope is DVD/SACD/CD combo players.

The masses will want the one player that does video and audio. Also computers will play DVD audio pretty quick. SACD (which is what I prefer) will only make it if they make dual SACD / DVD players, IMHO.

I believe we will see both formats supported on the same player. We all love our DVD movies and would like to be able to play both audio and video discs on the same player. DVD-A may have an install base of DVD players going for it, but I've heard SACD, and can tell you there is a spot I'm saving in my system just for an SACD player. Once you hear one, you will not be happy with anything less.

I have a feeling that they won't last if both formats are not going to release mainstream music. SACD is nice but I don't like the music thats out and DVD-Audio's 5.1 channel is just dumb to start with. I don't want people singing around me because since when am I alowed on stage?

I think DVD-Audio wins. They already have established the name, people know what DVD is, so they can relate to the format. They will have to have a good catalog or it won't survive. They have to cater to the majority of people, not just audiophiles.

Old CD needed an upgrade, You have to hear SACD with Active Speakers to believe it. The best so far..

My brain says DVD-A wins, but my heart hopes they will both go the way of the 8-track tape! Short-term, the former; long-term, the latter. Here's why: two major factors are at work here. The first is the Law of Mediocrity: the format with the worst overall quality will win. Remember Beta vs. VHS? Or LP vs. cassette ? Or LP vs. CD, for that matter? The second is that ultimately they WILL both disappear, as a result of being "improved" upon by yet ANOTHER new format. You see, dear audiophiles, the recording industry has adopted the marketing strategy of a rug trader: to stay in business, they need to sell you the same piece of crap over and over and over.

Since DSD is also a mastering format, it doesn't only depend on the audiouphile market. The new Telarc DSD-mastered Mahler 1 sounded unbelievable, just on HMV's house system. And anyway, audiophiles supported gold cd's and 180gm vinyl, so a premium format that is also downwards compatible shouldn't be a problem. DVD-Audio doesn't seem to offer too much to the average consumer, who will be playing them on a $500 surround sound HT setup. But it doesn't cost very much to include the higher sampling rate portion in mass market players, so I imagine that DVD-A will muddle along. Part of the the issue may depend on the availability of affordable players.

Everyone knows DVD—it's not new—and people are always resistant to a new format.

The new formats won't matter because people are evolving in the opposite direction. In a few years, when Santana releases another compressed "Carlos & Friends" recording, people will start shedding their ears like old antlers. Modern audiences will prefer to watch (TV) and feel (bass) music rather than listen to it. It is already happening. Just think about how many cheesy home-theater and PC sound systems are sold each year. Most people just leave the skinny black speaker wires hanging in front of their white Sheetrock walls without any concern for aesthetics or speaker placement. They don't give a damn what their system looks like or how it sounds, but they will go ballistic if their TVs aren't capable of burning high-contrast images on their retinae. And now people actually want to listen to digital downloads (which are marketed as "CD-quality" sound but are actually AM-radio–quality sound)! Pretty soon high-end audio systems will be designed for all those mice with human ears grafted on their backs.

Maybe one will fade out in time, but new machines will have to be universal for the formats to take off.

dvd audio will be included with future dvd players

I see SACD being a storage medium and for hi-fi purists, while DVD-A will become mainstream for the general public.

I think that the fact of the DVD-video format having wide spread acceptance, that is enough to keep the audio format alive for DVD-A

Univrsal player will win, so record companies will choose what suit them, just like 45 or 33 RPM

DVD Audio. Absolutely!!

Strong recording company backers (Sony). DVD-Audio still too much of a nitche. However, general public must "see the light" of the better quality format or all is lost.

Although SACD theoriticaly offers better sound because of its dcd technology and to my beleve that's a step closer to LP's natural sound , DVD-Audio will have a greater appeal in the mass market because of the success that DVD-Video already enjoys and because dvd-rw ,dvd-rom,dvd-ram and other related dvd-based formats are currendly boosted in the world-wide market thus giving the upper hand to the format.

I think SACD will initially apeal to the audiophile while slowly making in-roads in the consumer marker as Sony gradully incorporates the DSD technology into their full line of players. DVD-A will survive only if it also is incorporated into the standard DVD-Video machine. There's room for both, but SACD still sounds far superior to 24/96.