Vote

It will probably make a lot of people aware of SACD, but then they will discover there aren't many other titles available compared with CD. Still, I feel it will be a positive step for the SCAD market.

I still contend that the SACD format is intended for the audiophile arena. I think that in a world where so many "music enthusiasts" are completely satisfied with the free music they receive off the Internet and then play back through the ultra-compressed MPEG format. These folks are not interested in a more expensive medium that requires a special playback unit. This boost is for the Stones and the Stones only. These OLD MUSICIANS already have plenty of money. I do have a question, though: Do you think that Keith Richards would benefit from a new high-tech liver?

SACD? Huh? what's that? Do I need to buy a new cartridge for my Linn? Who cares?

Yes. Only the release of the Beatles recordings on SACD would help more.

I'm not a Rolling Stones fan but remastered recordings available as only CD/SACD Hybrids at the same price as regular CDs can only help SACD!

I believe it certainly is the step in the right direction. I will be getting a new cd player soon and you bet must do SACD too. We need more mainstream artists to make SACD a reality. It comes in handy for guys like me who don't care for classical or jazz too much.

I still say, unfortunately, and I do mean unfortunately, that very few people will care about the SACD layer of these discs. I will, but most people still look at me like I'm speaking Martian when I say "SACD".

Does the market even know and care about the better SACDs? Most people I know don't even know that there is such a format much less appreciate its strengths.

We've got them on LP, we've got them on CD, do you think we will buy them again?

Of course it will. But the real question should have been how many people will be buying these BECAUSE they are SACDs? The fact is that the majority of people who will be buying them have no idea what SACD is, and perhaps may never know.

Need LOTS AND LOTS of realeases to make some kind of dent in the marketplace. I cayn't get no... satisssfayctionnnnnn... and I tried, AND I TRIED...AND I TRIED...CAN'T GET ME NO... NO NO NO... <> We need way more than Master Mick, as great as he was, er is... Hey, I just got a big SACD player in the house, LET'S GO SONY! Hopeful and Monsterous

The commercials are cool as always and know exactly what is going on and exactly what to do. Audiophile speculators are the only ones worked up in emotion-based guesswork.

Here it comes, your 19th nervous breakdown...

The Stones are big, but not big enough to take SACD to the mass market. A vastly larger population still knows very little about SACD. I can't see the Stones making a sales record at this point in their careers.

The CD issues of the Stones have een hideous until now, and good vinyl has been extremely expensive. I'll buy them all.

This is another ploy by Sony to establish SACD. Some may be overjoyed with these releases, I think the majority of the people will not be! I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Can you tell that I'm NO fan of the Rolling Stones?

Like I said before, the general public couldn't care less about the new music formats. The current CD standard meets all of their sonic needs. Audiophiles are in the minority here and are not enough to make a difference so get used to it.

I visited one of my favor shop over the weekend and asked what's new. I heard the new Thiel speakers and listened to the Audio Research CD 3. Never a memtion or equipment with SACD. I anyone but the media listening to this format or DVD A?

Yeah, people love the Rolling Stones, but the majority of the public still has no idea what DVD-A or SACD are, and are content listening to their CDs and MP3s. The manufacturers have done a terrible job getting out the word on these new formats, and the Rolling Stones are not enough to counteract that.

The Stones belong on 8-track, a format that matches them well.

Oh, The Stones are going to save the format all on their own! I don't think a full SACD catalog of the Stones, Beatles, and Hendrix could save either of the formats. These two formats are more about sapping you dry of more cash than anything else I can tell. On the other hand, if you have tons of disposable cash, knock yourself out.

Great start, but there has to be a lot more of this to really make a difference

Compared to past eforts, in a very big way! At least this is getting very good mainstream reports, with posative reviews!

Reference the last two weeks questions. Average Joe public has never heard of the SACD or DVD-A format and doesn't know what it means. If they market these discs with the 'remaster' label that would sell them as much as the SACD encoding.

I do not have an SACD player, but I am interested in purchasing the remastered recordings of the Rolling Stones. Is the CD-layer copy protected (i.e. sonically impaired)?

I believe at least it will pick the curiosity on the format to many non-audiophiles but we need more high profile issues to follow suit.

I cannot believe that Joe Sixpack's $300 Kenwood receiver, Radio Shack speakers, and Monster cable would reveal any audible difference between the CD and the SACD. Sixpack may, nevertheless, believe he hears a difference and think himself cutting edge. If these new hybrid discs are priced to move, perhaps SACD can finally make some inroads.

Rolling Kidney Stones? Who are they?

first big time items release on SACD

If successful, it will make hybrid releases more likely to occur and that is a very good thing. Plus it will raise the public's awareness of Super Audio with all the press mentions.