Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Hmmm . . . yet another format. I will take a universal high-end player for a real price, but if I had to spring for an SACD-only player, I 'd want it as cheapo as possiblo.
Sony announced last week that they are lowering the price of their latest SACD player to $3500. Is this the right price to get your attention?
By most accounts thus far, SACD (DSD)appears to be a conscientiously high-quality, two-channel, audiophile-oriented audio format. DVD-A (24/96) appears primarily to be a multichannel format with two-channel audio as an option, but as an afterthought, especially if the DVD-A player must execute some sort of synthetic mixdown to two audio channels.
Two-channel SACD is simply not compelling enough; DVD-A is more promising due to its support for various formats. DVD is a "converged platform for home entertainment." Universal DVD-A/V players, multichannel audio support, software back-compatibility combined with reasonable improvement for sound reproductionI'll buy it!
From a market perspective, SACD is a dead-end technology. All the marketing muscle in the world will not overcome the facts that: a) most people are satisfied with CD sound, b) those who are not will be more impressed by the flexibility of DVD, and c) only a handful of record labels and music resellers will ever commit to the format.
The answer to the SACD question is: "It depends." SACD would seem to have the greatest chance of becoming an orphan in the format wars, due to market acceptance of DVD in non-audio formats and the yet-to-appear "universal" DVD format. With that in mind: Quality and pricing will have to be pretty remarkable to induce me to buy. Sony does have a significant presence in the music-making and distribution side, and they will need it unless and until they can convince other labels to put out SACD versions of discs. It is definitely an uphill battle for SACD, especially since John Q. Public will soon be able to buy a "universal player" that will still play his favorite movies regardless of who wins the format wars.
I learned from my experience of buying Sony's first CD player, the CDP-101, many years ago. It cost me a "princely" $750 and lasted 15 months before it broke down, just outside the warranty period. So I'll wait a little this time, not be "first on the block," and will probably buy Naim's offering, whatever format(s) that might cover.
A music format HAS to be mainstream if it is going to take off. It MUST be affordable for those of us who do not have Martin Logan speakers and Krell amps! :) The music must also be affordable, no more than what we pay now for those overpriced CDs!
Actually, "zero." If the sound quality of SACD and DVD-Audio are at least close, sonically, I do not believe SACD will survive the format war with DVD-Audio. I predict the major problems will be: 1) a lack of interesting titles (software), 2) the cost of SACD (they sell for $24.99 in Washington, DC), and 3) resistance from store owners to invest in four formats (CD, DVD-Audio, SACD, and cassette).
SACD needs to be both accessable and affordable to everyone, just as CD always was; not priced for audiophiles as some kind of sacred group of 'only haves/appreciates'. If Sony/Phillips make it available as they had originally indicated, for all, as a CD replacement, as a dual layer CD/SACD disc, then we are all served well by this format which finally realizes a 'digital reproduction' of unequaled reproduction of music.
The only way to get my attention would be if there were a number of SACD recordings available, of performances that I actually wanted to hear, delivering the performance that SACD promises, and, ideally, although I'm afraid I'm dreaming on this one, priced reasonably.