Dual Disc Pushing Out DVD-A and SACD?

Let's assume that we see a plethora of DualDisc titles released in the next six months. Say, 150 titles, which is simply an arbitrary number. Now let's say that those 150 titles are a healthy mix of hi-rez, DVD-Audio discs and lo-rez, DVD-Video discs. Let's further say that there is an even distribution of headliner artists and albums between the hi-rez and lo-rez discs. What I would like to know at that point, but probably never will know, is how well the discs are selling (high volume or niche volume) and if the hi-rez discs are selling better than the lo-rez discs. I'd love to have that sort of information if my release scenario at all plays out.

 

My local Best Buy has reduced the DVD-A/SACD to just (1) 8ft rack, down from (2).

 

Here is what is happening to SACD and DVD-A. Ready to buy ANOTHER player?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/11/11/spark.dvd/index.html

Thanks Sony!

 

A new format cannot be imposed. The consumer has to be convinced that it is really much better than the previous format, before he is willing to buy new hardware. SACD and DVD-A did not convince the masses, and other disc-based formats will not either.

CD and DVD are perfect in the eyes (and ears) of most people, as far as sound and picture quality is concerned. They were a big improvement over LP and VHS in terms of convenience and durability. Improving the playback quality is not enough, because the level reached by CD and DVD is close to the optimum for the average user, who does not have high end hardware.

The future is clearly downloadable media. New disc technologies may be interesting as mass storage for downloads (not just one film on a disc, but a dozen at least), but not for the classic distribution model of music and films. Most people are happy that DVDs are now available at reasonable prices, they don't want to pay again a premium price for the latest format.

And if new formats are mainly introduced to impose copyprotection and other restrictions on the consumer, the industry can forget it altogether.

 

The CD was good. The SACD was better. The Blu-Ray is betterer...

Sony will probably come out with a bettererer format within the next five years. You can't actually label a format as "best" because that paints you into a corner. With better, betterer, bettererer, betterererer, etc., you can continue to claim improvement.

 

Claude is right when it comes to most people.

 

I would not worry too much about what Best Buy does...they have not been doing a good job of carrying SACD inventory. At my local Tower there is lots of SACD inventory, little DVDA, and almost no DualDisc. I think the lack of quality launch titles, consumer confusion and statements about player compatibility indicate that DualDisc is off to a rocky start.

SACD is a healthy format and will likely be with us for some time if only as a niche. If anything SACD may benefit from increased marketing on hirez awareness...

 

More better.

...or the Mostest.

 

I agree as to audio, but strongly disagree as to video. The two should not be lumped together, as they are quite different situations. High definition video has already succeeded in the marketplace. It's a done deal. Prerecorded HDTV will be very successful, although a format war might delay things. Even people with 13" TVs will adopt it once it reaches price parity with DVDs...after all they might buy a bigger TV someday.

Downloading and storing music makes sense because of the small size, and how and where it is consumed. Movies last two hours and are consumed in the living room...music (pop) lasts 3-5 minutes and is consumed in a variety of locations, etc. So again, the situation with music and movies is completely different.

 

Yes, that's right. For video, the situation is better. Also because the average consumer can more easily notice differences in picture quality than in sound quality.

But for HDTV to be present in every household will take some time.

 

AND money (makes the world go around...)

 

How will Blu-Ray benefit audio? Will there be music titles released on this format? I know it's great for video but I failed to see any mention of hi-rez audio in the article posted.

 

I can understand the convenience of downloading (legal) music when you have a high-speed connection. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the US now lags behind Europe in this area. (Read last week that AOL was telling its high-speed Internet connection clients to go elsewhere and installed DSL connections in the US are far lower percentage wise than in the Old Continent).

In Spain, the official (slowest) DSL connection is now 524288 bps and there are rumors it might be doubled before the middle of next year. In France there are news of them going to 5Mbs. This surely makes a case for the popularization of legal musical downloads, HiRes included. Not to mention movies.

Unfortunately in the market the "most people" rule rules. To me marketing wise they are doing with Dual Disc what they should have done before (or even now) with DVD-Audio and SA-CD. Unfortunately, they are spending their efforts and marketing dollars in a format that has started on a dissonant note.

I agree that a new format cannot be imposed, but you cannot sell a new format if you don't advertise it properly, if at all.

Unknown, crappy artists, sell if marketed properly. The same can be done for quality. Nobody shuns quality (including "most people") if it is presented in an understandable way and at a logical price.

 

Continuing the "most people" thought process in regards to surround sound for music: most people or most young people, anyway, might think that the idea of music in surround is an interesting one but it's likely that's as far as it goes in their minds. "You mean I have to sit here in the middle to hear it properly?! Well, if I've got to just SIT here, I need a MOVIE to watch, man!" Otherwise, the music has to be portable and not require active listening. I still think the key to getting "most people" won over by surround sound is to push it hard in car audio systems. Flood the auto market with 5.1 surround sound system advertisements for a while and then try again in the home entertainment market after the youngsters have been acclimated to the sonic bliss of 5.1 audio in their vehicles.

 

Actually it's what's happening to the DVD Video format. For folks who are buying Hi Definition TV sets, I suspect they'll want the BluRay and/or HD-DVD players that arrive in late '05 or early '06

 

I wonder??? If these players and the discs have a huge premium over DVD...well, I really wonder. The popular perception among folks is that DVD is HD. If HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players cost more than $300, me thinks their market will be severely limited in the near future. Enthusists crave HD but joe sexpack....not at high prices.

 

Joe Sixpack will definitely stick with their $50 DVD players.

 

Sure. Nobody is predicting an overnight change; that never happens. It's always an uphill climb...

 

Don't forget that there is people buying $ 2000 players for dying formats right now. If there is plenty of good software the prices of players won't be so relevant and anyways after a while they will probably drop to under $ 100.
Sorry guys, but get ready to buy those Laylas and Elton John's yet again on Blu ray.

 

I don't know. Even though both formats are aimed at replacing DVD Video - and not the audio disc formats - folks here are already talking about the replacement of CD, SACD and DVD-A with BluRay and HD-DVD!

Seems like the marketing is already working - before it's even really started in late 2005....

 

I can assure you, if Joe Sixpack has a honking HD TV and he's been watching the footy in High-Def, when he puts on a movie he is going to want the same resolution.

There are millions of enthusiasts out there with large DVD collections (that probably replaced large VHS tape collections) who are going to latch on to High Definition DVDs when they come out. It will be HUGE.

 

Here is a typical conversation I come across.

“…I got an HDTV, I love it.”
“Oh yeah, who do you get your HD service from?”
“Umm, what do you mean?”
“How many channels of HD do you get and from who?”
“I get all of them, some look better then others. Yeah there’re like a hundred channels, Satellite has more then Cable…”
“Do you have an HD decoder? Did you buy one or did you get one from your provider?
“What’s an HD decoder?”

They don’t get it!! Most think if they buy an HDTV they are getting it. Even the sales people don’t get it or don’t care enough to explain. And in all fairness, even when you do explain, they don’t listen or have any retention.
The fact is that DVD looks great and HD isn’t any different to them.
(Them = consumer majority, especially Joe Sexpack)

“I’m looking for a DVD Player”
“Oh yeah, what kind”
“Oh I don’t’ know, I just want that new progressive scan. It supposed to make all my DVD look better.”
“Well, that’s not necessarily true. Do you have an HDTV?”
“No, I priced them but their too expensive.”


Do you know what EVERYONE is asking me about these days?
DVD Burners!! They want to record TV shows and Home Video to DVD. That’s all. No computer wanted and its got to be easy for them.

Blue Ray, Dual Disc, SACD, blah, blah blah!!!

DVD over VHS = Yes!
CD over Vinyl = Yes!
HD-DVD over DVD = who cares
SACD over CD = who cares
MP3 over CD = can I down load it?

Most of you over estimate the buying public. You place your own enthusiasm over theirs.

 

Rachael,

I couldn't agree with you more. Just a week ago my cousin came over to visit and we were watching my brand new HD set. We watched THe Emprire Strikes Back on DVD. The DVD player, a Samsung HD930, is an up-scaling DVI equipped player. Attached to the telly via DVI and upscaling the video to 720p, it looked like an HD picture. When I made the statement to my cousin that I thought the transfer was great and it looked practically like HD she asked me 'what's the difference?'. And I tried to explain to her, but I'm not so sure she grasped what I was saying. It also didn't help that the DVD looked so darned good. It actually looked better than some of the HD movies and programs I get on DirecTV or over the air.

I guess my point is, if they can make DVD transfers that look so good, and DVD players that upscale to 'HD' resolutions and use pure digital connections such as DVI and HDMI with the resulting output looking better than some HD out there, where is the incentive for people who can hardly even grasp the difference between DVD and HD to upgrade their recently purchased players for new ones that will probably cost double, triple, or more.

This is all speculation of course. Who knows? All it takes is one 'killer app', as they say. and the whole landscape can change practically overnight.

 

Actually it is somewhat mysterious to me why DVD has been so successful. What motivates people to collect DVDs? I mean, unlike music, the replay value is minimal. I like "Star Wars" as much as anyone, but I don't need to watch it every day, every week, or every year. Once every 5-10 years is plenty, which hardly justifies investing in the DVD. And this is a movie that I really like. For most movies, once in a lifetime is plenty.

 

Do you have kids?

I've seen Harry Potter nearly 5,000 times