DVD-Audio Sales Five Times that of SACD Says RIAA Survey

Too bad we can't get a handle on how many of each format are sold to people with dedicated "audio only" systems. I'm talking about systems used without a display of any sort, ones just meant for music reproduction only.

Figuring out which format is sold to people with higher end 2 channel "stereo" systems doesn't take much thought.

I think we have a few different markets here. I'm only concerned with the best quality most ergonomic 2 channel reproduction. For instance I would be one of the very few who would seriously consider a "dedicated 2 channel SACD" player that is "Optimized" for Stereo SACD and doesn't even play back redbook if I could attain better reproduction that way.

 

If some of the people on this forum can't hear the significant difference between the relatively higher resolution of redbook CD over dolby digital and DTS (CD offers approximately 20 X the resolution of DD and about 16X the resolution of DTS), then how do the forum members expect the Joe Sixpack masses to hear the difference.

 

Absolutely.

I disagree with you 110%. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Buying DVD-A for music represents a change in consumer purchasing habits, and opens up a new market. Buying a stealth single-inventory SACD does not.

It's all probably moot, because I doubt either format ever makes it beyond a small niche.

I don't disagree that CD sounds better than Dolby, but exactly where does this '20 times the resolution' come from?

I don't. Surround they can hear the difference. High-res, nobody will ever really care about except us freaks.

 

Chuck...I dissagree with your points:

1) You can NOT make the distinction that one who buys a DVD-A but doesnt have a DVD-A player is the SAME as the SACD guy playing the redbook layer!!!
Absolutely not.

Why? Because one who buys the DVD-A and plays it on a DVD player is getting the benefit of Surround Sound, Video content, web links, easter egss, all sorts of things.
That is all part of the DVD-A value, and the ONLY difference between DVD-A players and DVD players is the hi res layer. Its still coming out in 5.1

The SACD buyer who doesnt have an SACD player is getting NO benefit whatsover by playing the Redbook layer. In that case, its 100% identical to just buying the CD. In fact,. it could even be worse. There has been speculation that SONY encodes the Redbook layer on the Hybrids at a slightly worse quality than on the Redbook issue. I read that in more than one article, dont know if thats true, but the original point is still valid.

I still, cant see why a sale of a SACD Hybrid to a non SACD customer counts any more than a Redbook sale should. Same thing.

 

DVd-A

 

Mickey, but also making the ASSumption that ALL bybrids SACD are for redbook only is just a big farce. So with your logic, my 15-20 hybrid SACD should not count in favor of SACD?

"Chuck...I dissagree with your points:

1) You can NOT make the distinction that one who buys a DVD-A but doesnt have a DVD-A player is the SAME as the SACD guy playing the redbook layer!!!
Absolutely not."

I just did in fact make that distinction. Just throw the baby out with the bathwater seems to be your logic. Saying we are NOT going to count any SACD hybrid sales because they have redbook layers reeks of your obvious slant toward DVD-A. I, on the other hand, do like both formats. I even have 2 DVD-A capable players with a universal included. Just because there is video content and surround sound content on these DVD-A's does not mean they should all be COUNTED as DVD-A's outselling SACD by 5 times. The whole things seems to be something that a politician would come up with to get re-elected!

You can disagree with me and I darn sure disagree with you and how this so called survey comes across. Maybe DVD-V music will become the next great music format (NOT) . The problem is proclaiming DVD-A outsells SACD, which it does not obviously---at least to the people on this forum who are informed and understand BOTH formats. Go through this thread mickey and tally up the SACD and DVD-A numbers. That provides a true picture to reality. I could really care less if Joe Sixpack has a grasp on that DVD-Video (that happens to have a DVD-A hi rez track he will NEVER hear or even understand) he just got from Best Buy. I am sure he can't wait to put a DVD-V player in his Ford truck so he can do surround sound in the F150.

You said

"Why? Because one who buys the DVD-A and plays it on a DVD player is getting the benefit of Surround Sound, Video content, web links, easter egss, all sorts of things.
That is all part of the DVD-A value, and the ONLY difference between DVD-A players and DVD players is the hi res layer. Its still coming out in 5.1."

Yeap, I am foaming at the mouth for "all sorts of things" that DVD-A provides. My LP records contain far more interesting information than any DVD-A I've seen. You are dreaming if you think, based on this ridiculous survey, DVD-A is 5 times outselling SACD.

 

To quote that great philosopher, Chandler Bing: "Could you BE any more condescending?"
You better hope that Joe Sixpack puts surround sound in his truck, because the health of the music industry pretty much rests on that happening.
I AM " I am foaming at the mouth for "all sorts of things" that DVD-A provides". Have you even SEEN all the great stuff packed into the Pet Sounds DVD-A? NONE of it is possible on SACD, and, even though it may be technically feasible, I don't think we will ever get all 3 possible mixes (mono, stereo & 5.1) on an SACD, done easily on a DVD-A. I only pray that The Beatles' stuff comes out on DVD-A rather than SACD, so we can get everything possible that could be associated with each release (videos, interviews, lyrics on-screen, outtake photos from album cover sessions, whatever they can turn up).
I have both formats, and many more SACDs than DVD-As, but I FAR prefer a release to come out on DVD-A (as I await my DVD-A of Tommy, with the 1/2 hour Pete interview, and all the missing packaging, like lyrics & the drawings, NONE of which are on the SACD!)

 

He would be more likely to put an SACD player in his truck?

I'm happy with both formats. It is so funny how much brouhaha can get worked up in these forums about differing opinions about the mass public when we ain't them.

 

I guess there are many different viewpoints. I buy music for the music period. In my case I don't give a hoot for "extras" on music discs or even on DVD movies. I'm NOT a collector. I would rather have all the resources of the disc devoted to the best possible reproduction of the music or movie that I bought it for in the first place. That's why I don't care about the mass market. If the highest form of musical reproduction were only available from specialty "audiophile" labels it would suite me just fine as I'd never be able to afford all that even these limited companies could produce.

I'm confident two distinct markets will survive, Audiophile and Mass Market.

The format that suits the audiophile best is the only one I'm concerned about surviving even as a niche market.

I guess one format will "not fit all" and, the sooner we realize that the happier we'll all be.

 

Id have to say several years ago when I read about the two formats comming out DVD-A seemed to be the more interesting just for the fact any DVD player could play it and SACD needed a special player. I didn't jump on either format for some time and then about two years ago I decided it was about time to fianally get a DVD player and the prices just dropped on the Sony SACD/DVD player so thats what I got. that is the major reason I have 10 SACDs for every DVD-A (80 to 8) if I didn't have a SACD player I would have no SACDs probably only a hybrid or two like Dark Side of the Moon, I would more than likely have the same 8 DVD-A discs and probably more than that.
I would hate to see either format go out.

 

THe Pet Sounds DVD-A has THREE Hi-rez tracks, each at 96/24. NOTHING has been compromised to bring us something that would NEVER be on an SACD. It's just that the DVD-A spec allows for TONS more data than SACD can have. Tommy, which had to be on 2 SACDs will be on one DVD-A, even with extra material not on the SACD. With DVD-A we can have our cake & eat it too.
I had both the DVD-A & SACD of Sea Change. They sound virtually identical (and incredible) on my SACD and my DVD-A players, except the DVD-A also has 6 great videos (also in 5.1), and weird cool visuals. WHY should I settle for the SACD (which I have subsequently traded for Sam Cooke Live At The Copa)?

 

Amen!

 

Khorn makes an excellent point here. There will likely remain a niche market for some time which is a great thing for us consumers. We get more Steve Hoffman flat transfers of quality records, more great Fantasy jazz titles, more MoFi, more Mercury Living Presence 3 channels, etc.

I would also hate to lose DVDA as there are some awesome titles there, but I do wonder what the value of the format is if Warner is going to continue to sit on great stuff like the Van Morrison back catalog. They are doing nothing to support the format. How many DVDAs has Warner issued in total? It can't be much.

Amen.

I really wonder if SACD (or to be really fair hirez of all stripes +DVDA, + LP) may be the DCC or MoFi of the 2000s...niche market, premium priced, great sonics, great classic albums, great mastering, not mainstream accepted.

Should we care about that last part? I gotta think the answer is NO.

 

There was a piece in Billboard a few issues ago about the Van Morrison DVD-As. At first, I thought they meant JIM morrison!

If I remember correctly, his latest album is set for DVD-A, as well as his back catalog. However, as is with the case of Jackson Browne, there have been many delays. I wish they would just explain how there can be so many delays. I know that they want to get everything perfect. I guess it's best to do it right!

 

Larry,

Do you ever stop to wonder why Universal put this out on SACD first? Because it has a larger audience. A lot of the announced DVDAs are retreads of SACD releases. That appears to me to indicate a larger audience for the format.

 

I hope you are right but I have never seen or read any official announcements about this. Do you have link?

 

NO. It's because it's EASIER to just dump 2 mixes onto an SACD than it is to get together all the multi media stuff, menu preparation, video mastering & all the other associated extras that a DVD-A has (not to mention extra clearances for the extra material), and then to author it. The wait will be WELL worth it. Tommy will be a MUCH more satisfying release on DVD-A than the SACD. Anyway, how, then, do you explain The Marvin Gaye Collection coming out on DVD-A first (probably because there's not much extra content--just lyrics)?

 

another point not brought up here yet. I want to have the the best possible player that I can afford. There are very, very, few sota or near sota players capable of reproducing both formats up to their (the formats) capability and, the few that do are well out of the range of even dedicated audiophile types like us. In this arena there are quite a few more "high end" dedicated SACD players than "universal" units and Absolutely NO dedicated "audio only DVD-A units period.

DVD-A came on the market first and I was ready to by an easy to use (ergonomic) DVD-A stereo only player......never happened...enter SACD.

 

Probably tied up in legal limbo with Morrison's management. There are no Springsteen SACDs. There are no Beatles DVD-A or SACD. Blaming the record labels for such things is often misguided.

 

You are just guessing that is the reason. I think the reason is market size. Super Audios market is simply bigger.

I don't really place much value on the video stuff. Tommy sounded amazing in two channel and listening to it in my low light listening room was enough of a head trip.

 

I could see this on a select few artists, but Warner has hardly released ANYTHING.

 

I'd figure that Sony is buying limited duration exclusives (6 months, one year, etc). It's worked out great for the Playstation business, why not do it for the music business?

Prove it. Don't include freebie 'stealth' SACD layers (single-inventory) in your example.

 

Guys, it's all a matter of what makes the introduction of new formats easier for the industry. SACD was originally launched as a 'new' and 'different' format. This fact implies that, upon considering it, the consumer will have to make a decision to buy a totally different technology than that which he/she has or knows. This, and the high cost of new technology (after all you've got to get a return on your I+D) made Sony focus their releases on a niche audiophile market. This is where SACD gets its audiophile fame in the first place: market positioning.

But things have changed and the industry sees an opportunity to open the hi-rez market by catering to the large amount of DVD player owners. Nowadays many households own DVD players (on which users are increasingly playing their music), and a lesser number has dedicated hi-rez players or DVD players with SACD or DVD-Audio support. Regular CD players are everywhere, but offer nothing new. As I've said here before, it is easier to know what you are missing if you listen to something that sounds different that your regular redbook CD.

The redbook layer on a hybrid SACD is convenient in that you can play it on your car's CD player or Walkman, period. If someone does not have a player capable of playing SACD then, its like hearing that it's raining somewhere in the rain-forests of Brazil.

Now 'universal' players are starting to be launched. This, I am sure, will be many people's next player. Why? They don't want anything to do with the format wars, they want to listen to cool music and, if it sounds better than before, all the better. After all, who doesn't prefer DVD to VHS?

The problem with DVD players is that, as someone said on this thread, many people don't have 5.1 setups, others don't even decode DTS. The latest models are starting to include Dolby Digital and (some) DTS decoding, but originally you didn't even have that, just your regular stereo DD.

Now, anybody who has a 5.1 setup, or even a HTIB, and is wondering what to do with those extra speakers when not watching movies, has the possibility of listening to the DD or DTS tracks on a DVD-Audio. And, Wow! they even sound in 5.1 surround! This, you'll agree, is a different - and for many new - experience. Once they get acquainted with this way of listening to music, and become more aware that there are also hi-rez tracks on the disc, they'll want to buy another machine to listen to them: an 'universal' one most probably. This is how I see SACD entering the mass market, if at all. The main element, then, will be what catalog titles are available on the market.

Meanwhile, SACD is already being well-received by the audiophile niche. If not,what are we all dedicating so much time to discussing "how many angels fit on the tip of a pin."

Trying to get sales figures from 'stealth' sales of both formats, we all agree, is not quite a true picture of how the hi-rez market is doing. The poll results also do not mean that we, the SACD users, are not less loved. Nor that there is some underworld conspiracy behind it all. They just don't have any more data for SACD and, it seems, the DVD-Audio council decided to spin the results to create interest in the format.

BTW, I imagine there must also be people from the industry browsing through our threads looking for ideas that might be of use to sell both formats.

Hummm... I guess my view is in line with Michael and Mikey's.

 

I think they release DVD-Audio's later is due to the video extras taking more time to make and license.

 

And you're NOT guessing? Don't tell me that you REALLY think that it takes just as long to prepare an SACD. You're way too intelligent to not see that this is obvious. I do wish that they would release them at the same time anyway, just so we could really judge, as many people just can't wait, so they will get whatever hi-rez version comes 1st. I've been sucked into this a couple of times myself--I got the REDBOOK Fillmore East when neither hi-rez version has arrived--I just couldn't help myself!