Here is a link to an interesting blog about the state of SACD, another promising format that seems to be going the way of all things:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-s...-_b_64112.html
|
Here is a link to an interesting blog about the state of SACD, another promising format that seems to be going the way of all things:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-s...-_b_64112.html
Thanks for posting that.
I am a fan of the sound quality that SACD and DVD-A provide. I have about 30 discs combined.
I agree with the author about DVD-A and having to sit in the correct position to really benefit, and most of the SACDs are 5.1 as well, so they need the same thing.
Both of these formats need special players, so that makes it difficult to hit the mainstream buyer. With compressed music becoming the norm, these hi-rez formats lose out even more.
I really hope a lossless codec takes hold somewhere and offers an online delivery system. I know there are a couple now, but the catalogs are small, and with the pricing, I would much rather buy the disc and rip it myself.
-curtis
I'm an SACD fan (and a DVD-A fan, too, now that I have a player), but I think the best we can hope for is that it lives on as a niche, audiophile format. However, vinyl LPs have been outselling both of the high-res digital formats for the past few years, and that doesn't bode well...
Sony didn't handle SACD well. Format wars are never a good thing...either one format clearly wins (VHS vs. Beta) or neither do (DAT vs. MiniDisc). Sony has never won a format war in their life (so I'm not betting on Blu-Ray, but that's another story), but evidently they attached big licensing fees to all their DSD hardware, making it very expensive for studios to be able to make SACDs, and that did as much damage as anything.
To be fair, we can give half credit to Sony for the CD, which they developed along with Philips (although Philips holds the license for the redbook standard).
Me i really dig SACd yet I listen to the stereo mode.