[Scott[_6_]]

On Sunday, September 15, 2013 7:44:56 PM UTC-7, Audio_Empire wrote:
In article ,

Andrew Haley wrote:



Audio_Empire wrote:



Sony has great ideas, but they always manage to screw the pooch

somehow. They either don't follow through with marketing the ideas

(SACD) or they stubbornly refuse to fit the product to the real

marketing demands (BetaMax).



I don't think SACD was so much badly marketed as badly timed. It was

introduced at the same time as MP3 players, and an important feature

was that SACDs couldn't be ripped. It looked to me (and to many

others) like that was the real purpose of SACD: an unrippable medium.

High-res was just a teaser to get people to buy them.



This belief was perhaps wrong, and the timing was just an unfortunate

coincidence. But with people's listening moving onto the cloud and

digital players, any format tied to a physical medium is a relic, no

matter how good it can sound. If the new Sony players don't allow the

user the freedom to listen to their music where and how they want

those players will fail, and deservedly so.



Andrew.



I don't think that being not "ripp-able" had anything to do with SACD's

failure.

Failure? SACD is alive and well in the audiophile market. Lot's of new SACDs coming out each week and many of them are really well mastered. SACDs are about as dead as vinyl. IOW they are the rarest of beasts, physical media that is on the rise.