-GT wrote:

As usual, your reply has nothing to do with the question at hand. I used
the word "most will be". You changed it to "all". If you would bother
looking, you would see hybrid SACDs outnumber non hybrid SACDs in new
releases. But then you would have to admit your error, or try to change
what I said, again. I suspect the latter.

And if you bothered looking, you would see that new standard CD releases
vastly outnumber SACD releases, hybrid or otherwise. But then you would
have to admit to your error, or try to change what I said.

As usual, your reply has *nothing* to do with what I said. I said new
hybrid SACD releases outnumber non hybrid SACD releases, contrary to
what you wrote. Your commenting on the number of non SACD releases is
about as relevant as comparing it to DVD releases. Totally irrelevant.
You were wrong, so you changed the subject. Typical.

Wrong again, Einstein. The fact that I can play my CDs on my SACD
compatible player, SACDs on my SACD compatible player, or my hybrid
SACDs on any CD or SACD player is true whether or not *anyone else*
buys SACD format equipment. It's irrelevant, like many of your arguments.

Yes and most players are still being made *without* the SACD capability.
What about them? And what about DVD-A? There are still very few players
out there that will play both. The cheap-o Pioneer and the expensive Denons
are the only ones I know of.

Again, irrelevant to the point being discussed. You said that the backwards
compatibility of SACDs depends on if the SACD "catches on to the public at
large." That's what my above reply is about. Again, you were wrong so you
attempted to change the subject. How transparent.

Uh-oh, more ad hominem attacks from ric.

No, just a fact. When you make no sense (which is often), I'm not gonna
sugar coat it.

Did I hurt your touchy-feely feelings, ric? Aww... Me so saw-wee....

*YOU'RE* the one moaning about attacks, not me. What a moron.

I would rather have a SACD compatible player and have the CHOICE to
listen to SACD recordings when available than have a standard CD player
and NOT have that choice. Now, twist that around to mean something
completely different.

But I don't need that choice, ric. That's a choice for audiophiles who know
that the only way their precious format will survive is to piggyback it on
to the CD format. It can't stand on it's own an *you* know it.

Again, this has *NOTHING* to do with your erroneous statement that
getting a SACD compatible player limits one's choice. Again, you try
to change the subject because your original statement was erroneous
and could not be defended.

Notice a pattern here?

Anybody else hear banjos?

--
Better than hearing "Lady Day", or checking in at Monterey...