DVD-A & SACD Dying, As Predicted

[Arny Krueger]

The DVD-A and SACD formats are dying in the marketplace, as

http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/pdf/2005midYrStats.pdf

shows.

Just as I predicted... ;-)

[stealthaxe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in news:cO6dnfcqlJBTjSHeRVn-
:

> The DVD-A and SACD formats are dying in the marketplace, as
>
> http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/pdf/2005midYrStats.pdf
>
> shows.
>
> Just as I predicted... ;-)

they're (SACD) doing better than vinyl, vinyl single, CD single, cassette.

also, regular CD sales declined, tho not as much as SACD. Also on a whole
the industry declined.

The real problem is that it is such a small portion of the whole.

--
stealthaxe

[[email protected]]

Idonn't think these fromats are dying--sacd and dvd-audio have just
come to the attention of audiophiles and I think they are very
goodhaven't herd mpg etc and wouldnt bbuy it for the system i have---so
get what you wantand if you like it fine--i started with a stereo-
system worth 60$ and now have 250000 so-you do what you do and my first
system was fab and this one is more--just have fun

[Lefisc]

I think that there may be three reasons for them not selling well other
than people are not buying music like they used to.

First, unlike records, people do not feel the need to replace their
disc with identical looking discs. We like to think that sound quality
always matters but that is not always true.

I do not thin SACD is the future. Soon HD DVDs will be coming out. I
bet, in a short tiem, there will be new music formats that will use
this technology. I think a lot of people are waiting for this.

Fianll, people are rebelling to the cost of music and the SACD, at this
point in time, may be overpriced. This is mostly old music on a new
format.

[66fourdoor]

take a close look at those stats- ALL recorded music is dying- except
for video related clips

now they got the consumers hooked on watching the bands play, and
ignoring the music quality

besides, the SACD and DVD-A were inferior to analog tape at 3.75 IPS,
and also inferior to vinyl at 33/45 rpm. Heck, the digital formats are
inferior in SOUND QUALITY to a clean 78rpm shellac record that was
electrically recorded.

No wonder there- the digital formats are going the way of the quad
formats of the 1970's

Digital disk music basically SUCKS to listen to at home- it's thin,
brittle, and cutting to the ears- it's a good auto/car format, that's
about it.

[66fourdoor]

I don't feel I have to replace my records in the first place- I can
always burn them onto CD-R and make a CD. My records were kept in
perfect condition and carefully stored indoors in heated/AC area for
30+ years.

Old analog formats have intrinsic value- played on a high end analog
system, they are superior. People that spend $60,000 on speakers and
$100,000 on amps, run analog systems, not digital.

what's that say ?

[Lefisc]

I agree with you about the sound quaility of most digital recordings.
That is why I said that sound quality does not mean much to a great
many people.

CD dominated the market fro 20years, they have been a overwelming
sucess. To say that they have gone the was of quad cannot be true, CD
have billion snad billions of copies and continue to sell millions.
Unlike quad there will always be a machine in your house that plays
CDs.

The reason for the music industries failure recently have nothing to do
with sound quality. First, people are showing that the CD prices are
too high and they will get their (inferior) sounding music cheaper;
there are no "Beatles" or Sinatras or Jacksons out there that people
are flocking to buy. Fiannly, the industry is not doing that badly.
You see, kids are buying DVD from the same companies in gresat numbers.
The marketplace has just changed and there are more places to go and
buy entertainment. But they are are owned by the people.

[Mark D. Zacharias]

"Lefisc" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I agree with you about the sound quaility of most digital recordings.
> That is why I said that sound quality does not mean much to a great
> many people.
>
> CD dominated the market fro 20years, they have been a overwelming
> sucess. To say that they have gone the was of quad cannot be true, CD
> have billion snad billions of copies and continue to sell millions.
> Unlike quad there will always be a machine in your house that plays
> CDs.
>
> The reason for the music industries failure recently have nothing to do
> with sound quality. First, people are showing that the CD prices are
> too high and they will get their (inferior) sounding music cheaper;
> there are no "Beatles" or Sinatras or Jacksons out there that people
> are flocking to buy. Fiannly, the industry is not doing that badly.
> You see, kids are buying DVD from the same companies in gresat numbers.
> The marketplace has just changed and there are more places to go and
> buy entertainment. But they are are owned by the people.
>


Funny, when I record even the best analog source to even an average quality
16 bit 44.1 kHz digital recorder, it comes back sounding:



exactly like the analog original!



Mark Z.

[Arny Krueger]

"66fourdoor" > wrote in message
ups.com

> take a close look at those stats- ALL recorded music is
> dying- except for video related clips

DVD-A is dying a lot faster than most if not all of the rest.

> now they got the consumers hooked on watching the bands
> play, and ignoring the music quality

> besides, the SACD and DVD-A were inferior to analog tape
> at 3.75 IPS, and also inferior to vinyl at 33/45 rpm.

Just trolling, right?

> Heck, the digital formats are inferior in SOUND QUALITY
> to a clean 78rpm shellac record that was electrically
> recorded.

Say what?

> No wonder there- the digital formats are going the way of
> the quad formats of the 1970's

> Digital disk music basically SUCKS to listen to at home-
> it's thin, brittle, and cutting to the ears- it's a good
> auto/car format, that's about it.

Too bad about what happened to your hearing, friend.

[Lefisc]

I meant to write that
CDs and DVD companies are owned by the same people.

[Mark D. Zacharias]

"66fourdoor" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>I don't feel I have to replace my records in the first place- I can
> always burn them onto CD-R and make a CD. My records were kept in
> perfect condition and carefully stored indoors in heated/AC area for
> 30+ years.
>
> Old analog formats have intrinsic value- played on a high end analog
> system, they are superior. People that spend $60,000 on speakers and
> $100,000 on amps, run analog systems, not digital.
>
> what's that say ?
>


It says a lot about people's egos and gullibility, not much else.


Mark Z.

[Bill Kearney]

> The DVD-A and SACD formats are dying in the marketplace

No surprise there. The record companies have done next to nothing to
promote either format. That and they've long charged too much for the CDs.
So trying to charge an even higher price for something without effectively
articulating why it's "better" is a losing battle. Were they interested in
actually moving people off the CD format an onto something else they'd do
well to under-cut the CD price. CD improved over vinyl in one crucial area,
random-access. Giving people the ability to jump from track to track was a
HUGE improvement, more than enough to see users running out in droves to buy
new equipment to handle them. Audio quality just isn't an issue to the
mass-market audience. Sure, when given a comparision they might recognize
one format being "better" than another but at the end of the day it's their
wallet that decides.

The combination of pricing, lack of variety and basically just overall
contempt for their audience has left the record industry on death's door.
They deserve their fate.