On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:34:28 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Chelvam" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
om
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
For recent information about the latter two formats, check the
RIAA sales statistics posted at
http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/...midYrStats.pdf. What
they show is that same-half-year sales of SACD recordings has
dropped by more than half from 2003 to 2004.
...
the unit volume AND dollar increase in DVD-A failed to make up for
the SACD losses.

It appears that hybrid SACDs that are racked and sold as CDs -- the
Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan releases, for example -- are tallied as
CDs, not SACDs in the RIAA sales statistics. I do not know if this
will change the picture.

Why would that appear to be the case?

I've always thought that the highly-touted Rolling Stones and Bob
Dylan releases for Christmas season 2002-2003 contributed to the far
higher reported SACD sales for 2003.

JA is correct.

Not necessarily. He's made an unsupported assertion, as have you.


Over here (SEAsia), Rolling Stones (Hybrid) are sold as CDs.

However, that says zilch about how they are accounted for in RIAA stats. I'm
going to take a wild leap of faith and suggest that the people who produce
these discs know what they are.

Well, since the RIAA stats are pretty inaccurate in the first place,
I'm not sure if it really makes that much of a difference.