Arny said


It's really simple François. You,
someone, or the recording industry needs to deliver for free public
audition, a regular high-bitrate music recording, one that people in
general reliably identify as sounding different from the same
recording downsampled to CD format, in some kind of level-matched,
time-synched, bias-controlled listening test.

Just one such recording will make things really interesting.

I said


Interesting to a group of about 20 people. A far larger number of
people have already expressed a preference for SACDs based on
informal, uncontroled comparisons. Whether or not you like it, that
is good enough for most consumers.

Arny said


Which is why we have influential national publications publishing articles
entitled:

"DVD-Audio and SACD fail to impress electronics consumers"

I addressed that issue later on in my post. Most consumers are interested in
convenience and portability not sound quality. So yeah, DVD Audio and SACD are
not likely to impress electronic consumers. They offer no advantage in
convenience or portability. They are clearly aimed at a small niche market.


Arny said



It's all that pent-up consumer interest in DVD-A and SACD that stimulated
the author to write, and the editor to publish such an article.

What are you trying to say?


I said


I haven't really been following
the format wars of late but I would suspect that it will take
inexpensive portable players and autochangers for the car for SACD or
DVD audio to take off.

Arny said


Consumer interest has nothing to do with it, right?


It has everything to do with it. Most *consumers* are *interested* in formats
that maximize convenience and portability. CD is still way ahead in those
respects.

I said




That is what it took for CDs to take off.


Arny said


No it isn't.

Yes it is.

Arny said

And it isn't what it took for DVD-V to take off.

I didn't say it was.You are comparing apples to oranges. People are used to
watching video at home so it should be no surprise that DVDs were able to do
well before they became so portable. But the fact is they are quite convenient
and quite portable. I am confident that this has helped the success of that
medium.


Arny said



The autochanger thing has to be one of the worst red herrings in recent RAO
history,and that's saying quite a bit. Why do you need a changer with media
that already plays for a couple of hours from a single disc?

Because commercial discs rarely have a couple hours of material on them.

Arny said


The answer is
that you don't.

Wrong answer.


Arny said


And you said autochangers for the car? That's totally
unreal.

Hardly. But certainly CD players for the car were a major factor for the
success of CDs even before autochangers were available. Convenience and
portability.

I said


It is what the average consumer really wants. Convenience and
portability.


Arny said


Well, compared to what?

Inconvenience and nonportability.


Arny said


The pre-existing format for DVD-V was VHS tape,
which was already reasonably convenient.

Which has what to do with the topic of DVD Audio and SACD?

Arny said


Ironically, DVD-V's popularity was
based on picture and sound quality.

I would say there were other factors. Laser Disc already had VHS clearly beat
in quality and that format has died.

Arny said



It wasn't true for the CD which took maybe a decade for player prices to
come down to those of the average turntable,

No. They were available pretty much right away.

Arny said

and for which it took years and
years for portable players including auto players to become popular.

No. It took a few years for them to become avialable. As soon as they were
affordable to the average consumer they took off in popularity. Coincidentally
(not really a coincidence IMO) that was when the CD format took off as well.


Arny said


It wasn't true for the DVD which took off while DVD player prices were
substantially higher than average CD and VHS player prices, and when there
really was no such thing as a viable portable player that sold in any kind
of serious volume.

Which still has nothing to do with DVD Audio or SACD. Yeah, DVD came around at
a good time when home theater became interesting to more consumers.

I said


The fact is most consumers are quite satisfied with MP3.

Arny said


Now finally sockpuppet, you say something that makes a little sense.


Everything I said has made sense whether you agree with it or not.

I said



Most casual music listeners are not audiophiles. It is a niche market
and always has been.

Arny said


Problem is, the audiophile market is too tiny of a niche to support two
formats that could only possibly be interesting to audiophiles. SACD and
DVD-A could be interesting formats if they actually sounded better, but of
course they don't.

It may be true that the market is too small to support all the formats. That
has nothing to do with whether or not they offer any improvement in
performance. If consumers believe they offer an improvement it doesn't matter
if a handful of people disagree. Audiophiles have been raving about the
improvements they hear from both new formats. Whether or not that is from a
real difference in the formats themselves or a difference in the mastering of
the titles or even an imagined difference it is of no consequence to the sales
of titles in these formats. The perception is what matters.


Arny said


With DVD-A and SACD you've got two solutions looking for a problem that
neither of them adequately solves, duking it out in a niche marketplace. Be
still my heart!

Yours is only one opinion. You may be right though that the audiophile market
may simply be too small to support the formats. Time will tell. It doesn't seem
to take a large market to support the audio vinyl niche. That is still enjoying
a substantial reniassance much to my delight.