[vwap]

Hmm.. I guess this is a good thing I didn't shell out too much for a SACD player... and my SACD player plays DVDs really well, too!

As such, if and when SACD2 comes out, I can screw Sony and go out and buy a better redbook source. Most of my SACDs are hybrid anyhow, so they'll play in the new CDP, and I won't have to worry about the format wars.

[All the while, I'll keep my current source and relegate it to playing DVDs. Works for me!]

 

[grinch]

i agree with eric. the chances of sacd2's playing on original sacd players is very very slim. adding new protection will definitely require new hardware.

dvd-a was delayed two years because of decss, and they had to totally redesign the format. however, it still uses dvd basically, which means they can keep an ac3 track onto it. i think sacd uses dvd technology for the physical aspect of the media, but everything else is unknown to me. they're talking about encrypted streams and stuff on that webpage, and i highly doubt old sacd players will suddenly know how to handle this. if they could, what would be the point of adding this protection anyway?

 

[markl]

Are they not adding copy protection to our regular old CDs? Yet those still seem to play on our existing CDPs, yes? I don't see this as some insurmountable problem.

The real problem is, everyone wants a way to digitally output SACD and DVD-A to be processed separately by a DAC or a receiver, integrated amp, whatever. The technology, firewire has been agreed on for years. Content providers (record companies) don't want hi-rez music to be transmittable digitally in its pure form because theoretically people could make high-quality digital copies. Surely if a hardware swap is needed to add a firewire connection to SACDII players, they can add encryption capabilities to the new machines. Older players do not have any ability to output SACD digitally, so they are not a threat to content providers precious copyrights. There's no reason the new discs have to be unplayable on old machines, neither the record companies nor Sony have any reason to do that.

Mark

 

[grinch]

Quote:

Originally posted by markl Are they not adding copy protection to our regular old CDs? Yet those still seem to play on our existing CDPs, yes? I don't see this as some insurmountable problem.

this is exactly why the current redbook copy protections don't work for ****.

they absolutely HAVE to make the new cds compatible in old players, otherwise they'd seriously be out of business. redbook copy protection is a half-ass hack that doesn't work for ****. i've ripped copy-protected cds in my system and laughed as everyone of them read perfectly.

both the dvd-a format AND hardware was completely redesigned for their new copy-protection. at this point, the group of people who actually own sacd players is pretty small, so i would not be suprised at all if sony made the old users buy a new player. they've already done it with the whole stereo/multichannel thing.

it'd be ****ty, and i'm hoping against it, but i really wouldn't be suprised. at the current moment my feelings are **** sacd. any money i spend on the future for a source will be for vinyl.

 

[eric343]

Mark, apparently you didn't read the article closely. The only feature SACD2 players will have over SACD1 players is a video out; they are not doing this swap so they can add a digital out. (There are SACD1 players that have encrypted digital outputs.) They're changing to SACD2 so that the players have increased resistance to unauthorized modification. Therefore, if the SACD2 discs can be played on SACD1 players, the improved security of the SACD2 format is effectively bypassed and downgraded to SACD1 players.

Regarding the CDs, the copy protection is a far from perfect solution and everybody knows that; that's why they're promoting SACDs.

 

[markl]

Quote:

Mark, apparently you didn't read the article closely.

That article is based on rumor and heresay. We don't have the whole story, or really any story yet IMO.
Quote:

(There are SACD1 players that have encrypted digital outputs.)

But they are proprietary digital connections, not firewire, as far as I'm aware.
Why would they encrypt and copy protect discs that can't be copied digitally anyway? IMO, the subtext of SACDII with its copy-protection is the need to support some sort of digital connection. If you offer a digital connection, *then* you need the copy protection. I expect they will also announce that all future SACDPs will have a firewire connection (Sony call this iLink I believe).
Quote:

Therefore, if the SACD2 discs can be played on SACD1 players, the improved security of the SACD2 format is effectively bypassed and downgraded to SACD1 players.

But you can't send the hi-rez signal out the back of the player digitally anyway, so it doesn't matter from the record company's perspective if old machines can play back SACDII discs.

I still think that *for now* this is a mini tempest in a teapot.
Quote:

both the dvd-a format AND hardware was completely redesigned for their new copy-protection. at this point, the group of people who actually own sacd players is pretty small, so i would not be suprised at all if sony made the old users buy a new player. they've already done it with the whole stereo/multichannel thing.

As I recall, DVD-Audio did not resolve copy-protection issues until well after the first DVD-A players and DVD-As shipped. I've yet to read anything that says that these older machines are unable to read new, encrypted DVD-As. Sony can't afford to screw the "small number" of early-ish adopters, we are the apostles for this format, they *need* us to make it trickle down to everyone else. They can't afford to alienate us this way or they are dead in the water, I think we can all agree on that. If they have even the slightest, vaguest sense of the market they are fully aware of this, too.

Mark

 

[OriginalReaper]

Why the hell would they come out with the 2nd version of a format that isn't even well established?

 

[Nightfall]

Quote:

Originally posted by OriginalReaper Why the hell would they come out with the 2nd version of a format that isn't even well established?

Thats exactly one of the points I was attempting to make earlier. This borders on idiocy. Not to mention the fact that not ONE person I know has the slightest interest in seeing some miniscule video output from an SACD.
In fact, this could well be a negative, not a positive. All of the serious audiophiles that I know, including myself, have their "serious" listening equipment in a room other than where their televisions are located. Their source is an integral part of a music system where no television exists, or ever likely will.
But Reaper, you are dead on the money...........except saying that the SACD format "isnt even well established" is being kind, it virtually does not even "exist" insofar as the general public are concerned. Only very serious music lovers/audiophiles have allowed it to still be available. The same people they are spitting on with this traitrous SACDII scheme, if they indeed do go through with it. I'm extremely upset and I only dropped $1200.00 on the hot rod SCD-555ES. Do you want to take a guess at how those who laid out $2000-5000.00 for XA77ES, XA777ES's, and SCD1's are going to react?
To my knowledge, there has never been an intended mass market audio format in the entire history of the game that has not been offered in a single, standard version for less than say, thirty years....minimum.......think lps, cassettes, cds.............NO one could logically have expected this.



JC

 

[bluesaint]

This kind of reminds me of the D-VHS stuff. They are making a newer D-VHS as well. Most people never even heard of D-VHS.

 

[markl]

I think we are all getting hung up on the name "SACDII". That's what freaked me out at first, it doesn't sound like an expansion of SACD (say "SACD plus" or some such), it sounds like a completely new thing. It *sounds* like they are doing away with the original and replacing it with something else, when in fact all they are doing is expanding the capabilities of the existing format.

Or so I choose to believe at this time.

Mark

 

[MusicLover]

Quote:

Originally posted by bluesaint This kind of reminds me of the D-VHS stuff. They are making a newer D-VHS as well. Most people never even heard of D-VHS.

What about S-VHS?

 

[DanG]

I can already see the movie in the making...

SACD2: The Return of Markl, Digital Apologist.

Or should this be called CD3: Perfect Sound Returns... Again?

I was coming pretty close to buying a SACD player when I saw more titles being released, more players being made, and more people buying into it. It seemed like it would be a stable format that would survive after all. Now it seems more likely it won't, as no format can survive while simply playing catch-up.

 

[markl]

DanG, that's a bit of an unnecessary cheap shot. I'm not an apologist. I will be as PISSED as anyone if Sony is STUPID enough to obsolete SACD and all current SACD players, I think I've been pretty clear about that. I just don't see that happening. I think others are a little too ready to believe that the MAN is going to stick it to them yet again. In this case, the MAN needs us, he can't afford to screw us.

We'll see soon enough.

Mark

 

[DanG]

Mark, it was all meant in jest. I really hope you didn't take offense! It was just a little too funny for me to resist.

I was pretty optimistic about SACD when it came out and planned to buy a player as soon as the format became established with a wide variety of good performances of my favorite classical and jazz music. It seemed close and now it's jumped out of reach again. Maybe I should just switch to cassette tape, hit myself in the head repeatedly so I can't hear too well anymore, and be done with it. Maybe I'll even get a B&O six-disc spinny clear player when I'm rich too.

 

[arnett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Nightfall the SACD format "isnt even well established" is being kind, it virtually does not even "exist" insofar as the general public are concerned. Only very serious music lovers/audiophiles have allowed it to still be available.

it's clear to me that SACD has been a flop for sony. i can't imagine that sony would design a new format just for audiophiles (who are about 5% of the population). the only logical conclusion is that sony intended the SACD to 'take off' with consumers. that has not happened. i think it's likely that sony feels it has little to lose by coming out with a new format that is not backwards compatible if it will appeal to a larger audience.

Quote:

To my knowledge, there has never been an intended mass market audio format in the entire history of the game that has not been offered in a single, standard version for less than say, thirty years....minimum.......think lps, cassettes, cds.............NO one could logically have expected this.

digital compact cassettes (DCC)
8-tracks
pre-recorded reel-to-reel tapes
quadraphonic sound