[dvw]

What really bugs me is that CD and DVD only cost way less than a buck to make. I don't think SACD would cost more than a buck. The sole reason for moving to SACD is to get people to buy "remastered" SACD at more money and you can't rip the SACD or play in your computer.

I remember the promoise that CD will be cheaper or equal to LP. That day never came. With reissue of LP on CD, the CD quality is much less than the initial intro CD. Now you go to the store, and you see all these new remaster CD. Why can't they just do it right the first time?

If they going to make SACD only, I bet you the quality won't be as good as the technology promise to be. Ten years from now they'll be releasing remastered SACD again. I can see it now the Beatles' 50th anniversary limited edition remaster SACD for $40 a pop.

 

[Zanth]

Here it is in a nutshell:

1 disc, 2 layers. SACD lasers read at 650 nm wavelength, CD Redbooks lasers read at 780 nm. The SACD layer will appear "transparent" to the CD laser....thus permitting the Redbook playback with ease. All redbook players will have no problems here BECAUSE the copy protection is not going to be on the CD layer....it will be on the SACD layer.

Why? Here it is....SACD is superior, most people know this...some will argue against it, but whatever suped up redbook player one might have...the majority of the buying market surely does not have the equipment to make a redbook sound better. What will the RIAA do? Push SACDs like the MPAA pused DVDs. "Better sound," more room for "goodies." The SACD layer will start out at 4.7 Gigs while the CD layer remains at 700 or so Megs. This permits the SACD layer to hold not only the audio, but additional video as well as the digital code that can/will inhibit copying.

Some proposals voiced already on the web:

Have the Redbook stick it out without the copy protection...it is afterall an "inferior" format.

Have the SACD format permit copy once protection...that is...one legal backup of your purchased product. Future players will be able handle this idea.

As Kelly has stated, people do get addicted to new formats and will stop buying the older formats. For most consumer equipment, VHS is more than fine, but people want DVDs with the convenience of perfect pause, no rewinding, etc. Pack in some goodies and people will flock to SACD. Only sell new SACD/CD hybrids and the next player you buy will undeniably be an SACD. Soon, SACD players will be the norm (look at DVDROMs now...even DVDR's and DVDRW's, that burn CDs...see ya standard CDROMs and CDRWs and CDRs...).

This will now be the standard as Vert said. DVD-A just went the way of Beta. With three HUGE companies hitting the hybrids...that says it all. The rest will follow...and DVD-A will remain only for the few who jumped on too early.

Am I pleased? Hard to say at this point. I still think my player sounds better than the 333 I heard. Does it beat the 777? Not sure, haven't auditioned it. SACD should sound better...and in mulitchannel....DAMN!


My own thoughts on this are that in the available "copiable section" of the Redbook, instead of a treu 44Hz track. we will get some lower resolution track that sounds about as good as a 96 bitrate track or maybe even 128 bitrate. Of course...we can always wait for the new Sharpie marker to do away with all of this copy protection

 

[kerelybonto]

SACD capacity is 4.7GB? That's the same as a DVD, right? Why are there even two formats then? Doesn't make a lot of sense.

I think the whole copy protection thing is a non-issue, especially for hybrid discs. If Redbooks are unprotected, SACD protection isn't going to protect anything -- CDs are ripped (by the vast majority of people) at less than full quality, and it's ridiculous to think that people would start ripping SACDs for their better sound quality when they don't even take full advantage of CD sound quality.

And I think a lot of people can agree that the record companies' pricing policy is very messed up. I really think that if CD prices were significantly lower, they'd sell many more -- for example, I just joined BMG, and (through selective purchases) I've bought about $60 worth of CDs at an average of about $5-6 apiece. Before, I bought CDs very rarely -- the cost (because of the value) is justifiable all of the sudden. Granted, it might not be possible to bring down the price that much for most albums, but I think they could readjust a bit.

kerelybonto

 

[Nezer]

Quote:

Originally posted by kerelybonto SACD capacity is 4.7GB? That's the same as a DVD, right? Why are there even two formats then? Doesn't make a lot of sense. I think the whole copy protection thing is a non-issue, especially for hybrid discs. If Redbooks are unprotected, SACD protection isn't going to protect anything -- CDs are ripped (by the vast majority of people) at less than full quality, and it's ridiculous to think that people would start ripping SACDs for their better sound quality when they don't even take full advantage of CD sound quality. And I think a lot of people can agree that the record companies' pricing policy is very messed up. I really think that if CD prices were significantly lower, they'd sell many more -- for example, I just joined BMG, and (through selective purchases) I've bought about $60 worth of CDs at an average of about $5-6 apiece. Before, I bought CDs very rarely -- the cost (because of the value) is justifiable all of the sudden. Granted, it might not be possible to bring down the price that much for most albums, but I think they could readjust a bit. kerelybonto

Heres something you may not know about the record clubs like BMG.

When you buy at a sale price (free or non-regular club price) the performer gets squat! Notta, nothing. This is why some more popular artists are not listed or are unavailable as freebies; they have renegotiated thier contract to elimiate this.

When you figure you just got a bunch of redbooks for around $6 each, add another $4 for the artists and another $2-3 for the retailer, they are still overpriced considering you KNOW the record company still makes a profit at those club prices.

That said I would personally have no problem dishing out $18-20 for a hybrid SACD disc assuming no copy protection was in-place on the redbook layer otherwise whats the point?