[Welly Wu]

Soundboy:

May I please ask you to elaborate more on your opinion? What steps need to happen in the next year to help DVD-Audio survive? What do you think about Warner Music being potentially sold to Bronfman's Investment Group and its' impact on the future of DVD-Audio?

BTW, these questions are open to discussion for anyone willing to participate in a friendly and constructive manner.

Thank you!

 

[markl]

OTOH, the new formats ability to support better copy protection may just be the life-line they need to hold onto their intellectual property.

 

[soundboy]

These are just my speculations....

With the merger of Sony and BMG, it's possible that BMG will abandon issuing hi-rez titles on the DVD-A format. Afterall, BMG's RCA Red Seal label has just issued its first SACD title here in the US (Bruckner: Symphony No. 9 - Harnoncourt), not to mention that BMG has also issued SACDs overseas (in Hong Kong, for example). On the Warner side, Bronfman may go in and start doing massive cost cutting, and let's face it, DVD-A (nor SACD) is not exactly setting the accounting ledgers ablaze. Sony, on the other hand, can not only count on revenue from the sales of its own music catalog, but also from the sales of copyrights to SACD/DSD technologies.

This is besides the issue of how much software is available from each format. While here in the US, in terms of the number of titles available, it is clearly in favor of SACD. On a worldwide basis, I believe the advantage in title availability is even wider. Check out the listing at

http://sacdinfo.com/

However, sacdinfo.com doesn't hardly list Hong Kong titles. For those, you can check the below list for the stereo SACDs

http://www.geocities.com/emilsjr/index.htm

and this one for multi-channel releases (go to the buttom half of the page)

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...a/homepage.htm

While Sony will be releasing hybrids from now on, even re-releasing titles previously released on single-layer SACDs, the DVD-A camp need to get its "hybrid" disc into the market. I think the SACD is going the way of "single inventory", where a new release will be issued on a hybrid SACD only. In a tiny market such as Hong Kong, Universal has just started doing it.

This is just me thinking out loud.

 

[Edwood]

I would have preferred that SACD allowed full bandwidth digital output with an encrypted "broadcast flag" that would allow the use of external DAC's.

One box solutions are too restricting.

Well, at least high end equipment will be here to stay, as long as we keep voting with our dollars.

Thank goodness for Audiogon.

My wallet disagrees.

-Ed

 

[Jasper994]

I question why both sides are holding back so much. When DVD came out all movies there after were put out in DVD. Now we have two great formats and very little new music is produced in either... it's silly! Almost as if they really don't want the formats to survive.

 

[Edwood]

The reason?

Three letters:

M.......P.......3

-Ed

 

[markl]

Sony/phillips made a fortune on the CD. They created the technology and received licensing fees from everyone producing compact discs and players of compact discs for the last 25 years. SACD may not be making tons of money yet, but it could be a major cash-cow if it catches on.

 

[Welly Wu]

Markl:

I've been meaning to ask you these questions regarding DVD-Audio:

1. Do you think it will survive in 2004? In other words, will the imminent acquisition of Warner Music by the Bronfman Investment Group be the harbinger of the short-term survival of DVD-Audio or does it signal the death knell of DVD-Audio?

2. Will 2004 signal the year when the proponents of DVD-Audio will finally get their acts together and really develop a robust marketing campaign to push DVD-Audio as a competitve high resolution format akin to the efforts behind SACD?

3. What is your opinion on the steps necessary to make DVD-Audio not only a high resolution format that is going to endure but also one that will thrive in the next 1, 2, 3, and 5 years?

I'll be looking out for your answers to these three critical questions. Thank you for your time.

 

[markl]

Hi Welly Wu,
The introduction of dual-layer DVD-Audio discs that can be played on CD players is a big step in the right direction.

DVD-Audio has an inherent disadvantage over SACD in that no one really owns the format, it's a loose coalition of audio manufacturers and record companies that are behind it. SACD is owned by Sony/Phillips, they have a direct P&L responsibility for the future success of SACD. Sony owns lots of music and can more easily compel their subsidiary labels to get on-board and release titles, there's much less incentive for the record companies that have signed on to DVD-Audio. This accounts for the better marketing, penetration of SACD players and superior selection of SACDs.

DVD-Audio has an inherent advantage over SACD in that people are probably going to be better able to grasp the value of DVD-Audio in that it can maybe ride on the coat-tails of DVD-Video. Personally, I would have been betting on DVD-Audio going over best just for name recognition and automatic positive feelings people might have toward the name "DVD Audio", and instant understanding of its superior capabilities. But audiophiles have chosen to rally around SACD instead. Sony was smart in that they targeted the high-end first with SACD, with expensive players and lots of classical and jazz releases, where DVD-Audio went straight to budget players and rock 'n roll discs. SACD seems to have won the hearts and minds of early adopter audiophiles who really are the people most likely to seed the market first.

But the rise of universal players erases that advantage to some extent. Now, I no longer care if it's SACD or DVD-Audio. It will be real interesting to see how long it takes for Sony/Phillips to be forced to provide DVD-Audio support on their DVD players. All their competitors will be universal, will customers demand it and abandon Sony/phillips digital gear until they get on board?

Mark

 

[soundboy]

I agree with what markl posted....quite an irony that Sony/Philips will have to incorporate DVD-A capability, at the same time that it's winning on the software front.

Of course, it's still too early to say what the Bronfman group will do regarding WB's involvement in hi-rez. Therefore, 2004 will be a pivotal year for DVD-A.

As for the hybrid DVD-A, that's not out yet the last I heard. The rumor was that WB will develop the format on its own after the DVD-A group (whatever it's called) said there was some technical issues to work out.

 

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally posted by Edwood The reason? Three letters: M.......P.......3 -Ed

If they can convince people to listen and appreciate the quality differences, MP3 could easily go away or at least taper down to a niche. Personally I can't really tell the differences between a high quality MP3 and a CD but DVD-A and SACD take things to a whole new level that can even be appreciated with the budget players that a lot of people have and don't even know it.

They've done it with video, there's no reason they couldn't do it with audio, and it seems the natural order of things but for whatever reason they are choosing not to...

 

[Maxvla]

the benefit i see for the labels and the RIAA for pushing SACD and DVD-A is there are no SACD-rom's with which to rip music off and share with the world. this is probably also the case with DVD-A but i'm not as familiar with it.

i bought a SACD player not long ago because i believe its the format with a future unlike the technically superior DVD-A which will crumble soon due to reasons markl stated.

 

[soundboy]

Quote:

If they can convince people to listen and appreciate the quality differences, MP3 could easily go away or at least taper down to a niche.

I think the MP3 situation is out of the bag by now. People have voted and they rather have convenience instead of quality. In my opinion, SACD/DVD-A are destined to be a niche format, no matter what kind of marketing push is being done.

 

[Edwood]

LOL, try convincing the masses that regular Redbook sounds better than MP3's.

Of course, you'll have to tell them that you need to spend over $300 to get that.


Good.......Convenient.......Cheap

Pick two.


-Ed

 

[bifcake]

Quote:

Originally posted by soundboy I think the MP3 situation is out of the bag by now. People have voted and they rather have convenience instead of quality. In my opinion, SACD/DVD-A are destined to be a niche format, no matter what kind of marketing push is being done.

I completely agree with you, soundboy.

I think the reason DVD video was adopted quickly and enthusiastically by the public is because:

a) The VHS tape was seen as outdated, and inherently bad

b) DVD=no need to rewind

c) Picture quality. If VHS quality was as good as broadcast TV quality, I think the adoption of DVD wouldn't have been as quick

d) Longevity - DVDs don't wear out with playback.

e) Indexing - ability to jump to any point in the movie instanteneously

f) People actually sit down to watch tv. Meaning, when people watch tv, they give their utmost attention. I don't know if you guys realize this, but most people do NOT sit and listen to music. Most people play music as background while they do something else or they play it so they can dance to it. Very few people actually sit and listen to music.

I think that adoption of high rez formats will be limited because:

a) People don't see the value of high rez format. They see the CD being as good as it gets. They don't see the value of a higher rez format partially because they don't sit and listen to music.

b) Multichannel music capabilities isn't as relevant again because most people don't sit and listen to music. Once you're in the kitchen cooking dinner, while the music is playing in the living room, it makes very little difference whether the music is stereo or 5.1

c) You can't rip a high rez disc. People have discovered MP3's, which they deem as very good. If they can't make MP3's out of high rez disks, they don't want them. (This takes out the geeks as early adopters. They are the people that drove the adoption of PDAs, wireless computing, etc.)

d) Market confusion. Cars can't play high rez. The mass market doesn't know about CD layer. Even if there is a CD layer, the question becomes: why put it there if high rez is so good?

e) The supporting components of the average stereo such as receivers, speakers, etc aren't really good enough to demonstrate the quality advantages of a high rez format. You would have a much better time selling it if everyone had $10k speakers in their homes and $5k electronics such as amplifiers, preamps, etc. The high rez format offers little, if any advantage over the CD with the average home theater system.