Having become quickly a die-hard afficionado of multi-channel (ONLY) SACD recordings, I fear for the future of the format and have sent an eMail letter to a dozen SACD content providers which I duplicate here and humbly ask everyone with influence to carry the message on:
SACD technology is on its way into a dead end, its software suppliers could equally be its gravediggers
Dear Sirs,
for 6 years I have been running a home theatre store with the focus on high end video projection and multi-channel surround reproduction. Multi-channel audio has never been a customer request, but now that I have experienced various multi-channel SACDs that could hopefully change...could if only you would!
Most annoyingly I have come to notice that there is practically nowwhere a clear distinction between a stereo only or a true multi-channel SACD.
Simply labelling an SACD "Hybrid" - as amazon.com does - is just as confusing as the DVD classification "Dolby Digital" which can contain anything from 1.0 mono to 5.1 discrete multi-channel sound.
This is extremeley counter-productive to the SACD format: Frankly I didn't notice a significant improvement comparing an old CD with the latest SACD version (Peter Gabriel's SO ) and will - like consumers before me - return the SACD to amazon for refund.
I wonder which people the SACD manufacturers consider as target audience: the vanishing, wealthy upper-class stereo audiophiles or the broader exposure to the global market with its many home theatre multi-channel surround systems?
I wonder if somebody had delusions of grandure, thinking the SACD in the audio world would be what DVD had been in the video one?
DVD was replacing an outdated video system poor in picture and sound (VHS) but with instant picture and stereo sound improvement plus inherent (to be discovered) 16:9 picture enhancement and discrete multi-channel surround sound.
Besides, DVD is the de facto major threat to the SACD format on the one hand, providing multi-channel encoded music programs (with picture!) while on the other hand latest Dolby Pro Logic II technology allows multi-channel surround sound experience with any standard CD!
The original idea, to have a CD which plays in every household CD player but simultaneously contains amazing multi-channel reproduction potential for upcoming home entertainment upgrades was truly intelligent and great.
But it seems about time to execute this idea rather to resell consumers less data compressed stereo versions of CD titles they already own - add to this that only very few consumers will be able to appreciate the stereo sound improvement while general audiences will abandon the SACD format, feeling ripped off and cheated!
At the current time, only multi-channel SACDs carry the potential to get the format ahead, until visual song texts and pictures become a standard attribute to stereo SACDs (which would be - at best - a bonus but not the required improvement).
But they need to be highlighted as "multi-channel"!
As the software and hardware dealer in the front line it is my job to thrill and fascinate my customers and potential SACD adopters. But unless the industry provides the adequate means for that (multi-channel) I might just as well continue to advocate music DVD programs with either Dolby Digital or DTS discrete multi-channel sound instead.
Please give my thoughts some considerations, before greed to recycle will cause a major collapse of the SACD format.
Yours Sincerely, Frank T.
Frank T.
SACD technology is on its way into a dead end, its software suppliers could equally be its gravediggers
Dear Sirs,
for 6 years I have been running a home theatre store with the focus on high end video projection and multi-channel surround reproduction. Multi-channel audio has never been a customer request, but now that I have experienced various multi-channel SACDs that could hopefully change...could if only you would!
Most annoyingly I have come to notice that there is practically nowwhere a clear distinction between a stereo only or a true multi-channel SACD.
Simply labelling an SACD "Hybrid" - as amazon.com does - is just as confusing as the DVD classification "Dolby Digital" which can contain anything from 1.0 mono to 5.1 discrete multi-channel sound.
This is extremeley counter-productive to the SACD format: Frankly I didn't notice a significant improvement comparing an old CD with the latest SACD version (Peter Gabriel's SO ) and will - like consumers before me - return the SACD to amazon for refund.
I wonder which people the SACD manufacturers consider as target audience: the vanishing, wealthy upper-class stereo audiophiles or the broader exposure to the global market with its many home theatre multi-channel surround systems?
I wonder if somebody had delusions of grandure, thinking the SACD in the audio world would be what DVD had been in the video one?
DVD was replacing an outdated video system poor in picture and sound (VHS) but with instant picture and stereo sound improvement plus inherent (to be discovered) 16:9 picture enhancement and discrete multi-channel surround sound.
Besides, DVD is the de facto major threat to the SACD format on the one hand, providing multi-channel encoded music programs (with picture!) while on the other hand latest Dolby Pro Logic II technology allows multi-channel surround sound experience with any standard CD!
The original idea, to have a CD which plays in every household CD player but simultaneously contains amazing multi-channel reproduction potential for upcoming home entertainment upgrades was truly intelligent and great.
But it seems about time to execute this idea rather to resell consumers less data compressed stereo versions of CD titles they already own - add to this that only very few consumers will be able to appreciate the stereo sound improvement while general audiences will abandon the SACD format, feeling ripped off and cheated!
At the current time, only multi-channel SACDs carry the potential to get the format ahead, until visual song texts and pictures become a standard attribute to stereo SACDs (which would be - at best - a bonus but not the required improvement).
But they need to be highlighted as "multi-channel"!
As the software and hardware dealer in the front line it is my job to thrill and fascinate my customers and potential SACD adopters. But unless the industry provides the adequate means for that (multi-channel) I might just as well continue to advocate music DVD programs with either Dolby Digital or DTS discrete multi-channel sound instead.
Please give my thoughts some considerations, before greed to recycle will cause a major collapse of the SACD format.
Yours Sincerely, Frank T.
Frank T.
Comment