Is SACD dead?

[stringzz]

Does anyone think SACD is worth investing in? With Blu-Ray/HD DVD coming at the end of this year, is it worth investing in SACD? The only issue with the High def DVD's is that the format war has to work itself out and then the players need to drop to the $500 range, although I read somewhere that will happen mid 06.

I guess with the investment to SACD you still have PCM on the disk that will play in any CD player in the future.

[jimmyp58]

My purchasing of SACD software titles has been virtually nil for the last 4 months.

Is SACD dead? No as there will be an SACD II format available for Denon owners sometime later this year (or early next year). But to what degree and for how long, who knows.

If everyone comes together as they said they would last week, we shouldn't see format wars but I'll wait until I see it.

Jim

[Kramer]

Where is the investment? The better players already play SACD, and most SACD titles are not much more expensive than "regular" CDs.

Now, I wouldnt buy a dedicated "high-end" SACD player, or replace my CD collection with "duplicate" SACDs.

Of course, there is no reason to get into SACD if there are not any titles available that you like. On the same lines, just because HD-DVD and/or B-Ray hits the market, doesnt mean that there will be any music titles availible on those formats that you will like either.

[JonMarsh]

Whether SACD is a compelling choice or not depends a lot on your listening preferences, music preferences, and the quality and resolving ability of your system.

For example, to be a little silly, if you had a Bose home HT system, buy a Pro two track recorder or semi-pro disk machine wouldn't make much sense at all, would it? Nor would buying an SACD player of any kind for that system, unless SACD was just an incremental included feature (like a multi-disk DVD/SACD player, for example).

OTOH, if you have a really high end system, and are a hard core music lover (i.e., you turn up your nose at the mere mention of MP3, and wouldn't dream of allowing an MP3 player anywhere on your domicile), then SACD might well be for you, and I don't mean a "universal" player, as while SACD playback on these does usually sound better than CD playback, for $1K you can buy a DAC for CD which will in all likelihood blow away both the CD and SACD playback on plain old redbook.

That's the real quandry, here, is that inexpensive players don't do the format justice. It is a high end format; the equivalent in audio of HDTV, but they're trying to sell it to folks that only have "NTSC" equivalent systems, and find it hard to justify (understandably) the expenditure.

So, my own recommendation is possibly a two part strategy. If you have musical tastes that are in alignment with the available disks (I do), especially the hybrid disks, which feature both SACD layers and very good CD layers, then you might make some selective acquisitions- even if you don't have an SACD player. Why not get the SACD hybrid of Alison Kraus or Diana Krall, instead of just the plain CD version? This way one could build up a library of better than average recordings over time of things you like.

Then, when one's overall system performance justifies it, get a "Good" SACD player- at the low end, I'm talking about something like the midrange Marantz's. That doesn't mean you have to have $20K speakers or whatever- there are more modest size speakers, especially in the DIY realm, which at reasonable volume levels do deliver the goods, in terms of midrange naturalness, freedom from driver cone coloration, and overall smoothness and extension of sound. Maybe this means seperates in amplifiers and preamp, maybe it means a higher end HT amp/receiver with pure analog bypass. You'll know when you're at that point.

I listen to a lot of jazz, classical, and some classic rock, and there are lots of SACD titles out there. A big difference for some of them is not just the inherent disk performance, but the care in mastering which is taken in comparison to original CD releases. It's similar to the situation with the Sony Superbitmap CD's, which also recieved considerable care in mastering, and which rival XRCD releases.

I DON'T see SACD or DVD-A replacing conventional CD- for too many consumers, what's the point? They haven't been sold on the multi-channel aspect, either- maybe because their iPod headhpones don't support multi-channel.

I have over a hundred SACD disks, and I'm glad I have every one of them... they're an investment for the future, and unlikely to be exceeded in quality regardless of things like BD or HD-DVD.

Just my 0.02.

~Jon

[stringzz]

Jon,

Some excellent points. Although I do have a somewhat nice system Bryston sp1.7, B&W 803's and ATI 1505 (my next upgrade or better 2 channel amp), I don't have a high end SACD player. I was going to get a Sony DVD universal player because I am sure I will want HD DVD in a year or so. I have read that the lower end Sony SACD players have decent quality.

I have some DTS CD's and I can really tell the difference in fidelity. They also seem louder or more dynamic? I figure I will get the same dynamics or more from SACD. I would love to get some Brubeck, Miles, Contrane on SACD. The Classical I have on DTS sounds great, so I may get a few discs from that genre too. And I want some old Bowie on SACD!

So I think I will get some enjoyment from even a lower end SACD player. I just don't want to invest too much and have them become glorified CD's in 5 years.

[Brandon B]

I kicked SACD and it moaned a little, so I don't think it's dead. It's not real healthy though.

BB

[Andrew M Ward]

Sony isn't making SACD drives anymore

I was told that Sony discontinued manufacturing SACD drives a few months ago... Hmmm

were they not the primary driving force behind SACD a few years ago?

[cdwitmer]

My interest in SACD was recently piqued when my good friend Hidemi Suzuki released all of Bach's solo cello suites on SACD (BMG label, so I expect that overseas Harmonia Mundi Germany will do the distribution). From many perspectives this is an interesting and deeply satisfying two-disc set. But my interests run overwhelmingly to Baroque and Renaissance music and there is remarkably little material that lights my fire in the SACD format, so I am listening to the CD layer only. As Jon points out, the machines that really do the SACD format justice all carry steep prices. (Andrew, I think Sony is still making SACD players but likely discontinuing some of the best SACD-only, or perhaps stereo-only, players, in favor of less expensive, more versatile players. Trouble is, these don't sound as good as they could.) In my case, both when I think of SACD and vinyl LPs, I always conclude, "For this kind of money and trouble I could go to a lot of live classical music performances." And in my case, the live classical music performances win out. In fact, for the cost of the Sony SACD player that I would like to buy, I can pay for all my kids' music lessons for a year, and as a result I get live performances in my house every day. When the format wars are all over, I look forward to eventually buying something better than CD. At the rate things are progressing now, I may just record my kids' music at 24/192 and listen to that . . .

[David Meek]

One thing to note is that in the Blu-ray high-definition DVD standards, which is backed by Sony, there is no mention of the DSD codec or any effort made to include it. That to me unfortunately means SACD will not be a major player in the future. :nonod:

[csuzor]

One thing to note is that in the Blu-ray high-definition DVD standards, which is backed by Sony, there is no mention of the DSD codec or any effort made to include it. That to me unfortunately means SACD will not be a major player in the future.

This is interesting, but see the annoucement of Sony Europe, with the arrival of DSD encoding/decoding directly on a PC with a Blu-ray disc drive? Isn't that suggesting quite the opposite of what you're saying?

Let me be clear: Sony will probably announce DSD recordings on Blu-ray disks if/when these become popular.

For the moment, there is no higher definition audio standard than what is used on SACD and DVD-A, nor is it needed. Both these formats have much higher inherent quality capability than any recording/mixing studio can use today, and higher than anyone will need (just look at the number of audiophiles convinced CD is good enough! admittedly with expensive and/or exotic gear).

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=14655563

[DifferentLee]

There is a ton of new titles in jazz and classical so I am happy. I see SACD remaining a niche format for quite a while and that's okay. I think of it as being like MoFi or DCC - a few but high quality releases to a dedicated group of music lovers.

[DifferentLee]

I was told that Sony discontinued manufacturing SACD drives a few months ago

I don't believe this is true Andrew. Sony continues to build new versions of SACD and SACD-capable DVD players. Plus, it serves them well financially to include SACD capability for audiophiles and music lovers given the royaltees they earn.

[Andrew M Ward]

It's true

I don't believe this is true Andrew. Sony continues to build new versions of SACD and SACD-capable DVD players. Plus, it serves them well financially to include SACD capability for audiophiles and music lovers given the royaltees they earn.

Oh it's true...
Sony is no longer manufacturing SACD drive units (period) they sold their last run to Marantz and Yamaha... Pioneer is planning to Mfg. a few thousand units I heard, of their SACD drive, but after that they are done also....

Becuase (see below)

I was just at a High Def (Blue-Ray) forum in Burbank and Blue-Ray will be the new 24/192 audio format in the future.

Trust me on this one...

[DifferentLee]

Sony is no longer manufacturing SACD drive units (period) they sold their last run to Marantz and Yamaha

Can you cite a source and provide a link? They are still making SACD transports according to my local high end dealer who has been a trusted friend for a while.

[Andrew M Ward]

Sure thing

Can you cite a source and provide a link? They are still making SACD transports according to my local high end dealer who has been a trusted friend for a while.

Sony has openly discontinued service to their SACD licensees regarding orders for new drives and new license fees...

Yes you will see SACD players because their are thousand apon thousands of drives out there waiting to be built into machines.

Again: Blue-Ray is the new 24/192 high resolution audio format...

[Andrew Pratt]

If Andrew say's SACD's dead I think its safe to say it is...trust me he'd know

[Andrew M Ward]

No Harm No Foul

All this means is that we won't see any development money being spent on upgrading the existing SACD drives, (nor will anymore Sony drive units be built) that development capitol is being diverted towards Blue-Ray drive technology, which still has a few hurdles before "Show Time"

Many manufacturers are still looking into building Multi-Format Universal players which will become more difficult now that Sony is not doing any Liscensing of SACD rights BUT (there's always a BUT)

when I say universal I mean (DVD-A SACD MP3 CD CD-RW) capable players

BUT...
We may see a few Universal drives hit the market that were liscensed before 2005 so... Keep a sharp eye out, you might be surprised who has a true universal player available in the next few months...

Just my 2 1/2 cents

[DifferentLee]

Again: Blue-Ray is the new 24/192 high resolution audio format

Uh, I'm not sure how this relates to SACD transports. It's spelled BluRay by the way.

Is Equity Audio bringing out Universal machines? I seem to recall one from Classe but Rotel seems like DVD-Audio centric.

If so, does this contradict your view on Super Audio?

How do you know that BluRay won't offer DSD? My understanding was that the specs are still in flux.

Now I've been following hirez since the beginning and 24/192 is almost as good as DSD but I'm skeptical that titles will come out in quantity given the poor performance and lack of titles that DVDA exhibited. Maybe hidef video will change that with one (maybe 2?) big launches but if they don't talk up the benefits of hirez audio it seems to me that it will remain a niche...if that's the case should we maybe just have Super Audio which has still a much bigger grassroots following & audiophile success? Maybe good ole trusted vinyl is the way to go.

[Patt]

Is SACD dead?....

Hope not,
I own three of them and was looking forward to picking up another dozen or so to enjoy. On my setup the background is so much quieter than regular cd's and it makes me feel the $$ I have spent on electronics is well worth it.

[csuzor]

when I say universal I mean (DVD-A SACD MP3 CD CD-RW) capable players

Keep a sharp eye out, you might be surprised who has a true universal player available in the next few months...

Honestly, I don't care which audio encoding eventually wins out, the real winner will be audiophiles with whatever hirez format wins (does anybody really care, apart from those with a technical or financial relationship with either dsd/dxd/pcm?).
The prospect of being limited to 2-channel redbook for the future is scary, and probably at this stage unrealistic. I look forward to a universal player like you mention, with an ever-increasing number of hirez titles, whatever the format.
The vendors will just have to make their players compatible with the different disk formats to satisfy the consumers, the real consumer choice should be either audio only or audio+video, not which format it can/can't read.

[Chris D]

Well, yes, in terms of wanting the highest audio quality I don't care what formats are included and what direction it goes, as long as I get the highest resolution possible.

However, as I now own about 15 SACD and DVD-A titles, I don't want to see that capability left behind. Then I'd either have to write off those albums as a financial loss or keep a separate player just for those titles without any hope of upgrades into the future.

Ideally I'd like to see all "universal" players in the future be backward compatible with every disc format we've created so far. But what I'm hearing here makes that pretty unlikely.

[jimmyp58]

I wonder how Sony's decision will affect Denon?

[Andrew M Ward]

Blu-Ray ....

Uh, I'm not sure how this relates to SACD transports. It's spelled BluRay by the way.

Actually it's not BluRay or Blue-Ray it's Blu-Ray...

[Andrew M Ward]

Go here!

http://panasonic.jp/dvd/products/bd/spec/01.html

[Andrew M Ward]

Uh, I'm not sure how this relates to SACD transports. It's spelled BluRay by the way.

Is Equity Audio bringing out Universal machines? I seem to recall one from Classe but Rotel seems like DVD-Audio centric.

If so, does this contradict your view on Super Audio?

How do you know that BluRay won't offer DSD? My understanding was that the specs are still in flux.

Now I've been following hirez since the beginning and 24/192 is almost as good as DSD but I'm skeptical that titles will come out in quantity given the poor performance and lack of titles that DVDA exhibited. Maybe hidef video will change that with one (maybe 2?) big launches but if they don't talk up the benefits of hirez audio it seems to me that it will remain a niche...if that's the case should we maybe just have Super Audio which has still a much bigger grassroots following & audiophile success? Maybe good ole trusted vinyl is the way to go.

Good points:
It is true, DSD might work it's way into the Blu-Ray spec... I didn't hear much talk about Direct Stream (DSD) at the meetings I heard more talk of 24/192 but you're right, no official audio spec has been settled on.

Key point: DVDA and SACD both exhibited "Poor market performance" not just DVDA, they both failed in regards to market success but the industry has learned a few things (I hope) from the collective failures of competeing technologies.

Blu-Ray has over 100 companies fully in support of whatever specifications are settled on. Including DEL / Apple / Microshaft / Disney / ESPN / ABC /

" The Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) surpassed a milestone today as its membership grew beyond 100 companies. "What's most remarkable about the growing support for Blu-ray is not just its sheer volume, but its breadth." said Brian Zucker of Dell Inc.'s Client Product Group. Established in October of last year, the BDA has rapidly gained the support of leaders from the computer, consumer electronics, video gaming, optical media, disc replication, authoring and content industries."

more 2 cents

[DifferentLee]

Great response Andrew. Thank you. I'm actually a Blu-Ray fan for the higher capacity offered but I really want one big standard and tons of movies.

[Kingdaddy]

Blu-Ray had better get their software to market fast or they loose the race to HD-DVD, hardware means nothing to the end user, we only care about software. Actually, I have about 30 SACD and only about 5 or 6 are real keepers, the rest I could do without. For me at least, the lack of popular available titles makes SACD already dead.

[csuzor]

Actually, I have about 30 SACD and only about 5 or 6 are real keepers, the rest I could do without. For me at least, the lack of popular available titles makes SACD already dead.

I wonder if you can conclude that SACD is dead because there are few titles availables today (or DVD-A for that matter), because there is no other hirez format with more titles... I would classify it as an early starter, with a 3000 disk headstart.

If record companies start releasing more hirez, and consumers start buying more hirez, which format will they choose? hirez audio is for audiophiles, and until a majority of audiophiles have high quality players for another format (Blu-ray???), then I suspect that the existing formats will be their preferred choice. And I doubt that any would consider DVD with Dolby encoding for this.

In the Blu-ray scenario, within the next 2 years, perhaps, our favorite hifi companies may release a player with Blu-ray compatibility, and we would be expected to buy it, not knowing how many titles are available, and the record companies would have to be convinced that there are many consumers with Blu-ray players waiting to buy their albums, and only then the number of titles being released on Blu-ray may start increasing... probably even more slowly than SACD / DVD-A.

Not much to get excited about for me...
Christophe

[stringzz]

I wonder who will win the format war. Sony doesn't seem to have a good record in these battles (Betamax, MiniDisc). I guess you could say they won in the hi-resolution battle, since there are more, and better, SACD titles.

[DifferentLee]

Sony's past record may not apply since the the Betamax VHS war they did not have Matsushita on their side. This time they do. Plus there are a lot of PC companies ensconced in the BluRay camp. I just hope they get smart and work out a compromise.

After investing in laserdiscs and SACDs (which I'm glad I did), I may actually learn a new trick and sit out the early adoption process.

[purplepeople]

Since many of us can barely tell the difference between SACD and CD, the only real need for purchasing a high-res format is to give a challenge to the high-end playback systems. If the mfg were to drop the price of both SACD and DVDA, I would have a real collection of both by now.

The bigger reason to worry is if something with less resolution than Redbook were to become the standard sales format. The problem is that such a thing has a serious probability of occuring as most consumers cannot tell the difference between 128kb MP3 and 16/44 CD. As it stands, I'm the only one in my circles to actively avoid buying an MP3 player.

Although it is likely (IMHO) that CD will fall by the wayside due to iPod (et al), logic also dictates that a high-res format will always be available if only at some astronomical premium. This is because the source material will always be recorded at something with enough resolution for archiving and for transfer to various formats such as DTS soundtracks, etc.

We 'philes think that it's hard to get SACD or DVD-A now... just wait until it becomes hard to get 16/44!

ensen.

[RebelMan]

SACD and DVD-A are not really dead, just insignificant. As far as mainstream audio goes, plain old CD's and digital music files, like MP3's, will remain the standard for some time to come. As far as mainstream video goes, I forsee HD-DVD becoming the new standard. HD-DVD is the natural evolution of DVD. Mainstream buyers already identify with DVD and will naturally adopt HD-DVD. There is nothing technical about this opinion. Observations of market conditions, both past and present, serves as my guide.

If they could get the DualDisc fiasco under control, DVD-A might stand a fighting chance against CD. But they really need to include two-channel versions of the source material, which are currently mostly limited to just multi-channel, to make any real difference.

[mitch57]

The industry couldn't even get the consumer to buy/upgrade their cheap DVD/CD players when SACD/DVD-A came out! What makes them think the consumer will want to spend even more money to upgrade to another new format that cost's even more then the last upgrade?

Most consumers who have a working DVD player could care less about the new technology. As long as they can still play the movies/CDs they currently own and can still rent DVDs they won't be interested in buying something new.

I will concede that if the number of available titles on DVD/CD begin to dissappear like VHS has, we will see more purchases of whatever format leads the pack at that time.

I think that will be a long way off.

[David Meek]

The industry couldn't even get the consumer to buy/upgrade their cheap DVD/CD players when SACD/DVD-A came out! What makes them think the consumer will want to spend even more money to upgrade to another new format that cost's even more then the last upgrade?

One problem with getting Joe/Josephine 6-pack to upgrade their $99 player to one with SACD capability was that J/J (in all probability) didn't have a system that would let them hear the sonic improvements inherent to SACD, nor did they want to spend the money to get their system to the point they could. Being an audio-only format, marketing SACD to the lowest common denominator was (and still is) a losing proposition.

With HD being first and foremost a visual improvement with greatly enhanced audio, there will be something for J and J to see in BestBuy, and consequently to want.

[DifferentLee]

Being an audio-only format, marketing SACD to the lowest common denominator was (and still is) a losing proposition.

Agreed so I think the answer for hirez to have a chance at all is to co-market it with hidef. I see hidef marketing as a rare window of opportunity to do one big push...the consumer will see a huge difference visually and they get improved audio in the bargain (provided its on the spec-looks like 24/192 is there and DSD is fighting). Those with decent systems will hear a big difference over redbook even if their systems are modest. But maybe you sneak the better audio in through the back door on movie soundtracks...

In any event, without an attachment to hidef marketing, I feel SACD will remain a strong but niche format. As someone who likes jazz and classical there may be some advantages to that, but to those of you who like more mainstream music it may not be as relevant. Of course, many of those folks are happy with MP3 which I can't stand from a sonic standpoint.

[stringzz]

purplepeople,

You shouldn't avoid using/buying an ipod because it uses a lossy format like mp3. You can use wav files which are uncompressed from your CD.

I think the ipod is great for what is intended for, portable music. I don't have an audiophile system in my car, so it works good for what it is intended. I don't think audiophiles should worry or critize the ipod. I agree it shouldn't replace CD, SACD or any future hi res audio, it's good at being a portable player.

Maybe someday they will have digital outs on Ipods. Then you could play your wav files with an outboard DAC. Do harddrive players have jitter issues?

[DifferentLee]

Everything has jitter in digital playback, some just have enough to impact sound.

[RebelMan]

Most consumers who have a working DVD player could care less about the new technology. As long as they can still play the movies/CDs they currently own and can still rent DVDs they won't be interested in buying something new.

Hmm, so what happend to VHS? I believe VHS was then what DVD is now and what HD-DVD will be. Many people that bought HDTV's (wide screens) did so not because of cable or satelite but because of DVD's. It stands to reason that these same people will quickly adopt HD-DVD.

I will concede that if the number of available titles on DVD/CD begin to dissappear like VHS has, we will see more purchases of whatever format leads the pack at that time.

I think that will be a long way off.

It didn't take too long for CD's to supplant LP's, and DVD's were even faster to supplant VHS. HD-DVD's could catch on as fast as DVD's but the looming format wars may delay this some but I doubt it will be a long way off.

[Jack Keck]

One problem with getting Joe/Josephine 6-pack to upgrade their $99 player to one with SACD capability was that J/J (in all probability) didn't have a system that would let them hear the sonic improvements inherent to SACD, nor did they want to spend the money to get their system to the point they could. Being an audio-only format, marketing SACD to the lowest common denominator was (and still is) a losing proposition.

With HD being first and foremost a visual improvement with greatly enhanced audio, there will be something for J and J to see in BestBuy, and consequently to want.

While I basically agree with you, I always fingd that there is som eexception. A poster on the Classic Rock Forums was very impressed with the improvement he found in palying SACD/DVD-A on his Pkioneer 563. Few, if any poster on that forum seemed to be into mid-fi sound, at best. Many rely on boomboxes and IPods, so this may not be totally hopeless.

OTOH, I haven't bought into hi-rez yet due to allocating my audio funds elsewhere (DIIY sub) and fear that a cheaap universal player might not be enough of an improvement in my system (Pioneer HT receiver, Polk RTi 38s/CSi 30/cheapie surrounds) for the amount of time I get to listen to anything. The CRF poster has assured me that the fact that my reas speakers don't match the fronts is no reason not to get into hi-rez, if it is still hi-rez on those Pioneer players. :B

[DifferentLee]

Jack, you should take the plunge into hirez. You should hear the difference on Rti speakers.

[purplepeople]

purplepeople,

You shouldn't avoid using/buying an ipod because it uses a lossy format like mp3. You can use wav files which are uncompressed from your CD.

I think the ipod is great for what is intended for, portable music. I don't have an audiophile system in my car, so it works good for what it is intended. I don't think audiophiles should worry or critize the ipod. I agree it shouldn't replace CD, SACD or any future hi res audio, it's good at being a portable player.

Maybe someday they will have digital outs on Ipods. Then you could play your wav files with an outboard DAC. Do harddrive players have jitter issues?

Sorry to go OT, but this deserves a response. Mods... feel free to spin this off into another thread.

Any way, I was aware of the wav capability of iPod. To me there is no reason to justify what is still a multi-buck expense when I can port around my CDs and my reliable Pana portable. As my cousin the studio engineer says... "Jens, it sounds like a portable." And he uses high bitrate files.

Also, I was an early adopter once, but have come to realize that a technology is not even close to mature until it becomes public domain. iPod is still in a proprietary stage. This could be another BetaMax technology to be sunk the same way by a lesser competitor. I have a PalmPilot thats been sitting around since I quit doing volunteer work and I have eschewed buying a new cell phone because I can't find one that has or advertises very high quality RF transception.

Even with SACD, I only bought in because it was a cheap way to get higher quality analog stages for my CD library. Sure, I have a few SACDs in titles that are my absolute faves, but they don't really ever come out to play in the noisy background that is my downtown apartment.

But back to iPod. I thought the docking interface also worked as a digital audio output, a logical conclusion when many of the dockable speakers do not appear to plug into the headphone output. Besides, why should I have to buy an outboard DAC when I'm paying for the "best" digital player on the market. Should I not also be getting the best audio quality from this same top-ranked machine? The headphone output should at least be worth a pair of Sennheiser studio cans.

And finally, my understanding is that jitter can be brought under control by having a memory buffer with a very accurate clock. This is one of the reasons I always use the anti-shock feature on my portable. By spinning up the disk speed and parking 40 sec of data, the player is able to retrieve the data from RAM at a very fixed clock speed. Whether the iPod has this type of buffer is something I don't know, but it sure would be ridiculous to have an HDD running the entire time, when it can park the data in RAM and then shut down to save batteries and mechanical life.

Okay then... back to Format Wars: The MP3 Strikes Back.

ensen.

[Jack Keck]

Jack, you should take the plunge into hirez. You should hear the difference on Rti speakers.

Just make damn sure my wife never finds out who you are. :B

[DifferentLee]

Interesting thread about Sony/BMG issuing SACDs again:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=52887

[Chris D]

Hmmm...maybe SACD is dead after all. If DVD-A's success is dependant upon Dual Disc, it may be dead too.

Crap.

[Burke Strickland]

The question may not really be "Is SACD dead?" but rather "When was SACD ever alive?".

Neither SACD nor DVD-A have had enough titles to make them compelling as a sole medium for listening. Even if the sound quality were lightyears ahead of CD, which, given the right DAC for CD playback and/or the wrong mix for the hi-res release, it isn't an open and shut case that this is what you should be listening to.

The competiton between two similar but incompatible formats with no clearcut advantage hasn't helped either. Therefore, lack of commercial success isn't surprising

Burke