mx2005 said:

I can understand anyone falling out of love with SACD, when many of us feel a sense of betrayal by the record companies (that is to say the major labels, not our valued continuing contributors to the SACD discography). My primary interest is classical, and I can still remember my disgust when Universal lost their nerve. The feeling is still so acute that I have never bought the Bychkov/Renée Fleming recording of Richard Strauss' Daphne as I felt it should have been an SACD (especially when co-producer WDR, the orchestra and conductor had been involved in other SACD productions albeit on other labels, and of course Decca and Fleming had put out SACDs as well). I have since gone on to buy traditional CDs, and SACDs of course. I've even dabbled with downloads, but I found it rather soul-less - I felt I had cheated myself out of the joy of the physical purchase and found the subsequently burned CD a bit dodgy in the sound department.

Despite the lack of major label support, (and granted the outlook for pop, rock and maybe jazz as well is grim) and the way SACD producers seem to like recording some out-of-the-way provincial orchestras (when really we probably want our SACD Bruckner from Rattle and the BPO, or better: Vienna Philharmonic and just about anyone recorded by the Classic Sound and issued by Decca) I haven't lost heart - the way I see it, if Speakers Corner, Testament and others can press LPs of classic performances and sell them in 2008 purely to satisfy the needs of audiophiles then I'm sure someone will come along and (rather like Pentatone has done with Philips) strike up a deal to remaster and issue the classic recordings of the past (which should include stereo records as well as quad - I'm a surround fan but would eagerly snap up some of the VPO/Karajan Decca stuff in stereo, or the Solti Salome & Elektra). Then of course there's Pentatone, Linn, Chandos, LSO Live, BIS.... as long as the odd instant classic like the Mackerras Mozart symphonies set pops up then I'll be happy with SACD. Not everything issued on SACD is going to be a classic, and not everything is going to be issued on SACD which is regrettable. My record collection will never have SACD outnumbering the traditional CDs, but that's ok as I've got my Meridian and the good CDs sound pretty fine to me. And yet, I will continue to buy SACD when I see something I fancy - indeed I will actively seek them out via this website (even though I prefer bricks-and-mortar shops, but don't get me started on that one!).... in fact I think my next purchase is going to be the Barb Jungr Nina Simone tribute album. I don't think SACD is dead just yet.

Peter said:

Yes, it is very disappointing there's little VPO and BPO on hi-res/SACD.

And yes, it is disappointing that plans to issue Universal back cat ran aground.

Unfortunately, the bean counters rule and the long term investment forecasts were poor. If it doesn't provide a return quickly, it's pulled. However, look at what we do have. Plenty of riches in all sort of classical music except opera.

Why anyone thinks introducing blu-ray........(repeat of another post - you see, I'm beginning to bore even myself). However, for opera lovers, blu-ray surely must be a boon? Hi-res sound, and you can watch if you want?

Peter

mx2005 said:

I think that if back catalogue is going to work, then it will have to be a Speakers Corner-type licensing agreement, hopefully with the reproduction artwork and original liner notes (my only complaint with Pentatone's admirable RQR series is the desperately unattractive, generic artwork). I agree that there's lots of choice and quality on SACD already, though. Long live the independent labels!

Peter said:

Absolutely! I've a really soft spot for Classic Records and its restoration of Everest and Vanguard (with original artwork and notes) on DVD-A.

Pentatone's RQR artwork is rather bland, I think, though I'd prefer not to have cheesy '70s retro. To be fair, Philips were among the better ones. There are various websites with illustrations of sleeves, the best early ones in my opinion to be found here:

http://www.alexsteinweiss.com/

Peter

zeus said:


I'm curious though why some people think of audio formats/delivery as an either/or proposition.

sgb said:

I can't speak for others, but for myself I can say that after devoting several months of work at archiving about 80% of my collection, I am not about to dispose of my SACD and CD players. Those single layer SACDs I defended years ago need my 7+ year-old SA-14, since I could not add them to my library. The other portion of that 20% that I did not archive still needs a player too, and the Redmond CD25 modification is such that it makes redbook sound better than SACD. Furthermore, I see no need in disposing of the thousands of discs I have since their value (to others) continues to decline. They're great in the car too. My collection database tells me that I have not purchased an SACD since 7 September 2007.

mx2005 said:

I wonder if anyone has tried taking a 2-channel output from their single-layer SACD to a suitably serious soundcard and recording the output as 'live' and what the results are like. (Time consuming of course!)

zeus said:

This pervasive and old idea that SA-CDs sell mainly on their sonic advantages I think has little basis in fact, judged by the recordings/performances that I choose to buy.

Windsurfer said:

What, other than sonic advantage is there to make one choose to purchase an SACD?

raffells said:

V good especially if you use 192/24 or 172/24 but wastefull.
24/96 0r 20/ 88.2 is good enough.