Post by Arthur January 28, 2009 (201 of 321)
|
|
bissie said:
Sexier than BIS????!?
Man, oh man, you kick where it really hurts!!
Best - Robert
So sorry!
If it makes you feel any better, the Arte Dei Suonatori Handel was VERY sexy for me, and knocked several other labels' items downward on my wishlist!
A wonderful find!
Bret
|
|
|
Post by stvnharr January 28, 2009 (202 of 321)
|
|
Robert,
It seemed to me that most responses here were sacd only buyers. But of course there were not several hundred of them. And I could see where this was all going, as you have confirmed in your most recent postings.
Pity the thread got a bit off track, as threads will do, but it does bring up the issue that rbcd's can indeed sound very good, just that you don't get multichannel sound.
It is indeed fortunate that you take the time from your busy schedule to converse here. Now onward with the business of excellent music reproduction.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Phil W January 28, 2009 (203 of 321)
|
|
Several record labels, most notably Pentatone and Channel, release all of their discs as single-inventory, hybrid SACDs. I'm not privy to their balance sheets, but I presume these companies are making a profit. Why can't BIS do the same?
I own only a small number of BIS SACDs. Why? Because I, like many audiophiles, believe that DSD-sourced SACDs are (all other things being equal) sonically superior to hi-rez PCM. After several years of excellent DSD recordings (for example, the Grieg series), BIS decided to switch to hi-rez PCM. I have purchased several PCM SACD offerings from BIS; although they were certainly well recorded, sonically they fell far short of the DSD offerings. I know that Bissie (and some audiophiles) don't share my opinion, but BIS is losing SACD sales to me and others who vastly prefer DSD recordings. Is this a question of sound over music/performance? No. Like many record collectors, I have a large (6000+) CD collection, with multiple recordings of all the warhorses; therefore, my principal interest at present is purchasing the finest-sounding SACDs available (provided, of course, that the music interests me and the performances are of high quality). While many purchasers may not care about the DSD vs. PCM debate, others do and BIS must be losing at least some sales for this reason; also, if it drops SACD, it will lose further sales to those purchasers who are primarily interested in multi-channel recordings.
Bissie indicated that this thread would help him gather information about whether forum members were more likely to make purchases of SACD titles and that this would assist him in determining whether to continue releasing SACDs. However, several pages back, Bissie seemed to indicate that sales data alone give him all the information he needs to determine the answer, ignoring post after post telling him that SACD availability was extremely important to most of those who responded and that many titles were purchased only because they were available on SACD. I understand that you wouldn't get the same responses on forums not dedicated to SACD, but why ask the question if you aren't really listening to the answers--and indeed you apparently have your answer already available from sales data? Based on this fact, as well as certain language you employ in your responses to posters, I suspect that BIS SACDs will disappear in the not-too-distant future.
I do appreciate small record labels such as BIS for whom quality is their most important product. And I certainly appreciate the harsh economic reality that all these small labels face, particularly in today's environment. But if Pentatone, Channel and others can survive releasing only hybrid SACDs, I suspect BIS could do the same.
|
|
|
Post by trntbl January 29, 2009 (204 of 321)
|
|
Indeed, one would not get 600 replies in this forum even if you announce 10 free SACDs to everybody who post a reply.
|
|
|
Post by amatala January 29, 2009 (205 of 321)
|
|
trntbl said:
Indeed, one would not get 600 replies in this forum even if you announce 10 free SACDs to everybody who post a reply.
If you give me 10 SACDs each time I reply, they I am willing to reply 600 times... :-))))
... actually I don't want to seem greedy... 1 SACD/reply is also OK. Then I will reply 6000 times.
No, wait... 5664 only, otherwise there won't be enough titles to give me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil W said:
Several record labels, most notably Pentatone and Channel, release all of their discs as single-inventory, hybrid SACDs. I'm not privy to their balance sheets, but I presume these companies are making a profit. Why can't BIS do the same?
Bissie indicated that this thread would help him gather information about whether forum members were more likely to make purchases of SACD titles and that this would assist him in determining whether to continue releasing SACDs. However, several pages back, Bissie seemed to indicate that sales data alone give him all the information he needs to determine the answer, ignoring post after post telling him that SACD availability was extremely important to most of those who responded and that many titles were purchased only because they were available on SACD. I understand that you wouldn't get the same responses on forums not dedicated to SACD, but why ask the question if you aren't really listening to the answers--and indeed you apparently have your answer already available from sales data? Based on this fact, as well as certain language you employ in your responses to posters, I suspect that BIS SACDs will disappear in the not-too-distant future.
I do appreciate small record labels such as BIS for whom quality is their most important product. And I certainly appreciate the harsh economic reality that all these small labels face, particularly in today's environment. But if Pentatone, Channel and others can survive releasing only hybrid SACDs, I suspect BIS could do the same.
Generally agreed, although one needs to bear in mind that BIS is not based in the same countries as Channel and Pentatone. This means that they will have different levels of taxation etc. to deal with and if the industry is getting close to the margins of profitability then this will of course come into play.
Also, Channel and Pentatone are relatively new companies and so do not have the luxury/costs of keeping their many years of recording heritage in print/available - this is incidentally, where for early digital recordings, I believe the download medium is wonderful for both collectors and companies alike.
Like you, I need a good reason to part with hard earned cash to supplement/replace recordings on my shelves of pieces which I already own multiple accounts. Like you, I am fearful of the general tendency of people to only hear the answers that fit their pre-conceptions (I don't think that Bissie would have been so successful without a certain strong-headedness!) but there is no evidence (yet) that this is what is happening here. I think it more likely to see some of the more musically "interesting" releases revert to RBCD and only the flagship "bankers" being released on SACD. Only time will tell.
Part of the prompting for this will have been the general reining of consumer spending that will effect BIS along with all other companies at this troubled time. Eventually, things will recover. How long is an open ended question at present but hopefully most companies here are structured well enough to survive. They, after all, have listened to those who buy their wares and some are very open to suggestions (this IS you Bissie!) which is markedly different to those who (in the UK at least) have so far gone to the wall.
|
|
|
Post by DSD January 29, 2009 (207 of 321)
|
|
Phil W said:
Several record labels, most notably Pentatone and Channel, release all of their discs as single-inventory, hybrid SACDs. I'm not privy to their balance sheets, but I presume these companies are making a profit. Why can't BIS do the same?
I own only a small number of BIS SACDs. Why? Because I, like many audiophiles, believe that DSD-sourced SACDs are (all other things being equal) sonically superior to hi-rez PCM. After several years of excellent DSD recordings (for example, the Grieg series), BIS decided to switch to hi-rez PCM. I have purchased several PCM SACD offerings from BIS; although they were certainly well recorded, sonically they fell far short of the DSD offerings. I know that Bissie (and some audiophiles) don't share my opinion, but BIS is losing SACD sales to me and others who vastly prefer DSD recordings. Is this a question of sound over music/performance? No. Like many record collectors, I have a large (6000+) CD collection, with multiple recordings of all the warhorses; therefore, my principal interest at present is purchasing the finest-sounding SACDs available (provided, of course, that the music interests me and the performances are of high quality). While many purchasers may not care about the DSD vs. PCM debate, others do and BIS must be losing at least some sales for this reason; also, if it drops SACD, it will lose further sales to those purchasers who are primarily interested in multi-channel recordings.
Bissie indicated that this thread would help him gather information about whether forum members were more likely to make purchases of SACD titles and that this would assist him in determining whether to continue releasing SACDs. However, several pages back, Bissie seemed to indicate that sales data alone give him all the information he needs to determine the answer, ignoring post after post telling him that SACD availability was extremely important to most of those who responded and that many titles were purchased only because they were available on SACD. I understand that you wouldn't get the same responses on forums not dedicated to SACD, but why ask the question if you aren't really listening to the answers--and indeed you apparently have your answer already available from sales data? Based on this fact, as well as certain language you employ in your responses to posters, I suspect that BIS SACDs will disappear in the not-too-distant future.
I do appreciate small record labels such as BIS for whom quality is their most important product. And I certainly appreciate the harsh economic reality that all these small labels face, particularly in today's environment. But if Pentatone, Channel and others can survive releasing only hybrid SACDs, I suspect BIS could do the same.
Phil many, many excellent points. I agree that BIS's earlier SACDs from DSD masters are sonically superior to the latest SACDs from high resolution PCM masters. The Greig series you mentioned was recorded in DSD up until the complete Peer Gynt 2 SACD set. Beginning with Peer Gynt I too noticed the decline in sound quality. The later BIS SACDs from high resolution PCM masters are still 1,000 times better than a low resolution Redbook CD though.
On the other hand I applaud Chandos's move from 24 Bit 96kHz PCM to DSD masters and indeed one of the best sounding SACDs in my collection is a Chandos from a DSD master. Kurt Weill: Symphonies Nos. 1 & 2 - Beaumont
I never did understand Robert's reasoning in switching from DSD to high-rez PCM, perhaps they sold their DSD equipment to Chandos?
Both PentaTone and Channel Classics sell their single inventory SACDs at regular prices and the principles of both companies post here so maybe they can share their secrets with Robert?
One thing that really bothers me though is about half of the SACD owners here said they would still buy BIS recordings on CD if the SACD was not available. Which prompted Robert to make the comment about "dwindling SACD-only buyers". I still do not see the logic in accepting a CD in lieu of a potential SACD further down the road, especially considering the huge sonic differences between between the two formats. I am still baffled that any SACD owner said they would buy any CD if it was not released on SACD.
I think we have our work cut out for us, as BIS is still releasing some SACDs, we have to insure that BIS SACDs sell double or triple the titles of their CD only releases. The way to do this is:
1) Buy only SACDs
2) Tell every one you know about SACDs, let them hear your stereo. If we can increase SACD ownership from 20 million to 100 million by recruiting five lovers lovers each we can insure all SACD/CD hybrids outsell single-layer CDs easily, at which time all CDs will have SACD layers. This really can be done.
3) Send emails to the recording companies requesting the SACD version of a recording you want that they have not yet released on SACD. And tell them you would love to buy the recording if and only if it is released as a SACD/CD hybrid. Tell them that you and all your friends are withholding their money until the SACD/CD hybrid is released.
4) Tell them that SACD/CD hybrids make everyone happy, as they have a CD layer for folks who like low resolution, a high resolution DSD layer that offers high resolution stereo for the stereo lovers and high resolution multi-channel for the surround sound lovers.
And we have to be totally committed to this as SACD/CD hybrids are the only thing that will save SACD and CD.
|
|
|
Post by bissie January 29, 2009 (208 of 321)
|
|
Phil W said:
Several record labels, most notably Pentatone and Channel, release all of their discs as single-inventory, hybrid SACDs. I'm not privy to their balance sheets, but I presume these companies are making a profit. Why can't BIS do the same?
Bissie indicated that this thread would help him gather information about whether forum members were more likely to make purchases of SACD titles and that this would assist him in determining whether to continue releasing SACDs. However, several pages back, Bissie seemed to indicate that sales data alone give him all the information he needs to determine the answer, ignoring post after post telling him that SACD availability was extremely important to most of those who responded and that many titles were purchased only because they were available on SACD. I understand that you wouldn't get the same responses on forums not dedicated to SACD, but why ask the question if you aren't really listening to the answers--and indeed you apparently have your answer already available from sales data? Based on this fact, as well as certain language you employ in your responses to posters, I suspect that BIS SACDs will disappear in the not-too-distant future.
I do appreciate small record labels such as BIS for whom quality is their most important product. And I certainly appreciate the harsh economic reality that all these small labels face, particularly in today's environment. But if Pentatone, Channel and others can survive releasing only hybrid SACDs, I suspect BIS could do the same.
Dear Phil,
...and I also wrote, several times, that the answers on this Forum are VERY important for our decision-making, now and in the future. So if there is one thing I am NOT doing, it is to ignore the avalanche of answers. If I were, then, indeed, why put the question at all.
I have also said that we will continue to release SACD:s, so your suspicion must stand for yourself.
PentaTone presumably has shown a healthy profit. Now with Julia Fischer gone, I wouldn't be so sure. Also, they are having a substantial part of their releases from old Philips Quadro recordings. How many more are there?
BIS makes its own...
On top of that, BIS has a far more wide-reaching repertoire (read adventurous)and we record and release more than Channel and Penta put together. We have proven to our satisfaction that the SACD treatment doesn't help selling obscure repertoire, and therefore we cannot continue that unless the music itself calls for spacial treatment (Aho S12, Pulkkis and a few others).
I am not privy to how Penta and Channel run their businesses - I only know that I respect both the companies and their owners a lot.
I only know how we run BIS, and I know how many million SEK we send to the artists every year.
Until and unless one has all the facts in hand, it is difficult to compare companies and a statement that if Penta and Channel can, BIS should be able to is, while perhaps correct in general, not correct in particular. BIS has a totally different philosophy as regards repertoire, and keeping that intact is priority No. 1.
And, anyway, we ARE still one of the biggest SACD labels, perhaps the biggest. This year alone we're looking at 30+ SACD:s, all original BIS new recordings. That's more than either of Penta or Channel. Or Chandos/Ondine.
Best - Robert
|
|
|
Post by mahlerei January 29, 2009 (209 of 321)
|
|
Yes indeed, PentaTone has the benefit of access to Philips' old Quadro recordings, so their costs must be significantly lower. And even their own catalogue doesn't begin to compare with BIS's in terms of repertoire, so we're not really comparing like with like here.
As for the DSD v PCM debate I doubt most listeners would be able to tell the difference in a blind test. No, I'm not being provocative, as I recently took part in a similar test and discovered that when you're relying on your ears alone these difference become much, much harder to detect.
|
|
|
Post by krisjan January 29, 2009 (210 of 321)
|
|
bissie said:
On top of that, BIS has a far more wide-reaching repertoire (read adventurous)and we record and release more than Channel and Penta put together. We have proven to our satisfaction that the SACD treatment doesn't help selling obscure repertoire, and therefore we cannot continue that unless the music itself calls for spacial treatment (Aho S12, Pulkkis and a few others).
Robert - and this is exactly why the BIS label trumps those others and why I continue to buy many BIS titles whether they are CD or SACD. It is repertoire. I don't need any more war horses - I've got plenty of recordings of those already. Yes, I will still buy a war horse from time to time on SACD (e.g. the wonderful Vanska Van Beethoven series) but I'd rather explore the music I don't already know (preferably on SACD but that won't stop me from buying RBCD).
|
|
