Blu-CD or SACD? (not the new Blu-spec CD, discussing profile 3.0 BD vs. SACD)

[frenchglen]

What do you guys think of the future of the SACD format?

The Blu-ray "Profile 3" doesn't seem to be a new format with different codecs or anything, but just a Blu-ray Disc with no obligation for BD-J. It will just emphasise the audio. Assuming this:


Blu-CD Advantages
- Already compatible with PS3 and every other BD player. No need for new players.
- Ability to use PCM which simplifies the mastering process for the record companies
- Ability for more than 5.1 channels (SACD is only up to 5.1)
- Variety of codecs to choose from, and plenty of space for them all.


SACD Advantages
- Thousands of great releases already on the market
- Um that's all I can think of


I think they should call it something like Blu-CD. It needs to have CD in it, so people instantly know what it's meant to be. People will associate the "Blu" with high definition so they conclude it must be a high resolution CD that you listen to. DVD-Audio was like "What? so it's a DVD (instantly thinking video), um, with audio on it? But movies already have audio? What??" It was a stupid name. SACD is great because it is marketed as a type of "ultra CD" to consumers. Maybe it's more successful because it's simpler. It's a type of "CD", not some stupid complicated format only understood by audiophiles and techies (though I love DVD-Audio, don't get me wrong).

"Profile 3" just needs to be marketed as a simple ultra-quality surround CD playable in the lounge room on your PS3/blu-ray player, with optional extras such as video clips, etc.


So what do you think?


-- fg --