SACD/DVD-A dead

[dobyblue]

Yeah this is the first five albums after Peter Gabriel left.

Trick of the Tail
Wind and Wuthering
And Then There Were Three
Abacab
Duke

It's 1976-1982.

Each album is a two disc set. The first is a DSD Multi-channel/Stereo SACD and CD and the second features the album on DVD-Video in DTS 96/24 and Dolby Digital 48/24. It also features four or five videos including 2007 shot footage with each member of the band specific to the album that it's on.

The box set features an additional disc of songs also in the CD/SACD and DVD-V DTS/DD formats (ie - two discs)

There are 12 discs overall in the box set. The second one will come out later this year and will be the four albums after Duke and then in 2008 we'll get the first five albums which had Peter Gabriel on vocals.

I got mine from HMV Japan for 11,000 Yen, which is a steal. A far cry from the US$309 you'll pay on Amazon. The Japanese version was an NTSC European Union release from Virgin. All DVD-Video segments are Region Free and NTSC.

http://sa-cd.net/showtitle/4429

I can't say enough about the quality of the remixes - they are nothing short of brilliant.

[dobyblue]

As long as there are no SACD-ROM drives for PC's, SACD's will remain uncracked and this is why you'll continue to see the format supported by Sony and others.

With the PS3 supporting SACD and direct DSD through HDMI I think you'll see more SACD releases for popular music before you see less. Sony could really take advantage of the PS3 by releasing deluxe editions of some of their more popular artist's back catalogues like Pearl Jam and Dave Matthews Band.

[THE STUD]

Originally Posted by Ashplisken

They didn't really "do it" with dvd (referring to one universal format) as DVD-A never took off. The library available is very limited and the fanbase is even smaller. On top of that, it took years after DVD was introduced to a mainstream marketplace for DVD-A to be introduced to a mainstream marketplace. People stuck with CD and downloaded crap quality downloads all through the success of DVDs. It's the sad truth, but I'm telling you that the general public just doesn't care.

Yeah, to me, and you (all), bonus features and high-res audio on a music disc are quite alluring, your average consumer just doesn't care. Most people never even bother with their extra features on DVDs even after going out of their way to buy the "2-Disc special collectors ultra mega fantastic criterion super happy edition". Yes, it is sad but terribly true.

i blame apple and my stupid ipod. AAC is krap quality, and it's now everywhere. i wouldn't mind downloads if they were full size, but then still buring is lower than what you can buy on cd.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

With the PS3 supporting SACD and direct DSD through HDMI I think you'll see more SACD releases for popular music before you see less. Sony could really take advantage of the PS3 by releasing deluxe editions of some of their more popular artist's back catalogues like Pearl Jam and Dave Matthews Band.

You would hope this, but I think one of the biggest reasons SACD/DVD-Audio failed was the sheer *LACK* of mainstream titles. It's as if Blu-ray (or HD DVD for that matter) were releasing things like My Left Foot or older, more obscure or non-mainstream titles.

PS: Am I the only person in the world who can't stand the Dave Matthews Band?

Perhaps it's my sober lifestyle

[WriteSimply]

Well Sony Music did release John Mayer's Room For Squares and John Legend's Get Lifted on hybrid SACDs. Can't get more contemporary than that. However both releases were not day and date.

Key thing to do to re-launch SACD is to press ONLY hybrid SACDs for all releases. Just like what Atlantic did with Rob Thomas' Something To Be, which is only available as a DualDisc. Pricing of these hybrid SACDs must also be pocket friendly.

If Sony Music can do this for all of their releases without even doing a formal re-launch, then SACD will thrive.


fuad

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

You would hope this, but I think one of the biggest reasons SACD/DVD-Audio failed was the sheer *LACK* of mainstream titles. It's as if Blu-ray (or HD DVD for that matter) were releasing things like My Left Foot or older, more obscure or non-mainstream titles.

PS: Am I the only person in the world who can't stand the Dave Matthews Band?

Perhaps it's my sober lifestyle

I don't think being sober's got anything to do with it. They are great musicians and I've also had the priviledge of seeing guests like Neil Young, Warren Haynes and Santana join the band on stage for covers of Watchtower, Cortez, Free World and others. Although I've seen them 32 times so that's helped.

Elton John, Billy Joel and Peter Gabriel were all early releases on SACD. I feel the biggest flaw was the cost of the player and extra cabling and zero promotion.

[AlexKx]

These Genesis box sets you all keep going on and on about would not have to be two disc sets each if they were on Blu-Ray.

...and for the poster who said that people don't care about bonus features fine. Then why are there hundreds and hundreds of titles of music d.v.d.s at Best Buy and for twenty five years now recordings artists keep releasing them time and time again? Then why are there box sets of these bonus features that I keep talking about? Obviously there is a market for them...niche or not someone apparently buys them. Honestly if you were to buy a c.d. you would choose one for just the music or the one that has loads of features you could get for maybe a slight higher price if it had them? The latter for me...

What's the point of SACD when it would be yet ANOTHER format for the public to have to switch to?! You all would think THAT would be logical instead of one format for EVERYTHING?! HELLO DOES ANYONE HEAR ME?!!


Dave Mathew's band are horrible. I can't stand jam bands because I don't do drugs.

[dobyblue]

Alex that's an incredibly ignorant statement.

I don't do drugs either. I don't like the Grateful Dead, but I can appreciate that they were good musicians. The guy's last name is Matthews, so you can't put an apostrophe there.

You're obviously no musician.

Also there are millions of SACD players in the world right now.

If these Genesis sets were on Blu-ray there would be many people that wouldn't be able to listen to them. How much sense would that make? Seems a little stupid to me.

SACD has set audio. If it were on Blu-ray they could be anywhere from 24/48 to 24/192 5.1 or 24/96 7.1

I don't want to gamble on the audio level thanks very much. With SACD I know what I'm getting, which is why it's been so successful amongst audiophiles.

[Ashplisken]

I think I may have to go ahead and pick up some SACD now... you guys make it sound great.

Oh, and just to lend my support on the side conversation: I am a musician (have been for about 9 years now), and I cannot stand Dave Matthews or his band. It's simply a personal opinion and there's certainly no reason for such a heated argument about it.

[AlexKx]

Do you honestly present this, "24/48 to 24/192 5.1 or 24/96 7.1" as information that anyone would know what you are talking about? That was quite entertaining and funny! In the meantime if there were Blu-Ray discs for the music industry they could include all the Genesis stuff on one disc foar each of the studio l.p. releases plus more material on each disc than the SACDs. Yet you want an inferior product that has been out for years now and yet the public have clearly decided for WHATEVER reason that they don't care about it instead of going with this one format that could be used for everything. Na. I don't think so.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by AlexKx

Do you honestly present this, "24/48 to 24/192 5.1 or 24/96 7.1" as information that anyone would know what you are talking about? That was quite entertaining and funny! In the meantime if there were Blu-Ray discs for the music industry they could include all the Genesis stuff on one disc foar each of the studio l.p. releases plus more material on each disc than the SACDs. Yet you want an inferior product that has been out for years now and yet the public have clearly decided for WHATEVER reason that they don't care about it instead of going with this one format that could be used for everything. Na. I don't think so.

You're very ignorant, that's plain to see.

The majority of people that post here know exactly what 24/48 and 24/192 mean.

Sorry that you don't - perhaps you're a little out of your depth.

"Hey let's put all our albums out on one disc - that will really make us some money"

Please, are you that naive?

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Ashplisken

I think I may have to go ahead and pick up some SACD now... you guys make it sound great.

Oh, and just to lend my support on the side conversation: I am a musician (have been for about 9 years now), and I cannot stand Dave Matthews or his band. It's simply a personal opinion and there's certainly no reason for such a heated argument about it.

I don't like the Grateful Dead, yet I would never say "I can't stand Jerry Garcia or his band" because it's pretty ignorant. What is it they did that makes you not be able to stand them? Is it their constant support of over 60 charities across the world through Bama Rags?

When I heard Bruce Hornsby doing Jack Straw and Jane's Addiction doing Ripple I realised that I like the Grateful Dead's songwriting, I just don't like how they play it.

Personal opinions only come about through personal interaction. What is it you don't like about "his band" (which it isn't, it's just the name of the band)?
Is it the fact that the majority of the band are black? Is it the fact that their drummer is too polyrythmic for you and you prefer mostly 4/4 rock? Is it the jazz and blues influences you don't like? The African groove?

To make blanket statements is rather uninsightful and doesn't lend anything to any conversation.

PS - SACD is great and AlexKx doesn't have much of a clue what is going on here. He doesn't understand the technical points being made for and against Blu-ray having audio.

Alex - SonyBMG already have a site up for Blu-ray. If you think they don't intend to release some music on it I think you're dreaming; but to suggest that SACD is a has been format is rather shortsighted. The reasons why have already been explained to you and all you can come back with is "that's funny"

[THE STUD]

until SACD gets some serious scores/soundtracks, count me out, and count me onboard for a new format. LOTR came out on DVD-A, and that's the only one I"ve seen that's a great score. the rest are still on that stupid CD format, and people need to get off of it.

problem is that for you to truly appreciate HD audio, you must have a nice system, the average guy has a tiny little box set with a few satellites and an overrated subwoofer that couldn't fill a room with any quality sound. I have a marantz rcvr and dvd and JBL tower system, so I love the higher quality audio.

SACD has few choices in my area of interest. Scores need the HD touch because they are much more susceptible to static or phantom sound, and because SACD has like 5 of them, I can't take them serious or see them as being anything more than a dying format. fortunately my LOTR on DVD-A can play on any kind of dvd player, of course not the advanced resolution, but the dd can.

any format that slices CD prices I will like. unfortunately people are still quarelling over DVD-A and SACD and CD quality. we need this new format because the old ones still have too much confusion and not enough popularity. Blu-Ray music could allow the storage of multiple albums on one single disc in HD. imagine not having to switch discs anymore for ur favorite songs. WOW.

basically blu-ray should make a BD-A just like DVD-A but with higher quality and more room for extras. imageine listening to a song and being able to read all about that song, have an image of the actual sheet music, read a bio on the composer/artists, have pics from the movie(for scores) and so forth. SACD is just a glorified CD, we need NEW GENERATION, not just something u throw in the player and it goes, no extras, no images, no anything.
imagine albums in DD True HD. !!!!!!!!!!!

[PeterTHX]

What is it you don't like about "his band" (which it isn't, it's just the name of the band)?

Perhaps it's Dave Matthews way of singing stoned/half asleep?
The lyrics some 19 year old college girl would find deep?
That goofy foot shuffle while playing guitar that makes him look like an overcaffinated Special Olympics participant?
His divisive political commentary?

ANYWAY...(back to topic)

DVD-Audio is pretty much dead and buried. With the PS3 being a huge platform for HD Audio discs I would love to see record companies release DAY AND DATE mainstream, dual layered CD/SACD discs for general consumption.

[AlexKx]

DolbyBlue please pay attention to what I have said and don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say. I NEVER said that all albums should be on one disc. Duh! I've been VERY clear about that. I don't know how to make myself anymore clear as to what I think should be included on the INDIVIDUAL albums when put on Blu-Ray discs. I am also afraid that you have a distorted reality if you think that the public when told, "24/48 to 24/192 5.1 or 24/96 7.1" have any idea as to what you are talking about. Who cares what I think anyway?! I've been talking about the public who would be buying these products not some elitists.

[Deciazulado]

Give Peace a chance

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by THE STUD

until SACD gets some serious scores/soundtracks, count me out, and count me onboard for a new format. LOTR came out on DVD-A, and that's the only one I"ve seen that's a great score. the rest are still on that stupid CD format, and people need to get off of it.

You can't blame the SACD format just because LOTR was issued on DVD-A. Technically the score can also be issued on SACD but it just won't get any higher resolution.

problem is that for you to truly appreciate HD audio, you must have a nice system, the average guy has a tiny little box set with a few satellites and an overrated subwoofer that couldn't fill a room with any quality sound.

Not quite true. A neighbor of mind have always disliked the way his CDs sound when he played it on his Sony HTiB. Then I put in the Depeche Mode SACD and he was blown away.

SACD has few choices in my area of interest. Scores need the HD touch because they are much more susceptible to static or phantom sound, and because SACD has like 5 of them, I can't take them serious or see them as being anything more than a dying format. fortunately my LOTR on DVD-A can play on any kind of dvd player, of course not the advanced resolution, but the dd can.

I've no idea what the first half of this paragraph is about. But hybrid SACDs can be played on any CD player.

any format that slices CD prices I will like. unfortunately people are still quarelling over DVD-A and SACD and CD quality. we need this new format because the old ones still have too much confusion and not enough popularity. Blu-Ray music could allow the storage of multiple albums on one single disc in HD. imagine not having to switch discs anymore for ur favorite songs. WOW.

Read the bolded sentence. Then read the rest of your paragraph. Think before you respond.

basically blu-ray should make a BD-A just like DVD-A but with higher quality and more room for extras. imageine listening to a song and being able to read all about that song, have an image of the actual sheet music, read a bio on the composer/artists, have pics from the movie(for scores) and so forth. SACD is just a glorified CD, we need NEW GENERATION, not just something u throw in the player and it goes, no extras, no images, no anything.
imagine albums in DD True HD. !!!!!!!!!!!

DVD-A are already priced higher than regular CDs. Some of it have lyrics, videos, and bios. Yet you don't see a huge influx of people getting it. Launching a BD-A format is not going to get scores of people into HD audio - not unless the music labels back it 100%, which was why SACD and DVD-A didn't take off.


fuad

[AlexKx]

I agree with what you last said WriteSimply. DVD-Audio might have intended to be "A" next format or "THE" next format but it ended up being more of "special feature" of a format which is fine as I think that a proper format that would incompass all of the above would be warranted. Espcially one done right with loads of special features. The music industry are simply going to have to do some big work to get themselves going again competing against downloads. I for one think it would be great...even though I admit that I have no idea if it would be something the public would except even though I desperatly hope so.

[THE STUD]

Originally Posted by WriteSimply

You can't blame the SACD format just because LOTR was issued on DVD-A. Technically the score can also be issued on SACD but it just won't get any higher resolution.

Not quite true. A neighbor of mind have always disliked the way his CDs sound when he played it on his Sony HTiB. Then I put in the Depeche Mode SACD and he was blown away.

I've no idea what the first half of this paragraph is about. But hybrid SACDs can be played on any CD player.

Read the bolded sentence. Then read the rest of your paragraph. Think before you respond.

DVD-A are already priced higher than regular CDs. Some of it have lyrics, videos, and bios. Yet you don't see a huge influx of people getting it. Launching a BD-A format is not going to get scores of people into HD audio - not unless the music labels back it 100%, which was why SACD and DVD-A didn't take off.


fuad

well, you know why people don't buy these albums? because they don't have the big hits, end of discussion. I've seen albums on SACD that I've never in my life heard about, seen on cd stands, or heard. and why did you write "think before you respond" ? don't understand that at all

and what was the thing about me blaming sacd about the lotr release? what blame? i simply said that they didn't have it, and that dvd-a did. big woopty dooh. point i was making is that that's the only big score released on either format, and that's why i can't embrace them anymore, they have nothing to offer me, NOTHING.

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by THE STUD

well, you know why people don't buy these albums? because they don't have the big hits, end of discussion. I've seen albums on SACD that I've never in my life heard about, seen on cd stands, or heard.

People didn't buy because neither SACD nor DVD-A got the big push from the music labels. Universal Music gave it a go with both formats and so did Sony Music (though Sony Music was greedy not to include hybrids early on). Because there was no real push - IE top 40 albums - the format didn't grow.

and why did you write "think before you respond" ? don't understand that at all

Here's what you said:

Originally Posted by THE STUD

any format that slices CD prices I will like. unfortunately people are still quarelling over DVD-A and SACD and CD quality. we need this new format because the old ones still have too much confusion and not enough popularity. Blu-Ray music could allow the storage of multiple albums on one single disc in HD. imagine not having to switch discs anymore for ur favorite songs. WOW.

Goodbye Yellow Brick Road is one dual-LP album. On CDs, it's on TWO disc. The same thing with the version on SACD. I don't know about the DVD-A.

If you want to put all of Elton John's pre-80s albums on one BD, technically possible due to the capacity, you CAN. But don't think for a second that the BD is going to be cheaper than the CD ESPECIALLY when you compiled all of those albums on one disc.

And don't think that there won't be a premium over the CD versions either because you ARE paying for close to the master version of these albums.


fuad