sony "deletes" sacd

I hate Sony more every day.

Your anger is misplaced, beacuse the source doesn't know what he's talking about. One more reason never to listen to store clerks for vital info.

SACDs are still being produced, and from all accounts, Sony has not "deleted" the format or even stopped supporting it. Major SACD announcements were being made as recently as last month, and full SACD playback via HDMI is included in the PS3. In fact, there was a long article on SACD and the PS3 posted earlier this month. I can personally attest to this, as my PS3 not only reads SACDs, but can differentiate between CD, stereo, and multichannel layers on all my SACDs, and plays them back perfectly (i.e. no remixing of 3-channel or 4-channel mixes into 5.1)

Sony created a wonderful format, brought it up to speed, then pulled the legs out from under it. Many of us who invested in SACDs and SACD playback are frustrated at Sony's lack of support for those of us who love the format.

The fact that people think a game console is going to "save" SACD is too funny. I would venture to say that the majority of people who actually get an PS3 will never put an SACD into their units...............ever.

If Sony were still supporting SACD, there would be new releases on their website. Take a peek, it has not been updated for two years.

http://www.sonymusic.com/sacd/

Their new BluRay players do not support SACD.

If anyone responds about the "4000+ SACDs" listed at SA-CD.net, I am going to puke, as many are duplicates, out of print, not sold in the USA, and titles that would not even sell if they were in a cutout bin, at least in the USA.

Yes, there are the upcoming Genesis SACDs, and that is great. However, in the USA, they won't be SACDs. UMG was set to release 150 titles in 2005, and released maybe 5. (They did import the Moody Blues titles from Europe, but find them in a store)

At the total height of SACD's public awareness (the release of DSOTM, the freebie SACD disc in Rolling Stone Magazine), internal Sony decisions curtailed the production of Sony labeled SACDs to a trickle.

I feel no remorse for having ill-will towards Sony with regards to SACD......

:-jon

I think that website has been abandoned years ago.

While certainly not as prolific in terms of releases as Telarc or some other smaller labels, Sony did release a couple of titles just 3 months ago....Jay Goldberg and Danny Elfman. These are single inventory hybrid SACDs. The music may not be to your taste, but the SACDs are out there.

As for Genesis SACDs not being released here in the States....the band is signed to a DVD-A supporting label here. No way of getting around that fact.

Sony is still supporting this format and basically all of their products support it.

Recent Announcement:
SACD Software Production Enhanced - Good news for Sony is that a major new cutting master format has simplified and sped up the production of SACDs around the world, while significantly decreasing costs in the mastering process. Sony and Philips engineers have developed the new Unified Cutting Master Format (UCMF) as a file-based cutting master format which is similar to DDP used for CDs. Previously, SACD production has been a tape-based process, but the new system is not media-dependent, so cutting masters can be created, stored and transported as digital files over a network and archived to optical disc.

Sony disc replication factories in Austria, Japan, and Terra Haute, Indiana are now UCMF-ready, as well as production studios in New York and Hong Kong. Sony has worked with a number of specialist SACD production studios in the development of UCMF, including BK Audio in the Netherlands. Its owner Bastiaan Kuijt explained: "Burning a SACD cutting master to a DVD is much quicker and more convenient than with tape. With UCMF, managing and archiving the master becomes simple and cheap." The introduction of UCMF indicates that Sony still has an ongoing commitment to Super Audio CD, even though it has not recently been releasing many SACDs on its own labels, except for the Living Stereo 3-channel series. Several recent Sony SACD players have been introduced at a wide range of price levels, targeting the large CD player market.

http://www.audaud.com/article.php?ArticleID=2219

Oh, Sony announced last week that it has a new series of RCA Living Stereo SACDs ready for January 2007 release.

Recalled by BB, not Sony.

Is this of all BB's?

The one in Farmington Hills Michigan and Novi Michigan both had multiple rows of SACD's and DVD-A's in the past few months. All the others gave me the "huh" look when I asked for them.

I went back last night to pick up Aerosmith's O'Yeah on SACD and the multiple rows had shrunk to 2 small vertical rows with most everything missing. There were almost all DVD-A's and I did have to search for that copy of Aerosmith but thankfully it was still there and we bought it.

This is all within a weeks time. We saw it there last Tuesday and decided last night to pick it up after checking out some reviews.

Steve Job's is the devil

Sony lost staggering sums on SACD and gave up, it isn't complicated. Would you expect Sony to continue to lose enormous sums every year supporting a format the public doesn't want and the artists want duplicate or triplicate royalties if used? Sony hopes to make money on Blu-ray and is working on that format. As much as I love SACD, it bombed big time. The RIAA sales summary from 2005 indicates half million sold total.

I have no ill will and will continue to play the nearly 200 I own, mostly titles I love and most were made very well. I sure wished everybody else agreed and bought as many. Other companies continue to release titles and some are available for import. I don't expect to purchase many more but I hope to find a few.

Chris

Chris,

Your tireless defense of Sony with regards to SACD is admirable, but misplaced. You cannot have people, on one hand, claim that "SACD is still alive and well, check out the 4000+ titles available on SA-CD.net", while at the same time give the creator a "mulligan" for virtually giving up on the format because "nobody wants it" and "they lost staggering sums of money" on it.

If a company creates a product, puts it out to market, gets people to buy it, buy hardware, pays other companies to create product in their format, uses it's infulence to cause a major label to change a high profile release (DSOTM) from a competiting format to their format, pays to have a sample product inserted free in a major publication, then, a month later virually withdraws from producing that product, cancelling titles that they previously were promoting - to me that is nothing more than abuse of the buying public.

If they had used the money they spent on "Enchanced Stereo" DualDiscs or Redbook CD rootkits to instead further release DESIRABLE HIGH PROFILE titles that generated the average music lover to seek out SACD, then I would feel less animocity towards them.

The SACD is a perfect delivery package that should have become more popular. There should have been players in cars out of Detroit, Japan & Europe, there should have been big titles released as Hybrid SACD only. You should not be able to FIND a redbook DSOTM in a store today, the SACD should be the only disc version available.

Putting product in peoples hands will sell hardware. Putting decks in peoples cars will sell software. (Where would XM and SIRIUS be today without the radios coming installed in cars?) There are correct ways to do things, and there are wrong ways. If you come out with a product, you have to follow through. The examples are too many to list.

If you feel bad that Sony "lost staggering sums of money" on SACD, well, it's their own fault really. You and I did our part, we bought the stuff. We searched hard for it. We love it.

"Sony - No Baloney?"

I think the "no" does not apply in the case of SACD.

That is a comment worth discussing. If we look at SACD and DVD-A, they both offered a high resolution audio format together with (optional) 5.1 sound. The SACD was universally playable - as 5.1 in a SACD player and as a CD in a CD player. The DVD-A was almost as universal except that it could be played on DVD-V and DVD-A players, both with 5.1 sound. As we all know, you cannot get 5.1 sound off a SACD without a SACD player.

So considering ubiquity, one could argue that DVD players are almost as common in homes as CD players. For portable players and in cars, I think CD players far outnumber DVD players and anyway, these days portable music has pretty much been taken over my MP3 etc.

This leads to the next point when we think of Sony and their attempts to stop copying. Their root kit adventure signals just how much they were concerned about illegal copying of their music.

I haven't tried but I suspect it would be relatively easy to rip the CD layer of a SACD to MP3 and put onto your iPod or whatever. However it's not so easy to rip the DD or DTS track off a DVD-A and move to that to a portable player. While the tools are free, the process is not straightforward.

So you would think Sony would have had more to gain supporting DVD-A than come up with DSD format which is in fact easier to rip.

I can play and purchase both formats but like most folks, believe that the formats are dying, alas.

My views anyway


Larry

I don't believe they'll die quite yet. Doesn't make any sense - there's no replacement. Quadraphonic LPs died because they were an exposed technology, that involved extra speakers that would be used for no other formats. That's not the case any more.

The number of homes with surround speaker set-ups is increasing, because of film DVDs, and cheap home-theatre-in-a-box systems. And even those cheap systems can play the video zone of DVD-As, and a number of Sony's HTIBs can play SACD. Multichannel music, especially through DVD-Audio, is something accessible to more and more people. It's increasingly worthwhile to offer surround versions.

My view may be a little warped, of course, because I've only just really discovered the formats this year It's just taking off, you see... Consumer equipment's much more capable now than it was last time I upgraded in 2000.

There are over 4,000 SACD releases and Sony did lose a lot of money developing, promoting and trying to sell SACD. I don't guess I understand your points. If you think Sony should have tried longer and continued to lose money, of course you are entitled to your opinion. The decision had to be that there was no end in sight to the losses and other opportunities looked better. I don't know what would have happened if Sony had continued with attempts to reach the mass market. I believe it would have failed miserably and Sony would have looked even more foolish than with the course they chose.

Chris

Well, not 100% correct. Let's not forget that Sony, in their infinite wisdom, produced single-layer SACD's at first, playable only in SACD players. Toys In the Attic, The Stranger, Tapestry, Boston, James Taylor, Jeff Beck, lots of classical, etc.--all single-layer. It was not until later that hybrids were released.

Now, of course, many of these early single-layer Sony SACD's stand as some of the finer ones released, but it was typical Sony short-sightedness that caused them to be released as single-layer in the first place.

FWIW, I was in J&R in NYC the other day and I only could find DVD-A, there were no SACDs in sight. I was surprised that the clerk even knew what I was talking about when I asked. The remaining selection of DVD-A was also pitiful.

I did pick up the "Enhanced" Love disk, but I haven't popped it into the player yet as I haven't hooked up my rear speakers.

In any case, I'm not surprised hi-rez died. Even though I was interested in it a few years back, it never caught on with me. If they didn't get me, they're not going to get your average Joe.

I didn't know that since I got into MCH relatively late. That only serves to reinforce how stupid Sony can be at times. I like Sony gear but what they do to the marketplace in the goal of dominance is often quite naive and stupid.

I would second that. As a hifi enthusiast I was aware of SACD and DVD-A when they were released but never bothered to venture into it since I thought I would have to upgrade my HT system (which was basically a DD5.1 setup).

Had I done the research and realised then that I could enjoy the multichannel aspect of the format (at least on DVD-A) with existing equipment I might have upgraded a bit earlier so I could listen to even the DD5.1 tracks.

I can imagine how the average consumer would look at MCH audio and not really understand it all and the typical salesperson in a store would probably not be that helpful either

Larry

I've been following HT (and recently Hi-res music) for about 2 years now. Not as long as otherse here. But from my perspective it seems to me that Sony:

1. Tried to make SACD a high-end, audiophile product first.
2. Made the technology to play SACD propriety. A Sony 'exclusive'.
3. Charged high license fees for anyone else who wanted it in their hardware.

Not until this last year have I seen more lower priced DVD players that also support DVDA and/or SACD. I'm thinking that Sony has really lowered the price on the licensing for the hardware. It may not have all the marketing pizazz as when it was first introduced, but at least now it is making it's way more into the mainstream where it is more visible.

My 2cents.

Oblio98, Of course you are absolutely right on....again. I find it amazing that the music division of Sony was finished with SACD 2 years ago, yet the electronics division really began pushing their SACD players (including several budget models), in the last 18 months. I personally boycott this brand.

Don't know where this notion came from....the last Sony SACD release was 2 months (Danny Elfman). Not to mention the just announced Living Stereo SACDs being released next month.

2. Made the technology to play SACD propriety. A Sony 'exclusive'.


This has always been the problem with Sony - they have delusions of grandeur that belie their position as a purveyor of mass-market goods. I refuse to buy their products as well.

I thought Sony had bought Columbia Records, Epic, etc. How come these artists haven't been reissued on SACD Hybrids. Springsteen, Simon and Garfunkel, Santana, etc. If not in Surround, at the very least they could be released in Enhanced Stereo.

NBC Nightly News had a story last night that claimed the Baby Boomers were still the largest consumers of recorded music. Granted it's an ever dwindling pie, but at least it something. Today's youth has much more choices than the kids of the 70's have to spend their limited entertainment dollars. It's a different world and Sony needs to realize this and quit focusing on piracy. Besides anything I can hear, I can copy, maybe with small dip in quality, but it's still sufficient for MP3s. How was this any different 25 years ago when I made tapes for my Sony Walkman. iPods are the 21st century's Walkman. Yeah too bad Sony didn't invent it. You missed the boat this time, get over it.

Trying to save some bucks? Raid the vaults for those old quadrophonic mixes. I think any sales would just result in "found money" with little investment.

Meanwhile give away the technology to play SACDs. All DVD players should be capable of playing the enhanced sound of SACDs, as umbiquitous as DTS compatibility now is on today's players.

BlueRay? Forget it--Sony will drop this as well. In a few years they'll realize that the billions in profits aren't coming and Joe Six-Pack is happy with his $40 DVD player.

ematcion,

I respect your love for SACD very highly. I too am a strong supporter of SACD, and frankly wish I could run down and buy SACDs every week. I think the format is great, and when it comes down to pure audio, I even feel that an SACD will out perform a DVD-Audio.

However, I cannot feel "sorry" for Sony, or feel bad that they lost a ton of money on the format, because they themselves are to blame for their lack of support, and let me, again, describe why.

Go back to 2003. The HiRez formats were about 3 years old. They were getting some press, but not a lot of press. Sony had released a lot of titles in 2000-2001-2002-2003. Good stuff, popular stuff, classics, jazz, a very nice assortment of titles. Good coverage of surround as well as stereo. Sony had gotten other lables to create SACDs, most notibly UMG.

When DSOTM was rumored to being prepared for surround HiRez release on Capitol/EMI, a label which was in the DVD-A camp, they used their leverage to convince Capitol/EMI & the artist to release the title on SACD. (This was the ONLY Capitol SACD ever released! Past and future Capitol titles would be and were DVD-A). When DSOTM SACD was released, there was a lot of press. There were articles in magazines, newspapers, etc,. all pointing to the fact that to hear it in surround, you needed to have an SACD player, and THAT was the way it should be heard! SACD was prominent in the press releases and notes on the title.

This was a very high profile release, and got SACD a lot of good, positive press. Then, shortly after that, in November 2003, Rolling Stone created a special issue that highlighted the GREATEST ALBUMS OF ALL TIME. In that issue was included a "free" promotional SACD with great tracks on it:

1. Bob Dylan - "Simple Twist of Fate" - from Blood on the Tracks (Columbia CH 90323)
2. Pink Floyd - "Money" - from The Dark Side of the Moon (Capitol Records CDP 7243-5-82136-2-1)
3. The Who - "Pinball Wizard" - from The Who's Tommy (Geffen Records B0001386-36)
4. Herbie Hancock - "Watermelon Man" - from Headhunters (Columbia CS 65123)
5. Norah Jones - "Come Away With Me" - from Come Away With Me (Blue Note Records 7243-5-41747-2-8)
6. Elton John - "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" - from Goodbye Yellow Brick Road (Island Records B0001478-40)
7. Billy Joel - "Movin' Out" - from The Stranger (Columbia CS 69384)
8. Miles Davis "Blue In Green" - from Kind of Blue (Columbia CS 64935)
9. Aerosmith "Sweet Emotion" - from Toys In The Attic (Columbia CS 57362)

There was also a promotion for the readers to take their free SACD into a store and playback to see if they had won a prize. On that sampler SACD was the first track from the upcoming Elton John SACD releases that would be out early in the next year.

Universal had already announced SACDs from Elton John, Eric Clapton, Derek & the Dominoes, Michael McDonald, and many other high profile artists including Steely Dan. SACD was at the very height of it's popularity and this could have been the point where it broke out into the mainstream.

However, it was at this exact point that Sony, somewhere in it's boardrooms, dropped the ball and virtually withdrew from releasing SACDs, instead giving us "enhanced stereo" DualDiscs. Here was a time when they could have come through with SACDs from their most popular artists and back catalog artists. Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, Bob Dylan, current chart topping artists, and they only let out a trickle of pop/rock/folk titles.

In Decemeber 2003 they released an SACD by the Thorns.
In August 2004 they released an SACD by Incubus
In August 2004 they released an SACD by the Indigo Girls
In August 2004 they released an SACD by David Sanchez
In August 2004 they released an SACD by John Mayer (Heavier Things)
In June 2005 Sony UK released an SACD by Rory Gallagher
In June 2005 Sony UK released an SACD of Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds
In December 2005 they released an SACD by Duran Duran
In December 2005 they released an SACD by John Legend
In December 2005 they released an SACD by John Mayer (Room for Squares)
In December 2005 they released an SACD by Switchfoot
In January 2006 they released an SACD by Yo-Yo Ma (Not quite pop/rock/folk)

That's it! In THREE YEARS, these are the SACDs released by Sony. In 2004, UMG carried the SACD flag quite admirably, but soon left it flapping in the breeze, along with many SACD fans.

There are certainly labels like Telarc and Chesky that are doing a great job, but the bottom line is, the SACD market was at it's peak, and it's creator bailed out.

I'm sorry, but those are the facts. It really irritates me no end, because I love SACD and want more. The worst part is that there was a lot left on the table, and I truely believe that if it were handled better, the format would be doing so much better than it is.

Thanks Oblio--

Doesn't exactly inspire faith in Sony sticking with BlueRay--does it?

I just rec'd news that future UMG surround titles will not be on SACD, so pick up those Elton John, Moody Blues, etc. discs while they last.

oblio98,

Excellent analysis....you have no arguments from me regarding Sony for retreating from its own creation. However, I just don't think Sony has "abandoned" the format just yet.

BTW, Universal Music, one of SACD's biggest supporters, also "abandoned" the format after its SACD release of "The Carpenters: The Singles 169-1981"....until the recent importation of the 5 Moody Blues SACD titles.

Clearly, the current target audience for SACD is in the classical and jazz genres. Early on, Sony released a good deal of pop/rock titles on (single-layer) SACD, but I think it was disappointed at the sales of these titles. Perhaps the company saw better sales with its classical and jazz SACD titles? Who knows?

Don't forget there was also the issue of multiple royalties on multi-channel hybrid SACD when Sony announced the pending release of Beyonce's "Danerously in Love". This title was subsequently released....just not in the US.

For the record, Sony also released John Mayer's "Room For Square" and Switchfoot's "The Beautiful Letdown" on multi-channel hybrid SACD in December 2005. For January 2006, the company added Yo-Yo Ma's "Yo-Yo Ma plays Ennio Morricone", the soundtracks to the movie "The Phantom of the Opera" and "Zorro".

re Moody Blues - the Fontana label was responsible for bringing those titles over to the U.S. UMG was not involved.

Hi Felix,

So what's going on? Any more details?