"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Same sort of thing in MVC (?) St Ives, Cambs - I asked the two (female)
assistants doing *not a lot* behind the counter if they had any SACDs a
year or two back and got blank looks from both of them. (No wonder SACDs
didn't take off!!)


SACDs would have taken off had they satisfied a consumer demand, but they
didn't. Too often the big consumer electronics comapanies get off on the
cleverness of their new technology and forget that the product has to offer
the consumer something (s)he is willing to pay for. SACD simply didn't do
that.

David.

In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Same sort of thing in MVC (?) St Ives, Cambs - I asked the two (female)
assistants doing *not a lot* behind the counter if they had any SACDs a
year or two back and got blank looks from both of them. (No wonder SACDs
didn't take off!!)


SACDs would have taken off had they satisfied a consumer demand, but they
didn't. Too often the big consumer electronics comapanies get off on the
cleverness of their new technology and forget that the product has to offer
the consumer something (s)he is willing to pay for. SACD simply didn't do
that.

That said, had the major labels both supported hybrids and stopped
producing cds, few would have complained and the real benefits such as
multi-channel capability would have been available.

Stephen

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Same sort of thing in MVC (?) St Ives, Cambs - I asked the two
(female)
assistants doing *not a lot* behind the counter if they had any SACDs
a
year or two back and got blank looks from both of them. (No wonder
SACDs
didn't take off!!)


SACDs would have taken off had they satisfied a consumer demand, but they
didn't. Too often the big consumer electronics comapanies get off on the
cleverness of their new technology and forget that the product has to
offer
the consumer something (s)he is willing to pay for. SACD simply didn't do
that.

That said, had the major labels both supported hybrids and stopped
producing cds, few would have complained and the real benefits such as
multi-channel capability would have been available.


Hybrids are expensive to make, and have lower yields than plain CDs. I am
far from convinced that multi-channel capability is a "benefit" for music
recordings; the late and unlamented "quadraphonic" systems of the '70s
failed miserably to attract public interest and Dolby surround systems have
only sold in relatively small numbers to the "home cinema" brigade. If the
public had wanted SACD they'd have bought it - they didn't.

David.

In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Same sort of thing in MVC (?) St Ives, Cambs - I asked the two
(female)
assistants doing *not a lot* behind the counter if they had any SACDs
a
year or two back and got blank looks from both of them. (No wonder
SACDs
didn't take off!!)


SACDs would have taken off had they satisfied a consumer demand, but they
didn't. Too often the big consumer electronics comapanies get off on the
cleverness of their new technology and forget that the product has to
offer
the consumer something (s)he is willing to pay for. SACD simply didn't do
that.

That said, had the major labels both supported hybrids and stopped
producing cds, few would have complained and the real benefits such as
multi-channel capability would have been available.


Hybrids are expensive to make, and have lower yields than plain CDs. I am
far from convinced that multi-channel capability is a "benefit" for music
recordings; the late and unlamented "quadraphonic" systems of the '70s
failed miserably to attract public interest and Dolby surround systems have
only sold in relatively small numbers to the "home cinema" brigade. If the
public had wanted SACD they'd have bought it - they didn't.

Manufacturing would have improved and costs diminished as volume
increased. In the US home theater receivers and surround systems are
ubiquitous while one must search for stereo-only. With a single
inventory of hybrids, the consumer would have bought them without a
thought.

Of course, the real benefit of SACD was to Sony/Philips as the cd
license was running out and a switch would have been a way to replace
that revenue.

Stephen

"MiNe 109" wrote

In the US home theater receivers and surround systems are
ubiquitous while one must search for stereo-only.

Search for a stereo-only what? Music system?

Of course, the real benefit of SACD was to Sony/Philips as the cd
license was running out and a switch would have been a way to replace
that revenue.

Precisely, the benefit of SACD would have been to the manufacturer, not the
consumer. SACD wasn't quite as spectacular a failure as RCA's ill-fated
Selectavision video disk system, but it still joins the ranks of systems
that didn't make it.

David.

In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote

In the US home theater receivers and surround systems are
ubiquitous while one must search for stereo-only.

Search for a stereo-only what? Music system?

Yes. The usual package is the home-theater-in-a-box with a receiver and
mini speakers.

This applies to the big consumer electronic stores. It's also hard for
the consumer to find a specialty shop: there are several dealers in my
city but only one maintains a store front.

Of course, the real benefit of SACD was to Sony/Philips as the cd
license was running out and a switch would have been a way to replace
that revenue.

Precisely, the benefit of SACD would have been to the manufacturer, not the
consumer. SACD wasn't quite as spectacular a failure as RCA's ill-fated
Selectavision video disk system, but it still joins the ranks of systems
that didn't make it.

Yes, indeed, except possibly as a niche for surround-sound classical
fans.

Stephen

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Same sort of thing in MVC (?) St Ives, Cambs - I asked the two
(female)
assistants doing *not a lot* behind the counter if they had any
SACDs
a
year or two back and got blank looks from both of them. (No wonder
SACDs
didn't take off!!)


SACDs would have taken off had they satisfied a consumer demand, but
they
didn't. Too often the big consumer electronics comapanies get off on
the
cleverness of their new technology and forget that the product has to
offer
the consumer something (s)he is willing to pay for. SACD simply didn't
do
that.

That said, had the major labels both supported hybrids and stopped
producing cds, few would have complained and the real benefits such as
multi-channel capability would have been available.


Hybrids are expensive to make, and have lower yields than plain CDs. I am
far from convinced that multi-channel capability is a "benefit" for music
recordings; the late and unlamented "quadraphonic" systems of the '70s
failed miserably to attract public interest and Dolby surround systems
have
only sold in relatively small numbers to the "home cinema" brigade. If
the
public had wanted SACD they'd have bought it - they didn't.

Manufacturing would have improved and costs diminished as volume
increased.


Yes, by about the end of week 2....


In the US home theater receivers and surround systems are
ubiquitous while one must search for stereo-only.


Stereo amps are hard to find in the US?

I have one cinema system with a 5.1 speaker setup which is going to lose its
sub *this afternoon* to my other system which is stereo only and is a better
sound - due to being single driver 'fullrange' speakers, I suspect!! If the
sub doesn't improve the sound with a pair of bookshelf speakers (I have A
and B speaker switching on the amp) it will go!

@;-)


Of course, the real benefit of SACD was to Sony/Philips as the cd
license was running out and a switch would have been a way to replace
that revenue.


Now *that* is the right question, Detective Spooner....

"Keith G" wrote


Now *that* is the right question, Detective Spooner....



OK, let's have it exactly *right*:


*That*, Detective, is the right question. Program terminated.

@:-)

In article ,
"Keith G" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"Eiron" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Same sort of thing in MVC (?) St Ives, Cambs - I asked the two
(female)
assistants doing *not a lot* behind the counter if they had any
SACDs
a
year or two back and got blank looks from both of them. (No wonder
SACDs
didn't take off!!)


SACDs would have taken off had they satisfied a consumer demand, but
they
didn't. Too often the big consumer electronics comapanies get off on
the
cleverness of their new technology and forget that the product has to
offer
the consumer something (s)he is willing to pay for. SACD simply didn't
do
that.

That said, had the major labels both supported hybrids and stopped
producing cds, few would have complained and the real benefits such as
multi-channel capability would have been available.


Hybrids are expensive to make, and have lower yields than plain CDs. I am
far from convinced that multi-channel capability is a "benefit" for music
recordings; the late and unlamented "quadraphonic" systems of the '70s
failed miserably to attract public interest and Dolby surround systems
have
only sold in relatively small numbers to the "home cinema" brigade. If
the
public had wanted SACD they'd have bought it - they didn't.

Manufacturing would have improved and costs diminished as volume
increased.


Yes, by about the end of week 2....

The Rolling Stones sold plenty of hybrids.

In the US home theater receivers and surround systems are
ubiquitous while one must search for stereo-only.


Stereo amps are hard to find in the US?

Yes, and no. Shelf-space is given to theater receivers in consumer
electronics stores. You might have to talk to a sales-droid to find a
stereo receiver or amp.

I have one cinema system with a 5.1 speaker setup which is going to lose its
sub *this afternoon* to my other system which is stereo only and is a better
sound - due to being single driver 'fullrange' speakers, I suspect!! If the
sub doesn't improve the sound with a pair of bookshelf speakers (I have A
and B speaker switching on the amp) it will go!

@;-)

The worst cheap surround systems have mini speakers that don't go low
enough with subs that don't go high enough to cover the full-range.

Of course, the real benefit of SACD was to Sony/Philips as the cd
license was running out and a switch would have been a way to replace
that revenue.


Now *that* is the right question, Detective Spooner....

"Follow the money" is the American saying.

Stephen

"MiNe 109" wrote


Manufacturing would have improved and costs diminished as volume
increased.


Yes, by about the end of week 2....

The Rolling Stones sold plenty of hybrids.


That'll be Mick Jagger's little frilly dress then....

@;-)



In the US home theater receivers and surround systems are
ubiquitous while one must search for stereo-only.


Stereo amps are hard to find in the US?

Yes, and no. Shelf-space is given to theater receivers in consumer
electronics stores. You might have to talk to a sales-droid to find a
stereo receiver or amp.


Now that you say that, I recall the last time I was in the local hifi shop
(to buy an amp), there were only 2 stereo amps to choose from against at
least half a dozen 'cinema amps'!! Luckily, one of the stereo amps was/is
exactly what I wanted.



I have one cinema system with a 5.1 speaker setup which is going to lose
its
sub *this afternoon* to my other system which is stereo only and is a
better
sound - due to being single driver 'fullrange' speakers, I suspect!! If
the
sub doesn't improve the sound with a pair of bookshelf speakers (I have
A
and B speaker switching on the amp) it will go!

@;-)

The worst cheap surround systems have mini speakers that don't go low
enough with subs that don't go high enough to cover the full-range.


The point with cheap speaker packages is they make a lot of people happy!



Of course, the real benefit of SACD was to Sony/Philips as the cd
license was running out and a switch would have been a way to replace
that revenue.


Now *that* is the right question, Detective Spooner....

"Follow the money" is the American saying.


@:-)