Why HDCD did not become a dominant format?

Undertow, XRCD's are certainly still available new, the problem is that they include a lot of Japanese artists you have never heard of. I buy my odd XRCD purchases from a guy in Honk kong I believe, who sells on E bay as internationalrecords. Trouble is the prices are very good in £'s, not so good in $'s.
I have to say, I have always enjoyed the sound quality of the HDCD's I have and Reference Recordings have always been the label I have soought out.
I am sure it has been set out as a thread in the music section, but I would be interested in what are your favourite labels for CD's. I think mine would be Reference Recordings, Fone, Stockfisch and Sheffield labs.

Mcpody,yes I too enjoy the JVC XRCD and 'very' much appreciate their quality. JVC seems to have absolutely minimized distortion and that certainly allows for a much more musical presentation. In fact I think that's another recording system that CD could have evolved to, to the benefit of all. No new system. No new machines. Just better sound. The expense involved could not have been that great; probably insignificant in the grand scheme, just as HDCD would have been an insignificant expense on the recording side. I think you're right about it allowing for recordings virtually equal to the new formats in the way they reproduce music, especially over less than 'state of the art' playback systems. Which brings me back to my search for a newer "used" CD player that will provide closer to the XRCD or HDCD experience with my 'normal' classical recordings- i.e. elimination of the distortion and lack of detail/nuance, particularly in the strings, flute and bass sections. While I'm at it the Sony NS 9100ES I've been trying out sounds very nice; however when playing a Reference Recordings "HDCD" the sound is nowhere near as detailed, dynamic or lifelike as when played through my 'modest' older Toshiba SD9200 which decodes the HDCD. I'm sure Sony could do better Redbook CD if they wanted. Shame on their insatiable greed and dominant attitude. Just a little cooperation could have given us such a significant improvement on the CD.

Thanks David, You're right about the XRCDs. They're available-but very pricey, more than even the priciest SACDs. That's what keeps my purchases of them resticted. If they were only $5.00 more than a regular CD they'd be a favorite for me; but they are often close to triple the cost and I don't have an unlimited CD budget and there are so many recordings I'd like to buy. As far as labels I also find Harmonia Mundi consistently above average, as well as good old Philips,Deutsche Grammophon,Verve and yes, even Sony has provided some great classical recordings to my ears, especially solo instruments.

XRCD, Yeah I wanted to order a couple but at over 30 bucks shipped normally, and that seems a bit of a risk considering not that much essential music (for me anyway) is produced on them.. Oh well maybe one day I will give them a shot, but there is only like one title I saw that really interested me, I am mostly a rock listener.

You want a great player which is HDCD capable and supported by a superior aftermarket tech service? Find yourself an EAD 2000. It is built like a tank, musical as all get out, and can be had for around $800 on Audiogon. I own the EAD 2000 as well as the Naim CDX...while the Naim may be a bit more resolving, the EAD is the player that I listen to day in and day out, and the one piece of equipment that I would never sell. It does HDCD right.

By the way, there was a great point made about Licensing. Pacific Mirosonics believed at one point that they would be in the drivers seat...but companies like SONY are not big on paying licensing fees to small companies when they can find ways to create their own proprietary technology...marvels like DBX. Once Microsoft had the rights, nothing was going to stop Gates (who owns 30% of Apple) from supporting the Ipod movement.