Why JVC XRCDs are so expensive?

One likely culprit is volume. Since the audiophile disc market is so small, JVC has to spread its fixed costs, like remastering, over many fewer units. But I wouldn't discount the idea that pricing it higher makes it seem better. (But an audiophile would *never* fall for that, right?)

And many of the JVC remasterings are available on other labels for something closer to mass-market list prices. This is a classic market segmentation move. You charge a high price for those folks who buy their CDs from, say, the Music Direct catalog, and a lower price for people browsing the bins at Tower Records.

Part of the reason is meticulous care taken at every step of the process, including replacing anything that can improve things when it is discovered. I understand some people think the price is too high. The sound sure is considerably better than conventional CDs, however. Whether it's worth it or not is obviously an individual decision.

New technology always has a price. I remember paying $15.00 for "Discovered Again" by Dave Grusin on Sheffield, new in 1978. Direct-to-disk records were very high priced compared to regular LPs at the time. Quality recordings are worth every penney.

I have read more than once that it cost only $1.00 to make a CD. So much of the cost probably goes into wages, promotions, middle man, etc. etc. etc.

The best CD I have ever heard is the FIM XRCD2 by Jacintha "Autumn Leaves"-- the songs of Johnny Mercer. $30. from Music Direct. Is it worth it? Well, this one is but only because BOTH recording AND MUSIC are excellent. I don't have a standard CD of this disc too compare to either. Cheers. Craig