Is SACD winning over DVD-A?

Thedautch did a quick check of the Sychronicity SACD hybrid today.
Part of the problem is the original sound of the recording the production has not particularly stood the test of time that well-at least half of the tracks veer towards thin sounding and lack weight-although some other tracks have a less flat sound and more substance and sound a whole lot better.
However that aside I stand by my statement perhaps on the odd track on SACD may exhibit a little of the smoothness I associate with the format but it's very marginal to my ears the difference between that and the CD layer-this is indicative of what I found with all the hybrids I've heard.

I with Jposs on this one. I listen mostly to LPs. I bought an SCD-1 (3k) because I wanted to get into SACD and also to upgrade my CD player. Well, I LOVE the SCD-1. I think it is execellent on regular CDs, though I coudln't compare it to super expensive "state of the art" red book players.

The SACD sounds has me very excited though. In particular, the total silence combined with sound of extremely natural presence and nuance it stunning. I sure hope SACD continues and thrives. This is a really MUSICAL format.

Based on what I've seen in the market, SACD is beginning to significantly outpace DVD-Audio in popularity. To my ears, both formats are essentially equivalent in potential; A poorly engineered SACD recording will sound worse than a well engineered DVD-A disk, and vice versa. If only one format is fated to survive, my money's on SACD prevailing due primarily to the marketing power of Sony and Philips. They pioneered (sorry for the pun) the CD format, and they have that experience to draw upon. Also, Sony has a huge catalog of music software available for conversion/remastering to SACD. Lastly, and most importantly, we're talking folks with deep pockets here (I mean really deep). The biggest potential problem I see on the horizion is that insufficient demand might result in the recording industry eventually abandoning both formats. I think that would be a *&$# shame, so I humbly urge my fellow audio enthusiasts to support the hi-rez digital format of their choice both by buying the stuff and talking it up with people they know. Thanks to all participants, and happy listening.

In my opinion there are two key issues that have to be handled cleverly. This is from examining the tipping points that caused winners to emerge in past standards battles. The first is that the winner will need to use catalogue very cunningly to drive people to the new format. I tend to agree that Sony/Phillips have a better understanding of this issue and importantly a better ability to coordinate how they carry out such a strategy than a consortium of competitors. The second is that any new standard has to offer some kind of "gadget" value or convenience value, if it is not offering lower cost. Since there is very little to be seen in cost or convenience in the new standards then the key issue is "gadget" value. Since it is just another electronics box then I think they have already identified the only available "gadget" value which is surround sound and leveraging the investment that many already have in surround sound systems. That is a level playing field between the competing standards so no obvious winner from that angle.

Looking at what is distinctively different between the two technologies, the only thing significant is the backward compatibility of dual layer SACDs. This will be an advantage for SACD, but I think it will be small, and not compelling.

Therefore I conclude it is the clever use of catalogue that will probably be pivotal. The next question is what market will be pivotal. Perhaps it will be the Japanese market, and so I suspect we should be watching for Sony to begin some big bets in that market that are leveraged off mass popularity content that they own.