High-end Universal...Why? ?

Uppermidfi: Although he doesn't mince words saying it, Wainwright is probably not far off the mark. Also, try and chill out a bit. You need to be open to others point of view and how they say it. I'm not saying you have to agree with them, but read, absorb or not, and then move on. If what is written is a personal attack on you and only you, then, perhaps you have the right to rebutal and even an apology.

I agree with Bld63 that SACD will probably become a small niche in the market only few will care. Most people just don't care about the sound quality as much as they care about the picture quality of their home entertainment center. People will rather spend 3000.00 on a new plasma screen than on a cd player that can play sacd.

Since the technology is cheap enough nowaday, why can't Sony or Phillips make every of their new DVD players able to play SACD also and this will encourage people to experience the new format with little or no cost. Once they see the benefit of the new format, then maybe there is a small chance SACD will become part of the house hold topic.

By the way, when was the last time you see a SACD comercials on TV. I don't watch TV that much but honestly I swear I have not seen any thing on SACD on TV. The only ads I've seen are on hifi magazines but that is like preaching to the converted. (Wouldn't you rather see something else on TV others then Bush trying to trash Kerry war records :-) ?.)

It's kind of funny that most home electronic stores I visit, most salesman treat their SACD players, even the cheapest ones, as some sort of sacred devices that only a few can touch. This kind of remind me of the Apple vs. IBM fight back when computer was in its infancy. There is a joke that you don't ask a man what kind of computer he uses. If he uses Apple then he will proudly announce so.

Anyway, it seems like people in the SACD marketing departments are more audiophiles than marketers.

I believe there *are* many people who care about sound. To say otherwise is specious; otherwise why would anyone every buy a stereo system over $100? The general public will catch on. Like any company trying to recoup its R&D, Sony and Co is aiming at the Who, Rolling Stones, Tommy, and Classical crowd--middle-age men (presumably) with money. Price will come down. Naxos, a budget classical company has just started releasing SACDs at $12.

And Uppermidfi, a confession: I was born with a reptilian tail and besides being laughed at in middle school, I damaged record after record when, if I turned around too fast, it would knock the needle across my Soundesign turntable. I couldn't get the tail removed until Philips perfected laser technology in the '80's. I will always have an aversion to you people, and Lp's....

I was pretty well informed on audio technology in the mid 1980s, about when CDs came out . . .went through some impoverished times with my pair of Vandersteen 2ci, a Sony Walkman as a CD player and a receiver I bought at a garage sale, and just recently got back into the hobby.

My point is, even though I didn't read the audio press during the lean years, I was a person interested in audio in general, and should have noticed the introduction of a new format or technology, had it been publicized. I read newspapers and magazines, watch a lot of TV news and am generally well-informed.

I never knew that SACD OR DVD-Audio existed until I re-entered shopping for audio hardware last December and started buying the audio press again.

This does not make me optimistic that either of these formats will succeed. You are starting to see the occasional mention of SACD players at Circuit City-type stores now that there is one that sells for $150.

And remember that there are three competitors for the very small niche market for high resolution audio sources: DVD-A, SACD and vinyl. Right now, I would almost have to say that vinyl may win. . .

>> I believe there *are* many people who care about sound. To say otherwise is specious; otherwise why would anyone every buy a stereo system over $100? <<

Believe all you want, but the fact remains that SACD and DVD-Audio have almost 0 representation in the home of the average Joe. Yet that same Joe probably already has a DVD player capable of decoding DTS and Dolby Digital surround sound.

As for why anyone would have a > $100 sound system - c'mon, America is all about image - and nothing looks nicer (and impresses friends more) than a big home theater system kicking out the jams. Audiophiles are curious oddities to most folks, get used to it.

Game, set, match to DTS, I'm afraid...

-RW-