Wise Words - Audio Fidelity Moves to Selective Multichannel SACD Releases

quicksrt said:

It's the gawd-damn 4.0 red sticker that just confused stereo only audiophiles. They could not read further and figure out if the fucking disc would play in their players, and so they avoided the disc all-together. Yeah right.

I think that the Billy Joel and Labelle titles were two obvious missteps. Both wonderful displays of 70s quad mixing, high quality recordings, strong material, but titles the current market has little interest in. I bought them both because I wanted to know if I was missing something.

So yes, maybe AF needs to go away from quad for a while and wait until the right title has become available. But I would gauge the market by past releases. If Doors, Sly, Mahavishnu, Alice, Full Sail, and Secret Treaties are not doing well for AF, then yeah, Doobies, Lightfoot, and Jim Croce are not going to either right.

Click to expand...

What's MORE disturbing is the complete absence of ANY newer MAINSTREAM titles in QUAD. The younger generation has NO affinity for 70's and 80's rock/pop titles other than the obvious: Beatles, Stones, Led Zep and 'regurgiating' those 'ancient' rock/pop relics, even in Surround, have little enticement for them to invest $30 in titles which have no relevance.

With over 7.5+ billion people crammed into this world of ours, it's astounding that only a mere handful, in hindsight, are involved in hearing those 'chestnuts' in stereo......much less QUAD. We are, in reality, a VERY VERY minute niche market and to expect the reissue companies or majors to hear our [muted] demands is probably expecting way too much.

As the old saying goes: MONEY talks.......BULLSHIT walks! Most unfortunate, but TRUE!

When reissue companies CANNOT even sell 10K copies WORLDWIDE....one has to start putting things in proper perspective!

timbre4 said:

Cliff Notes:
AF will release albums as stereo CD only = COOL
AF will release albums with available quad mixes as stereo CD only = NOT COOL

Click to expand...

You mean AF will release albums on Stereo SACDs, not Stereo CDs.

quicksrt said:

It's the gawd-damn 4.0 red sticker that just confused stereo only audiophiles.

Click to expand...

The upcoming Multichannel SACD by Blue Oyster Cult from Audio Fidelity this month has revised packaging.
We will see if that results in increased sales.

bmoura said:

You mean AF will release albums on Stereo SACDs, not Stereo CDs.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Thanks and corrected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

4-earredwonder said:

What's MORE disturbing is the complete absence of ANY newer MAINSTREAM titles in QUAD. The younger generation has NO affinity for 70's and 80's rock/pop titles other than the obvious: Beatles, Stones, Led Zep and 'regurgiating' those 'ancient' rock/pop relics, even in Surround, have little enticement for them to invest $30 in titles which have no relevance.

Click to expand...

Well, quad ended in 1976 for most of the artists, so there is no "newer" titles to choose from only the old stuff.

But older is not the problem, the younger generations have welcomed the old stuff, and in some cases prefer it. These are called "evergreens" they are the artists that just sell and sell, or they have one album the audiophiles just can't keep from trying out with each new era of media.

I still think that the rock stuff, and hard rock stuff is going to do better than the easy stuff. I base my opinions on what are the hot quad LPs and tapes on the used market. If it is a very collectible CD-4 LP like Billion Dollar Babies or Paranoid, then it might be a top choice for reissue. If it is David Gates, then no.

Paranoid is an album which is a "Rite of Passage" for young boys into hard rock and metal for the first time. Not saying they will pay $30 for an SACD, but the title is one of the true evergreens.

bmoura said:

The upcoming Multichannel SACD by Blue Oyster Cult from Audio Fidelity this month has revised packaging.
We will see if that results in increased sales.

Click to expand...

I have BOC on pre~order but doubtful even the new packaging will be an enticement, especially since there are so few record stores carrying these titles....except, of course, in major cities (markets). A LOT of the internet stores sometimes even fail to mention they're QUAD and to the uninformed and casual record buyer.....QUAD has little or NO cache....anyway.

An advertising campaign would help raise awareness of just Audio Fidelity in general. We've moved into an era now when the average Joe doesn't even know that there are record companies left - let alone what names they go by now. I know advertising costs money, and lots of it. But I don't know if word-of-mouth works anymore.
To be honest, I don't know what works anymore period.

The notice that these two titles coming in stereo only comes as no surprise and I'm glad to hear that Mr. Blonstein is trying to be more selective. That's not such a bad thing! Granted, releasing two titles that had Quad mixes without the Quad layer does seem anomalous, these aren't titles I would've been interested in. I'd be willing to bet the average audiophile isn't going to care too much about the stereo releases either.

I would be chasing after the big names. The Doors, Sly Stone were great choices. The Guess Who and Alice Cooper, also brilliant choices. All were, for sake of argument, top-tier performers in their time and still have some "street cred" today.

The Laura Nyro and Billy Cobham titles were fantastic simply for the fact that those were shelved Quad mixes finally seeing the light of day after nearly 40 years.

I would suggest more Guess Who (Best of #2 and Road Food are great choices and Great mixes and rarities on the CD landscape).
Perhaps some country would shake things up a bit? I certainly would be interested!
The Eagles are a hot ticket item right now. I would seriously be pursuing that act and wouldn't take "no" for an answer. I would do what it takes. That's two, possibly four very hot albums to release.


But obviously, they are listening and that's not a bad thing.

I wonder if AF went all-in too quickly, issuing titles that seemed market worthy but with a bit more thought might have revealed themselves not to be so.

In order to think along these lines, you have to go back through their earlier SACD releases, pre-surround, and ask yourself "Would this title fit in with what was already released?". I mean, they released some "Peter Paul and Mary", which is classic stuff but really in 2015/6, who is looking for that title. I would put the Judy Collins in with that one, so if someone says that the Judy Collins SACD hurt the surround SACD program, well, did PP&M hurt the SACD program as well? You can't blame the surround if the JC did not sell. Is JC something modern day listeners are looking for?

We may be looking past the fact that maybe, just maybe, AF is at a financial turning point. People are not buying CDs and hardly anyone even knows what an SACD is these days. If the company is looking to cut costs to stay alive, the surround tracks would be the first thing to go because the surround market is the proverbial pimple on the ass cheek of what's left of the disc based market.

Everything is MP3, FLAC, AAC, iPod, Bluetooth, etc and very few people that do not participate in music forums on the internet buy discs of any sort anymore.

You and I feel like the BS&T GH and these two titles are HUGE disappointments and missed opportunities not being in surround, but I would bet you anything that Marshall himself wanted these titles in surround and requested these titles in surround but the additional cost in this marketplace could not be justified to the bean counters.

In order to survive, companies have to make tough decisions. This was probably a tough decision. We can all be pissed off and bummed out but some things are more important in the real world than a surround mix.

I think the Blood, Sweat and Tears was a missed opportunity absolutely. They are still a group that gets some airtime on classic radio stations today. I feel they are still very much in the public lexicon. Maybe if things pick up, since AF will probably hold the rights for 5 years, they may go back and reissue it with a surround layer? But then, what shape will the market be in by that point. Finances may enter into it, but I doubt that's anything that they'd be willing to publicly disclose. The only thing I could think of that may help the situation is if they offered us a chance to buy some stock in the company and help float things. That could really benefit us all.

I'm still going to keep my fingers crossed that something good will happen. We've had a great run so far, let's try to hold some of that momentum. The only thing that worries me is that like was pointed out in the other thread; Quad has a limited amount of titles and many are at this point dead ends. Something will have to change to reinvigorate sales.

A crazy idea would be to track down the Thriller 5.1 project. Biggest album of all time? Available for the first time in 5.1? Through Audio Fidelity only?? Tell me that wouldn't be a million-and-two seller!! If they're on such good terms with Sony.... that almost seems like a no brainer. Controversy surrounding the album aside, who is going to say no to money?

JonUrban said:

I wonder if AF went all-in too quickly, issuing titles that seemed market worthy but with a bit more thought might have revealed themselves not to be so.

In order to think along these lines, you have to go back through their earlier SACD releases, pre-surround, and ask yourself "Would this title fit in with what was already released?". I mean, they released some "Peter Paul and Mary", which is classic stuff but really in 2015/6, who is looking for that title. I would put the Judy Collins in with that one, so if someone says that the Judy Collins SACD hurt the surround SACD program, well, did PP&M hurt the SACD program as well? You can't blame the surround if the JC did not sell. Is JC something modern day listeners are looking for?

We may be looking past the fact that maybe, just maybe, AF is at a financial turning point. People are not buying CDs and hardly anyone even knows what an SACD is these days. If the company is looking to cut costs to stay alive, the surround tracks would be the first thing to go because the surround market is the proverbial pimple on the ass cheek of what's left of the disc based market.

Everything is MP3, FLAC, AAC, iPod, Bluetooth, etc and very few people that do not participate in music forums on the internet buy discs of any sort anymore.

You and I feel like the BS&T GH and these two titles are HUGE disappointments and missed opportunities not being in surround, but I would bet you anything that Marshall himself wanted these titles in surround and requested these titles in surround but the additional cost in this marketplace could not be justified to the bean counters.

In order to survive, companies have to make tough decisions. This was probably a tough decision. We can all be pissed off and bummed out but some things are more important in the real world than a surround mix.

Click to expand...

There is something more going on with BS&T I suspect. It's almost as if someone objected to the quad mix of the S/T album on SACD reissue. Because it was not included previously by Sony when they were launching the line originally. And it was decided not to repress that one at all, another odd thing me thinks.

Then Steve Hoffman stated that GH would not have a quad layer due to some obscure legal reason. He used the word legal. So I think it is not a contractual problem but there is a political problem, like Bobby Columby still has pull with Sony and had it zapped. Btw, I am so thrilled at AF getting that one (S/T) out on quad SACD that I still feel a glow. I think it slipped out quietly when nobody was looking.

Now the only way I can even guess if the quad or 4.0 series has a future is to know which titles did the best and which were losers out of the gate. If the real heavy hitters I mentioned previously were not real winners, then the game is changing fast. See I figured that Alice Cooper would do well for a number of reasons, one of them had nothing to do with quad being included. It was that fans who bought each of the previous Cooper gold or SACD discs would need it to complete their collections. Plus the quad fans would come on board and add another 500 units sold easy. Internationally, the Coop fans would hear about this disc and be interested.

All this stuff makes sense, except there is one other thing AF must adhear to, and that is a limited time frame for the item to be on the market. They don't get five years to market a title.

Importcds has been on back order for Billy Cobham for over two months. I guess that means AF sold out their first run and are waiting for the shipment to come in from the second run? If this is true than that is good news right. If it is not being repressed and retailers are out of it for good then that is bad.

But anyway I do wonder what if any of the 4.0 titles were hits out performing previous stereo only titles by an easy 500 to 1000 units. Maybe I will have to get that info in private.

JonUrban said:

I wonder if AF went all-in too quickly, issuing titles that seemed market worthy but with a bit more thought might have revealed themselves not to be so.

In order to think along these lines, you have to go back through their earlier SACD releases, pre-surround, and ask yourself "Would this title fit in with what was already released?". I mean, they released some "Peter Paul and Mary", which is classic stuff but really in 2015/6, who is looking for that title.

Click to expand...

Some people must be looking for Peter, Paul & Mary. 5 SACD reissues to date along with 2 DSD Download reissues:

• Audio Fidelity released their self-titled album and In The Wind on SACD
• Analogue Productions released Album 1700 and In Concert on SACD and now on Stereo DSD Downloads
• Top Music released Peter, Paul and Mary on SACD

One thing I have been wondering since AF announced their rollback of their Multichannel SACD program is how well the Bob Dylan Live SACD from 1964 has sold.
Now a lot of people might think that a SACD from Bob Dylan would be a huge seller, but I wonder how much the cost of that SACD itself has factored into its sales.
Even though it is 2 SACDs instead of 1, it costs close to $60 from most retailers, and that's the main reason why I have held off (so far) in purchasing that particular title. It's just too high of a cost for a disc that doesn't have that 'wow' factor like so many of the other AF surround titles do.

quicksrt said:

Well, quad ended in 1976 for most of the artists, so there is no "newer" titles to choose from only the old stuff.

But older is not the problem, the younger generations have welcomed the old stuff, and in some cases prefer it. These are called "evergreens" they are the artists that just sell and sell, or they have one album the audiophiles just can't keep from trying out with each new era of media.

I still think that the rock stuff, and hard rock stuff is going to do better than the easy stuff. I base my opinions on what are the hot quad LPs and tapes on the used market. If it is a very collectible CD-4 LP like Billion Dollar Babies or Paranoid, then it might be a top choice for reissue. If it is David Gates, then no.

Paranoid is an album which is a "Rite of Passage" for young boys into hard rock and metal for the first time. Not saying they will pay $30 for an SACD, but the title is one of the true evergreens.

Click to expand...

While I could hardly argue that GREAT music transcends time and place, it's HOW the "EVERGREENS" are listening to their music......TODAY! Portability and easy access seems to be the rule of thumb and QUAD/5.1 DOES require the ability to sit down and listen 'somewhat' intently for the gravitas of these remixes to readily 'kick in.'

QUAD is NOT obtainable through earbuds or rudimentary computer set~ups or (gasp) SOUNDBARS which pretend to do 5.1.

And to pay upwards of $30 for the privilege of experiencing QUAD, something we QQers are willing and able to do, is also a stretch for these Evergreens.

There is no easy solution to the paucity of surround titles available today and I suppose as the window of opportunity to release these vaulted surround mixes approaches expiration, let's be thankful for what we ARE getting.

And all I can think is that perhaps the majors are saving up all their vaulted surround titles for future FLAC 5.1 downloads......another more rational explanation why they're making it so difficult for the reissue companies to negotiate surround releases without breaking the bank....or going through exasperating legal hassles.

quicksrt said:

There is something more going on with BS&T I suspect. It's almost as if someone objected to the quad mix of the S/T album on SACD reissue. Because it was not included previously by Sony when they were launching the line originally. And it was decided not to repress that one at all, another odd thing me thinks.

Then Steve Hoffman stated that GH would not have a quad layer due to some obscure legal reason. He used the word legal. So I think it is not a contractual problem but there is a political problem, like Bobby Columby still has pull with Sony and had it zapped.

Click to expand...

That would definitely make more sense. Still, makes you wonder what is going through the minds of some artists when they object to surround or even simply the re-releasing of their previous work? Ugh. I don't know if I'll ever understand human egos.

bmoura said:

The upcoming Multichannel SACD by Blue Oyster Cult from Audio Fidelity this month has revised packaging.
We will see if that results in increased sales.

Click to expand...

Well on the one hand that is an encouraging sign.. Sales maybe increased, maybe not.. either way BOC will no doubt come too late to save the Surround on RTF and WR which appear to be due for release as early as next month!?

Very sad indeed about this Brian, I feel sure it's not your fault or responsibility at all and I for one am so immensely grateful for everything you have done and continue to do to fight Surround's corner.. but despite putting a gloss on it (they're not going to be CDs, they're going to be Stereo SACDs! Well that makes it alright then doesn't it! ) .. I am curious as to how you really feel about this, knowing how big a proponent of surround you are and have been for such a long while.. I mean, you're AF's Multichannel Maven after all, I'd be surprised if you were pleased about this development. You may not agree with me that I firmly believe this to be a mistake on AF's part and tbh I'd respect your viewpoint either way.

To add to the agony, to my mind this could well be the last physical release hurrah for Tale Spinnin' and Musicmagic.. what an inauspicious final release for them both it will be without their truly wonderful Quad mixes included.

So so so very disappointed. Hopes & expectations for any future Surround from AF now on an all-time low and staying that way, I don't want to feel like this about some stupid bloody reissue again.. life is just way too short and have too many grey hairs as it is.. besides we've got the old Quad records and tapes so we can still enjoy the Quads of these two albums I guess, just not in the finest master tape quality, which is what AF would have delivered here. I guess we just have to like it or lump it, the decision by the man at the top of AF has seemingly already been made and would appear to be final, release date is so close

Here's another burning question I have.
Why can't Audio Fidelity strike a deal with the artists whose albums they reissue to advertise on the artists' websites and Facebook pages?

Audio Fidelity's Facebook page just has less than 4,000 fans, but many of these artists' Facebook pages have tens or hundreds of thousands of fans.
I would bet that many of these artists' fans don't even know about these SACDs because of the general lack of marketing and advertisement.

Contrast that with the upcoming DVD-A/V and Blu-Ray release of "Tales from Topographic Oceans" from Yes. Yes have been very active in advertising this release on their website and social media pages to make sure their fans know of its impending release, so why can't these other artists do the same for these Audio Fidelity SACDs? It is still their music after all…

ADDENDUM: Holy cow, this was my 5,000th post! :yikes

We may be only a fortnight away from seeing 4-channel downloads direct from quad masters. We've gone over this before. Once you remove the cost of printing and pressing discs plus distribution, quad music from the vaults all of a sudden does not look like such a cash sink hole.

So touch up the grey hair with some good strong hair color, fix a nice beverage of your choice, and come on and get happy! We are on the brink of the quadraphonic revival in downloads. But just remember, they are going to give us plenty of what has already been issued recently first. Yes, lots of rehash, and then something fresh.

rtbluray said:

Here's another burning question I have.
Why can't Audio Fidelity strike a deal with the artists whose albums they reissue to advertise on the artists' websites and Facebook pages?

Audio Fidelity's Facebook page just has less than 4,000 fans, but many of these artists' Facebook pages have tens or hundreds of thousands of fans.
I would bet that many of these artists' fans don't even know about these SACDs because of the general lack of marketing and advertisement.

Contrast that with the upcoming DVD-A/V and Blu-Ray release of "Tales from Topographic Oceans" from Yes. Yes have been very active in advertising this release on their website and social media pages to make sure their fans know of its impending release, so why can't these other artists do the same for these Audio Fidelity SACDs? It is still their music after all…

ADDENDUM: Holy cow, this was my 5,000th post! :yikes

Click to expand...

A most EXCELLENT and well thought out strategy, rt.

And a GREAT conduit to Audio Fidelity could be our own MULTICHANNEL MAVEN Brian Moura.

Get the word out and do involve those artists with thousands upon thousands of loyal facebook followers.

We all know that the reissue companies don't spend a nickel on advertising [music, that is] other than their own websites or in the case of Music Direct and Acoustic Sounds their bi yearly glossy mags so by petitioning the artists whose music they reissue this would be a wonderful opportunity for all to elicit FREE PROMOs for their wares.

rtbluray said:

Here's another burning question I have.
Why can't Audio Fidelity strike a deal with the artists whose albums they reissue to advertise on the artists' websites and Facebook pages?

Audio Fidelity's Facebook page just has less than 4,000 fans, but many of these artists' Facebook pages have tens or hundreds of thousands of fans.
I would bet that many of these artists' fans don't even know about these SACDs because of the general lack of marketing and advertisement.

Contrast that with the upcoming DVD-A/V and Blu-Ray release of "Tales from Topographic Oceans" from Yes. Yes have been very active in advertising this release on their website and social media pages to make sure their fans know of its impending release, so why can't these other artists do the same for these Audio Fidelity SACDs? It is still their music after all…

ADDENDUM: Holy cow, this was my 5,000th post! :yikes

Click to expand...

Nice! arty I'm getting there, maybe another 30 years or so, at the rate I'm going. So, yeah, I'm catching up. ;D

Jim Messina is aware of the L & M SACDs and has commented on his FB page. Or others have commented on how nice they sound and he has acknowledged the appreciation of the quad layers being included.

I am going into Wiki to do some major revisions to many album pages. I am adding mention of a quad mix performed, released and then an Audio Fidelity reissue mention that included this very rare and desired quadraphonic mix from the 70s.

There will be links that make it so easy for readers to have that 4.0 SACD in their hands after reading about it, and seeing those lovely scans of the artwork.

Does anyone want to help with this wiki quad campaign?