Wise Words - Audio Fidelity Moves to Selective Multichannel SACD Releases

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Do they ever do a "second run"? Seems like most of their titles sell out and then that's that. How often have they done a second run? And if their business model is dependent on something selling so well and so fast that they need to do a second run to make a respectable profit on a title?

Then they've got even bigger problems that I thought. That can't be how it is working over there.

We've already stated the problem, have you forgotten it already?

The added expense of 4.0 does not bring in an additional 1000 units of sales. It's maybe 200 to 300 additional discs sold to quadraholics. This does not cover that added expense regardless of the second run or not.
 
....
If it had no impact on future releases, I would say "Go for it". Who cares? There are always people out there who like something, and those people might have been thrilled with these 4.0 SACD. The rest of you would have gone nuts, proclaiming "I'm not buying that crap" and "Why are they doing that lousy album?"

...

I couldn't have said it better...

and on top of that, most releases nowadays forego the "TEST PRESSINGS" which eventually lead to REPRESSINGS and mailing expenses, and therefore losing a lot of money...probably making them go into the red!:howl
 
The real crux of the issue is that while we're all glad that Audio Fidelity got into the business of releasing Multichannel SACDs for about two years and produced some really wonderful releases, in many respects, they waited too long to get into the Multichannel SACD business.
Now no matter when they would have jumped in, they were always going to run into brick walls here and there put up by the artists and record labels. It's to be expected.
However, if they would have started the releases several years sooner, they could have beaten the other reissue labels to the table on several key titles that could have been big sellers if released as Multichannel SACDs.
Titles from the likes of Santana, The Doobie Brothers, Billy Joel, The Allman Brothers Band, Bob Dylan, The Grateful Dead, Carly Simon, Miles Davis, and countless others. [That list encompasses 4.0 and 5.1 mixes]

So what it's come to is that Audio Fidelity have just run into too many brick walls to keep releasing Multichannel SACDs like they did over that two year period. The brick walls put up around certain titles by the artists and owning record labels is one thing, but then you also have other SACD reissue labels (like the surround-haters at MOFI) getting access to certain titles before AF could get ahold of them, and so what are they left with?
A lot of titles that would either be poor sellers for them (no matter how good the music and/or surround mix may be) or titles that have really terrible surround mixes, so much so that it would be a wasted effort to release them again in such a form.

I'm still really glad that Audio Fidelity released what they could, but let's face it. If they manage to get any other amazing Multichannel SACDs out the door, it really will be a miracle...

Well, rt, if the price/availability of gold hadn't gone up so radically, AF would've still be releasing 24k Gold RBCDs. And in the few years that AF has been doing multi, they've probably released as many titles as Analogue Productions* and MoFi combined. It was indeed a good run and there are still a few unreleased QUAD titles which AF could consider. The Philadelphia Sound, for instance, which they 'hinted' at in their COLLECTION release. I'd love for the unreleased Joni Mitchell QUADS to be released along with the long rumored 5.1 remix of Blue [exquisite album]. And what about Aerosmith's ROCKS in QUAD? BTW, Is Warner's off the QUAD reissue list? I know Universal is.


*NOT counting AP's three channel SACD releases
 
When reissue companies have to LICENSE a QUAD or 5.1 master tape from the conglomerates, they [the record companies] really started to sharpen their pencils by charging ridiculous and separate fees for the RBCD/Stereo and multichannel content which the reissue companies could no longer absorb compared to a RBCD/Stereo ONLY SACD.

...

Fortunately, Dutton Vocalion in England has a different and more agreeable licensing arrangement with SONY in order to offer two~fer QUAD SACDs for a ridiculously LOW price.

Also, bear in mind that the UK has a different royalty system to the U.S.
 
We've already stated the problem, have you forgotten it already?

The added expense of 4.0 does not bring in an additional 1000 units of sales. It's maybe 200 to 300 additional discs sold to quadraholics. This does not cover that added expense regardless of the second run or not.

Well that settles it. If there are only 2-300 of us? Yeah that's not worth it.
 
We've already stated the problem, have you forgotten it already?

The added expense of 4.0 does not bring in an additional 1000 units of sales. It's maybe 200 to 300 additional discs sold to quadraholics. This does not cover that added expense regardless of the second run or not.

Would imagine world wide - it would have to be much more than just 200-300 people like us here on QQ :mad:@:

Certain there are quad fanatics all over the world in much bigger numbers than we think. :cool:
 
Also, bear in mind that the UK has a different royalty system to the U.S.

Yes, obviously, as D~V can release a two~fer for $13. I'm sure the royalty figures would be much higher for A list titles. Come to think of it, D~V's demographic is probably ages 50~75 and I'm sure they grew up on rock 'n roll and soulful pop music so perhaps D~V should go after some of those classic rock/pop titles and slowly ease them into their eclectic inventory (of SACDs). Percy Faith morphing into George Michael's FAITH.
 
The only thing I disagree with Jon about is the inevitable end of physical media.

Take a look at the comments on the fading sales of physical media from the Naxos CEO.
He gives physical media "another 5 or maybe 10 years". Naxos is already making plans for what comes next as a result.

"CD sales are not holding," Heymann said. "In 2015, we had seven new releases that sold more than 10,000. In 2016, not a single release sold more than 5,000. There's still a stable market that buys 2,000 – 4,000 of everything. I am confident there will be CDs for another 5 or maybe 10 years. But the times of substantial sales are gone."

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...com-Shutters-ClassicsOnline-Disc-Sales-Trends
 
Take a look at the comments on the fading sales of physical media from the Naxos CEO.
He gives physical media "another 5 or maybe 10 years". Naxos is already making plans for what comes next as a result.



https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...com-Shutters-ClassicsOnline-Disc-Sales-Trends

Perhaps NAXOS former demographic is purchasing higher quality hybrid much SACDs for a few dollars more than their RBCDs. But then again, NAXOS is the distributor for a lot of SACD releasing companies. Five or 10 years is probably being a bit generous. Already, the downward spiral has begun. :(
 
Five or 10 years is probably being a bit generous. Already, the downward spiral has begun. :(

Could be. I haven't found anyone in the music business who disagrees with the Naxos CEO comments and predictions about the end date for physical media.
 
Could be. I haven't found anyone in the music business who disagrees with the Naxos CEO comments and predictions about the end date for physical media.

So it gives the reissue companies, the majors and the individual artists more precious time to fulfill our Quadraphonic Fantasies....or NOT!
 
I wish they would have put out a stunner like this and then gone out with a bang, rather than news of WR and RTF with no quad.

I'm sure many would have loved to get a Quad mix with those Weather Report and return to Forever SACDs but I think the first big disappointment was the fact that Blood, Sweat & Tears' Greatest Hits came out only in Stereo. That's when the door closed leaving a crack in the wall for future considerations on possible Quad releases.
 
I'm sure many would have loved to get a Quad mix with those Weather Report and return to Forever SACDs but I think the first big disappointment was the fact that Blood, Sweat & Tears' Greatest Hits came out only in Stereo. That's when the door closed leaving a crack in the wall for future considerations on possible Quad releases.

Only because we already got the very elusive and lovely quality of the self titled album in quad on SACD containing a bulk of the hits from BS&T, I was not bothered by this BS&T not being in quad. But yes, it was a tolling of the bells, which signaled the closing (slamming) of the door, which left a very visible crack in the wall.

In the old days, QQ would have been able to easily do several "Go Fund Me" type of fund raisers, and raised a $1,500 kitty for mastering on top titles. I'm still not convinced this idea is unworkable. But anyway, the crowd here seems a little off in the numbers compared to when the QQ Yahoo group moved to a web/forum platform.

I would write a $90 check towards the mastering costs of B$Bs quad layer.
 
It was indeed a good run and there are still a few unreleased QUAD titles which AF could consider. The Philadelphia Sound, for instance, which they 'hinted' at in their COLLECTION release. I'd love for the unreleased Joni Mitchell QUADS to be released along with the long rumored 5.1 remix of Blue [exquisite album]. And what about Aerosmith's ROCKS in QUAD? BTW, Is Warner's off the QUAD reissue list? I know Universal is.

I can't speak for any releases from the Philadelphia Sound, but I'm fairly certain that any Joni Mitchell and Aerosmith titles are off the table because all parties associated with those titles would not agree to a reissue on Multichannel SACD, especially since Joni Mitchell's classic albums are owned by Warner Music, who are no longer licensing titles out to labels like AF as of the beginning of last year.
 
I can't speak for any releases from the Philadelphia Sound, but I'm fairly certain that any Joni Mitchell and Aerosmith titles are off the table because all parties associated with those titles would not agree to a reissue on Multichannel SACD, especially since Joni Mitchell's classic albums are owned by Warner Music, who are no longer licensing titles out to labels like AF as of the beginning of last year.

Yeah, too bad about Aerosmith. I personally would love one of their titles released in Quad by AF. :phones
 
To be honest, I don't see any music marketing on TV anymore. It was just one of those things that seemed to disappear overnight. I can quite fondly remember as a kid not only all those Time Life or K-Tel sets, but some artists/groups would advertise their latest album on TV. I guess it's cost-prohibitive these days.

There's not as much music marketing on TV (or anywhere, really) these days as when we were kids. But the market isn't as big either.

But, like always, it depends what the product is and where to look. Today's equivalent of the K-Tel albums are those "Now That's What I Call Music" sets which I see advertised on Nickelodeon which is where the market for them is. IIRC, the K-Tel albums got advertised during "American Bandstand" and the Saturday morning cartoons. Not during "Lawrence Welk" or "Dragnet."
 
There's not as much music marketing on TV (or anywhere, really) these days as when we were kids. But the market isn't as big either.

But, like always, it depends what the product is and where to look. Today's equivalent of the K-Tel albums are those "Now That's What I Call Music" sets which I see advertised on Nickelodeon which is where the market for them is. IIRC, the K-Tel albums got advertised during "American Bandstand" and the Saturday morning cartoons. Not during "Lawrence Welk" or "Dragnet."

That's right. It does change the outcome a lot.

Imagine if Time-Life decided to launch a Quad SACD reissue campaign helped with TV spots and 30 minute infomercials like they have done so often in the past for their many compilation series. That could turn things around. Explain what Quad was/is and praise the merits of Multichannel mixes.

It's a nice dream I admit. :)
 
That's right. It does change the outcome a lot.

Imagine if Time-Life decided to launch a Quad SACD reissue campaign helped with TV spots and 30 minute infomercials like they have done so often in the past for their many compilation series. That could turn things around. Explain what Quad was/is and praise the merits of Multichannel mixes.

It's a nice dream I admit. :)

That would be amazing! I used to buy all those Time Life titles. Great stuff and it was a great initiative.
 
Well.. why don't they (AF) concentrate on bigger sellers as more of a priority at this point and include Quad/5.1 if available/useable on the bigger more guaranteed sellers and then leave the less rich pickings that do have Quad/5.1 mixes til later on..?

Well, the Catch-22 here seems to be that if an album is a big seller, then it won't need a bonus feature like a Quad layer to move the number of copies they want to move, so why go to the extra expense of adding it?

It really just comes down to the numbers, obviously. While those of us here would be willing to pay an extra $5 (or whatever) for the releases that have Quad, the regular stereo fans will see it as being charged extra for a feature on the disc they don't even want. So just charging more isn't a viable option.

So the other option is move more product. If they need to sell 5,000 copies of a regular SACD in order to meet their goals but need to move 6,000 for the ones with Quad and instead can only move 5,500? There-in lies the problem. Although this is where I start to scratch my head a bit as it seems most of the AF quad titles are sold on and most of the rest are on their way to being sold out. So I'm not sure how the sales goals aren't being met here? When something like the Billy Cobham disc sells out in a few months and now you can't find it anywhere for less than $60 just a year after its release? Somebody, somewhere is buying something....

Actually, I think the answer here (if there is one at all) will eventually lie with downloads. That's the only way they can effectively separate the stereo and MC versions. If there is ever going to be a way to monetize those old mixes from the small niche market that does want it--- it will be to do something like issue a download of, say, EW&F "Spirit" at $24.99 for the hi-rez stereo and issue the quad downloads for whatever-they-would-need-to-charge to cover the additional cost of licensing those masters. What would that be? $29.99? $39.99? If the market for the quad is truly just a few hundred people worldwide, then maybe there IS no price point where you can make a profit on them. (You'd have to charge so much that even those few hundred people wouldn't pay it.)

Although I would also suspect that once we move to a download-only business model that most of these reissue labels go by the wayside, because why would the major labels need them? Which should (theoretically anyway) lower the retail prices.
 
That's right. It does change the outcome a lot.

Imagine if Time-Life decided to launch a Quad SACD reissue campaign helped with TV spots and 30 minute infomercials like they have done so often in the past for their many compilation series. That could turn things around. Explain what Quad was/is and praise the merits of Multichannel mixes.

It's a nice dream I admit. :)

I can remember seeing/hearing ads as a kid in the 70s for what was probably Time/Life sets of 1940s Big Band music that had been remastered to sound "so much better than you remember it!" They would play clips of the old scratchy 78 soundings versions of "In the Mood" next to the new, clean, fuller sounding versions they were selling. (I guess this was maybe some of the first "remastering" of old music ever done?)

What would need to be done here would be to somehow target those older audiences who are watching 5.1 movies/TV and already have the systems set up and sell them on "you've never heard 'Hotel California' sound like THIS!"

Part of selling anything is often to convince people they want it/need it. I would THINK that these days the labels would be bordering on desperation to try and find new ways to squeeze the last few dollars that remain from this old music.
 
Back
Top