Great link, however, I have a problem with something James says. In his argument for SACD over DVD-A, he says this:

<em>If the major labels decide to go with DVD-A based solely on the argument that there are millions of DVD video players already out there that will play the disc, then they are saying that they are quite happy for people to listen to AC-3 or DTS. <span style="text-decoration:underline">They are effectively saying that they don't care about quality.</span>
</em>

To me, this is <em>bullshit</em>, SONY rhetoric.

If I play a SACD hybrid on a CD player, the sound quality is no better than that of playing a DVD-A on a DVD player.

I fail to see why he states that the non-DVD-A tracks have to be AC3 or DTS. They don't! In fact, before DVD-A and SACD, audiophile labels like Chesky release music on DVDs because they could get audio quality far better than a regular CD.

<strong>SACD</strong>: To get the Hi-Rez, you need an SACD player.
<strong>DVD-A</strong>: To get the Hi-Rez, you need an DVD-A player.

I fail to see the difference. Once again, you cannot even get a surround mix on a CD player, you CAN get a surround mix on a DVD player, as AC3 or DTS - but hey, at least you can <em>get</em> a surround mix!

:-jon