If you're looking for MP3s and ALAC files.
Wise Words - Audio Fidelity Moves to Selective Multichannel SACD Releases
- Thread starter JonUrban
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
If you're looking for MP3s and ALAC files.
I'm looking for MC. At this point, I'll take just about whatever format I can get
I think Multichannel files from Apple and Amazon is pretty unlikely at this point.
They have yet to get to standard and high resolution Stereo music downloads, much less Multichannel downloads.
To be fair, there are many people, include some on this forum, who would accuse them of peddling snake oil if they sold high resolution stereo downloads. Also worth noting that neither Apple nor Amazon (nor Google) sell lossless red book quality downloads (44.1kHz, 16-bit sample size). Amusingly, physical CDs at Amazon are often less expensive than MP3 downloads.
There are quite a few people who have asked Amazon and Apple to carry standard definition and high definition Stereo music downloads.
I think we will see their requests granted before the day that Amazon and Apple look at carrying Multichannel music downloads.
britmarc
Well-known Member
I am just wondering why I have not seen mentioned MOD or POD? (Manufacture On Demand // Press On Demand)
Several blu-ray companies do this time of thing with their *archive special editions*.....
Several blu-ray companies do this time of thing with their *archive special editions*.....
"But, unfortunately, it doesn't work that way as some artists are even opposed to releasing these multis [the Doobies, for instance"
Where did you get this info? I have never seen this anywhere in print.
Where did you get this info? I have never seen this anywhere in print.
I don't know if Amazon and Apple would be the appropriate distribution points or not, but that is really not my point. My point is that it I don't think it really takes all that much for it to be a worthwhile venture for the labels or certain distributors.
I get that selling the quad mixes doesn't work for AF under their current business model and licensing agreements but the flip side of that coin is that the majors seem to have no problem making old masters available either on a per-track or per-album basis for download or for streaming for very little money. They will still release and make available physical copies of compilations or old albums to be sold in the bins at WalMart for $6.99 retail.
Not everything needs to be a double gold-plated SACD with bonus tracks, a 50-page booklet, and a coupon for a year's worth of lattes at Starbucks. And while there are no doubt some instances where these old mixes couldn't be released without the artist's approval, I really can't believe that it would be true in most cases. If the label owns and controls the masters, then they own and control the masters. And outside of a few really big artists who may have negotiated a larger degree of control over them with subsequent contracts in later years? Can Mick Jones really tell WEA that they can't sell downloads of the 5.1 mixes made for "Foreigner" and "IV" in the 00s? Does whoever comprises The Doobie Brothers, Inc really have any say on what WEA does with the quad masters of "Stampede" that presumably have been sitting in a company vault and haven't been touched in 42 years? In some cases, maybe yes. In other cases, probably not.
My point is really that I'm not sure what, from the labels standpoint, the difference really is between selling downloads of the MC mixes vs the stereo mixes. Especially in the cases where both are now many-decades old.
The biggest cost/pain in the neck would be transferring these old tapes to digital, I suppose. But heck, there's gotta be people around willing to do it for next-for-nothing just to be able to get their hands on this stuff. Doing it for the love of the project as much as anything else. Then it's just about finding a distribution outlet for whom selling a few hundred/thousand downloads is worth their while. But the flip side of that is they could reasonably charge quite a bit more for the MCs because the few people who DO want them would be willing to pay more.
As far as the sound quality goes? Sure. I want them in the highest-rez version possible as well. But I also just want them out there. I'd settle for just getting them out there in MP3 and worry about lobbying for hi-rez or physical releases down the road. Heck, many people here are thrilled to listen to these mixes on decades-old 8-track tape. We're going to pitch a fit and refuse to buy a great quad mix if the only way we can get it for now is lossy?
I've never heard that either. Do those guys even remember that quad versions of their albums ever existed at this point?
And they were obviously fine with (or had no say in) "The Captain and Me" being remixed to 5.1 in the early 00s. So there isn't much evidence that they care or could do anything much about it even if they did.
If Rhino could do the Quadio Chicago box, and charge a very reasonable price for it, it would seem to reflect that they do understand that there is a market out there for multichannel releases. The Perception Box was manufactured twice, once in the big box, then in the smaller non-peep hole box. These two boxes are two of the most important surround releases of the 5.1 era.
So if ForagingRhino or someone else at Rhino could expand their download sales portal to include WEA quad and DVD-A titles, that would be a sure fire way to get some money flowing without having to spend money on licensing or physical media production. And, if there's an error, it can be easily corrected without having to resend corrected copies of discs to anyone.
Rhino has sold stereo audio downloads from their website in the past (I know, I've bought one or two), so the infrastructure is there.
To me, this makes the most sense. One of the labels with a lot of surround material, selling directly to the consumer without media, it's a slam-dunk in my book. They will have to absorb the piracy aspect of the thing. It's there. It will happen. But somehow HDTracks and others survive this so Rhino should be able to as well.
How about it? ForagingRhino, are you lurking? Start with a few high-demand titles. Eagles, Doobies, Black Sabaath, you know the ones. Make it so!!!
So if ForagingRhino or someone else at Rhino could expand their download sales portal to include WEA quad and DVD-A titles, that would be a sure fire way to get some money flowing without having to spend money on licensing or physical media production. And, if there's an error, it can be easily corrected without having to resend corrected copies of discs to anyone.
Rhino has sold stereo audio downloads from their website in the past (I know, I've bought one or two), so the infrastructure is there.
To me, this makes the most sense. One of the labels with a lot of surround material, selling directly to the consumer without media, it's a slam-dunk in my book. They will have to absorb the piracy aspect of the thing. It's there. It will happen. But somehow HDTracks and others survive this so Rhino should be able to as well.
How about it? ForagingRhino, are you lurking? Start with a few high-demand titles. Eagles, Doobies, Black Sabaath, you know the ones. Make it so!!!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,402
If Rhino could do the Quadio Chicago box, and charge a very reasonable price for it, it would seem to reflect that they do understand that there is a market out there for multichannel releases. The Perception Box was manufactured twice, once in the big box, then in the smaller non-peep hole box. These two boxes are two of the most important surround releases of the 5.1 era.
So if ForagingRhino or someone else at Rhino could expand their download sales portal to include WEA quad and DVD-A titles, that would be a sure fire way to get some money flowing without having to spend money on licensing or physical media production. And, if there's an error, it can be easily corrected without having to resend corrected copies of discs to anyone.
Rhino has sold stereo audio downloads from their website in the past (I know, I've bought one or two), so the infrastructure is there.
To me, this makes the most sense. One of the labels with a lot of surround material, selling directly to the consumer without media, it's a slam-dunk in my book. They will have to absorb the piracy aspect of the thing. It's there. It will happen. But somehow HDTracks and others survive this so Rhino should be able to as well.
How about it? ForagingRhino, are you lurking? Start with a few high-demand titles. Eagles, Doobies, Black Sabaath, you know the ones. Make it so!!!
Jon, I also think it's prudent to add Talking Heads fantastic BRICK and perhaps to a lesser extent Björk's SURROUNDED box sets.
Brian Moura's sobering post on this thread [#376] that 85-90% of listeners are STEREO oriented might be the major reason to impede multichannel downloads at this juncture. One would think that with ALL the available Universal players sold this century, multichannel music would be a slam dunk but as I always implied in the beginning of the DVD~A/mch SACD era, unlike Surround motion pictures which require one to sit raptly watching a screen, multichannel music does not share that 'commitment' with listeners who have no visuals to stare at....and might I add short attention spans.
Whether the Chicago Quadio boxset WAS indeed a one off celebrating the Band's induction into the R&R Hall of Fame is anyone's guess, but I'm sure ALL the majors are studying the ever changing market [including downloads] to best assess what will sell and what will not. As we all know, the bottom line IS profit which doesn't bode well for a niche market which comprises only a minuscule percentage of actual consumers.
I suppose we could also add the Genesis boxes too? Although I do think the Chicago box stands out for having such a unique emphasis on not only the MC mixes, but decades old quad mixes.
Or 85-90% of AF buyers anyway. is it possible there's a whole market of MC fans AF wasn't able to tap into because their marketing and reach is already defined by their SACD products? People who bought the Talking Heads "Brick" but have never bought an AF SACD?
The Chicago was perhaps a perfect storm of a big catalog, timing for interest in the band, and an interest in the product by a band who not only controls their own masters, but seems to have a distribution deal not only with WEA, but directly with Rhino.
But hopefully it had good enough success that it will cause other labels and/or artists to reconsider their old MC masters.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,402
Keywhiz, how could either Jon or I forget the fantastic (IMO) Genesis boxsets. LOVE them all.
As far as Brian Moura's stereo projections being relegated to AF sales ONLY.....VERY doubtful. There are vast numbers out there who STILL to this day have NO idea what a DVD~A or SACD is....much less multichannel [as applies to MUSIC not MOVIES]. I am proud to be in that small, BUT SELECT, group of multichannel zealots who appreciate the format and have been dutifully supporting it since the DTS Entertainment days...NOT counting my early 70's foray into SQ/QS/CD~4/Quad Open Reel.
Brian also stated that we still have about 8~10 GOOD years left for physical disc replication and I have NO doubt that eventually we'll be rewarded with a few hundred more multichannel surprises. But awareness to the format is key and INTEREST in multichannel is paramount. Whether that changes is highly doubtful. Regrettably, the die has been cast and we just have to face the reality that we'll always be in that 10~15% MINORITY WHO LOVE MULTICHANNEL.
BTW, when RHINO released the Chicago boxset, I sent them a proposal (via email) to perhaps release an ASSORTED boxset of titles from existing 5.1 masters from artists who only had one, two or three surround titles and of course I received that polite reply that they'd look into it. A POTPOURRI [grab bag] assortment, as I like to call it probably fell on deaf ears and was met with indifference by fellow QQ posters. Perhaps NOT surprising since almost ALL of AF's QUAD/5.1 SACDs were met with equal amounts of cheers .... and groans!
If Rhino could do the Quadio Chicago box, and charge a very reasonable price for it, it would seem to reflect that they do understand that there is a market out there for multichannel releases. The Perception Box was manufactured twice, once in the big box, then in the smaller non-peep hole box. These two boxes are two of the most important surround releases of the 5.1 era.
So if ForagingRhino or someone else at Rhino could expand their download sales portal to include WEA quad and DVD-A titles, that would be a sure fire way to get some money flowing without having to spend money on licensing or physical media production. And, if there's an error, it can be easily corrected without having to resend corrected copies of discs to anyone.
Rhino has sold stereo audio downloads from their website in the past (I know, I've bought one or two), so the infrastructure is there.
To me, this makes the most sense. One of the labels with a lot of surround material, selling directly to the consumer without media, it's a slam-dunk in my book. They will have to absorb the piracy aspect of the thing. It's there. It will happen. But somehow HDTracks and others survive this so Rhino should be able to as well.
How about it? ForagingRhino, are you lurking? Start with a few high-demand titles. Eagles, Doobies, Black Sabaath, you know the ones. Make it so!!!
The two big issues I see, and I think the labels are aware of is: one needs to milk the (however small) physical sales out of a title before it is offered up as a download, because after the fact can mean much fewer discs sold. Just like the Beatles offered up the farm on iTunes after the rollout of the remastered cds and a big box set that all sold nicely. The other issue is that once it has been offered up as a download, the sharing (piracy) of those files is a given. So you lose some sales, and you cannablize the market for a physical release.
This to me means that they would need to launch the HD Surround downloads with albums that have already had their day in the sun as a disc. Warners / Rhino it would seem, are in a great position here, not only the Doors and Heads big boxes , they have already exploited physically, but they are sitting on dozens of modern 5.1 mixes from their DVD-A line (Doobies, Alice, Dead, REM, Deep Purple, and the list goes on.
If they started the downloads with these titles, these is no cannablizing fear. Then they could start back up with Rhino Handmade Quadio "limited edition" releases like they had started with before, and continued with on the Chicago box.
They could do the limited edition discs and then downloads later, I think that they would grab each of the markets effectively. They would need to include a color catalog inside of each Quadio so the fans know about each and every release. And let the disc fans know that a download release is planned for one year later, if they want to wait.
Sony is in the same position in regards to having 5.1 material already mastered (as you are well aware) from their SACD line. They could start the downloads with those titles while they get Santana, BOC, Winters, EW&F prepped for their limited edition disc line to be pressed in Japan (nobody every promised low prices here). Then these old quads get their digital download release after the limited edition discs sell out.
I think that pricing is the ticket here. They need to charge enough to recoup quickly, and do not start with Ray Conniff Orchestra, or Percy Faith, but rather rock evergreens that sold, continue to sell. Ray and Percy can go strait to downloads after the first good two years of the big quad excavation project.
This is exactly why I've said, time and time again, that a small commercial advertisement is necessary. If you mention Surround or 5.1 to the average person, they either have a) no idea what you're talking about or b) have vague, inarticulate recollections of Quad and how it was such a commercial disaster. I recently had a person tell me that 40 years ago, they heard Mercedes Benz off Janis Joplin's Q8, and that one itty-bitty snippet was enough to turn them off Quad completely. They've never forgotten how that one little bit reminded them of the Duophonic 60's and that they'll never get into Quad if it's that bad.
Seriously.
You want something to sell in record numbers? Promote it.
None of these companies advertising campaigns (if they even exist) are worth anything.
Advertise in Audio Magazines.
The internet is LITTERED with ads and yet not one I've seen has anything to do with Surround sound.
Make a TV ad. Yes, it's expensive. What isn't these days?
I've always gotten people into Quad with a simple phrase: "It's like visiting an old friend you haven't seen in a while but have new stories to tell."
Because a lot of people will ask : Why do I need to buy that album AGAIN? If you offer something different, they might buy into it.
If you can sell someone a 6-disc Little Richard box set, you can sell somebody a single disc that plays anywhere in stereo & multichannel.
But it is funny how things go full circle. For a long time there was a little bit of software, but virtually no hardware to play it on. As the hardware segment grew, the record companies gave up on the software. Now we're back to very little hardware and companies trying to push software again. Chicken or the egg? It doesn't matter, because we the consumer get royally clucked either way.
Seriously.
You want something to sell in record numbers? Promote it.
None of these companies advertising campaigns (if they even exist) are worth anything.
Advertise in Audio Magazines.
The internet is LITTERED with ads and yet not one I've seen has anything to do with Surround sound.
Make a TV ad. Yes, it's expensive. What isn't these days?
I've always gotten people into Quad with a simple phrase: "It's like visiting an old friend you haven't seen in a while but have new stories to tell."
Because a lot of people will ask : Why do I need to buy that album AGAIN? If you offer something different, they might buy into it.
If you can sell someone a 6-disc Little Richard box set, you can sell somebody a single disc that plays anywhere in stereo & multichannel.
But it is funny how things go full circle. For a long time there was a little bit of software, but virtually no hardware to play it on. As the hardware segment grew, the record companies gave up on the software. Now we're back to very little hardware and companies trying to push software again. Chicken or the egg? It doesn't matter, because we the consumer get royally clucked either way.
Someone brought up advertising, and this is something that I have been saying for a while now.
Why haven't Audio Fidelity partnered with the artists whose titles they are reissuing to do some joint advertising together?
Just using their (AF) own website, email, and Facebook page (along with the Acoustic Sounds, Music Direct, and Elusive Disc websites) might make people who are already aware of their releases aware of a new title that is coming out, but how many fans of the artists that AF released Multichannel SACDs for knew that those releases had come out?
I would venture to bet that the vast majority of those artists' fan bases did not know about any of the AF Multichannel SACD releases.
Think about it.
How hard would it be for AF to work with those artists to promote these SACD releases through the artists' websites, email, and Facebook pages?
A post on an artist's Facebook page or an email they send out is worth so much more than any current advertising strategies AF are pursuing, so if anyone from AF is reading this, give it a shot! It shouldn't hurt your business, but it should grow it!
Why haven't Audio Fidelity partnered with the artists whose titles they are reissuing to do some joint advertising together?
Just using their (AF) own website, email, and Facebook page (along with the Acoustic Sounds, Music Direct, and Elusive Disc websites) might make people who are already aware of their releases aware of a new title that is coming out, but how many fans of the artists that AF released Multichannel SACDs for knew that those releases had come out?
I would venture to bet that the vast majority of those artists' fan bases did not know about any of the AF Multichannel SACD releases.
Think about it.
How hard would it be for AF to work with those artists to promote these SACD releases through the artists' websites, email, and Facebook pages?
A post on an artist's Facebook page or an email they send out is worth so much more than any current advertising strategies AF are pursuing, so if anyone from AF is reading this, give it a shot! It shouldn't hurt your business, but it should grow it!
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,402
Everything sounds good on paper but even the cost of taking out full page color ads in Boutique audio Magazines DOES cost an arm and a leg today. And IMO, putting out titles in multichannel as downloads, which have already been released (some multiple times) on physical discs and charging a premium is not a good business model. They'd have to offer some extraordinary especially remixed NEW/CURRENT titles of top rock/pop acts for this to even begin to sound remotely appetizing. What, NO Lady GaGa, No Katy Perry, No Alabama Shakes etc. And the QUAD/5.1 70's titles which have been released on physical disc with still NO STONES, NO Beatles and NO Zep may hold nostalgia for some but not for a younger crowd which is what we need to keep this format alive.
Even back in the heyday of DVD~A and SACD, there were VERY few print ads and perhaps a handful of TV ads and what really did these new formats in was the negative press from TOP audio magazines. They equated ALL digital physical discs as harsh sounding and proclaimed the warm analogue sound of Vinyl as KING.....which, if you haven't noticed, is STILL outselling all of the digital multichannel SACDs, DVD~As and BD~As COMBINED.
No one loves Surround Hi Res Formats more than me (oops, fredblue) but I'm also a realist. Way too much ink, RED & Black, has been spilled on how to make Surround a viable format. But unless the artists, OLD and NEW come forward and demand that their albums be remixed in 5.1, we're still at the mercy of the record conglomerates whose posture is still: Been There, DONE THAT! Sorry....just be thankful for the 'crumbs' we have bestowed upon you.
I agree. I think we are long past the point of being able to generate "record sales" just by advertising more.
The problem with getting MC stuff released is the labels see that Quad failed in the 70s and that 5.1 failed in the 00s. I think the only real marketing plan is for them to see it as low-risk as possible. Where selling even 500 copies of something still means a small profit.
That probably means downloads. As much as I'd like to see deluxe versions of a lot of these album where the MC mixes are just one of the many extras offered, the truth is very few of these albums would justify that sort of treatment.
And doing boxed sets of albums by different artists? That just sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. "I had to pay $60 for the one album I like just so I could be saddled with 3 albums I hate???"
I say cheap and easy has to be the way to go in most cases. We're just too far beyond the viability of physical media and, in most cases, the titles themselves to justify anything else.
What I do find interesting is the labels are, apparently, willing to give it up cheap when they don't see much value in it otherwise. Case in point, Sony giving the Tower of Power album to DV for what must have been peanuts. Why hold on more dearly to, say, the LaBelle title? I don't know the full details, obviously, but I'd guess in both cases Sony owns both titles virtually outright.
At some point they will need to figure out there isn't much market life left in the vast majority of these titles in any format.
The problem with getting MC stuff released is the labels see that Quad failed in the 70s and that 5.1 failed in the 00s. I think the only real marketing plan is for them to see it as low-risk as possible. Where selling even 500 copies of something still means a small profit.
That probably means downloads. As much as I'd like to see deluxe versions of a lot of these album where the MC mixes are just one of the many extras offered, the truth is very few of these albums would justify that sort of treatment.
And doing boxed sets of albums by different artists? That just sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. "I had to pay $60 for the one album I like just so I could be saddled with 3 albums I hate???"
I say cheap and easy has to be the way to go in most cases. We're just too far beyond the viability of physical media and, in most cases, the titles themselves to justify anything else.
What I do find interesting is the labels are, apparently, willing to give it up cheap when they don't see much value in it otherwise. Case in point, Sony giving the Tower of Power album to DV for what must have been peanuts. Why hold on more dearly to, say, the LaBelle title? I don't know the full details, obviously, but I'd guess in both cases Sony owns both titles virtually outright.
At some point they will need to figure out there isn't much market life left in the vast majority of these titles in any format.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,402
Similar threads
