How much extra is "fair" ro pay for a SACD/DVD-A with a M/C track?

Many announced titles are being delayed due to a dispute with the music publishers concerning the number of "versions" of songs on a single disc.

Some DVD-A's may have Hi Rez Stereo, Hi REz Multichannel, plus DD, DTS, and even "bonus" tracks. SACDs can have 3 versions as well.

Have we been spoiled paying sometime less than CD prices for our SACDs/DVD-As, or is it fair to charge more, like EMI & BMG have done (Pet Sounds, Elvis #1)?

How much more are you willing to pay to get a release with a hi-rez surround track?

Post your feelings here about this whole matter...

I want product releases so bad I'd pay a premium....

timbre4 said:

I want product releases so bad I'd pay a premium....

Click to expand...

I didn't like paying premium prices ($24.98) for some of my DVD-A and DTS titles but I think it would be fair to charge $19.99. Of course, double discs like Frampton would be more as well. In reality though, if it was a title that I really wanted, I would pay whatever the price was.

do artist's get more if they use 6 or 8 or 32 track tapes
do we pay half for mono
how many tracks should there be on a disc
if there is less than the amount should there be a reduced price
also should there be a time limit on the lenght of a track
or a limit on repeats of the same bars
angry of Aus.

When I set up my SACD player, I went hunting for Elton John's Goodbye Yellowbrick Road. While I could get it online for a discount, I wanted it immediately, so paid $35.00 at a bricks and morter record store. No problem as far as I'm concerned.

I'm a bit spoiled by prices myself and always want to shop around for the best bargain, but like most here I believe I'd pay a premium for a release I really wanted. I mean, after all, I've shelled out the big dough for something on EBay or the occasional *koff koff*...er, "fan club" pressing in the past.

Considering the cost of actually manufacturing the discs, consumers have been gouged for years. Sure, I'd be willing to pay a buck or two more for a superior product, but separate MC releases would only tend to contribute to non-acceptance in the marketplace, just as it did with quad vinyl. Keep the price the same and release EVERYTHING in MC format!

Thanks for the posting,
john e. bogus

timbre4 said:

I want product releases so bad I'd pay a premium....

Click to expand...

Same here....the trickle of new titles is just depressing...so bad, in fact, I almost--almost!--picked up the Britney Spears DVD-A, which should tell you something right there.....@: Haven't taken leave of my senses yet, but who knows how much longer I can hold out.

ED:sun

"the trickle of new titles is just depressing"

I think that between quad reissues and new releases that there's a somewhat reasonable selection developing among big name major label artists....but I agree totally in the overall general sense. It gets especially worse when your favorite music is obscure old-school metal bands on small independent labels! In light of this situation, why don't we create our own "releases" by recording live performances in MC formats and swapping them among ourselves? Many bands, obscure and well known, big and small, in all musical styles, allow fans to record their shows from the audience....I started in 1985, progressing from cassette to DAT to DV, and now I'm trying to get set up for taping in quad....anyone care to join me?

Yours Truly,
john e. bogus

I voted for the $2 and up option.
Main reason is I know how much work goes into those multichannel mixes, if done properly, as well as the enormous costs involved.

Also in favour of Stereo versions being included with M/C, as high res isn't just about multichannel. Hi Res stereo sounds pretty damned good to me too.

There is also the question of just who is actually doing the gouging. Store markups are generally over 100%, or else how could a site like play.com do the DVDA & SACD at the prices they do, and still not charge postage.

If the prices are too steep at the store, buy online, boycott the store - COMPLAIN. Don't put up with it.

I agree with the above 100%.
Keeping MC and stereo separate would be a very good way of killing MC recordings stone dead -the compatability between the two types is vital, and I too would miss high-res stereo recordings considering how good they tend to be.
The effort that goes into making MC releases is far greater (or it should be) than standard stereo recordings, so I don't mind paying a bit extra for them, provided, of course, the artists and those involved in the recording get the benefit, not some greedy retailer, which is where I still have a major problem.
Since CD was introduced, album prices in high-street chains tripled. In short, we have been chronically ripped off for around two decades, and this is Not A Good Thing and now they are complaining that piracy, itself caused by their artificially maintaining ludicrous album prices, is putting them out of business. My heart bleeds for their obscene profit margins. I may become weepy. I never buy from these stores now -and do do exactly as Neil suggests above by voting with my wallet and boycotting those stores that charge the earth and buy on-line from those with a firmer grasp on reality.

Ed Bishop said:

Same here....the trickle of new titles is just depressing...so bad, in fact, I almost--almost!--picked up the Britney Spears DVD-A, which should tell you something right there.....@: Haven't taken leave of my senses yet, but who knows how much longer I can hold out.

ED:sun

Click to expand...

. . . and it's been perfectly horrible over the last six months.

What I've come to acknowledge is that I'd rather listen to a two channel CD with good music, than super-quality high-resolution, multi-channel . . . boring music. Of course, it's stupendous when great music is put out on either of the two formats . . . but I've got over 800 CDs, and there's a lot of great music in that collection. Only a few ever made their way to SACD or DVD-Audio.

Of the two features offered by the new formats--high resolution, and a multichannel mix--I easily gravitate to the surround mix more readily than I do the resolution.

I'm really appreciating my Lexicon MC-12 now, as Logic 7 turns every two channel recording there is into a great surround experience. While I will still buy good titles on SACD or DVD-Audio, they're being released at too slow a pace to maintain interest without succumbing to frustration.

Dolby PLII is a great alternative to Logic 7, and, with or without a Lexicon, I'm glad that we can listen to lots of great music in alluring surround. That may be as good as it ever gets.

Yes, I'd pay more. But what's the difference, if they're not selling?

Nick

Artists will get 4 or 5 bucks from a just released, cd sale. Rest is divided between vendor record company and distributer. DVD audio is no dif. Record biz is a mess and that is not helping us at all. If the biz had some stability we would see more help.

quadtrade said:

Artists will get 4 or 5 bucks from a just released, cd sale. Rest is divided between vendor record company and distributer. DVD audio is no dif. Record biz is a mess and that is not helping us at all. If the biz had some stability we would see more help.

Click to expand...

Sounds tragic. We should all really appreciate the surround that we are listening to now. We may not get the support (from the money people who make all the releases possible) for very long. We may need to create our own bootleg releases---complete with original multi-track mixes--- to fufill the likely void that would be result from current industry lack of belief in the medium.

Hey I just bought John Taverner Total Eclise-Agraphon MC Hybrid SACD reg price $19.99 CDN at the same store the CD was $23.99 CDN. Now what's up with that.
I paid more for the Bartok Living Stereo CD than I paid for the MC Hybrid SACD.
I think all MC discs should be $2 or more less than the CD's

I just bought a $35,000 Car so I can listen to DVD-A's. $2.00 is a small price to pay.