I see that Audio Fidelity has a subscription model. But there's no mention of multichannel. Why not offer a Quad Club? This could ensure a minimum of sales for the quad releases!
Would you pay extra for an Audio Fidelity Surround SACD?
- Thread starter fredblue
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Maybe? I'd have to think that given the fact that Pentatone is officially distributed in the USA, Universal Classics isn't licensing to them on a Europe-only basis. Then again, who knows - Praga is officially distributed in the USA also and they've released a couple of unlicensed "historical" SACDs that blatantly violate US law without apparent incident.
With Pentatone part of the secret sauce might just be that it was founded by some of the heavyweights at Philips Classics after Universal decided it didn't need Philips as a third major label, especially since use of the name involved paying royalties to the electronics company that spun off its recording division decades ago. Not only were they close to the Universal execs who remained, they had been personally involved in making these recordings, so they knew exactly what was available.
Also, I don't know know exactly what Pentatone's deal is with Gordon Getty, but I assume that acting as a vanity press for a billionaire composer helps balance the books too. Although a few scoff at this arrangement I think it's fantastic - and his music is better, sometimes much better, than I would have expected.
Something else i would like to mention, if the quad mixes cost more, like 30.00 to 35.00, that would be fine. But it would slow me down from buying as many. At the 25.00 to 30.00 price they are now i can afford to take chances on titles i think imight like but am not sure of. For example if the Earth wind and fire sacds were 35.00 i wouldn't have tried them, and i would have missed out on two enjoyable discs, and of course there asre others i wouldn't have tried at a higher price. So at least for me, i wouldn't buy as many as i do now.
That is correct.
There is also a cost difference between licensing a Classical Music album for reissue and a Pop Music title.
And it helps that the Pentatone founders were formerly with Philips before Philips sold their music division to Universal.
That is correct.
There is also a cost difference between licensing a Classical Music album for reissue and a Pop Music title.
And it helps that the Pentatone founders were formerly with Philips before Philips sold their music division to Universal.
Great stuff!
So.. how does one reach out to UK labels like Esoteric/Cherry Red, for example, to gauge their level of interest in licensing Quads..?
We know Esoteric/Cherry Red are pro-surround since they have released a number of surround titles already like the Anthony Phillips series, Tony Banks, Hawkwind, Barclay James Harvest, Ray Thomas, Andy Jackson, etc..
..and Esoteric/Cherry Red have already reissued many Sony licensed titles that have Quad mixes, like Billy Paul, Isleys, Miracles, etc.. so they already have a rapport with Sony and encouragingly are not anti these 70's artists or genres such as Soul/R&B, even if the existing Esoteric/Cherry Red reissues of those artists were regrettably stereo only..
..my question is, is there any way someone with influence here could convince Esoteric/Cherry Red to dip a toe in the Quad waters,
maybe, if licensing Quads in the UK/Europe is so much cheaper than it is in the United States..?
The rising Audio Fidelity prices here in Canada are already cooling my jets and discouraging me from taking more chances on their releases.
I think more than twice about paying $50 for a single album (plus taxes/shipping/whatever), when that would have bought two albums not long ago.
I suppose that if I buy less but the editions still sell out, then I'm the only loser - but I'll probably spend my money on other, more reasonable, options.
Since you asked.
Scott
I think more than twice about paying $50 for a single album (plus taxes/shipping/whatever), when that would have bought two albums not long ago.
I suppose that if I buy less but the editions still sell out, then I'm the only loser - but I'll probably spend my money on other, more reasonable, options.
Since you asked.
Scott
hirez
Senior Member
Very true.
I would pay more for a stereo or mch hirez disc product for something I want but will not buy any title simply because it has a hirez disc release.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,438
Since our beloved Clint Eastwood who used to post Deep Discount's 15% off sales on a regular basis is on 'hiatus' I did receive an e~mail today from DD that until Thursday September 22, 2016 at 12 Noon, ALL merchandise on the site is 15% off with the promo code: FALL15.
This means (trying to stay on topic) that almost ALL of Audio Fidelity's stereo/multichannel SACDs (w/discount) are roughly $20.82 (that's if you're exempt from sales tax) and does include FREE shipping for orders over $25.
This means (trying to stay on topic) that almost ALL of Audio Fidelity's stereo/multichannel SACDs (w/discount) are roughly $20.82 (that's if you're exempt from sales tax) and does include FREE shipping for orders over $25.
Sorry to go OT for a sec., has anyone here heard from Clint at all please?
Quite concerned to be honest..
Quite concerned to be honest..
Also to address your last point Ralph, I so wish AF had a UK & Europe distribution arm that could at least arrange bulk export sales for them or something, I think it might help shift more units.. certainly in my case getting the AF Surround titles over here has proved much more costly than it has for many QQ-ers in the States (international shipping and import duty are just getting too onerous for me now really, pretty much the two costs combined are as much as the discs themselves..)
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,438
Perhaps Brian Moura might have some input on this matter, Adam. I too would be curious if Audio Fidelity has ever explored this option. Since ALL domestic SACDs are pressed in Austria*, I'm sure some arrangement could be made with a European distributor to help allay the ridiculous (onerous) tariffs European customers (and for that matter ALL non~US customers) have to endure when purchasing these discs.
[*but probably shipped to the US on spindles where all package assembly is done]
Indeed Ralph! ..I've thought for a little while now that one slightly batty thing about these AF SACDs (or indeed any SACD thats pressed up in Austria and then assembled and distributed for Sale around the U.S.A) in this situation, when they are bought by Brits and Euro customers, is the carbon footprint they must leave on the planet as they are shipped around the world and back again, from Europe to the States and back to Europe again, isn't it all a bit silly.. and maybe slightly immoral/irresponsible..!? I wonder if Coldplay's upcoming 5.1 music Blu-ray's will be pressed in Europe, shipped to the States and shipped back to Europe again.. Chris Martin and co seem too "right on, man" for all that though, don't they.. it'll probably come in biodegradable packaging that self destructs in a week..!
A shorter post this time...unfortunately the only way we really have to express our discontentment with the quality or selection of new surround releases, whether by AF or anyone else in any format, is not spending our money on it. The inherent problem with this is that it is seen as failure. The bigger problem is trying to determine if that failure is due to it being in surround and people don't want to spend more for that. Or is it that the recording was not done well. Or even maybe people just don't like the artist or album released. With all these variables, how can we clearly communicate our preferences? I don't have a hotline or contact at any record company to give feedback, and even if I did, I represent a very small sample size of the intended audience.
How do we tell them what we prefer other than just buying it? Like I said before, I have purchased discs in surround that I didn't "love" just to show support, but that will only last so long. Apparently by the cutbacks on releases, AF has gotten the message that this new surround release series is up and down at best. No doubt some discs were better received than others, but do they know why? Or doesn't it matter, money is the only factor?
I brought up the BDA as an alternative format that has more potential for mainstream success. Mainly being that there are (forgive me if it has changed) approximately 100 million blu ray players in the US alone. With a market that big, maybe SACD shouldn't be the format they push. Just a suggestion. I don't know the details as to how difficult it is to do BDA vs. SACD, I am just saying there are WAY more blu ray players than SACD players. And from the idiot perspective, everyone knows what a blu ray is, but I bet 75% of the people never even heard of a SACD. I know the argument can be that there is a CD layer and SACD layer, but it seems to me that that is becoming a dinosaur very quickly, if not already. I am not running the marketing department and am not privy to the variables, but from a simplistic common sense approach, I think BDA would stand a better chance, and most likely doesn't change our desires to purchase or not.
Again, just my overpriced 1000000000 cents...
How do we tell them what we prefer other than just buying it? Like I said before, I have purchased discs in surround that I didn't "love" just to show support, but that will only last so long. Apparently by the cutbacks on releases, AF has gotten the message that this new surround release series is up and down at best. No doubt some discs were better received than others, but do they know why? Or doesn't it matter, money is the only factor?
I brought up the BDA as an alternative format that has more potential for mainstream success. Mainly being that there are (forgive me if it has changed) approximately 100 million blu ray players in the US alone. With a market that big, maybe SACD shouldn't be the format they push. Just a suggestion. I don't know the details as to how difficult it is to do BDA vs. SACD, I am just saying there are WAY more blu ray players than SACD players. And from the idiot perspective, everyone knows what a blu ray is, but I bet 75% of the people never even heard of a SACD. I know the argument can be that there is a CD layer and SACD layer, but it seems to me that that is becoming a dinosaur very quickly, if not already. I am not running the marketing department and am not privy to the variables, but from a simplistic common sense approach, I think BDA would stand a better chance, and most likely doesn't change our desires to purchase or not.
Again, just my overpriced 1000000000 cents...
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,438
Indeed Ralph! ..I've thought for a little while now that one slightly batty thing about these AF SACDs (or indeed any SACD thats pressed up in Austria and then assembled and distributed for Sale around the U.S.A) in this situation, when they are bought by Brits and Euro customers, is the carbon footprint they must leave on the planet as they are shipped around the world and back again, from Europe to the States and back to Europe again, isn't it all a bit silly.. and maybe slightly immoral/irresponsible..!? I wonder if Coldplay's upcoming 5.1 music Blu-ray's will be pressed in Europe, shipped to the States and shipped back to Europe again.. Chris Martin and co seem too "right on, man" for all that though, don't they.. it'll probably come in biodegradable packaging that self destructs in a week..!
I do know, Adam, that most European classical labels utilize NAXOS for their worldwide distribution. But I don't know what share NAXOS would charge the individual record companies. If all the US reissue companies could find a way to not only press but assemble their SACDs in Europe there would still be the problem of distribution to all other countries in the world so I don't rationally think that would solve any distribution issues. It's a small world until you factor in the complexity in getting a product from Point A to Points B>Z.......more than a bit convoluted, IMO.
AF seeks (and is granted) only a US licenses for their releases. However, they know others import and export them as a business. AF is not able to simply get a EU distribution deal. But plenty of the product makes it out to distant countries, unfortunately prices get hiked up pretty badly.m the heartbreaking postage hike to Canada is particularly alarming. US / Canada was always cheap and easy for doing business for both parties. That romance is over.
Just like AF moved to the SACD format, they may need to move to BDA at some point later. But while BR has more saturation than SACD, CD still is king of music players. I'd bet a large group of AF buyers are CD only, missing out on high-res and surround layers. The CD buyers would be dumped overnight with this change.
Is there a fundamental lack of understanding the various sectors of the market on the parts of all labels..?
I mean, the bulk of CD buyers more than likely do not have the same needs and criteria for buying a title as Hi-Res Stereo buyers..
..and from observing activity at places like the SHF, Hi-Res Stereo buyers and Surround buyers are often a breed apart, with Hi-Res Stereo people having no interest in Surround and sometimes vice versa where the Surround crowd (or rather huddle) only want Surround and are not too bothered about the Stereo..
..of course there will always be a crossover with customers wanting CD quality, Stereo Hi-Res and Surround all in one package... not least the cross compatibility and functionality of CD & Hi-Res & Surround on different players and in different listening environments in their life (anywhere in general with a CD player, in the home theatre, in the car, etc) all on one disc but does a single inventory "catch all" disc that does it all, really best serve Surround's interests?
Maybe a limited print run release of the most desirable Quads and 5.1's along the lines of the DTS CD model,
that is = Surround only titles for Surround buyers only.. is the right way to go...?
It would be cheaper for a label to license only the Quad, cheaper to transfer only the Quad, cheaper to remaster only the Quad..
..I'm surprised no other label has tried to emulate what DTS did so well back at the turn of the millennium, with titles that have no Stereo option and are only in Quad/5.1... market them to their captive surround only audience and price them attractively and it could be a solution for us here..
..how many times do you not buy a surround title because it is not a standalone item..?
how many more surround titles would you buy if they were purely Surround sound only..?
Maybe..
..but how much does it cost to do a run of, say, 1,000 DVD's nowadays..?
Gotta be cheaper than ever..
Someone (a label, an individual, IDK) in the UK Licences a Quad..
..buy a thousand DVD's, to be replicated by the cheapest but decent company you can find..
..commission our friends at Opus to do the mastering and then a similarly no bells and whistles Opus authoring job (preferably as a DVD-Audio)..
get one of the folks here with mega Quad knowledge to do some liner notes..
get one of the arty folks here to do the cover art (you could just replicate the Quad LP, so less design work to do and more authentic)..
bung it in a simple jewel case or no frills digipak (whichever is cheapest packaging, I've no idea!)
..but have a brief to keep all costs down as low as poss but keep it best sounding product as possible (of course) and...
Ker-Ching! Every QQ Quad fans a winner baby..
..and if you can't sell a thousand copies that way then there really is no point going any further, imho!
Similar threads
