Dual Disc Most major labels back off DualDisc

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

bobou2

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2003
Messages
297
Location
The Bronx
Most major labels back off DualDisc

By Brian Garrity Sat Feb 4, 6:39 AM ET

NEW YORK (Billboard) - The DualDisc marks its one-year anniversary of mass distribution this month, but the new hybrid CD/DVD once expected to become the physical successor to the CD may already be on life support.

A year after a consortium of major and indie labels announced they would back the product, its future appears to be riding on the one leading music company actually pushing it as a priority: Sony BMG Music Entertainment.

All the majors are sold on the notion of using bundled audiovisual experiences to add value to physical goods. And hit-starved retailers are clamoring for more combo products. They are charging anywhere from the same price for both versions of an album to $3 more for DualDisc.

Sony BMG is set to release more than 100 DualDisc titles in 2006. The shipment total is expected to surpass its 2005 output of more than 13 million units on 102 titles. Among the acts with DualDisc titles in the first half of this year are Pink, Dixie Chicks,
Barry Manilow, Teddy Geiger,
Miranda Lambert,
Clay Aiken, Weird Al Yankovic, the Fray, the Jonas Brothers and London Pigg.

On the other hand, Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and EMI combined did not come close to Sony BMG's DualDisc output last year. The prospects for 2006 do not look any better.

While all three majors are officially reviewing the product, few, if any, DualDisc titles are on the way this year. "It's just about a dead issue," a source at one major label says. "We'll put out a few here and there, but it's not anywhere near a major initiative."

The rub in the debate over DualDisc remains cost. The price of manufacturing a DualDisc is double the average CD -- about $1.20, versus 50 cents-60 cents for the traditional CD with jewel box and booklet, distribution sources say.

Universal, Warner and EMI all are balking at the notion of dramatically increasing their manufacturing costs for a product that they say lacks clearly defined consumer demand. An NPD study of DualDisc usage published in August found that nearly half of all DualDisc buyers did not realize they were purchasing the configuration until after they left the store.

Other roadblocks to acceptance include mixed enthusiasm from artists about producing DualDisc content, the long lead time to properly produce the hybrid titles and a limited number of manufacturers that can actually make the discs.

The three holdout labels are more attracted to 2-in-1 CD/DVD combo packages, which are cheaper to produce than the all-in-one DualDiscs. They also are releasing combo packs in greater numbers.

Still, Sony BMG is not dissuaded by the resistance of the other majors. The company's executives are heartened by another set of NPD stats, indicating that 72% of consumers that own a DualDisc title would buy another one in the next six months.

Reuters/Billboard
 
Maybe if Sony would make a practice of putting 5.1 on the DVD side, they'd have better penetration! I must have browse 50 DDs in Best Buy today, and only 20% of them featured 5.1.

As a consumer, why would you pony up extra bux for "enhanced stereo?" It offers no significant improvement to the listening experience. Sheesh. And they wonder why they can't get traction... once again, a case of marketers NOT LISTENING to the marketplace.
 
Sony killed it - or at least, gave it their best shot.
They did this by refusing to go with the product as conceived, IE with a DVD-A layer.
Typical.
I honestly believe that Sony do not want High Rez to ever succeed - otherwise why did they ever go with DSD as a release medium? It's fatally flawed, and most producers & digital Audio specialists I know all loathe it.
(Nika Aldrich, John Watkinson etc - both of whom literally "Wrote the book" on digital Audio). Their reasons for the whole SACD/DSD debacle, IMHO, were all $$$ based, as they wanted to own the entire medium - which is bad for us, bad for the format & bad for consumers too as they split the market, caused confusion, and repeated the same mistakes all over again with DualDisc.
I think it''s all part of their master plan to force the dreadful BRD onto the public - and those are going to be so fragile as to be useless.
0.1mm? Get real.
Another worry I have with BRD is the Java part for interactive components. Why Java? And the way it will work means that any interactive content will be permanently running in the background, and hogging bandwidth.
Don't hold yer breath for HR audio and HD video from Sony - it will never happen.

DVD-A was an attempt to put studio quality audio in the hands of the consumer, and that is why I think Sony hate it so much.
 
Looking back at the entire HiRez deal, from the very beginning, the fact that SONY never ever ever ever ever made a DVD player with DVD-A capability pretty much doomed the end user "us" to a format war that was skewed in their favor.

It's almost to the point that they sacrificed SACD to make sure that DVD-A "went away".

Imagine if Sony Hardware made true universal players, they kept their normal output of SACDs, and DVD-A continued from other labels, we'd still be movin' along.

For a major hardware vendor not to include DVD-A in ANY of their equipment only created more confusion for the average joe.

For everything they do well (SACD), they do so many other things poorly. It seems like it's been easy to beat on Sony in the past few years, but in reality they made it that way.

Sad Sad Sad
 
Not good news, especially concerning Universal. Once they gave up on SACD, I thought at the very least they would concentrate their efforts in releasing hi-rez multi-channel music via DualDiscs. Alas, they've been few and far between over the last year, and there's nothing on the upcoming schedule. I guess it's effectively over.

As for Sony's continued championing of the format: Who cares?
 
Warner has certainly gone the way of the CD/DVD package. Look at all the REM discs, Running on Empty, The Soft Bulletin, the upcoming Donald Fagen album, the new Flaming Lips album (At War With the Mystics), etc. I actually prefer the CD/DVD packs to DualDiscs. That's why I was very surprised to see Warner issue the Talking Heads stuff on DualDisc. The only DualDiscs EMI has released I think are REM's Document and Crowded House's eponymous album. Not much of a selection. Universal has released a fair amount of DualDiscs but they haven't put out any more since probably October or so. Sad really. But hey, as long as labels like Warner still keep the DVD-Audio coming, I'll buy it whether it's in DualDisc or CD/DVD packaging.
 
I like the DVD-A/CD packages from Warner. There's just not enough of them. A Neil Young reissue/remaster series of his catalog would be nice.
 
I don't own any Sony DualDiscs, nor will I if they don't offer a true surround mix on the DVD-V side. If they are the only ones that will be issuing DualDiscs then the format is dead as far as I am concerned.
 
neil wilkes said:
Sony killed it - or at least, gave it their best shot.
They did this by refusing to go with the product as conceived, IE with a DVD-A layer.
Typical.
I honestly believe that Sony do not want High Rez to ever succeed - otherwise why did they ever go with DSD as a release medium? It's fatally flawed, and most producers & digital Audio specialists I know all loathe it.
(Nika Aldrich, John Watkinson etc - both of whom literally "Wrote the book" on digital Audio).


But Nika will agree (and I know this because we've spoken about it) that while SACD is pointless, it does have one 'advantage' over the other formats, in that the spec for DSD does not allow the sort of digital clipping that is now so common in CD remasters. (That doesn't prevent anyhone from 'clipping' the file in PCM then transcoding the file to DSD, of course.)

This isn't an inherent superiority of DSD, it's just a by-product of the different
standards that were devised for the formats. Back in the early days of Redbook no one anticipated how digital's dynamic range would be abused.
 
Hi Neil!

neil wilkes said:
I honestly believe that Sony do not want High Rez to ever succeed - otherwise why did they ever go with DSD as a release medium? It's fatally flawed, and most producers & digital Audio specialists I know all loathe it.

I'm sure you are much more knowlegable about the technical side of the formats and you have good reason to say that.
I can only speak as a consumer buying the stuff. And I have to say that I have quite a few SACDs which really sound great. It may be that there are some technical shortcomings which makes it inferior in certain points to DVD-Audio, but what counts for me is the end result I'm listening to. And to be quite honest: I don't hear that SACD sounds in any way less good than DVD-Audio (maybe I don't have the right equipment and or the right ears to hear that ;))

What I like about the SACD compared to the DVD-Audio is the usability, because it handles just like a CD: pop in the disc, press play, and you're done. Having a home cinema projector that I don't want to fire up every time I want to listen to some music, this is a big plus! In the meantime I got a small 7" preview LCD so that I can navigate through the menus of DVD-Audio and DVD-Video concert discs without the projector. So this levels out this advantage; although the "UI" is still more consistent for the SACD than for DVD-Audio (where each disc might behave differently).

neil wilkes said:
Another worry I have with BRD is the Java part for interactive components. Why Java? And the way it will work means that any interactive content will be permanently running in the background, and hogging bandwidth.

I don't know why you object to Java as such. I think it is a very good choice as a programming language that allows for platform-independent programming. (I'm a software developer and I'm working with Java myself).
Java is well-defined, and although the language specification is owned and managed by Sun, they have so far taken care that it is not restricted to a specific platform. So I think the decision to go with Java is much better than to use something that will work exclusively on a Windows platform later on.

Of course, the Blu-Ray proponents take their DRM-paranoia to even further heights than their HD-DVD counterparts. But I think at this point it is more or less a choice between fire and brimstone :mad:

The film studios should get their collective heads examined if they think the consumers will accept a product where the content providers can render your equipment useless on a whim by introducing a virus with the next disc that disables all HD output just because someone in China hacked the same player model you happen to have paid big bucks for! :howl

Ok, I'm stepping off my soap box and go to bed now!
Good night!
Oliver
 
El Guapo said:
Hi Neil!



I'm sure you are much more knowlegable about the technical side of the formats and you have good reason to say that.
I can only speak as a consumer buying the stuff. And I have to say that I have quite a few SACDs which really sound great. It may be that there are some technical shortcomings which makes it inferior in certain points to DVD-Audio, but what counts for me is the end result I'm listening to. And to be quite honest: I don't hear that SACD sounds in any way less good than DVD-Audio (maybe I don't have the right equipment and or the right ears to hear that ;))

What I like about the SACD compared to the DVD-Audio is the usability, because it handles just like a CD: pop in the disc, press play, and you're done. Having a home cinema projector that I don't want to fire up every time I want to listen to some music, this is a big plus! In the meantime I got a small 7" preview LCD so that I can navigate through the menus of DVD-Audio and DVD-Video concert discs without the projector. So this levels out this advantage; although the "UI" is still more consistent for the SACD than for DVD-Audio (where each disc might behave differently).



I don't know why you object to Java as such. I think it is a very good choice as a programming language that allows for platform-independent programming. (I'm a software developer and I'm working with Java myself).
Java is well-defined, and although the language specification is owned and managed by Sun, they have so far taken care that it is not restricted to a specific platform. So I think the decision to go with Java is much better than to use something that will work exclusively on a Windows platform later on.

Of course, the Blu-Ray proponents take their DRM-paranoia to even further heights than their HD-DVD counterparts. But I think at this point it is more or less a choice between fire and brimstone :mad:

The film studios should get their collective heads examined if they think the consumers will accept a product where the content providers can render your equipment useless on a whim by introducing a virus with the next disc that disables all HD output just because someone in China hacked the same player model you happen to have paid big bucks for! :howl

Ok, I'm stepping off my soap box and go to bed now!
Good night!
Oliver

Excellent post Oliver, I agree completely. Be careful though ... I got kicked out of here for challenging the great Neil-man. Don't make the same mistake that I did. Just play nice, and don't disagree with Neil. You will stay longer that way. Mike.
 
I just received my copy of NIN With Teeth. It included the "Everything you need to know about the DualDisc." insert. The insert asks and answers the question: "What Other DualDisc Titles are Available? For more information about DualDisc selections, visit www.dualdisc.com." I went to the website and discovered that it looked like it was not being updated. Check it out, there is not much there. Looks bad for DualDisc.
 
All this, and compatability problems with certain players, doomed the format. Once again Sony shoots itself in the foot.

ED :)
 
Back
Top