Poll: Sony's Corporate Image

[solaris]

How much do you love Sony and it's huge effect on Multi-Channel music

 

[Bob Romano]

I have lots of Sony gear (receivers, MD player/recorder, SACD player, Betamax). I love their innovations. I hate that they never stick with anything. So I have now stopped buying Sony products. Their latest debacle with the copyrighted cds has also put a really bad taste in my mouth as well. Dual disc is another example. Almost no multichannel music on the DVD side and "enhanced" stereo tracks at 48/16. Just another way for them to get a dollar (or $14.99) from unsuspecting Joe Public who has no idea that the cd side is really the exact same thing basically. Just slap the word enhanced on there and what a deal!!!

Your first choice in the poll is - great, they invented SACD.... Big f!@king deal. Now what are they doing with it. Gee, thanks for the Roger Waters title and the overblown War Of The Worlds. Oh yeah and another big thanks for re-releasing Duran Duran, John Legend and Switchfoot... after I bought the f!@king Dualdiscs... you know what... Sony are a BIG bunch of a$$hole$.

PS.... Happy Thanksgiving.

 

[lonster]

I'm pretty much fed up with the Sony mindset of 'We can make (or NOT make) what ever crap we want, and the public has to buy it because we're Sony'.
Sony no balony?
I voted the last choice.

 

[JonUrban]

Why is it that putting an "enhanced stereo" track on a DualDisc does not cause a "Harry Fox" problem, but the 5.1 mix on an SACD does?

I still feel that if Sony put the effort (and money) into releasing Hybrid SACDs in the same way as they now market DualDiscs, things would have been different. SACD surely had the advantage over DVD-A in the compatibiliy with CD arena.

Funny thing is this - DualDiscs were primarily created to get CD compatibility with the DVD-A format. How ironic that Sony now releases the majority of the DualDiscs - with no DVD-A side!

 

[Lucanu]

I recently bought a "new" TT from Sony, but in general I hate the way it working on the market, they lost my appreciation forever.
Besides the release of SACD and Dualdisc they're still failing in other branches too, i.e. HDTV (for the cost of a 40" LCD you could buy a 42" HDTV plasma with more features on it).

Sony WAS a great brand name, now it's dead IMHO

 

[Manmc]

Bob , you took all my lines
I hate these mother******! and everything they stand for .As I commented in another thread they used to indeed be 'industry leaders' but in the last 10 years they have actually retarded all formats they have touched ( copy-protected cds, sacd, multi - dipped dvds ).
Some very interesting debates going on about Sony around the web including HTF which had a link to this in usatoday :

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2005-11-17-sony-cds_x.htm

The Sony diet = How to buy everything and own nothing !!

Enjoy your music,

~M~

 

[neil wilkes]

Why is it that putting an "enhanced stereo" track on a DualDisc does not cause a "Harry Fox" problem, but the 5.1 mix on an SACD does?

I still feel that if Sony put the effort (and money) into releasing Hybrid SACDs in the same way as they now market DualDiscs, things would have been different. SACD surely had the advantage over DVD-A in the compatibiliy with CD arena.

Funny thing is this - DualDiscs were primarily created to get CD compatibility with the DVD-A format. How ironic that Sony now releases the majority of the DualDiscs - with no DVD-A side!

Ironic?
I wonder, Jon, I really do.
Makes me think that Sony are deliberately screwing the DualDisc format.

There is quite simply no way they will ever issue DualDisc as it was intended to be (DVD-A/CD) as it is obviously a direct competitor to SACD.

GUess what I voted??

 

[Arthur Dent]

Makes me think that Sony are deliberately screwing the DualDisc format.
There is quite simply no way they will ever issue DualDisc as it was intended to be (DVD-A/CD) as it is obviously a direct competitor to SACD.

Exactly. And their official explanation for lack of MC DualDiscs probably would be "Sony is going through rough times and there's no money for multichannel". Deep down inside they are saying "If SACD is sinking, DVD-A should go down too. Let's spoof the DualDisc format to death!"

 

[ClarkNovak]

Why is it that putting an "enhanced stereo" track on a DualDisc does not cause a "Harry Fox" problem, but the 5.1 mix on an SACD does?

I missed that gem... is this really their official reasoning for all but discontinuing SACD releases?

Sony really do have "King Midas In Reverse" syndrome lately... everything they touch turns to rust. Quick, gimme another Memory Stick!

- Clark

 

[ss9001]

I cannot add much that hasn't already been said!

Unfortunately, recently I did end up buying a Sony 715 DVD/HD recorder. Oh well...

To me, Sony = innovation & engineering + lousy marketing

The Reverse Midas Touch...I like that, except substitute brown stuff for rust!

ss9001

 

[Frantic]

MC has suffered severely, but has it been a death blow?

As long as we have a voice, I say no.

I say no to Sony and its minions!

Dual Disc@:
What a joke.

 

[Chris Gerhard]

I agree Sony's DualDisc releases are mostly terrible, either no surround mix or a poor Dolby Digital mix. I purchased the entire 15-disc set of Bob Dylan SACD releases and think a great job was done there, and although a couple more of them could have had surround mixes, I won't complain. What other company re-released a large quantity of old albums by one artist in high resolution? I haven't counted but believe I must have about 50 Sony high resolution discs including many of my favorites.

My Sony KV-30XBR910 HDTV has been great as have most of my other Sony products over the last few decades. I am aware Sony has made some terrible or terribly over-priced products but I assume the market recognizes that and either doesn't buy the products or the bad ones are returned. The Sony front projectors are often very good, LCD and CRT. The Sony professional line of products has always been good and has generated profits. I believe Sony continues to be recognized as one of the most liked brand names by consumers. These are going to be tough times for Sony after the MiniDisc, SACD, and UMD failures and loss of market share throughout its consumer product line. With the investment Sony makes in R & D, I hope things turn around since so many of the products we love started with Sony. The bad marketing rap is expressed often in these forums, but I don't think Sony marketing is the cause of much of the problems. Mistakes in releasing formats that have little or no chance of success such as UMD has been a problem.

Chris

 

[Baba O'Riley]

Great they Invented SACD Say no more,

Sony invents great stuff, promotes it very agressively, they put lots of software in the market. But when Joe Public don't buy it they stop promoting it, they will support it then for a long time. Betamax players/cassettes could be bought for a very long time, although the system was dead. They did their best with SACD, but Joe Public didn't want it. They will support it for a while, an occasional software output, SACD playback support in the PS3. And that will be it.
Same with UMD, lots of movies. But nobody will buy them.

 

[jaybird100]

What can you say about a company that develops and markets some great innovations and then abandons them? The SACD is a prime example. In addition, they have refused to do surround mixes for most dual disc releases, and claim it costs too much to do. Sure, it does. But since they have to pay out all that moolah for that "little" faux pas with the copy prevention scheme that messed up so many computers, and since they claim the surround mixes are too expensive to create, we, as the music buying public have to suffer. Not cool, guys!

 

[Chris Gerhard]

What can you say about a company that develops and markets some great innovations and then abandons them? The SACD is a prime example.

The marketplace didn't buy it. Sony invested large sums and released a large quantity of music. Titles were easy to find online and in stores. They didn't sell, the marketplace made that decision, not Sony. SACD is my favorite home audio format of all time and I must have owned most all of them. Artists should have liked it, no digital copies are possible. Sound quality is great and it works well in surround. It seems to me, make a product that is great and make it available, you have done your job. Not all great products succeed. I have owned just about every audio format since the 50's, some I shouldn't have bothered with, this one I love. If Sony should have continued to absord the enormous losses and not given up, I can't see it.

Chris

 

[JonUrban]

The annoying thing about Sony and SACD was that at the time they stopped, SACD was just about at it's peak of comsumer conscienceness and getting a lot of press.

Dark Side of the Moon was released that year, and it's 5.1 "surround mix" was written up in many newspapers and magazine across the world as the "ultimate" way to be heard. More labels, like Blue Note, were releasing big titles like Norah Jones's breakout release. The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan SACDs were in the stores with publicity, and there was even a Rolling Stones 5.1 SACD released of "Sympathy of the Devil". SACD sections were in the stores, players were in the stores, UMG was about to release the Eltons, the Claptons, etc. Then, the ultimate publicity deal, the Rolling Stone Magazine freebie SACD was distributed to millions of subscribers and newstand readers. SACD was on a roll.......

Then, just when the time was perfect for a massive Sony SACD release campaign, the entire machine STOPPED. Only a handful of pop SACD's were released the next year, John Mayers's disc one of them. Sony left UMG as the only major label releasing pop titles, and they withdrew the next year.

To me, this is what makes me crazy. It was such a missed opportunity. They had to stick it out and go for it, instead they withdrew. And the timing could not have been worse.

I think if they released a slew of SACDs to follow the Rolling Stone Magazine SACD, they would have buried DVD-A and established a HiRez marketplace. Not replacing CD, but providing an alternative, high end product.

It was not meant to be.

And that sucks...............

 

[Chris Gerhard]

The annoying thing about Sony and SACD was that at the time they stopped, SACD was just about at it's peak of comsumer conscienceness and getting a lot of press.

Dark Side of the Moon was released that year, and it's 5.1 "surround mix" was written up in many newspapers and magazine across the world as the "ultimate" way to be heard. More labels, like Blue Note, were releasing big titles like Norah Jones's breakout release. The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan SACDs were in the stores with publicity, and there was even a Rolling Stones 5.1 SACD released of "Sympathy of the Devil". SACD sections were in the stores, players were in the stores, UMG was about to release the Eltons, the Claptons, etc. Then, the ultimate publicity deal, the Rolling Stone Magazine freebie SACD was distributed to millions of subscribers and newstand readers. SACD was on a roll.......

Then, just when the time was perfect for a massive Sony SACD release campaign, the entire machine STOPPED. Only a handful of pop SACD's were released the next year, John Mayers's disc one of them. Sony left UMG as the only major label releasing pop titles, and they withdrew the next year.

To me, this is what makes me crazy. It was such a missed opportunity. They had to stick it out and go for it, instead they withdrew. And the timing could not have been worse.

I think if they released a slew of SACDs to follow the Rolling Stone Magazine SACD, they would have buried DVD-A and established a HiRez marketplace. Not replacing CD, but providing an alternative, high end product.

It was not meant to be.

And that sucks...............

John, releasing everything as an SACD Hybrid is what I wanted Sony to do. I don't share in your optimism that SACD was getting ready to take off however. I think it had already crashed and burned on the runway. The Rolling Stones remastered SACD's did sell well, but the albums were all stereo and I don't think most people even knew they were SACD. I think it was just time for remastering of those great old albums and the majority that purchased them did so to play as a redbook CD. I ordered "Beggars Banquet" and "Let it Bleed" on SACD, only "Beggars Banquet" was delivered on SACD, the other was a CD. I didn't even bother with the hassle of returning the darn thing. "Beggars Banquet" didn't even state SACD on the cover if I recall correctly. How could anybody but us know that the 2002 Abkco Rolling Stones digipaks were SACD? I still see many of the titles sitting in Best Buy Circuit City CD sections without any identification. Unless I am mistaken the Bob Dylan SACD series was a big disappointment in terms of sales. An artistic success but a financial disaster.

Putting more money into SACD at that time would be like running out to a flaming jet on the runway with jet fuel hoping to get it airborn. More fuel would have been burned and more damage but no flight.

Chris

 

[JonUrban]

John, releasing everything as an SACD Hybrid is what I wanted Sony to do. I don't share in your optimism that SACD was getting ready to take off however. I think it had already crashed and burned on the runway. ..............
Chris

Chris, I think you are missing my point. I too agree that the rock group the Rolling Stones' SACDs were poorly marketed and extremely poorly marked as SACDs. No one knew what they were getting. That to me was a huge mistake.

What I was trying to point out is that the ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE promotional SACD, in which SONY played a HUGE part it, got the SACD visibility to an all time high, with a contest tie in and everything. For those of you who forgot, these three links may remind you...

http://www.avrev.com/news/1003/13.sony.shtml

http://www.prosoundnews.com/articles/archives/2003/october/1022.5.shtml

"Each of the 1.3 million copies of the magazine that are printed will have a 6-page gatefold advertisement that will include an actual multichannel SACD with selections from the Top 500 Albums that can be heard in either stereo or 5.1-channel surround sound. Readers will be able to take the disc to any one of the more than 600 Circuit City locations, where there will be an SACD kiosk waiting for them. There, they can hear the sampler in surround sound and enter a contest for a chance to win over 45,000 prizes including SACD-compatible DVD Dream systems and other SACD titles."

http://hometheater.about.com/b/a/034352.htm

"Sony enlists the aid of Rolling Stone Magazine, Circuit City, and Clear Channel Radio on its 20-million-dollar adverstising campaign to publicize the merits of SACD."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

They paid for the setup. They paid for the SACDs. They paid for the contests. They went the distance. I think they did GREAT.

Then, within months, titles were cancelled (the next Dylans to name a few), and they virtually withdrew from popular SACD, leaving only UMG to fly the flag in 2004.

I do not mean to say that SACD was on the tip of everyones tounge, I'm just stating that Sony started something and did not allow it to finish. If, after the Rolling Stone MAGAZINE SACD, they followed with titles like Pink Floyd's Wish You Were Here, some Springsteen SACDs, and other sure fire hits from their catalog (More Billy Joels, More James Taylors, Aerosmiths, etc), they would have had something there.

 

[daved64]

I recall the big huge posters trumpeting the Dylan discs and how you've "never heard Dylan like this". Then it's like they just gave up. I'd love to one day know the ins and outs of how the company misplayed this hot potato of a format.

 

[quadtrade]

Jon,

i think you are correct in the timing issue. The format works extremely well for all involved. If they also thought sales would emulate Dylan sales, that is a big if. That assumes lots of folks would replace existing copies. Something happened upstairs. Most times you have to find someone inside who got demoted or canned to explain what heads rolled when someone upstairs took over that division, decided the new format takes precident. Another big if. People are happy with dvd. Very powerful, strange company.