When you think about it, what was the purpose of surround SACD anyway? @:[/QUOTE]
Isn't that like asking what the whole purpose to surround sound in general was in the first place? We all share a common affinity for this form of audio reproduction, and both DVD-A and SACD were fully capable of delivering it. In my opinion, DVD-A had the better ability to deliver it to more people by including DD and DTS tracks which could be played on any DVD player. SACD never had that flexibility, and although hybrid discs play in all CD players too, they do so only in stereo. DTS CD's also sound great, but must be decoded. As far as I'm concerned, there were no real losers here, but as it were, no winners, either. Actually, there ARE losers... us!
Isn't that like asking what the whole purpose to surround sound in general was in the first place? We all share a common affinity for this form of audio reproduction, and both DVD-A and SACD were fully capable of delivering it. In my opinion, DVD-A had the better ability to deliver it to more people by including DD and DTS tracks which could be played on any DVD player. SACD never had that flexibility, and although hybrid discs play in all CD players too, they do so only in stereo. DTS CD's also sound great, but must be decoded. As far as I'm concerned, there were no real losers here, but as it were, no winners, either. Actually, there ARE losers... us!