The Audiophiliac

Betamax was one of Sony's biggest blunders.

The videocassette format was introduced in 1975, and initially sold well. But when JVC's VHS tape cartridge was introduced in 1978, Betamax quickly lost its lead. The media loved Beta for its superior picture quality, but Standard Betamax tapes were only 60 minutes, and VHS 3-hour tapes could record more TV shows.

VHS was more popular, but Betamax refused to die. Production in the U.S. ended in 1993, and the last Betamax machine in the world was produced in Japan in 2002.

Ah, but the Compact Disc was a hit from the get-go. On August 31, 1982, an announcement was made in Tokyo that four companies, Sony, CBS/Sony, Philips, and Polygram had jointly developed the world's first CD system. Talk of the CD's demise are premature, sales are still in the hundreds of millions of discs a year.

The MiniDisc was introduced January 12, 1992. The recordable music format was originally based exclusively on ATRAC audio data compression, but the format never caught on in the U.S. MiniDiscs were popular in Japan and Asia as a digital upgrade from cassette tapes.

Which reminds me, Sony's ill-fated Elcaset came out in 1976. Like Betamax, Sony was trying to make a higher quality tape format, in this case better than the Philips Compact Cassette. Elcaset was better, but it was too large and cumbersome. Elcaset was a flop.

... Read more

Forget Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD, thanks to YouTube you can check out what the experts at the Consumer Electronics Show were saying about the original video format war, Beta vs VHS tape, way back in 1981. Oh, and there's a tantalizing glimpse of the "future," RCA's new video format, the SelectaVision VideoDisc. (Full video after the jump.)

... Read more

The SACD is a "super" CD, it sounds better, offers multichannel, high-resolution sound, and hybrid SACDs are backwards compatible with CD players. Sony initially pushed SACD as a CD replacement and the market yawned. OK, but you would have thought that audiophiles would have, en mass, supported SACD, especially after so many of them bashed CD for its harsh digital sound. SACDs, at least ones sourced from high quality recordings, really do sound better than CD (but a crappy original recording, remastered to SACD, still sounds crappy). No, just a small segment of the audiophile market embraced SACD, why, I'm still not sure.

So my question is, now with the distraction of the HD DVD/Blu-ray format war finally out of the way, why would the market embrace Blu-ray, which is merely a "super" DVD? Yes, the format can hold up to 25GB on a single-layer disc and 50GB on a dual-layer disc, offers 1080i/p resolution, and a host of other features that, for the most part, no one cares about. My videophile pals tell me that Blu-ray's superior picture quality won't be all that visible to most people with 50 inch or smaller displays (especially when their DVDs are upconverted to 1080i/p). Hell, most people are pretty happy with DVDs and already think DVDs are HD.

I also think that the problem for both SACD and Blu-ray is that the new and improved discs looked almost identical to the older format. There's no perceived difference between the physical appearance of a SACD and a CD, or a Blu-ray and DVD disc. When CDs were introduced, the sonic differences between LPs and CDs was obvious, plus the difference in the way the played was likewise unsubtle. CDs also looked way cooler than LPs. The same benefits to the consumer were apparent during the transition from VHS tape to DVD. Consumer didn't have to be "educated," and once prices came down on DVD, the vast majority of VHS holdouts jumped on the DVD bandwagon.

With HD DVD out of the picture, I have no doubt Blu-ray will do better, but it will grow far more slowly than DVD did. Blu-ray will likely remain a niche format, while the market for downloads gains more and more momentum. DVD sales, already past their peak will continue to decline.

They're all born with the best of intentions, but only the strong survive.

Formats come and go. Some are barely noticed, and some die a slow, painful death. So now we can all breathe a sigh of relief that the format war between Blu-ray and HD DVD was comparatively brief--unless you're on the losing side, stuck with a slowpoke player and a collection of HD DVD discs. I've already heard from some angry HD DVD supporters. War is tough.

If you're over 35, you probably remember the Betamax vs. VHS wars, which raged from 1975 to the late 1980s, when Sony finally surrendered and started marketing VHS machines.

Like the HD DVD-Blu-ray debacle, manufacturers divided into two camps: Beta had Sony, Toshiba, Sanyo, NEC, Aiwa, and Pioneer. An impressive lineup, but JVC, Matsushita (Panasonic), Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Sharp, and Akai sided with VHS. Even when everyone said Beta was dead as a doornail in the early 1990s (long before the introduction of DVD), the format soldiered on in Japan until 2002.

Some formats wither and die on their own--the Laserdisc wasn't competing against anything but a lack of interest. The LD was a 12-inch optical analog disc alternative to Beta and VHS. It looked like an LP-size CD. Yes, it was a better, higher-quality format than tape, and it still garnered only a small yet fanatical market base among videophiles.

The LD fared better than RCA's crippled-from-the-start CED (Capacitance Electronic Disc) that came out in 1981. Marketed as "SelectaVision," the grooved, LP-like discs were fragile, and they never stood a chance against VHS tape. Still, RCA stuck to its guns for five long years before snuffing the CED in 1986. Ten years later, the Laserdisc was on its last legs when the DVD finally killed it off--the software, that is. Pioneer still sells new DVD-LD players. How's that for customer support?

DVD was unchallenged but for a brief skirmish with Divx (Digital Video Express, not to be confused with DivX). Divx was a DVD rental variant, but cheaper (a disc sold for about $5) and could be viewed only for 48 hours after its first use. Divx players could play DVDs, but standard DVD players couldn't play Divx discs. Disney, Twentieth Century Fox Film, and Paramount Pictures released their movies in the Divx format.

Audio has had its own share of format wars, but it also had some remarkably stable formats. The LP has been around for 50-plus years, and you can still play the oldest LPs on a brand-new turntable.

It's starting to look like the LP will outlast the CD. But CDs are a long-running success and likewise universally playable, and most surviving cassettes are serviceable.

Analog tape formats like reel-to-reel, 8-track, and 4-track cartridges still have tiny outposts of devout followers, but the Elcaset came and went so fast, I never even heard it. Digital-tape formats like DAT and the Digital Compact Cassette (DCC) barely made a dent in the public's awareness.

So how will the HD DVD fare in the format history time line? What do you think: a mere blip or an interesting diversion?

It's safe to say most, I mean like 99 percent, of music buyers don't give a hoot about sound quality. Why else would CD sales continue to plummet and worse than CD quality downloads go up every year?

OK, that's the mainstream, what about the other 1 percent; why have the audiophiles, according to a poll on the Stereophile website, already given up on SACD and DVD-Audio? Before I cite their feedback I'd like to point out that despite the naysayers, the super sound formats are still hanging on. Neil Young's latest release, "Chrome Dreams II" just came out on DVD-A, because he still cares about the sound of his music. You can still buy Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" on SACD, and it really is one of the best sounding remasters of all time. Amazon currently lists 3,436 SACDs and 3,303 DVD-As, so anyone interested in checking out high-rez audio can do so. Audiophile labels like Telarc and Chesky Records are still putting out SACDs all the time.

Ah, but Amazon currently offers just 596 Blu-ray titles and 687 HD DVDs. Gee, I would have thought the tens of millions of people with HDTVs would have gobbled up high-rez discs by the boatload by now. Aren't Blu-ray and HD DVD supposed to be the up and coming video stars?

Back to audio: thirty eight percent of Stereophile's readers believe SACD and DVD-Audio are "dead," and 23% more think the formats are "mortally wounded." Only 3% claim they're "alive and kicking." Wow, that's pretty bleak. But one guy wrote "I own about 900 SACDs. In Japan everything high-quality in Jazz, and/or classical music is issued in DSD/SACD/CD. There are stores exclusively dedicated to the format. DVD-A's pretty much dead." Somebody chimed in with the hope that SACD and DVD-A "May get resurrected via Dolby TrueHD if Blu-Ray and HD-DVD don't kill each other first." And I think another guy hit the nail on the head with, "The market has voted in favor of convenience over quality. Consumers are unwilling to purchase new hardware and make complex new connections for the sake of quality. . . But, as high speed broadband connectivity becomes more commonplace, all digital content will be distributed over the web. All physical media, including HD-DVD and Blu-ray, will become obsolete." Gee, I think, gulp, he's right.