Would you pay extra for an Audio Fidelity Surround SACD?

[sperezmore]

Yes, you're scary..! :yikes

You're also wonderful, so stop fishing for compliments, you scary surround guru, you..!!!

Bingo indeed..!!! :upthumb ...The Japanese Jeff Beck Quad SACDs are way too expensive.. but people are still buying them..

Also, I could name 10 way overpriced out of print SACDs off the top of my head that next to no-one has ever voted for on QQ (even though I bugged Jon to create Polls for some of them cos I thought they had great surround mixes, which I feel kinda bad about to this day.. and even some of you here might not have heard of some of them they are that off the radar!) yet they still cost a bloody arm and a leg (and a kidney) on the after market.. in these kinds of situations, a lack of QQ votes could be an indicator of many things, people haven't voted on those discs yet because they don't even know about them not just because they are expensive.. maybe.. I dunno?

still.. a prod to get more folks here to Vote is a good thing under any circumstances though I reckon, so prod away I say... prod prod prod..!!!
Is that like a Facebook poke btw? In which case, please do poke gently, I'm British!

Great post......and be gently with me also, I'm Cuban-American!!!!!!

Regards,

 

[sperezmore]

Yes, you're scary..! :yikes

You're also wonderful, so stop fishing for compliments, you scary surround guru, you..!!!

Bingo indeed..!!! :upthumb ...The Japanese Jeff Beck Quad SACDs are way too expensive.. but people are still buying them..

Also, I could name 10 way overpriced out of print SACDs off the top of my head that next to no-one has ever voted for on QQ (even though I bugged Jon to create Polls for some of them cos I thought they had great surround mixes, which I feel kinda bad about to this day.. and even some of you here might not have heard of some of them they are that off the radar!) yet they still cost a bloody arm and a leg (and a kidney) on the after market.. in these kinds of situations, a lack of QQ votes could be an indicator of many things, people haven't voted on those discs yet because they don't even know about them not just because they are expensive.. maybe.. I dunno?

still.. a prod to get more folks here to Vote is a good thing under any circumstances though I reckon, so prod away I say... prod prod prod..!!!
Is that like a Facebook poke btw? In which case, please do poke gently, I'm British!

Great post......and be gently with me also, I'm Cuban-American!!!!!!

Regards,

 

[quicksrt]

Kinda funny.
8 pages of a What If? thread.
9 reviews of the latest Audio Fidelity actual Quad release.

Seems this forum isn't much different from the much maligned SHF.
Speculation is sometimes more engaging than an actual release.
Far more reviews of this title there.
Just an observation.

It is slightly alarming isn't it. The other forum can offer sometimes no reviews on surround layers, like almost everyone there is stereo only.

I said something sarcastic not long ago. I asked a "stereo only" listener if when he is hooking up his system and sees the SURROUND Left & Right connectors on his SACD or DVD player, does he ever get curious and wonder what those other outputs sound like? Which is one way of suggesting someone has low, or lacks intellectual curiosity. But it could be taken as an innocent question. If someone likes music and how it is played by band members, why would they not want to at least know what's going on in the music and mix of it. Offence was taken.

 

[fredblue]

It is slightly alarming isn't it. The other forum can offer sometimes no reviews on surround layers, like almost everyone there is stereo only.

I said something sarcastic not long ago. I asked a "stereo only" listener if when he is hooking up his system and sees the SURROUND Left & Right connectors on his SACD or DVD player, does he ever get curious and wonder what those other outputs sound like? Which is one way of suggesting someone has low, or lacks intellectual curiosity. But it could be taken as an innocent question. If someone likes music and how it is played by band members, why would they not want to at least know what's going on in the music and mix of it. Offence was taken.

Personal experience the total opposite, when looking at the back panel of a bit of kit I'll be using for surround..

"What are those Stereo-only connectors for..!?"

As someone on here (sorry the username escapes me at present ) has in their QQ signature : "Give me surround or give me silence"

..which is something I'm leaning more towards every day, which surprises me somewhat since so many of my favourite artists and albums are not represented by surround but going back to Stereo is a flat and rather ordinary experience for me nowadays having just listened to a 5.1 or Quad piece of music..

 

[TVB]

I would pay whatever it takes for titles I really want eg...Steely Dan Pretzel Logic- which supposedly had a great quad mix on the Canadian Q8. I would pay dearly for Quad titles that were listed toward the end of the quad era but never made it, like Simon and Garfunkel "Bookends". If titles like these were only available in a box set for $150 then so be it. I'm a 70's era quad type music guy and these are the titles Id have to buy no matter what they cost -- Elton (best there has ever been), Eagles, Jackson Brown, Moodies, Doobies Al stewart, Neil Young and his cohorts etc. Ive bought LOTS of artists I'm not really familiar with and hardly listen to them at all, so I'm at a point where if i dont know any songs from the artist i'm not buying at all.

 

[ar surround]

...Ive bought LOTS of artists I'm not really familiar with and hardly listen to them at all, so I'm at a point where if i dont know any songs from the artist i'm not buying at all.

I know what you mean. At least in my case, the older I get the more attached I am to the stuff of my youth. I think it is that way with most people. But I must admit that I do enjoy Porcupine Tree.

 

[Barbazul]

It's a YES for new/contemporary music, it's a NO for re-re-re-releases. :music

 

[Scott M4]

I don't know if this is a petty concern but I find the AF CD/SACD cases very flimsy for such pricey items. My last few have had the spindles broken and the discs loose. (They each came from different sources.)

 

[Simon A]

I don't know if this is a petty concern but I find the AF CD/SACD cases very flimsy for such pricey items. My last few have had the spindles broken and the discs loose. (They each came from different sources.)

This has been the situation for years. Every time I purchase an Audio Fidelity title I change the case for a better on upon reception of the disc (the cases are always broken anyway). I don't let it bother me because I can replace it. The company has let the consumer know that it places no importance on this part of the product. It would bother me more if I received a disc in a broken super jewel case (SACD case). Those are more troublesome and cost too much to change. I'm sure that's also why Mobile Fidelity dropped them in favour of their current mini LP style sleeves (which I'm not a fan of).

 

[ar surround]

I don't know if this is a petty concern but I find the AF CD/SACD cases very flimsy for such pricey items. My last few have had the spindles broken and the discs loose. (They each came from different sources.)

That's really strange. I've bought a bunch of these AF SACD's and Gold CD's and have experienced a broken case, spindle or loose disc. They were all sourced through Amazon.com.

 

[fredblue]

fwiw (though ultimately its only a cd case, not a super jewel box, as Simon says) many of my AF SACDs have come broken despite being new and sealed.. some cracked thru on the face and or back of the jewel case, one where the hinge had snapped off, several with spindles that no longer retained the disc and one where the grey plastic ridged exposed section of the hub tray had cracked and broken away from the tray.. how much of this was down to any abuse or mishandling they suffered en route or as a result of poor packaging or just that the jewel cases AF uses are cheap/inferior quality I don't know.. but seeing as I was only really buying these AF SACDs more latterly primarily for the Quad mixes I just sucked it up and forgot about it.. but for a premium product its a bit underwhelming I guess rather than flat out disappointing that the packaging and the robustness of that packaging may be somewhat lacking.. still the contents for me are king and AF got more things right with their Surround SACDs than they got wrong imho.

 

[skherbeck]

Many of mine have arrived cracked as well... like you, I just suck it up!

fwiw (though ultimately its only a cd case, not a super jewel box, as Simon says) many of my AF SACDs have come broken despite being new and sealed.. some cracked thru on the face and or back of the jewel case, one where the hinge had snapped off, several with spindles that no longer retained the disc and one where the grey plastic ridged exposed section of the hub tray had cracked and broken away from the tray.. how much of this was down to any abuse or mishandling they suffered en route or as a result of poor packaging or just that the jewel cases AF uses are cheap/inferior quality I don't know.. but seeing as I was only really buying these AF SACDs more latterly primarily for the Quad mixes I just sucked it up and forgot about it.. but for a premium product its a bit underwhelming I guess rather than flat out disappointing that the packaging and the robustness of that packaging may be somewhat lacking.. still the contents for me are king and AF got more things right with their Surround SACDs than they got wrong imho.

 

[4-earredwonder]

That's really strange. I've bought a bunch of these AF SACD's and Gold CD's and have experienced a broken case, spindle or loose disc. They were all sourced through Amazon.com.

I did notice, compared to the replacement RBCD cases I have purchased from Sleeve City, that the AF RBCD cases are somewhat inferior. I have replaced a few but not too many AF cases but I attribute it to poor packaging, as well. And it's not only the AF cases that do come damaged. More disturbing is when I purchase an older SACD title in a super jewl box which comes damaged because the newer replacement super jewel cases are NOT compatible with the inserts.

Sleeve City does NOT carry super jewel cases, however, but I do think their replacement RBCD cases and packaging are superior to ANYTHING Amazon sells and I've ordered replacement RBCD cases from Amazon and a lot of them are cracked upon delivery.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Many of mine have arrived cracked as well... like you, I just suck it up!

Agreed, it would be nice if they switched to something with less plastic like a mini lp sleeve but as long as the SACD plays ok and sustains no damage from shipping I can't complain, and "suck it up".

could always be worse.

 

[Simon A]

Agreed, it would be nice if they switched to something with less plastic like a mini lp sleeve but as long as the SACD plays ok and sustains no damage from shipping I can't complain, and "suck it up".

could always be worse.

I seriously doubt that will happen. Mobile Fidelity's visual signature has always been the "Original Master Recording" banner. This allowed them to use it on any format they wanted to, which is really smart. Audio Fidelity, on the other hand, chose to duplicate the DCC slipcase design which would become obsolete should they revise their packaging for a mini-LP style sleeve. They're sort of stuck with it.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

I seriously doubt that will happen. Mobile Fidelity's visual signature has always been the "Original Master Recording" banner. This allowed them to use it on any format they wanted to, which is really smart. Audio Fidelity, on the other hand, chose to duplicate the DCC slipcase design which would become obsolete should they revise their packaging for a mini-LP style sleeve. They're sort of stuck with it.

Oh I'm certain if there was a willingness to change on their part they would .No one boutique label has the exclusive rights to format an art cover case unless they own the manufacturing .I'm thinking along the lines of what Neil Young's Harvest DVDA was packaged in, but anything with less or limited plastic content would be nice.

It's likely a moot point though as I will accept whatever A.F. decides. It is their wonderful music title quad/5ch I want anyway.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

Back to the "essence" of the thread.


I'd pay EXTRA coin for a copy of FLEETWOOD MAC-FLEETWOOD MAC (75).

That's a no brainer for me. Bring it on.:upthumb

 

[rtbluray]

Back to the "essence" of the thread.


I'd pay EXTRA coin for a copy of FLEETWOOD MAC-FLEETWOOD MAC (75).

That's a no brainer for me. Bring it on.:upthumb

That's likely being saved for a deluxe edition release directly from Warner Music themselves, similar to the recent reissues of "Tusk" and "Mirage".

 

[Q-Eight]

Just a note, I've ordered all of my discs directly from Audio Fidelity; not from the discount houses. All of mine have arrived in pristine condition and packed very well.

 

[fredblue]

Just a note, I've ordered all of my discs directly from Audio Fidelity; not from the discount houses. All of mine have arrived in pristine condition and packed very well.

Yes I think a lot of it boils down to Amazon, their packaging is often woefully under protected, especially for stuff coming from the States to the UK, imho.. in fact I think its the rare exception out of the 27 AF Surround discs I got from Amazon.com only about 1/2 a dozen have their cases 100% intact, the rest all have damage in some shape or form..

anyway.. back to the Poll in hand, I notice we're currently at:

81.08 % (60) YES
18.92 % (14) NO

60 out of 74 responses say = YES, they would pay more for an AF Surround SACD (some QQ members have expressed a "Yes" vote with proviso's of course)

...which is a margin more in favour of people prepared to pay more for a Surround AF SACD than I was expecting tbh..