Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Music execs upset on iTMS
- Thread starter pretentious
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
that's the real reason for the slump in the Music Industry. Artists are turning out garbage. One or two hits and a bunch of canned filler.
When Kelly Clarkson has the most well-rounded pop album, something's wrong. Pop/R&B artists have gotten greedy and lazy.
No one's going to buy bad music just to support their lifestyle. They'll either buy singles from ITMS or download them for free.
When Kelly Clarkson has the most well-rounded pop album, something's wrong. Pop/R&B artists have gotten greedy and lazy.
No one's going to buy bad music just to support their lifestyle. They'll either buy singles from ITMS or download them for free.
I agree. No way I would pay for a full album unless it is all good. Even from my favorite bands. I really like iTMS. I have bought about 30 songs (not so many but enough) and one full album
All the single songs were from albums that only had one or two good songs. Now, if you force me to buy the album you would get 0 instead of a couple of bucks. Just makes sense to allow people to buy what they want. Ultimately it pays off.
I think the iTMS numbers that half the sales come from full albums shows people will buy the whole thing if it is good. Especially if you have 12 or 13 good songs for the price of $9.99.
All the single songs were from albums that only had one or two good songs. Now, if you force me to buy the album you would get 0 instead of a couple of bucks. Just makes sense to allow people to buy what they want. Ultimately it pays off.
I think the iTMS numbers that half the sales come from full albums shows people will buy the whole thing if it is good. Especially if you have 12 or 13 good songs for the price of $9.99.
Well said! The only album I will buy is a "greatest hits" album. I think the artists should cut their losses and go with the iTunesMS. Well, if they don't like it the legal way (iTunesMS) and they don't like it the illegal way (P2P) then they'll be left behind by artists that actually want to make money. I think the individual song download is a great idea. I pay only for what I want. I hope they, eventually, realize that "the customer is always right".
And we're saying they should look at the consumer issues here.
It's really silly too, since almost half of the tracks bought were full albums. That should dispel artists fears that people will only buy individual tracks. And so what if we want to anyway? That should be our right as a consumer. Or make all the songs good enough that I want to buy them all. My only real gripe with iTMS (besides selection, which is being worked on) is that I don't get all the goodies I get when I buy a CD. When I buy an album from iTMS, I would like to get all the liner notes, and an option to dl and print all cover artwork, lyrics, etc.
It all keeps pointing to finding a new way of doing business for these record companies. It was forced on the record labels almost without warning by the rapid and unforseen explosion in music swapping. Evolve or die.
agree with all of ya... i don't understand why recording industry thinks they are in a position of leverage. i really hope steve won't get bullied into this.
"Think of the artists"?? That's garbage. Artists can go make whatever they want. Whether they will be supported by consumers or not is up to us (consumers) not them. If they make junk, it's not our obligation to buy them.
The only time I can support the artists in this case is if they make a compelling argument that their artistic creation (music) is compromised unless the entire album is sold as is... I haven't heard an album I felt I got money's worth since radiohead's ok computer.
"Think of the artists"?? That's garbage. Artists can go make whatever they want. Whether they will be supported by consumers or not is up to us (consumers) not them. If they make junk, it's not our obligation to buy them.
The only time I can support the artists in this case is if they make a compelling argument that their artistic creation (music) is compromised unless the entire album is sold as is... I haven't heard an album I felt I got money's worth since radiohead's ok computer.
hmm...that's sad. Thare's so much great music happening right now.
Get the new Four Tet album. rounds. It's great.
But I agree. I'm not buying an album unless the whole thing is good. I'm not even the type of person to buy good singles. If the band isn't good enough to put together a cohesive, solid album, then they're not good enough for my cash.
I don't why this is stopping artists from signing up. Its a question of no additional revenue, or some additional revenue. I don't think having your songs on ITMS would affect CD sales at all.
Even though I haven't used the ITMS cos I'm from England, I think the music companies should look more at the exclusives area and really push them. Steve has said that the exclusives were doing great business. The store is an excellent place for rare or live tunes. People want things that are different from the tracks on an album or singles.
You make it sound as though "legal" is less than desirable!
I've read a number of reviews by the 30+ crowd about iTunes and the majority of them have been highly favorable. Most people who have lives away from their computers don't view P2P sites as being an option. They want to easily search, listen and buy and organize their purchases. With iTunes you get all that at a price reduction of about 30% from CDs.
In regards to the execs not liking the single idea, well, tough luck. Music isn't inherently about profit, it's about artistic expression. The success of cdBaby reflects the desires of the American music listening market to hear other than what is heavily promoted by the bloated music industry and increasingly bland radio industry. You can bet your booties that Clear Channel is getting very anxious about the success of Yahoo and AOL and iTunes and the iPod. The labels may hold the rights to a lot of existing music but I really think that a lot of artists in the future won't have need of a traditional label. cdBaby will provide them their access to the distribution outlets.
The reluctance of big name artists to distribute their music electonically isn't about their "rights" it's about their wallets. They have come to expect millions of dollars flowing into their pockets as a result of their mostly manufactured fame. This has come at the expense of smaller groups who have a niche appeal.
The music industry as we know it has become a dinosaur and whether it becomes extinct or is merely evolving is anyone's guess.
no no, that wasnt what i was getting at. i love the store and im just waiting from them to add some music i want and ill buy some. all i was saying is the exclusive songs for most of my major artists i have already heard before, implying that its not like they were locked in a secret vault bfore apple came along.
iJon
I worked in the recording industry...
And everybody inside say "one song sell one album".
Today I was listening to the latest Madonna album and is the worse piece of crap ever, she may be one of those poor artist.
I see everything in the oposite way, if I was an artist I would have to produce just one song at a time to be rich! at the end we just listen to 2 of the most popular songs per album and we buy the albums because of the first and second promotional songs, so, lets get those two songs! period.
The thing is that those executive get comisions for studio hours, the more songs to produce, more hours = more $$$.
And everybody inside say "one song sell one album".
Today I was listening to the latest Madonna album and is the worse piece of crap ever, she may be one of those poor artist.
I see everything in the oposite way, if I was an artist I would have to produce just one song at a time to be rich! at the end we just listen to 2 of the most popular songs per album and we buy the albums because of the first and second promotional songs, so, lets get those two songs! period.
The thing is that those executive get comisions for studio hours, the more songs to produce, more hours = more $$$.
well, I kind of agree with the artists/labels. You guys do make great points about albums which contain only a few good songs, but my biggest fear with this service would be the death of albums. I try to steer clear of Greatest Hits albums because they fail to give me real perspective of the artist's work. I don't care what their #1 songs sound like bundled together, I want to see where their head is at during the time they made that hit. What else were they up to.
I think artists should have the option of only selling their music by the album. I'm sure that would have a negative effect on sales, so I wouldn't worry about this choice becoming too popular. Let's face it, if you want the whole album, you're more likely to buy the CD. Give the artists the option and let them decide if they are content with low sales. No harm no foul. At least their music will be available in some form (meaning someone will buy it).
I think artists should have the option of only selling their music by the album. I'm sure that would have a negative effect on sales, so I wouldn't worry about this choice becoming too popular. Let's face it, if you want the whole album, you're more likely to buy the CD. Give the artists the option and let them decide if they are content with low sales. No harm no foul. At least their music will be available in some form (meaning someone will buy it).
I agree with you, some albums are meant to be listened to in their entirety and I would hate to see the death of them, however, I don't think I should have to pay an artist for something I'm not interested in. It would be like going to an art gallery and being told that none of the pieces are available individually only in groups of ten or whatever. Sure, artworks sell for a lot more than a buck apiece but either the album needs to feel like an album or I will only buy the songs I want.
Music distribution is going through a fundamental shift and it is the distribution (radio, at the beginning) that created the music industry, not the other way around. I feel for artists but the ones who are most likely to suffer are the ones who earn millions not the ones who earn a few hundred a gig.
Music distribution is going through a fundamental shift and it is the distribution (radio, at the beginning) that created the music industry, not the other way around. I feel for artists but the ones who are most likely to suffer are the ones who earn millions not the ones who earn a few hundred a gig.
Ok if the deal breaker right now is the that they have to offer all their songs as singles...How about a compromise?
I would at least rather have the artist in the store than no artist, and personally I can see the artist perspective at this, they will make more money by trying to sell more albums than singles.
Why doesn't Apple offer this; a 4-1 ratio, the artist has to offer at least 1 track to the 4 in an album. So if an album has say 10 tracks they have to offer at least two singles. but make the labels fully aware that sales are still going to be calculated by a per-track bases, so that gives an incentive for the artist to offer the best tracks as singles.
As a consumer I think that this will be perfectly fine, since most people don't really want the more filler tracks, but rather the hits, which should still be offered by the artist as singles. and if the consumer does like the filler I would think that they would be more happy with the full album.
I would at least rather have the artist in the store than no artist, and personally I can see the artist perspective at this, they will make more money by trying to sell more albums than singles.
Why doesn't Apple offer this; a 4-1 ratio, the artist has to offer at least 1 track to the 4 in an album. So if an album has say 10 tracks they have to offer at least two singles. but make the labels fully aware that sales are still going to be calculated by a per-track bases, so that gives an incentive for the artist to offer the best tracks as singles.
As a consumer I think that this will be perfectly fine, since most people don't really want the more filler tracks, but rather the hits, which should still be offered by the artist as singles. and if the consumer does like the filler I would think that they would be more happy with the full album.
heres a big problem.. most people listen to whats on MTV and 90% (now I didnt say ALL of it) of whats on there is like everyone else said a couple good songs then the rest of the cd is horrible. Personally almost everything I listen to I get the full cd because its all good but Ive only bought 4 cds from the iTMS because I dont realy listen to a lot of music on major labels and the things I do I all ready had the cds, but those 4 cds I got all have come out since the iTMS has been out. Now if apple gets a couple of the labels that I LOVE Im ready to buy tons of cds on it and stop ording online and gettin the cds in about a week lata. Has anyone heard of anyone posting all the labels that were at that meeting? labels Id be so HAPPY that got on board would be road runner records and Id seriously go crazy if subran noize records got all their music into the iTMS.
well i cant find anything i'm looking for on itms
no metallica, no trance, just a bunch of mainstream crud. Nice service, but no artists! time for round two, apple.
no metallica, no trance, just a bunch of mainstream crud. Nice service, but no artists! time for round two, apple.
iTMS is a really great revenue boosting idea for smaller bands like Taking Back Sunday, Dashboard Confessions, and Coheed and Cambria, as well as other small hip hop and soul groups. this thing could really put those artists on the map with the attention iTMS is getting, i say they should try and sign vagrant records with a long term deal
Re: "one song sell one album"
That recording industry worked that trick to death in the '80's and '90's. It ain't gonna work no more - that's the positive influence of the P2P craze.
OTOH, the iTMS has rekindled my interest in collecting full albums - from the truly great artists. I'm often disappointed to see only a "partial album" listed. However, I think the audience should have the right to choose.
Solid artists don't need to fear that their albums will be ripped apart but the pop franchises don't have the confidence to post singles.
That recording industry worked that trick to death in the '80's and '90's. It ain't gonna work no more - that's the positive influence of the P2P craze.
OTOH, the iTMS has rekindled my interest in collecting full albums - from the truly great artists. I'm often disappointed to see only a "partial album" listed. However, I think the audience should have the right to choose.
Solid artists don't need to fear that their albums will be ripped apart but the pop franchises don't have the confidence to post singles.
explains the foo
I recently went to the taping of the Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn where the Foo Fighters performed. I thought they were amazing live. After the show, I thought "Hey, I like what I've heard on the radio by them. I'll check the iTMS to see if I can get the album or at least some singles."
No such luck. I entered in an artist request for them and picked the album from Best Buy and I am pretty disappointed with my decision. My fiancee likes it, but I only like about half the songs, if that. And I don't feel that it has a flow to it that constitutes a "whole album only" experience. They're a bunch of individual songs on the same record. It's not like the album is Operation Mindcrime (anyone? anyone?) or a tool album: meant to be a cohesive experience
Given my disappointment, it is unlikely I will buy another Foo Figthers album. I'm not mad or anything, I just don't like their stuff enough to spend another $15 on it. I'd buy singles, but not albums. If they'd rather get $0 instead of say $5, well, I guess that's their decision.
As for Madonna (and Metallica as someone posted their preference for them) she/they will never, EVER, see another cent from me. And I bought every Metallica album up to the black one. Anyone that disrespects their fans, or anyone else, like they have deserves to flicker out as an artist. File sharing got you down? Fine. Try this:
"Dear file sharers, I am glad you enjoy my music, but please understand it is my livelihood. If you don't agree with the existing pricing structure, that is unfortunate, but please do not steal the music. May I suggest putting your energy towards proposing a new pricing structure, one that you feel is fair to both consumers, artists, and any others whose livelihoods depend on the music business? Again, thank you for being a fan. But please work within the existing system, or be an agent of change of that system, as long as it follows the letter of the law"
Stealing music is wrong, no matter how you slice it. But telling people doing it "What the **** do you think you're doing?" through an mp3 only makes you look immature, and it certainly doesn't stop them. And metallica.... cripes. Sueing your fans? gg. I was one. No longer. And no amount of apologizing will ever change that. Could I go get the album off p2p and "stick it to them"? Sure. But I'd rather be Metallica-free than sink to their level.
-p
I recently went to the taping of the Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn where the Foo Fighters performed. I thought they were amazing live. After the show, I thought "Hey, I like what I've heard on the radio by them. I'll check the iTMS to see if I can get the album or at least some singles."
No such luck. I entered in an artist request for them and picked the album from Best Buy and I am pretty disappointed with my decision. My fiancee likes it, but I only like about half the songs, if that. And I don't feel that it has a flow to it that constitutes a "whole album only" experience. They're a bunch of individual songs on the same record. It's not like the album is Operation Mindcrime (anyone? anyone?) or a tool album: meant to be a cohesive experience
Given my disappointment, it is unlikely I will buy another Foo Figthers album. I'm not mad or anything, I just don't like their stuff enough to spend another $15 on it. I'd buy singles, but not albums. If they'd rather get $0 instead of say $5, well, I guess that's their decision.
As for Madonna (and Metallica as someone posted their preference for them) she/they will never, EVER, see another cent from me. And I bought every Metallica album up to the black one. Anyone that disrespects their fans, or anyone else, like they have deserves to flicker out as an artist. File sharing got you down? Fine. Try this:
"Dear file sharers, I am glad you enjoy my music, but please understand it is my livelihood. If you don't agree with the existing pricing structure, that is unfortunate, but please do not steal the music. May I suggest putting your energy towards proposing a new pricing structure, one that you feel is fair to both consumers, artists, and any others whose livelihoods depend on the music business? Again, thank you for being a fan. But please work within the existing system, or be an agent of change of that system, as long as it follows the letter of the law"
Stealing music is wrong, no matter how you slice it. But telling people doing it "What the **** do you think you're doing?" through an mp3 only makes you look immature, and it certainly doesn't stop them. And metallica.... cripes. Sueing your fans? gg. I was one. No longer. And no amount of apologizing will ever change that. Could I go get the album off p2p and "stick it to them"? Sure. But I'd rather be Metallica-free than sink to their level.
-p
well, that's a really simplistic way to look at it, they would probably argue. the idea of iTMS is that people buy music online instead of buying it at the store. the catch is, while cutting physical album revenue, i'd be willing to bet money that this would be incentive for people to actually buy songs they like rather than just illegally downloading them which is honestly almost as easy as iTMS, probably even easier for common songs that are popular like good DMB stuff.
that's really sad, though, that they are so set on making you buy their bad stuff with their good that they turn down a good oppurtunity like this. their loss, IMO. in a similar vein, metallica has discovered the ULTIMATE solution to internet piracy: making really really bad music. kudos to them. i hope my favorite bands don't follow suit.
The iMS makes it easier than ever to buy whole albums--no need to enforce that. Half my songs bought were from full albums, and the store stats say I'm typical.
When I find a single I want at iMS, I also preview the other tracks, and decide if I want the album. If I don't, nothing will force me to buy it.
I have some albums that are great from start to finish. They ARE out there. And that's subjective anyway. But don't try to force people into it.
And if artists want to make albums, for artistic reasons, that's great--the iMS isn't stopping them from doing so by any means.
When I find a single I want at iMS, I also preview the other tracks, and decide if I want the album. If I don't, nothing will force me to buy it.
I have some albums that are great from start to finish. They ARE out there. And that's subjective anyway. But don't try to force people into it.
And if artists want to make albums, for artistic reasons, that's great--the iMS isn't stopping them from doing so by any means.
Some great points in this thread. Making me think a little more on a topic I thought I already thought to death.
I support artists who don't want their work picked apart. I like the idea that a record is presented as a whole. Then again, if my copy of Pink Floyd's The Wall gets a skip on one song, that's the only one I want to buy. I can't justify replacing the whole album for one track.
There really are no winners with this one, as far as I can see.
As for the artists who have a full album available, minus one track, I won't buy a single song. I'm tired of finding records that have 13 songs ready to buy, but just one has been left out. I thought those final tracks were still coming, when iTMS was brand new. Now I figure that artists like Sticky Fingaz (20 track partial) are just trying to get every cent they can, and I won't play ball.
Dan
edit: wooha, psxndc - mindcrime!
I support artists who don't want their work picked apart. I like the idea that a record is presented as a whole. Then again, if my copy of Pink Floyd's The Wall gets a skip on one song, that's the only one I want to buy. I can't justify replacing the whole album for one track.
There really are no winners with this one, as far as I can see.
As for the artists who have a full album available, minus one track, I won't buy a single song. I'm tired of finding records that have 13 songs ready to buy, but just one has been left out. I thought those final tracks were still coming, when iTMS was brand new. Now I figure that artists like Sticky Fingaz (20 track partial) are just trying to get every cent they can, and I won't play ball.
Dan
edit: wooha, psxndc - mindcrime!