PDA

View Full Version : No Beatles... but Custom Ringtones?




MacRumors
Aug 29, 2007, 08:22 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

AlleyInsider claims (http://www.alleyinsider.com/2007/08/source-no-beatl.html) (reliability unknown) that "a well-informed source" has told them that the Beatles will not be introduced at Apple's media event next week.

Their source does expect a new iPod, but also a new Ringtone feature for iPhone users. According to their source, users will be able to make ringtones out of songs they've already purchased from iTunes. They also claim, however, that Universal songs won't be available for this feature.

In the days leading to the iPhone launch, we had heard from reliable sources (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/27/itunes-7-3-with-custom-ringtones/) that Apple was working on incorporating Ringtone features into iTunes, but that report claimed the service would cost $.99.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/29/no-beatles-but-custom-ringtones/)



O and A
Aug 29, 2007, 08:23 PM
Finally ringtones. I hope it works with any file ITMS or not.

Zwhaler
Aug 29, 2007, 08:24 PM
Then why all the Beatles references? I don't care though, I own their music. I just want new iPods.

Drizzt
Aug 29, 2007, 08:25 PM
I don't think that the Beatles has ever been compared to ringtones :) I think the Beatles catalog will be introduced to iTunes on the 5th.

zedsdead
Aug 29, 2007, 08:27 PM
I still am banking on the Beatles as well...not that I need them either...but I do WANT RINGTONES! And HD movies on Apple TV...and have the iPhone act as an Apple TV remote...and a moble iTunes store...hopefully at least one will be true.

Gherkin
Aug 29, 2007, 08:29 PM
Can anyone actually confirm that the final Beatles press release had "the beat goes on" at the end? Are we all just trusting Appleinsider on this?

Snowy_River
Aug 29, 2007, 08:30 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

AlleyInsider claims (http://www.alleyinsider.com/2007/08/source-no-beatl.html) (reliability unknown) that "a well-informed source" has told them that the Beatles will not be introduced at Apple's media event next week.

And do we know what kind of track record they have with rumors? Or are they a new entry onto the field, so to speak?

Their source does expect a new iPod, but also a new Ringtone feature for iPhone users. According to their source, users will be able to make ringtones out of songs they've already purchased from iTunes. They also claim, however, that Universal songs won't be available for this feature.

Well, if it can discriminate between songs, then this sounds like a shot across Universal's bow. A little bit of retribution for U not playing nice with contracts and DRM-free music?

In the days leading to the iPhone launch, we had heard from reliable sources (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/27/itunes-7-3-with-custom-ringtones/) that Apple was working on incorporating Ringtone features into iTunes, but that report claimed the service would cost $.99.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/29/no-beatles-but-custom-ringtones/)

xtbfx
Aug 29, 2007, 08:32 PM
Let's hope Apple doesn't screw this up and make it JUST iTunes purchases/downloads for ringtones. We should be able to add any ringtone we want to our iPhones.

AND I want the ability to manually manage music/videos on the iPhone like the iPod has. It's stupid to be this far behind the iPod when the iPhone is supposed to be "the best iPod ever made."

Frisco
Aug 29, 2007, 08:33 PM
Who cares about the Beatles?

Nemisis
Aug 29, 2007, 08:36 PM
That'd be sweet...even though I don't have an iPhone.

Is there any chance at all that it will be available for people without iPhones? :D

netdoc66
Aug 29, 2007, 08:42 PM
What utter spoonfed apple dribble. A normal cell phone would have have something as simple as ringtones day 1. As for Apple TV I guess they needed a few 100,000 moron's like me to cop a few mill for vacation money. Color me Apple-unimpressed in 2007

/dev/toaster
Aug 29, 2007, 08:43 PM
I have purchased quite a bit of content from iTunes. I don't mind paying for the content.

With that being said, I will be very pissed off if I am expected to either pay again to have the media I already purchased as a ring tone or to create my own custom ring tone. (From whatever source, CD, recording of my own voice, whatever)

However, I don't think Apple would go that route ... it would piss a lot of people off.

zap2
Aug 29, 2007, 08:43 PM
Who cares about the Beatles?

I do!!



But either way, I'll be happy...or both!!

Doctor Q
Aug 29, 2007, 08:44 PM
Will we have a choice of Ringtones and Ringtones Plus? :rolleyes:

bdkennedy1
Aug 29, 2007, 08:46 PM
I say ********. Apple has Beatles album covers on the invitation for the event.

BornAgainMac
Aug 29, 2007, 08:47 PM
Eventually, by the time the Beatles come on iTunes, nobody will be old enough to remember them. Now is the time because of that Road ahead is shorter than the road behind for their target audience.

skellener
Aug 29, 2007, 08:48 PM
What's the big deal about The Beatles? Go to any used CD store and buy any of their albums dirt cheap and rip it in whatever format you like. Why is everyone so obsessed with iTunes downloads for The Beatles? It's not like any new songs are coming out. They're out now, digitally, better quality than will be available from iTunes and no DRM.

As far as possible re-masters...anyone interested in re-masters isn't going to waste time with compressed downloads. They'll buy new CDs or even SACD or DVD-Audio. So if you want The Beatles...just go get them right now.

skellener
Aug 29, 2007, 08:50 PM
Color me Apple-unimpressed in 2007
I hear 'ya. It's been a lousy year. The new iMac is the first real interesting thing I've seen all year. We still have Leopard to look forward to.

izzle22
Aug 29, 2007, 08:51 PM
Who cares about the Beatles?


A lot of people including myself care about the Beatles. They are the reason we have any good music today. That being said I already own everything they have ever done and wouldn't buy any of their music from iTunes. I think it would be a great accomplishment for Apple and the Beatles to finally get them in the store for others who DO care about them.

nemaslov
Aug 29, 2007, 08:52 PM
No Beatles til 08 early maybe Macworld. A new Ringo Hits came out yesterday and McCartney has a three disd career spanning DVD of his solo video work coming in November.

They will NOT compete with themselves.

It will be a huge CD remasters push and iTunes push in the first quarter of 08.

Forget the downloads. These remasters will sound amazing have both stereo and mono mixes on one disc and then a second with 5.1 surround . They will also include the singles they were recording around the same time as each album, as the Beatles never issued singles that were album cuts. AT least not in the UK. Only Capitol in the US and later hits collections included singles. The Beatles didn't want their fans to have to rebuy songs. Yes this is true.

Me1000
Aug 29, 2007, 08:53 PM
Why would I pay $0.99 for a ringtone, when I could pay the same price for the song, then make it a ringtone? :confused:

Gherkin
Aug 29, 2007, 08:54 PM
What's the big deal about The Beatles? Go to any used CD store and buy any of their albums dirt cheap and rip it in whatever format you like. Why is everyone so obsessed with iTunes downloads for The Beatles? It's not like any new songs are coming out. They're out now, digitally, better quality than will be available from iTunes and no DRM.

As far as possible re-masters...anyone interested in re-masters isn't going to waste time with compressed downloads. They'll buy new CDs or even SACD or DVD-Audio. So if you want The Beatles...just go get them right now.

With that logic, why buy ANY music off the iTMS? Some people really like this digital direction music is going in and would gladly buy digital versions of Beatles albums. Apple will most likely have a Beatles-complete set which is very appealing to some people.

As for why it's such a big deal, the Beatles are the best selling artists ever in the history of music (Elvis and Michael Jackson are argued as best selling as well, but regardless, Beatles are at least in the top 3 EVER). Their music being available for digital download is very symbolic for the industry as a whole.

Hairball
Aug 29, 2007, 08:54 PM
If the story about the Beatles is true, that's too bad. I've been waiting for a updated remastering of their stuff.

Gherkin
Aug 29, 2007, 08:56 PM
I hear 'ya. It's been a lousy year. The new iMac is the first real interesting thing I've seen all year. We still have Leopard to look forward to.

The new iMacs impress you, but the iPhone doesn't?

Chundles
Aug 29, 2007, 08:58 PM
I say ********. Apple has Beatles album covers on the invitation for the event.

No they don't. None of the covers on the invitation are from Beatles albums.

nemaslov
Aug 29, 2007, 09:01 PM
What's the big deal about The Beatles? Go to any used CD store and buy any of their albums dirt cheap and rip it in whatever format you like. Why is everyone so obsessed with iTunes downloads for The Beatles? It's not like any new songs are coming out. They're out now, digitally, better quality than will be available from iTunes and no DRM.

As far as possible re-masters...anyone interested in re-masters isn't going to waste time with compressed downloads. They'll buy new CDs or even SACD or DVD-Audio. So if you want The Beatles...just go get them right now.

And there are alot of impulse buyers.

Picture if you will. Late at night. Just got laid, a few glasses of wine or a joint. You go to your computer and you gotta have Revolution #9. CLICK. It's yours. YEs you have the white album ona shelf somewhere.....and that four day old ding dong, is looking pretty tasty right now! :cool:

Cult Follower
Aug 29, 2007, 09:03 PM
I really hope this "newcomer" is wrong, I want the Beatles.

CaptSaltyJack
Aug 29, 2007, 09:05 PM
I hear 'ya. It's been a lousy year. The new iMac is the first real interesting thing I've seen all year. We still have Leopard to look forward to.

Boo. Frickin. Hoo. Are you serious?

Let's see, this year we've had:

* iPhone launch
* New iMac
* Mac Mini NOT put to sleep, quite the opposite (CPU upgrade, HD upgrade)
* iLife '08 (the best part being the major updates to iPhoto)
* iWork '08 (new app, Numbers; and nice updates to Pages and Keynote)
* iPhoto/.Mac/iPhone get very awesome "Web Gallery" feature
* .Mac users get much-needed major storage boost from 1GB to 10GB for FREE

What a horrible year so far. Appalling.

Modjo
Aug 29, 2007, 09:08 PM
Their source does expect a new iPod, but also a new Ringtone feature for iPhone users. According to their source, users will be able to make ringtones out of songs they've already purchased from iTunes. They also claim, however, that Universal songs won't be available for this feature.



A rumor source that EXPECTS something to happen is kinda shallow. That's like me making a prediction. Let's hope his predictions are based upon solid background knowledge.

bdkennedy1
Aug 29, 2007, 09:08 PM
Wow, you're right. I thought that cover on the left with "BEA" was the Beatles and it's the Beastie Boys.

Getting old sucks :(

No they don't. None of the covers on the invitation are from Beatles albums.

wavelayer
Aug 29, 2007, 09:09 PM
Boo. Frickin. Hoo. Are you serious?

Let's see, this year we've had:

* iPhone launch
* New iMac
* Mac Mini NOT put to sleep, quite the opposite (CPU upgrade)
* iLife '08 (the best part being the major updates to iPhoto)
* iWork '08 (new app, Numbers; and nice updates to Pages and Keynote)
* iPhoto/.Mac/iPhone get very awesome "Web Gallery" feature
* .Mac users get much-needed major storage boost from 1GB to 10GB for FREE

What a horrible year so far. Appalling.

Don't forget Final Cut Studio 2! Which is great, by the way.;)

User01748
Aug 29, 2007, 09:11 PM
I'm hoping The Beatles catalog is coming to iTunes in the next month or so. Not because I would buy the 128 kbps tracks but because it means the remastering of The Beatles library has finally been completed. The outdated sound of the old CDs from the 80's aren't cutting it anymore even when they're ripped with Apple Lossless.

I'll be the 1st person in line to buy all the remastered CDs when they are released so I can listen to all the songs without the flatness of the current versions. And here's something to think about: Lennon's catalog was added a few weeks ago. Ringo's was added this week and Macca's got some special iTunes exclusive thing that came out this week. This could either be building up to the big Beatles iTunes extravaganza or it could mean that we're gonna have to wait until next year like some other posters have said so the solo stuff isn't competing with The Beatles stuff.

Ok. That was my 1st post on here. sorry for the wall of text but I'm a big Beatles fan and would desperately like to see the remastered stuff as well as the rumored new single that was scrapped in 94/95. Beatle-mania 07! (or 08)

fpnc
Aug 29, 2007, 09:11 PM
I doubt that Apple will simply "throw the door open" and offer free ringtone conversions for the iPhone. The ringtone business is worth billions of dollars and the record labels are highly unlikely to allow Apple to bundle ringtone conversions at the standard $0.99 song price. Even less likely is the possibility that they will allow you to convert songs that you've ripped from CDs.

I suspect that they will allow upgrades like they do with iTunes Plus and for a limited amount of time you'll be able to download a ringtone version of any song that you've previously purchased for a relatively small fee. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if it were something like $0.99 for each upgrade and $1.98 for any future purchases of the full-length song plus ringtone.

As for the Beatles, I kind of doubt it. Eventually it will happen but I don't think it will be next week.

Tampa Tom
Aug 29, 2007, 09:23 PM
Can anyone actually confirm that the final Beatles press release had "the beat goes on" at the end? Are we all just trusting Appleinsider on this?
From Wikipedia:

""The Beat Goes On" is a song recorded by Sonny and Cher. It was issued as a single and appeared on their 1967 album In Case You're in Love. It peaked at number 6 on the pop charts, charting January 14, 1967. It has been covered by American jazz musician Buddy Rich, jazz pianist/singer Patricia Barber, Italian singer Mina, and the British electronic music group All Seeing I produced a cover version of this for Britney Spears on her hit debut album, ...Baby One More Time. The song was recently featured on a television commercial for Egg Beaters.[citation needed]
This song is incorrectly referred to as And The Beat Goes On, due to the fact the closing lyric adds the word "and" to the song's title (the actual one has no "and"). There was an unrelated song released in 1980 actually called "And The Beat Goes On" (recorded by The Whispers).
"The Beat Goes On" was sung at Sonny Bono's funeral, and the phrase also appears on his tombstone."

OMG!! A Sonny and Cher iPod!!!!
Seriously....
OK here's the final Beatles press release as found at http://purplelagoon.org/Beatles/:
---------
Spring is here and Leeds play Chelsea tomorrow and Ringo and John
and George and Paul are alive and well and full of hope.
The world is still spinning and so are we and so are you.
When the spinning stops — that'll be the time to worry, not before.
Until then, the Beatles are alive and well and the beat goes on, the beat goes on.
— Final Beatles press release, April 10, 1970

fawlty
Aug 29, 2007, 09:30 PM
Wow, you're right. I thought that cover on the left with "BEA" was the Beatles and it's the Beastie Boys.(

But if the coverflow is sorted alphabetically, the placeholder ("September 5") would be in the right place for "Beatles".

nemaslov
Aug 29, 2007, 09:33 PM
the beat goes on - album reviews
The expanded CD release of this second Vanilla Fudge album is much more accessible than the original vinyl version because of the inclusion of a number of cover tunes, most notably Beatles songs. The revealing liner notes that Sundazed project manager Tim Livingston adds to the reissues of these Atco albums helps put this influential band in a better light. The Beat Goes On is a difficult record, especially after the explosion that was their debut. The single from their previous album, Vanilla Fudge, originally charted in the Top 100 in the U.S. in 1967. (Britain was more hip to the group.) They finally hit in America in the summer of 1968, but had already begun to influence Deep Purple and the Rotary Connection, among others. The problem with this project is that they failed to influence themselves. Bassist Tim Bogert notes that "The Beat Goes On was the album that killed the band," while guitarist Vinny Martell adds "we had already started our second album when Shadow (Morton) had this other concept idea for The Beat Goes On." Morton had produced the Shangri Las, not the Beatles, and this creative effort was by a group with only two hit singles arriving on the scene around the time of Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band. Morton set before the boys a daunting task which needed much, much better execution. Renaissance, which they were recording simultaneous with this, at least included a Donovan tune, "Season of the Witch." The exotic wandering would have been better served by a reworking of "Strawberry Fields Forever" across a side of the disc instead of the keyboard notes which reference the tune. Even a killer guitar version of "The Beat Goes On" would have been more exciting than "18th Century Variations on a Theme by Mozart" or noodlings that can't decide if they are "Chatanooga Choo Choo" or "Theme to the Match Game." For a group of impressionable young kids out of high school, as referenced in the liners, this must've been extremely rough. The expanded CD has jam session versions of Elvis Presley's "Hound Dog" and the Beatles' "I Feel Fine," "She Loves You," "Day Tripper," "I Want to Hold Your Hand," and "You Can't Do That." Any of these extended à la "Eleanor Rigby" from their debut would be more desirable than the interview-type questions about sex; the Beatles' interest in "Indian meditation" (sitar enters here, and how would the VF know?); audio newsclips of John F. Kennedy, Hitler, and others, all a very strong argument against artistic control for some producers. Exploring the initial ideas that brought them fame was what was expected of Vanilla Fudge. What would you rather hear, readings from -The Bible or the single from January 1968, "The Look of Love" b/w "Where Is My Mind"? Thankfully, Sundazed has included the Bacharach/David tune and two additional Mark Stein titles, "All in Your Mind" and the aforementioned B side, "Where Is My Mind," on the expanded Renaissance album, the real follow-up to the Vanilla Fudge debut. Historically important, listening to this archive piece is truly a labor of love, with the emphasis on labor. ~ Joe Viglione, All Music Guide

FreeState
Aug 29, 2007, 09:42 PM
I say ********. Apple has Beatles album covers on the invitation for the event.

Just an FYI the albums are:

Keane, Under The Iron Sea
The Flaming Lips, Yoshimi Battles The Pink Robots
Beastie Boys, The Mix-Up
Mika, Life In Cartoon Motion
Jack Johnson, In Between Dreams
Sonic Youth, Rather Ripped

Id add that all of the above except the Beastie Boys and maybe Sonic Youth, to me anyway, are very British/British inspired sounds. Milka is amazing and sounds like Queen/Scissor Sisters/Beattles to me...

FreeState
Aug 29, 2007, 09:47 PM
rest

mark2288
Aug 29, 2007, 09:55 PM
What's the big deal about The Beatles? Go to any used CD store and buy any of their albums dirt cheap and rip it in whatever format you like. Why is everyone so obsessed with iTunes downloads for The Beatles? It's not like any new songs are coming out. They're out now, digitally, better quality than will be available from iTunes and no DRM.

As far as possible re-masters...anyone interested in re-masters isn't going to waste time with compressed downloads. They'll buy new CDs or even SACD or DVD-Audio. So if you want The Beatles...just go get them right now.

I concur - although the Beatles should have been included in the original iTunes store, I don't think it stopped anyone serious about listening to them from going out and buying their CD. It may be just more of a "forbidden fruit" thing.

I'm sure once the Beatles go on iTunes, they will sell, but I don't think it should warrant that much attention. I'm more interested in new iPods, not digital copies of things I can do myself.

Then again - I am a "do it yourself" type of guy. Some people like the convenience of just clicking on purchase and having the songs downloaded ot their computer.

Either way - more choice in the iTunes store is never a bad thing in my opinion.

Chundles
Aug 29, 2007, 09:56 PM
Wow, you're right. I thought that cover on the left with "BEA" was the Beatles and it's the Beastie Boys.

Getting old sucks :(

You're alright mate, no harm done. Here they are:

Keane, Under The Iron Sea
The Flaming Lips, Yoshimi Battles The Pink Robots
Beastie Boys, The Mix-Up
Mika, Life In Cartoon Motion
Jack Johnson, In Between Dreams
Sonic Youth, Rather Ripped

EDIT: Damn, getting slow in MY old age.... young whippersnappers getting in there so fast.

MM2270
Aug 29, 2007, 09:58 PM
Can anyone actually confirm that the final Beatles press release had "the beat goes on" at the end? Are we all just trusting Appleinsider on this?

Yes, it's true. See here (http://purplelagoon.org/Beatles/)

Mgkwho
Aug 29, 2007, 09:59 PM
Still..."the beat goes on" is written on the invitation! Apple has lately included subtle hints toward the announcements, and there has to be a reason for its inclusion!

-=|Mgkwho

JGowan
Aug 29, 2007, 10:00 PM
Can anyone actually confirm that the final Beatles press release had "the beat goes on" at the end? Are we all just trusting Appleinsider on this?"Spring is here and Leeds play Chelsea tomorrow and Ringo and John and George and Paul are alive and well and full of hope. The world is still spinning and so are we and so are you. When the spinning stops — that'll be the time to worry, not before. Until then, the Beatles are alive and well and the beat goes on, the beat goes on.

— Final Beatles press release, April 10, 1970"

Source Link (http://purplelagoon.org/Beatles/)

cohibadad
Aug 29, 2007, 10:02 PM
Boo. Frickin. Hoo. Are you serious?

Let's see, this year we've had:

* iPhone launch
* New iMac
* Mac Mini NOT put to sleep, quite the opposite (CPU upgrade, HD upgrade)
* iLife '08 (the best part being the major updates to iPhoto)
* iWork '08 (new app, Numbers; and nice updates to Pages and Keynote)
* iPhoto/.Mac/iPhone get very awesome "Web Gallery" feature
* .Mac users get much-needed major storage boost from 1GB to 10GB for FREE

What a horrible year so far. Appalling.

Agree completely. If the iPhone was the only new Apple product this year it would still be revolutionary but when you add all the above and Leopard I'd say this is THE biggest apple year since Apple II launch? Mac launch? NEXT acquisition? something like that

propynyl
Aug 29, 2007, 10:02 PM
Does it bother anyone else that this iPhone (as great as it is), is so freaking buggy, yet Apple is wasting their effort looking for new sources of cash flow?

Instead of thinking about their revenue stream, they should be rapidly updating the iPhone, fixing the bugs, and adding some of the "missing" features that need to see the light of day FAST before the competition copies and catches up.

Give me color-coded calendars, and I'm happy...screw paying for ringtones!

-propynyl

twoodcc
Aug 29, 2007, 10:03 PM
i wouldn't be surprised about the ringtones. really i don't mind the current ones, if only i could make my iPhone louder

Stella
Aug 29, 2007, 10:05 PM
Custom Ring tones... wwoooow.

Such innovation from Apple :rolleyes:

Mgkwho
Aug 29, 2007, 10:08 PM
Do you think the ringtone feature will be free? I mean, you already own the song, so it should count as one of the 5 uses, right?

-=|Mgkwho

NewSc2
Aug 29, 2007, 10:09 PM
I don't really care for song ringtones (why would I pay $1 for a snippet when I can buy the full song for the same price?), but a few more "phone" ringtones would be nice. As of now I only use 3 or 4 of the included ones. Some are just odd -- why would you want a siren?

FF_productions
Aug 29, 2007, 10:14 PM
It would be awesome if the Beatles made it to iTunes.

Thing is, I have the Beatles on CD, cassette, 8-track, and on records.

I'd probably buy the music videos, like I did with John Lennon's "Imagine".

Stella
Aug 29, 2007, 10:21 PM
I'm waiting for the Apple fan boi justifying Apple charging to put ringtones that the customer may have already paid for, spending more money for the opportunity to put on their iPhone.

It should be a fun time...

CaptSaltyJack
Aug 29, 2007, 10:22 PM
Does it bother anyone else that this iPhone (as great as it is), is so freaking buggy, yet Apple is wasting their effort looking for new sources of cash flow?

*chortle* You mean they're doing what every other successful business does? Wow.

And BTW, iPhone is up to 1.0.2 in case you hadn't noticed. Looks like they're addressing bugs just fine.

chr1s60
Aug 29, 2007, 10:22 PM
I don't really care about whether or not the Beatles are released on iTunes but ringtones without hacking would be awesome. I hope they are right about this. My one concern is that you won't be able to make tones from songs you got off cd's.

JGowan
Aug 29, 2007, 10:26 PM
Nobody reads if you say say "RIGHT. WE AGREE THE RUMOR." You have to say something contrary and then have more information. Alley Insider is just trying to draw in traffic. THAT'S IT.

"The Beat Goes On" couldn't be more specific to The Beatles coming to iTunes than ANYTHING EVER, unless the line was "The BEATLES GO ON iTUNES".

We've got all the boys and their solo stuff up now (I think George's label said "Sod off") and now the Finale, with the Group's efforts going on next. EMI & Apple love each other. Apple Inc. & Apple Corps kissed and made up. It's the freakin' Summer-O-Love. ;)

Porchland
Aug 29, 2007, 10:27 PM
No Beatles til 08 early maybe Macworld. A new Ringo Hits came out yesterday and McCartney has a three disd career spanning DVD of his solo video work coming in November.

They will NOT compete with themselves.


That's like saying Apple is going to stop selling iPods at Best Buy because they don't want to compete with themselves. Nonsense.

How is being on iTunes competing with yourself?

donlphi
Aug 29, 2007, 10:29 PM
iPhone Gadget OS X Rumors Weekly (http://icanwaituntilthefifth.com) claims a reliable source has information regarding next Wednesday's Apple Media Event.

Announcement 1: Release of the entire Sonny and Cher Library - completely DRM free.

Announcement 2: Red iPOD Shuffles - 10 cents of every Red iPOD sold will go towards feeding the children of Africa (this up 5 cents from last year).

Announcement 3: Hi-Fi II - Should be exactly the same shape and size as the original Hi-FI, but will have 3 additional feet of power cord and a glossy finish to the front grill (no option for matte finish).

ONE MORE THING: Everybody wants The BEATLES catalog and a Beatles flavored iPOD. Can you say "WHITE ALBUM"? That's right... you too can own the Beatles White Album on your special "WHITE ALBUM" 7th Generation iPOD. The entire album on one beautiful white iPOD.


I hope these rumors are true. I can hardly imagine a white iPOD. :D

Tommyg117
Aug 29, 2007, 10:52 PM
All I want are ringtones.

nickbates
Aug 29, 2007, 11:12 PM
I'm waiting for the Apple fan boi justifying Apple charging to put ringtones that the customer may have already paid for, spending more money for the opportunity to put on their iPhone.

It should be a fun time...

Just about every post you make seems to be you complaining about Apple Fan boi's... why the hell do you come to this forum then? Why don't you just chill out with the negativity (jealousy?) and move on...

propynyl
Aug 29, 2007, 11:25 PM
Some are just odd -- why would you want a siren?

One word..."mother-in-law"

DonWilson
Aug 29, 2007, 11:29 PM
They're not going to intro the Beatles, yet they're using the Beatles albums on their media PR. Yea, they wont introduce the Beatles albums.

Mgkwho
Aug 29, 2007, 11:36 PM
"The Beat Goes On" couldn't be more specific to The Beatles coming to iTunes than ANYTHING EVER, unless the line was "The BEATLES GO ON iTUNES".

See, I agree with you. Wasn't it at the "D" conference that Jobs said he wants to know too when it would happen? The clue was "soon..."

Well, now would be perfect timing wouldn't you say?

-=|Mgkwho

redfirebird08
Aug 29, 2007, 11:43 PM
It's not necessarily the Beatles, but what they represent. They're the most popular band ever, so when they choose to stay away from digital music stores, it makes bands like Led Zeppelin and AC/DC think that it's the best way to go about things. Getting the Beatles in the digital music stores would break down a barrier and I think would eventually lead to ALL major artists being in digital stores, including newer acts like Radiohead.

MacbookSwitcher
Aug 29, 2007, 11:51 PM
Who cares about the Beatles?

Agreed.

However, to answer your question directly, people who were alive in the 1960's care about them, because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then.

But people like me (and probably you), born in later generations, couldn't care two cents about the Beatles.

halhiker
Aug 30, 2007, 12:00 AM
Quote: Why would you want a siren?

One word..."mother-in-law"

What the barking dog isn't good enough?

halhiker
Aug 30, 2007, 12:03 AM
Doesn't the picture somewhat remind you of the Beatles "Love" album cover?

givemefive
Aug 30, 2007, 12:05 AM
Forget the downloads. These remasters will sound amazing have both stereo and mono mixes on one disc and then a second with 5.1 surround .

You mean they will have the life and dynamic range ripped out of them so they will sound peppy on cheap apple earbuds and low quality equipment?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war#Remasters

skellener
Aug 30, 2007, 12:07 AM
Boo. Frickin. Hoo. Are you serious?
Let's see, this year we've had:

* iPhone launch
* New iMac
* Mac Mini NOT put to sleep, quite the opposite (CPU upgrade, HD upgrade)
* iLife '08 (the best part being the major updates to iPhoto)
* iWork '08 (new app, Numbers; and nice updates to Pages and Keynote)
* iPhoto/.Mac/iPhone get very awesome "Web Gallery" feature
* .Mac users get much-needed major storage boost from 1GB to 10GB for FREE

What a horrible year so far. Appalling.

- Not interested in a $600 phone or AT&T or many of the shortcomings for that price.
- I like the new iMac. Only had to wait a year for the update.
- Mac-mini finally got updated after a year as well. Too long between revs.
- iLife is late. They can call it '08 and make it seem early all they want.
- Numbers seems interesting. Again, iWork '08 is a late '07.
- Not impressed with iPhoto/.Mac/iPhone. Big deal.
- .Mac gets 10GB. It's $99, NOT free. Big deal. I've had 1TB for almost a year now. It was only $54 and I have my own domain with unlimited email accounts. Dot Mac still very weak. Try globat.com

Apple hasn't bumped DVD drive speeds in a couple of years. They haven't added eSata to their machines yet. They pushed Leopard back because of the iPhone. AppleTV has no HD content from iTunes.

Much of 2007 seems to be setting up for 2008. I think 2008 will be a much better year. All these things should mature. I'd like to see them push more on the computer side next year. Leopard will be out. Hopefully the can concentrate on it's capabilities. :)

MILLER4157
Aug 30, 2007, 12:12 AM
Can anyone actually confirm that the final Beatles press release had "the beat goes on" at the end? Are we all just trusting Appleinsider on this?

if you look at the album covers on their advertisement. the one slightly left is a beastie boys cover. hence the beat goes on

propynyl
Aug 30, 2007, 12:18 AM
What the barking dog isn't good enough?

Haha, that was my second choice!

A Pittarelli
Aug 30, 2007, 12:22 AM
im calling *********, this sounds like informed speculation, anybody could make the same assumptions by reading this site alone.

Chundles
Aug 30, 2007, 12:30 AM
Agreed.

However, to answer your question directly, people who were alive in the 1960's care about them, because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then.

But people like me (and probably you), born in later generations, couldn't care two cents about the Beatles.

Exactly. I don't care about any band that made music before 1982 and I also disregard any influence they had on the music industry and music as a whole before I was born.

Basically music before 1982 does not exist in my mind.

TitoC
Aug 30, 2007, 12:38 AM
Agreed.

However, to answer your question directly, people who were alive in the 1960's care about them, because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then.

But people like me (and probably you), born in later generations, couldn't care two cents about the Beatles.

Speak for yourself! If you know anything about music you wouldn't make such a stupid and blanket statement, but that's YOUR choice, not everyone in your age group. Yeah, I didn't grow up at the time of Matisse, Monet, or Mozart, yet that doesn't make me appreciate them any less. Just because YOU don't like or care for the Beatles, doesn't make ALL people of your generation think like you. People from all age groups, races and backgrounds appreciate them for their talent.

"because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then."

You really think that's the only reason why people like the Beatles? Really? I can like the Beatles, Rimsky-Korsakov, Mozart, White Stripes and the Velvet Underground, but not because of "memories" but because umm . . . I don't know . . how about because it's incredible music! I suggest you go to the library or a record store and just listen to music, ALL kinds of music. There's more to music than just what's out there now.

People appreciate the Beatles because they appreciate music. I know it's a hard concept, but you might be surprised that's it true.

Bernie-Mac
Aug 30, 2007, 12:39 AM
If Apple charges for ringtones im keeping iFuntastic on my hard drive

CJD2112
Aug 30, 2007, 12:47 AM
The new iMacs impress you, but the iPhone doesn't?

lol Seriously. When I read that I was a little perplexed. Oh well.

knelto
Aug 30, 2007, 12:49 AM
I've been wondering this about ringtones (and correct me anywhere I'm wrong):

I've heard that under 30 seconds can be used under Fair Use (like Amazon and iTunes track preview) and as far as I know, phones will usually ring for 30 seconds before going to voicemail. If both are true, then Apple could technically let us rip 30 song clips and use them as ringtones without it being a copyright violation or anything.

And I understand that they could sell us ringtones but really, Apple doesn't want pocket change from ringtones, they want the gold from iPhone sales.

CJD2112
Aug 30, 2007, 12:53 AM
Mika is amazing and sounds like Queen/Scissor Sisters/Beattles to me...

I agree. I made the same comment in another post and some user read me the riot lol. It's amusing that Mika and other artists with more cutting edge and actual vocal talent are huge everyone but the states, while the states seems caught up in the Britney Spears/Timbaland/Justin Timberlake bread and butter blandness of corporate money making. Whatever happened to the originality of the 80's and early 90's? Music seems to have generally gone down hill since...

north385com
Aug 30, 2007, 12:58 AM
If Apple pulls a stunt like charging for ringtones, I'm going straight to hacking the freaking iPhone and never looking back. That's the dumbest idea I have heard in a long... long time.

Where's iChat? Where's a browser that doesn't crash all the time? Where is an official SDK? Apple, please don't tell me that you've been wasting all this time on the Beatles and ringtones that we're going to have to pay for. I beg of you... make this announcement worth the time it has taken to put together!

New iPods? Okay great, but how about giving some much needed updates to the iPhone and its community that should've been there from the start?

JonfromVegas
Aug 30, 2007, 01:11 AM
I'm surprised that we haven't seen any decent spy shots of the new ipods surface. Apple is doing a good job of keeping a tight lid on things.

Bubbasteve
Aug 30, 2007, 01:23 AM
I hope they introduce iTunes 8 which will come with the "events" styling ala iPhoto

I think it would be neat to have a new "view" button for that, but that's me and I'm funny like that

and I guess iPods would be pretty cool as well...

Daremo
Aug 30, 2007, 01:30 AM
All I want is MMS, and the ability to send text and MMS to multiple people at the same time. I can live with the ringtones, and even if I can't, there's ways to hack the phone to get them on. I just want some missing features i used to use daily. It's bad enough the reception on AT&T sucks for me... As much as I love some aspects of this phone, I'm REALLY missing some other basics.

DaftUnion
Aug 30, 2007, 01:43 AM
Wow. If you can make free ringtones out of ANY song that you have in iTunes, that'll be...well fantastically awesome.

Zygon Gambit
Aug 30, 2007, 01:46 AM
No Beatles til 08 early maybe Macworld.
They will NOT compete with themselves.

It will be a huge CD remasters push and iTunes push in the first quarter of 08.

Forget the downloads. These remasters will sound amazing have both stereo and mono mixes on one disc and then a second with 5.1 surround.
Yes, if The Beatles are on iTunes next week, it will be the old 1980s CDs, not any re-issues. I don't think they would want that, so I think no Beatles this year.

When it does happen, it will be only a small part of a huge re-issue series. At that point no-one will care (or notice) that they are also on iTunes.

homeboy
Aug 30, 2007, 02:27 AM
I don't get why you all are reading into this whole stupid Beatles hype. So what if Beatles songs aren't sold on iPod. It can't be that important, because if you are a hardcore Beatles fan you already have their CDs or have downloaded their song illegally. It ain't like their songs are debuting on iTunes or something. Geeez!!

propropro
Aug 30, 2007, 03:08 AM
"Their source does expect a new iPod".... only one?:(

Derwood
Aug 30, 2007, 03:15 AM
...that sinking feeling? Aren't we long overdue an underwhelming Apple Media Event? ;)

"Oh, and one more thing... As of today we will make available to ALL iPhone customers the facility to use audio content purchased from the iTunes store as custom ringtones."

Queue a wave of ear-bleed that spreads through the crowd as the mass of assembled journalists snap biros/pencils in thunderous unison.

Perhaps...

surferfromuk
Aug 30, 2007, 03:39 AM
I think The Beatles on iTunes is as much symbolic as it is commercial.

For iTunes to finally get the last great holdout truly legitimises online digital music distribution as a bona-fide long term reality.

It also comes at a time when iTunes is under pressure from giants like Universal who are engaged in a stealth strategy to become their own digital distributer and cut everybody else from the game.

EMI/Apple Corps giving distribution rights of the worlds greatest and most popular band of all time to iTunes once more reinforces the clear and logical distinction between a record label and it's chosen digital media distribution solutions partner.

plus it will be cool to bring The Beatles catalog to a generation who currently don't care much about The Beatles...

sneakyh
Aug 30, 2007, 03:53 AM
iPhone Gadget OS X Rumors Weekly (http://icanwaituntilthefifth.com) claims a reliable source has information regarding next Wednesday's Apple Media Event.

Announcement 1: Release of the entire Sonny and Cher Library - completely DRM free.

Announcement 2: Red iPOD Shuffles - 10 cents of every Red iPOD sold will go towards feeding the children of Africa (this up 5 cents from last year).

Announcement 3: Hi-Fi II - Should be exactly the same shape and size as the original Hi-FI, but will have 3 additional feet of power cord and a glossy finish to the front grill (no option for matte finish).

ONE MORE THING: Everybody wants The BEATLES catalog and a Beatles flavored iPOD. Can you say "WHITE ALBUM"? That's right... you too can own the Beatles White Album on your special "WHITE ALBUM" 7th Generation iPOD. The entire album on one beautiful white iPOD.



I hope these rumors are true. I can hardly imagine a white iPOD. :D

I lol'ed. We need to buy our new Red Shuffles to save Africa, 10 cents at a time.

ATG
Aug 30, 2007, 04:09 AM
Who cares about the Beatles?
Yeah

I've got my iMac, I don't care if they get sold to MS now :eek:

abrooks
Aug 30, 2007, 05:03 AM
Color me Apple-unimpressed in 2007

Hold your horses, the next few months are just going to be amazing! We're looking at refreshing the entire iPod range, Leopard, Europe iPhone launch and more I'm sure.

SthrnCmfrtr
Aug 30, 2007, 05:06 AM
People appreciate the Beatles because they appreciate music. I know it's a hard concept, but you might be surprised that's it true.

I think you should avoid arguing with people who believe music began with Flock of Seagulls.

Much Ado
Aug 30, 2007, 05:18 AM
I say ********. Apple has Beatles album covers on the invitation for the event.

Where?

rdowns
Aug 30, 2007, 05:20 AM
I think you should avoid arguing with people who believe music began with Flock of Seagulls.

Your comment is useless without pictures. :p

http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000ERU3PG.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V64884696_.jpg

jmelrose
Aug 30, 2007, 05:37 AM
Custom Ring tones... wwoooow.

Such innovation from Apple :rolleyes:

I think Apple TOTALLY missed the boat by not putting a ringtone maker into Garageband 08. I was actually pretty shocked.

JQW
Aug 30, 2007, 05:41 AM
Forget the downloads. These remasters will sound amazing have both stereo and mono mixes on one disc and then a second with 5.1 surround . They will also include the singles they were recording around the same time as each album, as the Beatles never issued singles that were album cuts. AT least not in the UK. Only Capitol in the US and later hits collections included singles. The Beatles didn't want their fans to have to rebuy songs. Yes this is true.

Except it isn't quite true. There's plenty of singles cuts (A and B-sides) on the Beatles official UK album releases, particularly the earlier ones. However the tracks always appeared on singles first, except for the 'Something/Come Together' double A-side which appeared around a month after the release of 'Abbey Road'.

ImAliveUK
Aug 30, 2007, 06:26 AM
Hi everyone!! New poster here - Loving the site - you guys keep me informed!!

Just a quick theory on the 'the beat goes on' tagline....

Could it be so simple as to basically say that the iPod isn't dead and that it will go on?

Kev

awesomebase
Aug 30, 2007, 06:32 AM
I love the Beatles, but man... they're all going to be 6-feet under before a deal to put their music online ever happens!!:)

Project
Aug 30, 2007, 06:40 AM
I couldn't care less about custom ringtons but..

custom ringtones > the Beatles

Derwood
Aug 30, 2007, 06:42 AM
These remasters will sound amazing have both stereo and mono mixes on one disc and then a second with 5.1 surround .

Why would anyone want to hear a 5.1 mix of an album that wasn't conceived of as a surround sound project? Novelty value at best; total desecration at worst.

I'm not knocking 5.1 for audio per sé (the Super Furry Animals have done simultaneous 5.1 releases of all their records since Rings Around The World all of which make great use of the tech), but to me it's a lot like when stereo LP's first appeared and all of a sudden everything was remixed for stereo and you would have these Rolling Stones LP's with Keef 100% panned left and Ronnie 100% panned right and the whole thing just sounds weird and not at all good.

I've listened to the stereo mixes of Village Green maybe two or three times. Always reach for the mono. :cool:

SCarino21
Aug 30, 2007, 06:53 AM
Speak for yourself! If you know anything about music you wouldn't make such a stupid and blanket statement, but that's YOUR choice, not everyone in your age group. Yeah, I didn't grow up at the time of Matisse, Monet, or Mozart, yet that doesn't make me appreciate them any less. Just because YOU don't like or care for the Beatles, doesn't make ALL people of your generation think like you. People from all age groups, races and backgrounds appreciate them for their talent.

"because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then."

You really think that's the only reason why people like the Beatles? Really? I can like the Beatles, Rimsky-Korsakov, Mozart, White Stripes and the Velvet Underground, but not because of "memories" but because umm . . . I don't know . . how about because it's incredible music! I suggest you go to the library or a record store and just listen to music, ALL kinds of music. There's more to music than just what's out there now.

People appreciate the Beatles because they appreciate music. I know it's a hard concept, but you might be surprised that's it true.

I have this debate all the time, where people think groups like The Beatles will die out with the generation that grew up with them. Yes, the Beatles and most other early rock groups have an influence on 'modern rock' Ask your favorite rock bands and they'll tell you themselves. (if you're into hip hop only, forget it then. )

Music is not newspapers. They have no dates and no pictures unless you're hung up on album covers. Music expresses emotion and if you can relate to the artist's message then that song lives with you forever.

On another note: When younger people who don't really know or care about the Beatles hear about them, they usually think of maybe four songs: "Hard Day's Night", "She Loves You", "Sgt. Peppers" and "Yellow Submarine" Which I understand can sound kinda tiresome... The cure is the Abbey Road album, which can still go toe-to toe against anything produced in the last 38 years.

After playing Abbey Road to someone for a first time:
"That's a beatles song?!"
"Yea, that's a beatles song."

Zadillo
Aug 30, 2007, 06:57 AM
I hear 'ya. It's been a lousy year. The new iMac is the first real interesting thing I've seen all year. We still have Leopard to look forward to.

It all depends on your needs. Fair enough that the iMac is the only thing interesting to you (I'm the opposite; the new iMac doesn't dramatically interest me). But on the other hand, I found the new MBP to be majorly impressive (still the only laptop on the market with a 15.4" LED-backlit screen, and still by far the lightest and thinnest laptop with an 8600M GT). But I assume you found it to be uninteresting.

Aside from that, this year also brought the iPhone; even if you're not personally interested in it, given it's introduction of a new mobile OS X platform, I'm not sure how it can be said to be part of a lousy year.

-Zadillo

jfmartin
Aug 30, 2007, 07:27 AM
Come on ! Guys ! Can you just rip your Beatles CD into iTunes and sync with the iPod ? Why wait for Apple ???:eek:

Ringtones... mmm, that was lame but I guess this make Apple the only cell phone manufacturer who cares to improve the software it ships with the hardware...

Project
Aug 30, 2007, 07:35 AM
Music is not newspapers. They have no dates and no pictures unless you're hung up on album covers. Music expresses emotion and if you can relate to the artist's message then that song lives with you forever.


I somewhat disagree with this. Sure, you can have timeless music and albums that transcend the generations. But periods or eras of music definitely have a 'date' to them, and for some people certain music sounds dated. In the same way a lot of people cant get into a Dickens or Shakespeare novel because the writing dynamics changed, yet the story remained the same.

nja247
Aug 30, 2007, 07:53 AM
I do!!

But either way, I'll be happy...or both!!

Seriously, just buy their albums and rip them to iTunes using whatever format and quality setting you want. No need to wait. Sure it'd be great to be able to buy a track on the whim whilst high as someone suggested, but if you're that much of a fan you'd have most of their work regardless.

Though having their work on a digital library will be a symbolic moment, yet there's really no need to 'wait' -- when/if it happens it happens.

nja247
Aug 30, 2007, 07:58 AM
From Wikipedia:

""The Beat Goes On" is a song recorded by Sonny and Cher. It was issued as a single and appeared on their 1967 album In Case You're in Love. It peaked at number 6 on the pop charts, charting January 14, 1967. It has been covered by American jazz musician Buddy Rich, jazz pianist/singer Patricia Barber, Italian singer Mina, and the British electronic music group All Seeing I produced a cover version of this for Britney Spears on her hit debut album, ...Baby One More Time. The song was recently featured on a television commercial for Egg Beaters.[citation needed]
This song is incorrectly referred to as And The Beat Goes On, due to the fact the closing lyric adds the word "and" to the song's title (the actual one has no "and"). There was an unrelated song released in 1980 actually called "And The Beat Goes On" (recorded by The Whispers).
"The Beat Goes On" was sung at Sonny Bono's funeral, and the phrase also appears on his tombstone."

OMG!! A Sonny and Cher iPod!!!!
Seriously....
OK here's the final Beatles press release as found at http://purplelagoon.org/Beatles/:
---------
Spring is here and Leeds play Chelsea tomorrow and Ringo and John
and George and Paul are alive and well and full of hope.
The world is still spinning and so are we and so are you.
When the spinning stops — that'll be the time to worry, not before.
Until then, the Beatles are alive and well and the beat goes on, the beat goes on.
— Final Beatles press release, April 10, 1970

Not that this has anything to do with it (probably anyway), but 'The beat goes on' is also the name of the new single from Madonna and Pharrel, from her unnamed, unannounced, upcoming album.

Dwight Schrute
Aug 30, 2007, 07:59 AM
On another note: When younger people who don't really know or care about the Beatles hear about them, they usually think of maybe four songs: "Hard Day's Night", "She Loves You", "Sgt. Peppers" and "Yellow Submarine" Which I understand can sound kinda tiresome... The cure is the Abbey Road album, which can still go toe-to toe against anything produced in the last 38 years.

After playing Abbey Road to someone for a first time:
"That's a beatles song?!"
"Yea, that's a beatles song."

Abbey Road is great pop music - Revolver is more innovative and in many ways less Beatles-y.

Dwight Schrute
Aug 30, 2007, 08:03 AM
Spring is here and Leeds play Chelsea tomorrow and Ringo and John
and George and Paul are alive and well and full of hope.
The world is still spinning and so are we and so are you.
When the spinning stops — that'll be the time to worry, not before.
Until then, the Beatles are alive and well and the beat goes on, the beat goes on.
— Final Beatles press release, April 10, 1970


Leeds play Chelsea? Is this a reference to football (soccer)?

Luke714
Aug 30, 2007, 08:04 AM
I was reading Imogen Heap's blog last night and came across this:

"...then three days later went to New York and around for a good mate's wedding for a week. While I was out there of course, met up with people, did some "business" stuff including a rather sexy (sad as it sounds) ring tone for a certain company I rather like. If it comes off (probably sept) i'll let you know then...if not, i'll put it on the site anyway. It's an all vocal 50 second, getting more and more layered and complex mini song. I can't really describe it but I think it's rather groovy."

She uses a Macbook Pro extensively in her gigs, so i'm guessing she is the first to leak having made a special ringtone for Apple.

rockstarjoe
Aug 30, 2007, 08:15 AM
It sure is depressing to see people say things like "ringtones > beatles".

I already have all of their music ripped from CD, and I'm still excited to see them on the iTunes store. I'm can't wait to hear the new re-masters.

coolbreeze
Aug 30, 2007, 08:18 AM
So if you (like me) prefer an actual business-sounding ringer (i.e. normal tone) I'm out of luck? I'd rather not pay to download a song, then chop it up. Nothing like hearing "Under my uhm-br-ella-a-a-a-eh-eh" ringing out while in a business setting.

I just want to be able to place simple sound snippits on my iPhone. Don't care about blaring music ringers.

Parky
Aug 30, 2007, 08:44 AM
I say ********. Apple has Beatles album covers on the invitation for the event.

I don't recognise any Beatles album covers on the invite.

I see MIKA and Keane.

Ian

Nepenthe
Aug 30, 2007, 08:53 AM
You mean they will have the life and dynamic range ripped out of them so they will sound peppy on cheap apple earbuds and low quality equipment?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war#Remasters

Not really disagreeing with this, but keep in mind that sometimes remastering can improve the "quality" of albums - EVEN IF the final destination of the remasters is 128k AAC. Good examples are "older" albums like the Beatles, U2, Stones, Dylan, etc... that have been around for a while. Lots of these albums were recorded poorly in cheap studios or live (ie. before the bands became rich'n'famous) or with older noiser equipment.

Running the 60's, 70's tracks through a modern digital restoration and remastering setup can expose them to some great new EQ, noise reduction, and editing technology. (And, yes, they can get the dynamic range crushed out of them radio-style).

Cloudsurfer
Aug 30, 2007, 09:00 AM
Why is Apple making this big a deal out of ringtones? Every phone on Earth lets you select any sound file as ringtone, but iPhone, supposedly the most advanced one of them, doesn't let you do that.

netdoc66
Aug 30, 2007, 09:12 AM
Hold your horses, the next few months are just going to be amazing! We're looking at refreshing the entire iPod range, Leopard, Europe iPhone launch and more I'm sure.

The reason that I am Apple-unimpressed is because for the technology that I've brought from them this year is pretty much half finished. Steve Jobs made big noises to describe the Apple TV. I so wanted the Apple TV when I got it I realized that some parts weren't in the box (Video playlist, Media genre's etc). I say to myself, "that's ok, their gonna fix this stuff soon." I'm still waiting for these things. The iPhone, I brought the iPhone again parts missing. Ringtones, copy & paste and third part REAL apps and not those iphone formatted websites. I said that's ok Apple will update these missing pieces. Also, isn't it illegal for Apple to lock this phone up like this? I mean shouldn't I be able to get this thing unlocked if I want to travel overseas? I don't see anything innovative with these "I give you later" strategies. It insults my intelligence to have these things delivered as such. So, my faith in Apple to deliver "fully intact products" is 0%. The dumbing down of existing products; ie, glossy screens on iMacs to prevent them from being used for design. The exclusion of certain iMovie functionality to influence purchase of Final Cut Express. These things are fundamentally bad business practices. I used to like the Apple swagger but now that Apple is pimpin' me my mindset is to ":apple: think differently then Apple does."

To summarized: Apple TV: crippled. iPhone: OK but not the NEXT EVOLUTION of phone and definately not 5 years ahead of anything. iMac: glossy screen cripples it to be a movie watching machine. Leopard: huh? hope they blow my socks off with Leopard. I'm sure it will come with missing parts.

netdoc66
Aug 30, 2007, 09:17 AM
PS: I was going to buy a new iMac but with a glossy screen as the only option for display. not gonna happen.

jouster
Aug 30, 2007, 09:33 AM
....and "Yellow Submarine" Which I understand can sound kinda tiresome...

My opinion too. I love the Beatles, with the exception of "Yellow Submarine," which is an awful, silly, childish dirge. Kinda can't be bothered with the four hour outtro to "Hey Jude" either.....

Leeds play Chelsea? Is this a reference to football (soccer)?

Yes. Sadly for Leeds fans these days, they won't be playing Chelsea any time soon.....

skellener
Aug 30, 2007, 09:38 AM
I don't care about any band that made music before 1982 and I also disregard any influence they had on the music industry and music as a whole before I was born.

Basically music before 1982 does not exist in my mind.

Dugg down for stupidity.

ibwb
Aug 30, 2007, 09:40 AM
I'm waiting for the Apple fan boi justifying Apple charging to put ringtones that the customer may have already paid for, spending more money for the opportunity to put on their iPhone.

It should be a fun time...

Sigh... this is such a clueless statement, I don't know where to begin.

OK, as much as people go on about how Apple (through the iPod and the iTMS) has taken on the music industry, they are still a minor player with little power overall. Apple's success with the iTMS has been based on a delicate balance between convincing the rest of the industry that the store is in their best interest on one hand, while on the other hand taking various anti-industry strategic steps ("Rip, Mix, Burn", podcasting, maintaining a sensible price model, etc).

As such, various aspects of the iTMS are concessions to the music industry that were necessary for the store to exist at all. Generally these compromises have been mirrored in the music stores that have followed (at least, in those stores that sell music from major labels).

If you did even the slightest shred of research into Apple's position before coming on here and calling people names, you'd be aware that one of those compromises is a clause in the iTMS ToS (which every iTMS user must agree to) stating that none of your iTMS purchased songs can legally be used as ringtones. This clause has been around for years, well before the iPhone was a blip on Apple's radar, and it was required by the labels simply because selling ringtones was (and is) a huge profit center for them.

So for Apple to allow ringtones to be created from iTMS songs, they need to renegotiate contracts with the labels, and the labels will certainly want some kind of compensation. In my opinion, it's flat-out obvious that this is the reason why custom ringtones are so late; the negotiations weren't completed in time for the iPhone release.

Of course it would be ridiculous for Apple to release a ringtone creator that wouldn't work with songs purchased from their own music store, as that would really be shooting themselves in the foot; that's why you won't be able to make ringtones from non-iTMS files either until the situation with iTMS songs is resolved. Other cell phone manufacturers are simply not in this kind of position.

KingofAwesome
Aug 30, 2007, 09:42 AM
But if the coverflow is sorted alphabetically, the placeholder ("September 5") would be in the right place for "Beatles".

It would be in the right place for "Beck" or "Bedrock" too. :)

Why would anyone want to hear a 5.1 mix of an album that wasn't conceived of as a surround sound project? Novelty value at best; total desecration at worst.

Perhaps you don't understand how much control they have when remastering - they usually still can access each individual track, as it originally came in from the microphone. A good remastering project will start with the original tracks brought in from the original reels, and then the engineers and producers can work on it as if it was recorded earlier that day.

Whether or not an album was conceived as a 5.1 project, the individual instruments would still generally be recorded into single mics (except instruments like pianos, where the sound comes from various places). Even a drumset wouldn't have overheads set up in a surround style.

I've heard "Love" in surround, and I think that it came out quite well in surround. More than a novelty, for sure.

slffl
Aug 30, 2007, 09:46 AM
Wow, I'm amazed at how many people DON'T want custom ringtones.

coolbreeze
Aug 30, 2007, 10:06 AM
Wow, I'm amazed at how many people DON'T want custom ringtones.

I think people would welcome user-customizable ringers, they just don't want to be tied to the iTMS music-only ringers.

I really wish AAPL would just let us put our own ringtones on our phones. It's simple, really.

Unspeaked
Aug 30, 2007, 10:11 AM
Well, if it can discriminate between songs, then this sounds like a shot across Universal's bow. A little bit of retribution for U not playing nice with contracts and DRM-free music?

Actually, I would imagine this is Universal's choice and not Apple's...


A lot of people including myself care about the Beatles. They are the reason we have any good music today.

I love The Beatles as much as the next guy, but this is a pretty silly statement.


Id add that all of the above except the Beastie Boys and maybe Sonic Youth, to me anyway, are very British/British inspired sounds.

Uh, the Flaming Lips are British inspired? That's news to me...


But people like me (and probably you), born in later generations, couldn't care two cents about the Beatles.

You care enough to make that post.

And to put together some pretty speculative conclusions...


I think The Beatles on iTunes is as much symbolic as it is commercial.

This is *SO* right on, and could be used in response to a third of the posts in this thread.

The reason this is a big deal isn't because people are clamoring for Beatles downloads on iTunes, it's because it's a big deal in and of itself.

If you read music industry trades, you'll see this has been talked about for ages. Heck, even the general music media has been waiting for this forever, and don't get me started on the Apple/tech community.

This is one of those stories that would cross-over from MacRumors into those cute little 1 minute and 30 second segements they stick into the end of the nightly news... those are always a big deal.


I somewhat disagree with this. Sure, you can have timeless music and albums that transcend the generations. But periods or eras of music definitely have a 'date' to them, and for some people certain music sounds dated. In the same way a lot of people cant get into a Dickens or Shakespeare novel because the writing dynamics changed, yet the story remained the same.

Yeah, bands like Strawberry Alarm Clock - even if they are fun to listen to - are certainly carved into their own era and easily dated.


Abbey Road is great pop music - Revolver is more innovative and in many ways less Beatles-y.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Much less dated sounding; Octopus's Garden alone ruins Abbey Road for me...

bigdz68
Aug 30, 2007, 10:11 AM
I think people would welcome user-customizable ringers, they just don't want to be tied to the iTMS music-only ringers.

I really wish AAPL would just let us put our own ringtones on our phones. It's simple, really.

I agree!
But of course you can put any ringtone you want on your phone in under 5 minutes with Audio Hijack Pro and some 3rd party software! Even if you have a PPC/Intel/Windows machine!

nemaslov
Aug 30, 2007, 10:28 AM
Except it isn't quite true. There's plenty of singles cuts (A and B-sides) on the Beatles official UK album releases, particularly the earlier ones. However the tracks always appeared on singles first, except for the 'Something/Come Together' double A-side which appeared around a month after the release of 'Abbey Road'.

Yes early on only with first few albums, but soon Singles were a totally separate release. They were not added to albums after the fact like in the States. Sgt. Pepper was the first album where the UK and US versions were the same. That's why when the CDs came out in the 80s, they added two CDS full of the singles and EPs that were never on albums:


Past Masters Volume One:

When the Beatles albums were first released on compact disc, this collection (and a second collection entitled Past Masters, Volume Two) were put together so that the Beatles' entire catalogue of released work would be available on CD. None of these songs (in the versions included on this album) are found on any of the Beatles' original non-compilation albums released in the UK up to 1970.

Past Masters, Volume Two

is a compilation album by The Beatles released in 1988. It contains tracks from several Beatles singles (including some B-sides) and one album track (the "Wildlife" version of "Across the Universe") that were originally released between 1965 and 1970.
When the Beatles' albums were first released on compact disc, this collection (along with a second collection entitled Past Masters, Volume One) was put together so that the Beatles' entire catalogue of released work would be available on CD. One American LP, Magical Mystery Tour, was released on CD which include the Beatles' 1967 singles explaining why no 1967 recordings are included here. None of these songs (in the versions included on this album) are found on any of the Beatles' original non-compilation albums released in the UK up to 1970, although several songs feature on the U.S. compilation album Hey Jude.

milo
Aug 30, 2007, 10:34 AM
I don't get why anyone would pay for a ringtone. Ever.

All I care about is being able to put any audio file on as a ringtone, I'd be more interested in making my own than putting a song on.

I just don't get why someone would "buy" a song again just so they can hear it when their phone rings.

Derwood
Aug 30, 2007, 10:35 AM
Perhaps you don't understand how much control they have when remastering

I understand the process all too well (I worked as an audio engineer in various studios around the UK for nearly ten years), and what disappoints me with remixing records in 5.1 is that it is a lot, and in many case a LOT of work that, from what I have heard, rarely yields enough to make it worthwhile. For live recordings? Yes, totally understand that. Totally. For studio albums, and perhaps its a very personal thing, but that I just don't understand. Its certainly not uncommon for the artist to not even involve themselves with the 5.1 mixing and to elect to simply approve the final masters.

And why should they? We're talking about creative people who are being asked to revisit things they did 30 odd years ago. There are very few creatives I know who would relish the idea of trawling over past works. Onwards and upwards is the attitude.

Record labels will, and historically have, tried every trick in the book to get the consumer to buy, over and over again, music that you already own and remastering / 5.1 / multi-format single release / new formats / bonus-tracks / previously unreleased tracks are all devices that make this happen. I can understand why an artist wouldn't necessarily fall over themselves to be involved with a retrospective cash-cow project when they could be working on new things.

I still haven't heard a 5.1 mix of a record originally released in stereo / mono that has made me think: "Yeah, this is it. I get it." That said, I'm certainly open to suggestions. I would like to be convinced otherwise.

Love? The band or The George & Giles Martin Beatles thing? Haven't heard it I have to say. Will endeavour to check it out.

All the best,

Derwood

mozmac
Aug 30, 2007, 10:40 AM
If the ringtone rumor is true, then that pisses me right off. Why is Apple getting into the business of screwing you out of every penny. They've already managed to sell you a $600 phone with a $30/month extra bill. The technology is there to let uses use their own music as ringtones, they are just taking a page from Verizon's book and kicking their customers in the balls until they pay up. DON'T GET INVOLVED IN THAT, APPLE!

nemaslov
Aug 30, 2007, 10:48 AM
I understand the process all too well (I worked as an audio engineer in various studios around the UK for nearly ten years), and what disappoints me with remixing records in 5.1 is that it is a lot, and in many case a LOT of work that, from what I have heard, rarely yields enough to make it worthwhile. For live recordings? Yes, totally understand that. Totally. For studio albums, and perhaps its a very personal thing, but that I just don't understand. Its certainly not uncommon for the artist to not even involve themselves with the 5.1 mixing and to elect to simply approve the final masters.

And why should they? We're talking about creative people who are being asked to revisit things they did 30 odd years ago. There are very few creatives I know who would relish the idea of trawling over past works. Onwards and upwards is the attitude.

Record labels will, and historically have, tried every trick in the book to get the consumer to buy, over and over again, music that you already own and remastering / 5.1 / multi-format single release / new formats / bonus-tracks / previously unreleased tracks are all devices that make this happen. I can understand why an artist wouldn't necessarily fall over themselves to be involved with a retrospective cash-cow project when they could be working on new things.

I still haven't heard a 5.1 mix of a record originally released in stereo / mono that has made me think: "Yeah, this is it. I get it." That said, I'm certainly open to suggestions. I would like to be convinced otherwise.

Love? The band or The George & Giles Martin Beatles thing? Haven't heard it I have to say. Will endeavour to check it out.

All the best,

Derwood

The LOVE 5.1 is great, not that all of the mash-ups work. But it made me really want the later albums Rubber Soul and on in 5.1. I have the Doors 5.1 new reissues and they are AMAZING. But yes some things should remain Mono or Stereo. It should be an expansion and NOT a replacement.

And YES I agree that Super Furry Animals Rings Around the World album which was made for 5.1 is one of the most amazing albums I have ever heard in that format. You have not hearrd real 5.1 until you have listened to that album...LOUD!

Doctor Q
Aug 30, 2007, 11:19 AM
Octopus's Garden alone ruins Abbey Road for me...You shouldn't judge Beatles albums by the Ringo track. He often sang the "silly" song on an album: Act Naturally, Yellow Submarine, Octopus's Garden. You might count "With a Little Help from My Friends" among those too.

ClassicMac247
Aug 30, 2007, 11:26 AM
Apple is definately releasing something for the beatles, maybe they will be the first available ringtone as well:D

nemaslov
Aug 30, 2007, 11:30 AM
You shouldn't judge Beatles albums by the Ringo track. He often sang the "silly" song on an album: Act Naturally, Yellow Submarine, Octopus's Garden. You might count "With a Little Help from My Friends" among those too.

Yes but then he made Photograph and It don't come Easy which could arguably be two of the top ten best Solo Beat singles. I am talking great written, recorded and produced radio singles.

goosnarrggh
Aug 30, 2007, 11:30 AM
Also, isn't it illegal for Apple to lock this phone up like this? I mean shouldn't I be able to get this thing unlocked if I want to travel overseas?
No, it's not illegal at all (at least, in the USA). They aren't obliged to give you any helping hand in unlocking their phone.

OTOH, there appears to be a growing consensus that (for the duration of the oft-mentioned 3-year exemption) they don't have grounds for winning legal action against people who, for their own personal use, modify the phone on their own to operate on a different network.
______

Personally, I too found the new iMac design the most exciting thing to come out of Apple so far this year.

seashellz
Aug 30, 2007, 11:32 AM
people forget about the Beatles?
I dunno-KEXP plays them right alongside lily allen, yeah yeah yeah!, LCD Soundsystem etc.

And one VERY good reason, if you are so inclined, to buy them is that they are REMASTERED.
The previous CDs were from EQ'd tapes for 12" LPs

MacbookSwitcher
Aug 30, 2007, 11:41 AM
Speak for yourself! If you know anything about music you wouldn't make such a stupid and blanket statement, but that's YOUR choice, not everyone in your age group. Yeah, I didn't grow up at the time of Matisse, Monet, or Mozart, yet that doesn't make me appreciate them any less. Just because YOU don't like or care for the Beatles, doesn't make ALL people of your generation think like you. People from all age groups, races and backgrounds appreciate them for their talent.

"because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then."

You really think that's the only reason why people like the Beatles? Really? I can like the Beatles, Rimsky-Korsakov, Mozart, White Stripes and the Velvet Underground, but not because of "memories" but because umm . . . I don't know . . how about because it's incredible music! I suggest you go to the library or a record store and just listen to music, ALL kinds of music. There's more to music than just what's out there now.

People appreciate the Beatles because they appreciate music. I know it's a hard concept, but you might be surprised that's it true.

LOL. Comparing the Beatles to Mozart is quite a stretch! I studied and played music all through school and learned about the real greats. But let's not get carried away here: the Beatles are like the Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys of previous generations. They are pop music.

(FWIW: I believe most pop music produced by my generation is garbage)

robin.southbeac
Aug 30, 2007, 11:43 AM
The beat goes on is about Madonna. That is the name of the single that was leaked on the internet last week and she has helped before with the launch of the Motorola RKR. So I think her song will be the song use to promote all the new products and she might be part of a new commercial. I wouldnt be surprised if she end up singing in the presentation on September 5th.

In short, Madonna NOT the Beatles

ibwb
Aug 30, 2007, 11:48 AM
LOL. Comparing the Beatles to Mozart is quite a stretch! I studied and played music all through school and learned about the real greats. But let's not get carried away here: the Beatles are like the Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys of previous generations. They are pop music.

(FWIW: I believe most pop music produced by my generation is garbage)

Mozart's music, of course, was nothing more than the pop music of a generation further previous. And there was a lot of really bad music in Mozart's time, too.

Mozart in particular did not spend years laboring over his delicate creations. He churned out the hits the same way Paul and John did.

Unspeaked
Aug 30, 2007, 12:11 PM
LOL. Comparing the Beatles to Mozart is quite a stretch! I studied and played music all through school and learned about the real greats. But let's not get carried away here: the Beatles are like the Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys of previous generations. They are pop music.

Ha - what kind of garbage do you think Mozart would be churning out if he were alive today?

He's probably be making ringtones and the scores to Dreamworks animated films...

The Beatles were not bubblegum pop, at least not in their later years, and just as Britney Spears is far from the pinnacle of musical creativity today, some of the music being produced in the late 60s was as beautifully composed as any classical piece.

netdoc66
Aug 30, 2007, 12:20 PM
All of this Beattles crap probably has something to do with their settlement with Apple Corp. Wonder what the percentage points will be on Beattles transactions in the Apple Store?

saisrujan
Aug 30, 2007, 01:11 PM
No they don't. None of the covers on the invitation are from Beatles albums.

http://cover6.cduniverse.com/CDUCoverArt/Music/Large/7317676.jpg

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/08/appleinvite.jpg

Are they similar? Or are they not? I dunno.

morespce54
Aug 30, 2007, 01:19 PM
I say ********. Apple has Beatles album covers on the invitation for the event.

em, not so sure. the one I saw (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/28/apple-event-september-5th-2007/) had The Beat Goes On and Mika and Beastie Boys' album covers (both covers look a lot like Beatles' album covers 'though).

as a side note, Ringo Starr solo's are now available on iTunes... Is there only one missing now?

EDIT: see what I mean ^

psychofreak
Aug 30, 2007, 01:21 PM
as a side note, Ringo Starr solo's are now available on iTunes... Is there only one missing now?
Yep, the 6 year dead George Harrison...

CWallace
Aug 30, 2007, 01:43 PM
I've had custom ringtones on my iPhone since the day I bought it thanks to sending $10 to Gx5 (it's now $15) for their "iPhoneRingToneMaker" program.

It only runs under Windows, but the ringtones I sent over stayed when I synched my iPhone to my new iMac (the iPhone convinced me to switch full-time to Mac). I have not tried to use it again via Parallels, but perhaps I should to see what happens (it seems to use the iTunes plug-in to connect to the iPhone, but does not need iTunes to be open and active to work).

http://software.palminfocenter.com/product.asp?id=12970

sotied
Aug 30, 2007, 02:06 PM
It's probably been covered, but Mobile17.com lets you send ringtones to nearly any phone. I edit my songs in iTunes and then send the clip to my phone as a picture message. Why couldn't you do the same with the iPhone and not pay the .99.

The Mobile17 service is free.

Jeff
http://www.bowlofcheese.com

FreeState
Aug 30, 2007, 02:45 PM
It's probably been covered, but Mobile17.com lets you send ringtones to nearly any phone. I edit my songs in iTunes and then send the clip to my phone as a picture message. Why couldn't you do the same with the iPhone and not pay the .99.

The Mobile17 service is free.

Jeff
http://www.bowlofcheese.com


iPhone does not support picture mail for one...

milo
Aug 30, 2007, 03:20 PM
LOL. Comparing the Beatles to Mozart is quite a stretch! I studied and played music all through school and learned about the real greats. But let's not get carried away here: the Beatles are like the Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys of previous generations. They are pop music.

Looks like you didn't study very hard. Back in Mozart's time, his stuff was pop music.

The beatles only compare with Britney in that they both have had music that was played on the radio and sold well. That's it.

While I think it's a stretch to compare music created hundreds of years apart, I'd personally put the beatles closer to Mozart than Britney. They were incredibly artistic, influential, and innovative, and even a decades later, they are widely held in incredibly high regard.

izzle22
Aug 30, 2007, 03:34 PM
If the ringtone rumor is true, then that pisses me right off. Why is Apple getting into the business of screwing you out of every penny. They've already managed to sell you a $600 phone with a $30/month extra bill. The technology is there to let uses use their own music as ringtones, they are just taking a page from Verizon's book and kicking their customers in the balls until they pay up. DON'T GET INVOLVED IN THAT, APPLE!


Yeah and I spent over $200,000 on a new house plus over $400 a month in utilities, and still had to buy garage door openers, trash cans, blinds, a fridge, and a lawn mower. Get over it it's life and how things work. Just because you paid $600 for a phone doesn't mean Apple has to give you everything for free now.

nemaslov
Aug 30, 2007, 03:36 PM
Looks like you didn't study very hard. Back in Mozart's time, his stuff was pop music.

The beatles only compare with Britney in that they both have had music that was played on the radio and sold well. That's it.

While I think it's a stretch to compare music created hundreds of years apart, I'd personally put the beatles closer to Mozart than Britney. They were incredibly artistic, influential, and innovative, and even a decades later, they are widely held in incredibly high regard.

One could say that timing is everything too, but so much that is now common in record making, the Beatles' helped create. And even though they overdubbed and added effects, they did not have digital equipment to make the sound bette to do it easier. They created so much and were the first band to ever release an album without their name on the cover...Rubber Soul. Nobody else could have done that at the time. It is common now.

Doctor Q
Aug 30, 2007, 03:36 PM
I don't really care if they add the Beatles' catalog to the iTunes Store. The entire catalogs of Stuart Sutcliffe and Pete Best (http://beatlesnumber9.com/stupete.html) in their Beatles days are what I'm really anxious for!

(I'm kidding, but as it turns out there is one Pete Best album actually there!)

nemaslov
Aug 30, 2007, 03:37 PM
Yeah and I spent over $200,000 on a new house plus over $400 a month in utilities, and still had to buy garage door openers, trash cans, blinds, a fridge, and a lawn mower. Get over it it's life and how things work. Just because you paid $600 for a phone doesn't mean Apple has to give you everything for free now.

True True. You buy an iPod and you have to pay to fill it up!

NewSc2
Aug 30, 2007, 04:20 PM
LOL. Comparing the Beatles to Mozart is quite a stretch! I studied and played music all through school and learned about the real greats. But let's not get carried away here: the Beatles are like the Britney Spears and Backstreet Boys of previous generations. They are pop music.

(FWIW: I believe most pop music produced by my generation is garbage)

God you stuffy music snobs make us all look bad. I'd compare Beatles to Mozart anyday. Mozart's music is bastardly simple... I've played it at competitions, at concerts, and I've always thought so. It's good, it's catchy, it's like the Beatles.

For that matter, I'd compare Pink Floyd to Chopin and Radiohead to Beethoven anyday. Kraftwerk = Bach. Some of the newer electronic music (not Aphex Twin or Squarepusher, but the more pop ones like Underworld and Plastikman) is superb. You're not looking hard enough at "pop" music if you can make a blanket statement like that.

EDIT: And as for studying music throughout all school -- I have too. Been playing piano since 4, been writing music, production, and DJing (as a hobby) for the past 7 years.

nemaslov
Aug 30, 2007, 04:49 PM
God you stuffy music snobs make us all look bad. I'd compare Beatles to Mozart anyday. Mozart's music is bastardly simple... I've played it at competitions, at concerts, and I've always thought so. It's good, it's catchy, it's like the Beatles.

For that matter, I'd compare Pink Floyd to Chopin and Radiohead to Beethoven anyday. Kraftwerk = Bach. Some of the newer electronic music (not Aphex Twin or Squarepusher, but the more pop ones like Underworld and Plastikman) is superb. You're not looking hard enough at "pop" music if you can make a blanket statement like that.

EDIT: And as for studying music throughout all school -- I have too. Been playing piano since 4, been writing music, production, and DJing (as a hobby) for the past 7 years.


And the Sex Pistols to Philip Glass? Yoko Ono to John Cage (especially their silent compositions)

gotohamish
Aug 30, 2007, 04:58 PM
Agreed.

However, to answer your question directly, people who were alive in the 1960's care about them, because it reminds them of those times and brings back memories of what they used to listen to back then.

But people like me (and probably you), born in later generations, couldn't care two cents about the Beatles.

That's one opinion. Another is that people who liked them in the 1960s might still like them today, as with people who heard them in the 1970s, 80s, 90s, noughties, and, well, today for the first time. Because they're that good, and that popular.

RossoA
Aug 30, 2007, 05:07 PM
I still am banking on the Beatles as well...not that I need them either...but I do WANT RINGTONES! And HD movies on Apple TV...and have the iPhone act as an Apple TV remote...and a moble iTunes store...hopefully at least one will be true.

I think a mobile iTunes store is a real possibility in the months to come, after the iPhone wave has ended, why wouldn't Apple want to sell music direct download to your iPhone on the move?

Oh and come on, using the last 4 words spoken in the last ever Beatles conference...That's not just a funny play on words. They are coming!

golfstud
Aug 30, 2007, 07:14 PM
as a student of the Beatles and of Apple Computer...

If the re-masters are DONE...then they will go on ITUNES...I don't think they are done. BUT they might be before XMAS.

The Beatles ALWAYS had a new album right before XMAS...usually early NOVEMBER, Capitol certainly followed this trend after the breakup. XMAS moves product.

Steve Jobs LOVES the BEATLES. Getting the LAW suit out of the way is a HUGE thing to him. Paul and Ringo will be on stage with him when the songs come to ITUNES if he can have it his way. Paul and Ringo being on Larry King make me think they might appear for Apple, especially for $$$.

What Gils and George did with LOVE was simply AMAZING even not in 5.1. Abbey Road re-mastered will be a highlight.

and finally to this poor soul who said this:(I believe it was Chundle, and I hope you were being sarcastic..)
Exactly. I don't care about any band that made music before 1982 and I also disregard any influence they had on the music industry and music as a whole before I was born.

Basically music before 1982 does not exist in my mind.

Well, this is just sad for you. The record companies(and corporate America) have convinced Americans and the world that if it is NOT new then it must not be good.
BORN in '64, graduated in '82 and much richer for listening to:
Crosby--as in "Brother Can you Spare a Dime"
Goodwin--as in Sing, Sing, Sing..live..with apologies to Louis Prima
SINATRA--if you've ever been dumped, or if you've ever got laid:)
MOZART-duh
THE CLASH in 1979!!! This is RADIO CLASH...LONDON CALLING.
OH, CHUCK "the FATHER" BERRY.

OK, this could go on all night, but the B-SIDE(remember those) of ABBEY ROAD is timeless as anything...it makes you wonder when your 15, makes you cry when you are 30, makes you smile when you are 45...carry the weight.

99% of the pop music that is release each year is CRAP, it is the 1% that stands the test of time. RANT over.

comingaround
Aug 30, 2007, 09:43 PM
Is there anything the music industry can do legally against Apple to prevent us from making customized ringtones using existing songs?

They're our songs for one, even if we only utilize 30 or less seconds of them. Some phones let you record your own voice or any other sounds you'd like to hear when receiving a call or message using the phone's mic which is the same end result as customizing your own in the way people would like to have for their iphones.

I don't see why Apple shouldn't take this step. They can always argue it's a computer more than a phone.

I prefer vibrate anyways but this would change that. I'd have to have an iphone as well though...

Mgkwho
Aug 30, 2007, 10:12 PM
It seems like the RIAA can do anything these days, so who knows? I completely agree with you, comingaround.

-=|Mgkwho

zap2
Aug 30, 2007, 10:22 PM
Is there anything the music industry can do legally against Apple to prevent us from making customized ringtones using existing songs?

They're our songs for one, even if we only utilize 30 or less seconds of them. Some phones let you record your own voice or any other sounds you'd like to hear when receiving a call or message using the phone's mic which is the same end result as customizing your own in the way people would like to have for their iphones.

I don't see why Apple shouldn't take this step. They can always argue it's a computer more than a phone.

I prefer vibrate anyways but this would change that. I'd have to have an iphone as well though...


Most likely if they wanted too, but there are phones that let you use Mp3s are ringtones, this isn't much differemt

mickhyperion
Aug 30, 2007, 10:59 PM
These Beatles clues can only mean one thing... Paul is dead.

Eduardo1971
Aug 30, 2007, 11:31 PM
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-apple31aug31,0,1618784.story?coll=la-home-center
:)

golfstud
Aug 31, 2007, 12:11 AM
These Beatles clues can only mean one thing... Paul is dead.

Paul the DEAD WALRUS...LOL

djejrejk
Aug 31, 2007, 01:31 AM
Agree completely. If the iPhone was the only new Apple product this year it would still be revolutionary but when you add all the above and Leopard I'd say this is THE biggest apple year since Apple II launch? Mac launch? NEXT acquisition? something like that

What a great source,.. they have a beatles section and a power rangers section.. now i believe it.

These Beatles clues can only mean one thing... Paul is dead.

Don't tease me..

Project
Aug 31, 2007, 03:12 AM
I think a mobile iTunes store is a real possibility in the months to come, after the iPhone wave has ended, why wouldn't Apple want to sell music direct download to your iPhone on the move?

Oh and come on, using the last 4 words spoken in the last ever Beatles conference...That's not just a funny play on words. They are coming!

I think a more telling sign was the recent addition of 'transfer purchases to this computer'. Thats basically the back end work for syncing back tracks bought on an iPod/iPhone to iTunes I think.

Unspeaked
Aug 31, 2007, 09:27 AM
For that matter, I'd compare Pink Floyd to Chopin and Radiohead to Beethoven anyday. Kraftwerk = Bach.

I'd call Chopin the Sex Pistols myself...

dalvin200
Aug 31, 2007, 10:34 AM
I'm not sure about the "No Beatles" announcement, as while I was just coming home from work listening to Radio 1, it was mentioned that Sir Paul was going to be on Radio 1 next wednesday 5th Sept with an announcement..

This is all very interesting now.. lots of announcements on the 5th - all related? who knows?

hmm....

comments please

zac4mac
Sep 1, 2007, 05:41 AM
Maybe Sir Paul will announce that he is the new VP of Music for Apple.

Le Master
Sep 2, 2007, 09:39 PM
Paul the DEAD WALRUS...LOL

Ha...maybe Paul is planning on finally revealing his true identity...Billy Shears. The evidence is overwhelming, he just needs to tell the world the whole story before he has a grabber or some unfortunate accident...like the man he is living his life as. ;)