Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yes, 80s and 90s ....Beavis and Butthead.
Mike Judge can probably be swayed into some exclusive work.

Say, Jackson is Beavis, would Eddie Cue (less )be Butthead?
 
  • Like
Reactions: radiology
MTV in the 80s and 90s? No wonder I have zero interest in Apple music and never have any idea who these supposed talented "artists" are. I never cared about or paid attention to MTV in the 80s or the 90s (or the 00s or the 10s) because I don't need a TV or radio station to tell me what music to listen to, I already know and own the music I like and have no need to "discover" aggravating obnoxious noise that is called "music" for some reason.

So... is it cool if I chill on your lawn, or would you like me to... you know... get off?
 
I hate to see music going the way of exclusives, because no one service will get them all. No one wants to join Apple Music, Spotify, Tidal, Google Play, and Amazon Prime just to listen to all their favorite artists. I'll stick with buying CDs before I subscribe to 5 music services.

I would have to agree.
 
Why can't the iTunes store just be like it was back in the early days. I see some newly released stuff and such on the landing page, I search for my music and buy it. If I want radio there are HUNDEREDS of internet radio stations under "Radio" (much better than listening to Beats1 or this curated crap they have now). That's all we needed. I have zero interest in paying a monthly fee for music I don't own. Ping seemed more put together than this new Music app!
 
MTV in the 80s and 90s? No wonder I have zero interest in Apple music and never have any idea who these supposed talented "artists" are. I never cared about or paid attention to MTV in the 80s or the 90s (or the 00s or the 10s) because I don't need a TV or radio station to tell me what music to listen to, I already know and own the music I like and have no need to "discover" aggravating obnoxious noise that is called "music" for some reason.
Garump!

There are plenty of other places to discover music. However, many are complacent with the media presented to them and what it says. While both Cronkite and MTV are all but a memory for most of the media market. This disruption has a whole new field of dust settling on ones mobile device.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thefourthpope
MTV in the 80s and 90s? No wonder I have zero interest in Apple music and never have any idea who these supposed talented "artists" are. I never cared about or paid attention to MTV in the 80s or the 90s (or the 00s or the 10s) because I don't need a TV or radio station to tell me what music to listen to, I already know and own the music I like and have no need to "discover" aggravating obnoxious noise that is called "music" for some reason.

I hope you mean that you don't appreciate the top-40 of recent years, because surely you can't be arguing that no good music has been made since 1979.
[doublepost=1467168920][/doublepost]
Why can't the iTunes store just be like it was back in the early days. I see some newly released stuff and such on the landing page, I search for my music and buy it. If I want radio there are HUNDEREDS of internet radio stations under "Radio" (much better than listening to Beats1 or this curated crap they have now). That's all we needed. I have zero interest in paying a monthly fee for music I don't own. Ping seemed more put together than this new Music app!
I would love the actual radio stations to come back. Sure, there's a separate app for that, but why not have it in the radio part of the primary music app (also looking at you, iTunes)
[doublepost=1467168973][/doublepost]
If we can get some "MTV Unplugged" level content, that would be amazing.
They already have the iTunes festival, so this should easily be within reach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cineplex
I hope you mean that you don't appreciate the top-40 of recent years, because surely you can't be arguing that no good music has been made since 1979.
There are those that say all music is crap after the Audio CD was introduced.

I still remember seeing demo's of the earliest CD players in the formative 80s with record producers complaining the sound was "too clean" and "too perfect" or -- and I love this one -- "Each play was identical. Vinyl records wearing as it plays gives it individual personality of the media owner."

Believe it or not, there were complaints like this at the start. I'm sure these critics also never found their part of the trickle down cash flow that boomed the American economy in the 80's.
 
There are those that say all music is crap after the Audio CD was introduced.

I still remember seeing demo's of the earliest CD players in the formative 80s with record producers complaining the sound was "too clean" and "too perfect" or -- and I love this one -- "Each play was identical. Vinyl records wearing as it plays gives it individual personality of the media owner."

Believe it or not, there were complaints like this at the start. I'm sure these critics also never found their part of the trickle down cash flow that boomed the American economy in the 80's.

Some bands play music live.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
I'm pretty sure Apple is not saying they want to it to exactly be like MTv in 80s and 90s, I think they want Apple Music to be the place to where artist go to release and promote their new material. They want the service to be the 'it' place. Don't worry they're not trying to bring back Remote Comtrol and Beevis and Butthead.

Btw, 120 minutes on MTV was my go to place for music discovery back in the day - yes I'm old ;).
 
Some bands play music live.
Yup. For most bands, touring and their stage fee is their biggest income from their music.

Record sales tend to profit the distributor with the band getting a pittance in royalties. Some one hit wonders from decades ago are still cashing in on that one or two songs in cavalcade music tours.

They may have less than a half hour on stage, but a grand or so for each show during an entire touring season adds up well. Put that with a rotating tour schedule skipping around over the years, you have the life.
 
Nothing they or anyone else does will equal MTV during the 80's up to the mid 90's. There's too many options now that weren't around then. People use to all watch that channel... all of us. Now, you've got some kids listening to music on youtube, some watching games on twitch, some watching movies on netflix, some are watching HBO, some playing video games, some listening to spotify... there will never again be anything as fun as MTV back in the day because everyone is fractured so there's no feeling of unity.
 
Exclusives has always been around, this is nothing new. Good on Apple for collaborating with artists to create content.

Yes, but "exclusives" in the past didn't typically really exclude a segment of the music buying public from obtaining the content. If a deluxe version of your favorite artist's album was exclusively available at, say for example, Target you would just go to your nearest Target store even if it meant going out of your way to get it. It wasn't really a huge sacrifice. But making content exclusive to a particular music streaming service is screwing over the consumer. It's a well known fact that people only commit to one platform at a time and no one, not even die-hard music fans will fork over an extra ten or twenty bucks per month to use other streaming services just to have access to their favorite artists' music. It's not realistic in the least bit. Perhaps the artists and labels who insist on platform exclusives do this in the hopes of deliberately frustrating music fans and inciting them to go buy music instead of paying a pittance for having smorgasbord of music readily available to them, but what they don't realize is that people can retaliate by simply resorting to piracy again. The music industry has a knack for shooting itself in the foot. They never learn from their mistakes.
 
Nobody cares about lossless, total marketing gimmick.

But you're free to sign up for Tidal or other services.
I'm not going to lie Tidal has superior sound quality compared to Apple Music and it's not even close.
[doublepost=1467172099][/doublepost]
Yes, but "exclusives" in the past didn't typically really exclude a segment of the music buying public from obtaining the content. If a deluxe version of your favorite artist's album was exclusively available at, say for example, Target you would just go to your nearest Target store even if it meant going out of your way to get it. It wasn't really a huge sacrifice. But making content exclusive to a particular music streaming service is screwing over the consumer. It's a well known fact that people only commit to one platform at a time and no one, not even die-hard music fans will fork over an extra ten or twenty bucks per month to use other streaming services just to have access to their favorite artists' music. It's not realistic in the least bit. Perhaps the artists and labels who insist on platform exclusives do this in the hopes of deliberately frustrating music fans and inciting them to go buy music instead of paying a pittance for having smorgasbord of music readily available to them, but what they don't realize is that people can retaliate by simply resorting to piracy again. The music industry has a knack for shooting itself in the foot. They never learn from their mistakes.
This!!! They've worked so hard to keep people from pirating now they are forcing people to pirate music again...and people care eve less about music now than they did before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
So in general, everyone deserves what they've done before.
Australia is introducing bill to ban pirating sites like the pirate bay. But I doubt people with extreme tight budget as well as music hard core fan will cease finding free contents.
Back to the topic. Yeah. I didn't live that long and I selectively listen to certain type of music, mostly are from anime and games. But, for a single song I like, I can at most listen to it over 20 times in a row before switching to another one. Plus, if I listen to a song over 180 times, it is highly likely that I would not want to listen to that song quite a while again. Maybe, current fast food style music creation ruins the music itself entirely, yet a lot young teenagers (I am too old, although I am still at 25 :D) just blindly follow their favorite artists, giving me a feeling that their music could "cure " those teenagers. I cannot understand.
Talking about classical music, my personal guess is: people cannot generally fully understand the full extent of a single classical music piece so they listen to them over and over. Popular music often comes with lyrics and singers so the meaning of music is pretty straightforward. Or on the other hand, it ruins our imagination of that music, or it eliminates the possibility of interpreting that music to another completely different way.
Nevertheless, either streaming or buying, music itself needs to continuously evolve to meet everyone's need anyway.
 
I'm not going to lie Tidal has superior sound quality compared to Apple Music and it's not even close.

And dinosaurs never existed.
[doublepost=1467174409][/doublepost]
Which is probably the case everyone would encounter. Being one way or the other.

Right now, it is not. Spotify, Google, and Microsoft aren't producing original content. AFAIK.
 
And this is why I have been waiting for a refreshed Macbook Pro for over a year?

Apple, can you please get your priorities straight?

Truth.

It's funny... people say Apple is always stuck waiting on Intel to deliver new chips. Well... umm... a dozen other manufacturers have been using Intel's latest chips for over 6 months.

But hey... at least Apple Music will get some exclusive artists. That'll make up for it! :D
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Yes, but "exclusives" in the past didn't typically really exclude a segment of the music buying public from obtaining the content. If a deluxe version of your favorite artist's album was exclusively available at, say for example, Target you would just go to your nearest Target store even if it meant going out of your way to get it. It wasn't really a huge sacrifice. But making content exclusive to a particular music streaming service is screwing over the consumer. It's a well known fact that people only commit to one platform at a time and no one, not even die-hard music fans will fork over an extra ten or twenty bucks per month to use other streaming services just to have access to their favorite artists' music. It's not realistic in the least bit. Perhaps the artists and labels who insist on platform exclusives do this in the hopes of deliberately frustrating music fans and inciting them to go buy music instead of paying a pittance for having smorgasbord of music readily available to them, but what they don't realize is that people can retaliate by simply resorting to piracy again. The music industry has a knack for shooting itself in the foot. They never learn from their mistakes.

It is my understanding that even if it is exclusive to a streaming site. It is still also available in physical form. And such exclusivity is for a short period. You are saying people are going to suffer because they can't wait a week for a song? Seriously???

The problem is not exclusives. It's this generation of full of spoiled brats who think they are entitled to music at whatever price they deem it is worth. And most times they think that price should be $0. Well to that I say **** off! Those artist work hard at their craft. They can sell it which ever way they want. And I fully support that.

BTW when artist sign an exclusive with Apple etc. they are actually bypassing the "music industry" as you mentioned.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.