Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Modeling Apple Music Exclusive Content After ‘MTV in its 80s and 90s Heyday’
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MTV in the 80s and early 90s was awesome. I was there in the very beginning when the channel showed up with videos. In fact, over the years, they've had VJs ( video jockeys ) there on all day and night. I liked Martha Quinn who was quite cute to watch 
. It was like a 24 hour music station that played EVERYTHING with mostly the current hits in the rotation most of the time. They had live interviews with musicians or bands there and it was great stuff. We're talking old school here.
I remember how MTV would break up their segments with live hosts each day from pop music in the day to heavy metal hour late at night. Classic programming.
Today, MTV has become corporatized just like Apple but it turned to crap some time after the mid 1990s and then on, I think. I remember coming home from school ( elementary to high school ) over the years and turn on MTV to see what's playing. The VJs knew their stuff and it was like having a friend over in our room all day hanging out. They lived and breathed music. Especially one of the most iconic commercials of ' I want my MTV! ". I can still hear Billy Idol saying it to this day in my head. I'd rather have Joan Jett/Billy Idol in front of me than Drake. F U Eddy Cue.
Beats One? Are they kidding me? I'm sure it's a good station but they and Apple will NEVER. EVER. touch what MTV pulled off back in the old days. If Apple thinks it's trying to get the MTV vibe, I don't think it's going to work.
Best part of MTV? It was FREE! ( actually my parents had to pay for the cable tv fees monthly ). Music 24/7. Not this subscription based BS on Beats radio.
Why hasn't Apple come up with its own live tv channel of their music app? This would have been the modernized version of MTV streaming 24/7.
. It was like a 24 hour music station that played EVERYTHING with mostly the current hits in the rotation most of the time. They had live interviews with musicians or bands there and it was great stuff. We're talking old school here. I remember how MTV would break up their segments with live hosts each day from pop music in the day to heavy metal hour late at night. Classic programming.
Today, MTV has become corporatized just like Apple but it turned to crap some time after the mid 1990s and then on, I think. I remember coming home from school ( elementary to high school ) over the years and turn on MTV to see what's playing. The VJs knew their stuff and it was like having a friend over in our room all day hanging out. They lived and breathed music. Especially one of the most iconic commercials of ' I want my MTV! ". I can still hear Billy Idol saying it to this day in my head. I'd rather have Joan Jett/Billy Idol in front of me than Drake. F U Eddy Cue.
Beats One? Are they kidding me? I'm sure it's a good station but they and Apple will NEVER. EVER. touch what MTV pulled off back in the old days. If Apple thinks it's trying to get the MTV vibe, I don't think it's going to work.
Best part of MTV? It was FREE! ( actually my parents had to pay for the cable tv fees monthly ). Music 24/7. Not this subscription based BS on Beats radio.
Why hasn't Apple come up with its own live tv channel of their music app? This would have been the modernized version of MTV streaming 24/7.
Last edited:
I think iTunes Radio has to be subscribed. It's part of the other Beats channels. The Beats One is probably the only free pet of it but the rest aren't, if I'm not mistaken.
Well, offering exclusive content of music I don't like isn't going to win me over. Also its exclusive until it's not and it ends up in everybody's streaming service 6 months from now. I mean ultimately this is the kind of BS that makes people want to pirate content, making it exclusive, expensive, and acting like an entitled ******* just rubs consumers the wrong way and it only takes like 5 seconds to download the entire Taylor Swift back library over bittorrent these days and 10 minutes to realize you hate it all.
Apple can play this game, which is similar behavior to how Microsoft runs their Xbox division, but it won't make them "win" in the long run because this kind of BS is what consumers hate about multi-billion dollar companies wanting to make a few extra billion by offering really nothing of value in return.
Apple can play this game, which is similar behavior to how Microsoft runs their Xbox division, but it won't make them "win" in the long run because this kind of BS is what consumers hate about multi-billion dollar companies wanting to make a few extra billion by offering really nothing of value in return.
He's probably referring to the fact that tests have shown again and again that people generally can't tell the difference between a good MP3/AAC encoding and the lossless original if the test uses proper scientific methodology (i.e. double-blind, level-matching etc.). Which of course doesn't mean that it has no subjective value if you believe in lossless audio (just like some audiophiles probably perceive Shakti stones as a great value because they give them warm feelings
).
He's probably referring to the fact that tests have shown again and again that people generally can't tell the difference between a good MP3/AAC encoding and the lossless original if the test uses proper scientific methodology (i.e. double-blind, level-matching etc.). Which of course doesn't mean that it has no subjective value if you believe in lossless audio (just like some audiophiles probably perceive Shakti stones as a great value because they give them warm feelings
I think you are right.
Generally people cannot tell the difference , this mainly comes down to the hardware/gear.
Setup a proper DAC and reference headphones and you realise how awful your music collection actually is. With poor quality gear, this is not exposed.
Headphone such as senheiser HD800 or AKG 812 are not just a markerting joke to get money out of suckers .
you need to trust your ears, and even doing blind tests as you listen from CD quality MP3 to DSD .... I'm yet to find someone who cannot tell the difference .
Heck, 4K video , 1080p video all looks the same when running on 480p tv.
Absolutely, they could be the "utility company" of music like Google's approach, or to a lesser degree Spotify's approach. But they're getting way into the weeds here, trying to recreate the feeling of a great record store, an eclectic radio station, and apparently now even doing content creation.
You know they've got older music too, right? They've even got a radio show hosted by Elton John on Beats 1. Apple's clearly trying to appeal to a younger audience (as they consume the most music), but they've got a catalog big enough that there's surely something for everyone.
I used to feel this way, although I didn't sound so bitter about it. Is all music that you don't own really just "noise", I mean come on now. I used to think that I had no interest in discovery either, but Apple Music's "For You" section is pretty great, and between that, and the occasional Beats 1 listening, I actually have found quite a bit of new music that I didn't know about months ago.
That is a common argument from audiophiles ("if you can't hear it, your equipment must be junk") and makers of high-end gear or esoteric voodoo products, but no, I don't think that is the point. The artifacts introduced by good perceptual compression are for the most part simply inaudible given enough bandwidth, no matter how good your equipment is. That is, after all, the purpose of it, and the inventors of this technology are very smart people who knew exactly what they were doing. There are some rare exceptions where artifacts are clearly audible, but most consumers don't even know what to listen for.
Every major study performed by real experts that I have seen comes to a different conclusion. Most people who claim to hear the difference have never done a proper double-blind test (or even a simple blind ABX test on their own).
There's something about owning your own music that just feels good. I mean I get why people enjoy the convenience of these streaming services, but having your own music, to listen when you want to, without a paywall is very nice.
Having the CDs is best but even buying digitally still feels great imo. (Thanks to cloud services)
Comment of the year!
Spotify had nothing original, Rhapsody has been doing that way before them.
Apple is not buying their way, they are winning their way, while Spotify if stealing their way out of artists paying miserably for ad-supported users as well as premium users.
This has been discussed and demonstrated over and over again, I'm not wasting my time with people who aren't bothering to google it.
aka: I don't know. Google it to to see there is an active debate over this!
[doublepost=1467222358][/doublepost]
Feel free To quote these experts . I've see some of these reviews a/b tests done using speakers, what a joke.
ive heard the differenc on a HD800 setup, I was amazed how bad some of my collection was.
So let me ask you, have you heard high end gear or are you just going off what others say? I don't trust oth
ers opinions , I need to try it myself.
Edit : I can see this becoming a topic that has been discussed many times over .
From 44.1 kHz MP3 to 5.6 dsf. you will hear a dramatic difference . From where one stops hearing the difference depends on thier hearing and the quality of the equipment. All I can say is try it before you judge. Plenty of Apple experts here in MR tell me the iPhone can take pics equivalent to a high end DSLR
Last edited:
Aka, I do know, and I do know how much "audiophiles" tend to stick their head in the sand and ignore arguments and I'm not willing to waste my time.
Im no audiophile , I jsut find it intriguing someone would not trust thier own ears, and pretends to hide behind science while not providing scientific evidence
. Though hey, you believe everything apple says so that makes sense. Just like our GPS discussion....
You already start with BS arguments like this.
I'm doing myself a favor.
Go find another one to piss off.
I asked for your scientific evidence to prove audio quality , as you stated you knew thier was no differnce, and a man of science....
It repeats itself.
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...nalysis-and-more.1977653/page-5#post-23018634
Pretending to be smart and scientific , while having no evidence or understaffed , as per the INS discussion, absurd to suggest an iPhone can be used an an INS. Please google what an INS is, to understand.
Feel free to have an opinion, but don't patronise people as being not intelligent enough to deserve your replies. Cause it's not true. Don't behind science when you don't understand it.....
Good day to you also. I believe we are done
Everybody "hears the difference" if they know what they are listening to. Assuming you prepared the source material correctly and did precise level-matching, it was very likely just your brain tricking you to hear what you were expecting. People need to realize that the human hearing system is not a microphone; what you hear is heavily preprocessed by the brain.
My gear is pretty good. Scientific listening tests are usually done on studio-grade equipment.
Yes, but unless you just want to confirm your existing beliefs, you need to eliminate expectation bias.
Indeed. Not the right thread for this.
At least we now know what "innovating" means: Doing in 2016 what MTV did in the 80s and 90s.
Must be hard making completely false statements and believing them.