Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Music is dead. Never to return. Let's enjoy what came before the manufactured, autotuned dross that passes for it now. Thanks to :

Simon Cowell

Apple

The music "industry"


Enjoy YouTube stuff pre 1990 and wish you were born earlier before it all got gobbled uo....
 
You don't need it use itunes program at all.
The iTunes store, sure...which is better than all the alternatives by far...so not sure what your problem is unless you pirate evrything.

Also, streaming is useless. Pay $15 a month and you get nothing, even if you don't use. Unless you're buying albums every month(considering how horrible music is these days, can't be possible), I don see how streaming is even close to being better. Be like Netflix? Pay a monthly fee for b movies and year old tv shows? Wow, great. I have to cancel Netflix continually since most of their content is awful.

Basically the people complaining about iTunes are just people who want everything cheap an don't want to pay for anything because they are greedy and just want to suck companies dry for another dollar in their pocket.

The amount of things wrong with post is amazing. Get off your high horse.
 
But that's not the same as having iTunes go away. Although I do dislike parts of it (unrelated to this point), the buying experience is a lot better than I get from Amazon.

What do you still not like about the buying experience on Amazon that's different on iTunes?

The main thing I don't like about buying tracks on Amazon now is they're always wanting you to download their cloud-player app and use that to play your music. That has been a fairly recent development, and before it would always just launch the AmazonDownloader app to download and import the tracks into iTunes. Even when I tell the Amazon site that I want to by default use the app and just download it conveniently "forgets" this and makes me manually tell it to download tracks.

It's like Amazon really wants to change their store to an on-demand streaming service (like their video service) and stop people from getting actual files they can play when they aren't online.

You don't have to use iTunes Store for content. I use Amazon a lot on my computer to purchase digital music because often times I'm able to find it cheaper there. The Amazon Downloader tool then imports the music directly into my iTunes media folder on my desktop so I can then sync it to my iPhone when I plug it in. It's been like this for a long time.

Uh, yeah. I know. :rolleyes: You obviously didn't read my post. My point is the limitation on the iTunes Music Store that one has to use iTunes to access it is the issue. It means these iTunes-exclusive albums are only available to people who use iTunes (the program), even though the files can be played on a large number of devices and platforms Apple doesn't support with iTunes.
 
A good way to boost piracy rates.... :rolleyes:

Services like MOG and Spotify, and Pandora, are where the near-term future of music is.

Start doing exclusives and we go back to file sharing.

iTunes is a bit of a dinosaur and iRadio pretty much sucks, so Apple is flailing. Exclusives are a bad idea for everyone.

P.S. Amazon sucks even worse than iTunes.
 
From a record producer I make money off iTunes sales I make more than Apple makes I get 70%.
I make NO Money on Spotify they are stealing my music they get 99.9% I get 0.1% that is not fair. Spotify can go $uck themselves.
 
I know a lot of people use iTunes and like it a lot, but I really don't like the idea of exclusives like this, even if I do have an iPad now. I don't like the idea of one company having so much control over something like music.

You mean, like record companies?

----------

We should push iTunes to be more like Spotify/Netflix.

Yep. No exclusive content on Netflix.
 
Most bands realise that if they want to make money today in the industry then it comes from merchandising and putting on live shows. The recorded music is a promotional vehicle for the live events that allow them to make a living doing what they love.

This is an argument that is trotted out a lot by people who want music to be free, but it just isn't reality. Musicians have *always* been touring and selling merch at shows. People act like this is some amazing new way of making a living. The fact is, the small amount of money made from ticket sales (most venues get the majority of revenue) and merchandise (paltry) goes to pay for the tour itself -- traveling, even by car, is not cheap. It's usually break-even. If you're a bigger artist who is not expected to put on an elaborate show, you might make some money. But that money will probably go towards paying for the recording costs of the album.

The crux of this argument you support is that musicians should just tour 365 days a year, living as roaming troubadours, making enough to continue to slog through endless tours. The recorded music becomes essentially a free giveaway. But that is not "making a living", that's "barely scraping by". But people don't seem to care about the artists. They just want some kind of brutal, deregulated free market of music where music artists are commodities and not people with the ability to contribute amazing art to society. But that just underscores the general devaluation of art by younger generations, especially Americans. I also think that humans just don't have the capacity to see digital products as real products with a monetary value, and this is having profound changes upon society.

Moreover, and most importantly, your suggested way of musician life leaves no room to focus on making great music, great art. Do you really think any of the classic albums of the 60s and 70s could have been made today in the way you propose? Hendrix and Dylan and the Beatles and Brian Wilson constantly on the road? They wouldn't even have had the money to record in the studios they did.

You can't turn the subscription model tap off and expect everyone to go back to paying for all your music. Those days are long gone. You'll just go back to competing against piracy all over again. And if the music fans wants starts dropping off subscription services, those subscriptions get cancelled and replaced with... illegal downloads.

I think most musicians would choose piracy over Spotify. At least the honest and ethical people were still buying records. Now those people are just streaming. The problem is Spotify is like radio, and radio was a net-positive for bands in the past, but radio had limitations that made it more like a teaser and encouraged people to buy the music. You only heard a single or two, and often the whole song wouldn't be played. With Spotify you can basically stream the whole album, listen to what you want when you want. Why buy the cow when the milk is free? It's an unsustainable delivery mechanism, and while listeners of music might think it's awesome, it is definitely not awesome for musicians. And definitely not awesome for music.
 
Last edited:
Not completely .....

I used to play guitar in a local band (long time ago, but nonetheless...). I have some idea what it's like.

Sure, musicians have always been selling merchandise at shows and touring. There are others who rarely tour at all because they're really introverted people who prefer just making/recording their own music in a personal studio ... but that tends to be the exception. Most musicians have a need for that interaction between musician and fan, to motivate them to keep creating content. Without the feedback you get from a live concert, you tend to burn out.

It's not that touring is perceived as some "new, amazing way to make money". It's more the fact that listeners have seen the writing on the wall. It's no longer really feasible to make a great living for yourself as a musician just by selling recordings (whether on physical or digital download).

One issue I think the industry fails to really address is the overall change in how society perceives and interacts with popular music today.

You can blame streaming services like Spotify all you want for killing profits... but maybe it's worth asking why we barely see bands these days who develop enough of a following to fill stadiums when on tour? When I try to think of who is actually popular enough to reach the level of interest that happened *all the time* with bands when I was a teenager growing up? I struggle to list more than a dozen, tops! Nickelback did it for a little while, and then it seemed like there was a huge backlash against them in popular culture. They became the butt of jokes about rock bands, and quickly faded in popularity. Lady Gaga qualifies, but let's face it -- she's closely copy-catting what made Madonna so famous a couple decades earlier.

IMO, there's just a lot of music released these days that most people perceive as "so-so". They may like a song or two from one of the bands, until it's overplayed and they tire of it. But it's rare to find a band with any "staying power", who keep cranking out hits and who "speaks" to a really large cross-section of the population.

Against the current backdrop, it's not surprising people don't want to pay much to download (or stream) music. They long ago bought the older stuff they liked (if they are from that generation). Now, you just consider going to the occasional show where you probably won't pay a whole lot for a ticket, and you don't really care if you own the album or not.


This is an argument that is trotted out a lot by people who want music to be free, but it just isn't reality. Musicians have *always* been touring and selling merch at shows. People act like this is some amazing new way of making a living. The fact is, the small amount of money made from ticket sales (most venues get the majority of revenue) and merchandise (paltry) goes to pay for the tour itself -- traveling, even by car, is not cheap. It's usually break-even. If you're a bigger artist who is not expected to put on an elaborate show, you might make some money. But that money will probably go towards paying for the recording costs of the album.

The crux of this argument you support is that musicians should just tour 365 days a year, living as roaming troubadours, making enough to continue to slog through endless tours. The recorded music becomes essentially a free giveaway. But that is not "making a living", that's "barely scraping by". But people don't seem to care about the artists. They just want some kind of brutal, deregulated free market of music where music artists are commodities and not people with the ability to contribute amazing art to society. But that just underscores the general devaluation of art by younger generations, especially Americans. I also think that humans just don't have the capacity to see digital products as real products with a monetary value, and this is having profound changes upon society.

Moreover, and most importantly, your suggested way of musician life leaves no room to focus on making great music, great art. Do you really think any of the classic albums of the 60s and 70s could have been made today in the way you propose? Hendrix and Dylan and the Beatles and Brian Wilson constantly on the road? They wouldn't even have had the money to record in the studios they did.



I think most musicians would choose piracy over Spotify. At least the honest and ethical people were still buying records. Now those people are just streaming. The problem is Spotify is like radio, and radio was a net-positive for bands in the past, but radio had limitations that made it more like a teaser and encouraged people to buy the music. You only heard a single or two, and often the whole song wouldn't be played. With Spotify you can basically stream the whole album, listen to what you want when you want. Why buy the cow when the milk is free? It's an unsustainable delivery mechanism, and while listeners of music might think it's awesome, it is definitely not awesome for musicians. And definitely not awesome for music.
 
Music is dead. Never to return. Let's enjoy what came before the manufactured, autotuned dross that passes for it now. Thanks to :

Simon Cowell

Apple

The music "industry"


Enjoy YouTube stuff pre 1990 and wish you were born earlier before it all got gobbled uo....

Thanks for regurgitating what everyone said about the generation before's music. From Grunge to Ragtime, people have bitched about the "death of music" when it comes to modern popular music.

Let's not forget, before experimenting with drugs and Far East philosophy, the Beatles were just another boy band.
 
Every time I see Apple doing things like this is always reminds me of their BIG advert:

http://youtu.be/OYecfV3ubP8

And how they are doing all the can to become the very thing they themselves fought against. The only difference being now the shoe is on the other foot and they are the ones trying to control things.

It's funny how a company can so desperatly be trying to become the very thing they hated

Things have come full circle since then, haven't they?
 
I personally think Apple is dangling the prospect of album exclusives released in the Apple Lossless audio compression format.

Before you dismiss this idea, don't forget that Apple made the Apple Lossless format an open format using the Apache license model at the end of October 2011, so anyone with a portable music player could incorporate Apple Lossless support. Besides, with the gigantic number of Apple portable devices out there (iPhone, iPad and new model iPods) that directly decode the Apple Lossless format, that means there is a huge market out there for music albums in this format.

Don't they have an option of downloading ALAC quality music these days?

----------

Music is dead. Never to return. Let's enjoy what came before the manufactured, autotuned dross that passes for it now. Thanks to :

Simon Cowell

Apple

The music "industry"


Enjoy YouTube stuff pre 1990 and wish you were born earlier before it all got gobbled uo....

Well, not every popular music is auto-tuned stuff. Those are just tired crappy old pop music. It's probably just your taste so I suggest you looking deeper. Think Indie/Alternative. Search for Ed Sheeran, Lorde, Arctic Monkeys, The 1975, Imagine Dragons, Coldplay, OneRepublic and more. There's a lot of great music out there. Just keep looking for it.
 
I don't like the idea of one company having so much control over anything. Monopolies hurt the consumer.


Amen to that. And, believe me, this is exactly why the TV industry is slow to warm up to apple. Itunes was good for the recording industry but, Apple, as an ecosystem, is not the 800 pound gorilla: Android, in all it flavors, Is. And intimately, money, not the better ecosystem talks.
 
Amen to that. And, believe me, this is exactly why the TV industry is slow to warm up to apple. Itunes was good for the recording industry but, Apple, as an ecosystem, is not the 800 pound gorilla: Android, in all it flavors, Is. And intimately, money, not the better ecosystem talks.

Is this english?
 
Apple should just do more first listen exclusives on iTunes Radio. I've been listening to Pharrell Williams new album all weekend. I have no problem with exclusives. It's not Google and others can't negotiate exclusives. Especially if the industry or artists are concerned about the "800 pound gorilla" aka iTunes.

Btw, earlier this year Amazon and CBS announced an exclusive licensing agreement. I don't remember people complaining about that.

http://www.cbscorporation.com/news-article.php?id=1013
 
Don't they have an option of downloading ALAC quality music these days?

No, and it's ridiculous that they don't. Especially now that you can buy the actual CD on Amazon, which is sometimes even cheaper, and instantly get MP3s using AutoRip.
 
I use iTunes all the time. I don't believe in renting music, therefore would never use Spotify or any of that. There's only so many artists I like, better of just buy their album than renting then from Spotify. Spotify has nearly the same model that Microsoft had with Zune. Yet Microsoft was criticized and Spotify is considered "the future". For people who don't have large music collections I can understand Spoitfy. For those of us who do, there isn't much of an advantage.
 
Thanks for regurgitating what everyone said about the generation before's music. From Grunge to Ragtime, people have bitched about the "death of music" when it comes to modern popular music.

Let's not forget, before experimenting with drugs and Far East philosophy, the Beatles were just another boy band.


Love the last bit. Clearly, son you weren't around then
Stick to One Direction. As demanded by those in power.
Musicianship? Nay!
Singer songwriter bollocks? Yay!

Goodnight!
 
Those who follow the fads and the popular music will support sites like Spotify. Those of us who are true fans and want to support the music and the musician support iTunes. Artists really don't make much in the way of the record sales, but their money is made in touring and merch. And doing other projects. I try to see as much live music as I can and support the artists by buying their merchandise. Sure, the venue may not make much off the ticket sales, but their real revenue stream is alcohol. And maybe food.

Piracy has always been and always will be a part of the Internet. Anytime there is an attempt to curb it, there are people who are finding ways to work around that. Lots of sites don't want you downloading their embedded videos, but with Firefox addons, you can grab pretty much everything. I am surprised there isn't a Spotify grabber to grab individual songs.

I think artists teaming up with iTunes to release limited-time exclusive or fully exclusive songs and albums is a great idea. iTunes is probably the biggest music selling site (as far as digital downloads), so you stand the best chance to reach a wider audience by giving them first crack. And it boosts exposure and adoption for iTunes. I am sure plenty of people who didn't have it before downloaded it just to get the Beyonce album. And then you can get them to buy other stuff, so win-win for Apple.

There have been similar changes with the DVD/Blu-Ray industry. Sometimes you can get digital downloads before the physical disc is released, and sometimes they will allow you to watch the movie on PPV or buy the disc weeks before they hit RedBox/NetFlix/etc.

Same with retail. I work for in the cpg (consumer packaged goods) industry, and our company will give a chain of stores exclusivity on an item for 30,60,90 days. Or produce something exclusive for them, and nobody else. It helps build a relationship that their business is important to us, and we are mutually invested in increasing profits for both us and the chain. And if someone wants the item, they have to come to their stores to get it. And then spend money on other things while they are there.
 
Up till now, I think a major reason for nobody wanting to releasing albums in ALAC under iTunes is the fact the file size for an ALAC-encoded album could be as big as 400 MB. But with wide use of broadband, downloading a 400 MB file isn't as daunting as it used to be.

I would not be surprised some time in 2014 Apple will announce the first digital albums released in ALAC format.
 
No CD available, no sale from me. Hopefully record labels will decline this sort of consumer limiting idiocy.
 
This is rubbish.

Apple should be embracing streaming rather than making backroom deals which undermine the format that the consumer prefers. Expand iTunes Radio!

While they're at it, they could negotiate lower movie prices. I could buy a month of Netflix and have change for the price of one movie from iTunes (or 2 rentals). This is why movie piracy is so rampant; lots of the films can be bought on physical media for like half the price of iTunes' version.

iTunes:
Sound of Music (HD): £8.99 / Cannot rent
To Catch a Thief (HD): £9.99 / £3.49 rental
Fantasia 2000 (HD): £13.99 / £3.49 rental

Netflix:
1 month subscription: £5.29

I'm pretty sure that the movie companies are setting their own pricing in iTunes. That decision is not up to Apple.
 
There is no way I would go back to iTunes after having Spotify.

----------

Those who follow the fads and the popular music will support sites like Spotify. Those of us who are true fans and want to support the music and the musician support iTunes. Artists really don't make much in the way of the record sales, but their money is made in touring and merch. And doing other projects. I try to see as much live music as I can and support the artists by buying their merchandise. Sure, the venue may not make much off the ticket sales, but their real revenue stream is alcohol. And maybe food.

Piracy has always been and always will be a part of the Internet. Anytime there is an attempt to curb it, there are people who are finding ways to work around that. Lots of sites don't want you downloading their embedded videos, but with Firefox addons, you can grab pretty much everything. I am surprised there isn't a Spotify grabber to grab individual songs.

I think artists teaming up with iTunes to release limited-time exclusive or fully exclusive songs and albums is a great idea. iTunes is probably the biggest music selling site (as far as digital downloads), so you stand the best chance to reach a wider audience by giving them first crack. And it boosts exposure and adoption for iTunes. I am sure plenty of people who didn't have it before downloaded it just to get the Beyonce album. And then you can get them to buy other stuff, so win-win for Apple.

There have been similar changes with the DVD/Blu-Ray industry. Sometimes you can get digital downloads before the physical disc is released, and sometimes they will allow you to watch the movie on PPV or buy the disc weeks before they hit RedBox/NetFlix/etc.

Same with retail. I work for in the cpg (consumer packaged goods) industry, and our company will give a chain of stores exclusivity on an item for 30,60,90 days. Or produce something exclusive for them, and nobody else. It helps build a relationship that their business is important to us, and we are mutually invested in increasing profits for both us and the chain. And if someone wants the item, they have to come to their stores to get it. And then spend money on other things while they are there.


Those of us who want to support the artist go to the concerts, artist makes pennies on your iTunes purchase as well.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.