Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I can understand that enthusiasts still want ALAC/FLAC albums to get the full CD audio quality and yes, this should be an option, however I am not sure how large the market for that would really be. I think most people would just stream from spotify or wherever to discover new music or get some background noise in their ear plugs and if they really love an album, then the audiophile and die-hard fans just buy the vinyl or CD instead to actually have the album at the best available quality with all the artwork and booklet and stuff.

And this is exactly what I do. I use Spotify for discovery, and then if I love the album, I hit up Amazon to purchase a physical copy. Call me old-fashioned, but my collection has to be physical before digital. You simply don't get the same experience with an album you love if you just own it digitally. Plus, it looks great on a CD rack.
 
It's been a long time since albums didn't suck. Bands come up with two good songs and a lot of filler and then they put it out as an album. The songs don't play together in a coherent way, don't tell a single story, don't relate to each other, etc. Half the time the artists don't even write the songs so there is no chance for there to be anything coherent about the album. Albums today are nothing more than playlists of a single artist. There's little chance anyone can do anything compelling to increase album sales given that state of affairs.

Obviously there is something that can be done. Write a dozen good songs, without listening to rubbish producers who tell you to copy the last hit song you had again and again. Admittedly, it's hard. But people have done it before.
 
It's all in the details. A print of the Mona Lisa is nothing like seeing the real thing. Music is like that too. A compressed AAC file is deader sounding than an uncompressed AIFF.

yepp, that's true. i just don't get how Bono/U2 could help with this issue. i guess it's an engineering/researching/biology kind of story. for sure they could compare how it sounds, but i hardly believe that an average (or extraordinary) musician could come up with a groundbreaking technical theory to revolutionise the music industry's de-facto digital standards. i mean, without the expertise i just don't see the value they could add... or it's just some marketing BS, right?
 
Someone has to let Apple know about the opensource FLAC-format...:rolleyes:

Someone willing to create a Quicktime Plug-in implementing it, so that people can use it? (And forget about Apple adding it themselves and putting iTunes or QuickTime under GPL control). What are the bets that there is someone involved in the code who doesn't want it to run on iOS devices?
 
After Cook approved a ~100 million dollar check to U2 for a free album that turned into a PR disaster, he's approving another collaboration? I'm really starting to doubt this guy's competence.
 
Spotify anyone?

OMG... Nooooo i love Apple but geesh lets get with the program here perhaps work with someone who actually sells albums.... Just saying.

Maybe they should purchase spotify or one of the other streaming services? :eek:

:apple: ...Think Different...
 
After Cook approved a ~100 million dollar check to U2 for a free album that turned into a PR disaster, he's approving another collaboration? I'm really starting to doubt this guy's competence.

He didn't give U2 $100m. I'm sure he is so worried about your opinion on his competence. Maybe you could read up and learn a bit more about the deal.
 
I don't think they're talking about a file format. They're referring to a new way of releasing albums, whatever that means. It could be including live performances, or artwork or gear with an album purchase. But it's probably something I haven't thought of.
 
I can't imagine a new audio file format is their ambition. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they rolled out a new file format so they can boast "10x better than mp3!" as part of their marketing, but this has got to be about distribution. A new marketplace with really great discovery tools? A pay-per-listen until you've spent enough to own the album model?

Between Pandora, iTunes, YouTube, and the occasional other digital purchase, I get all the music I want. I can't imagine what would make me spend more on music. They've got a tall task ahead of them...
 
I have never been intrigued - at all - by any music streaming service. If I like an album (or a song), I have to own it.

Guess I'm in the minority.
 
Is that how the zombie-apocalypse is starting?

EDIT: At least U2 accomplished to get the people's minds off the Apple-Beats-merger. :D
 
I can't imagine a new audio file format is their ambition. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they rolled out a new file format so they can boast "10x better than mp3!" as part of their marketing, but this has got to be about distribution. A new marketplace with really great discovery tools? A pay-per-listen until you've spent enough to own the album model?

Between Pandora, iTunes, YouTube, and the occasional other digital purchase, I get all the music I want. I can't imagine what would make me spend more on music. They've got a tall task ahead of them...

Better music would make me buy more.

There are a LOT of bands out there that never get the kind of exposure needed to boost music sales.

Example :

Arcade Fire.

They made their own distribution system. Produced their own music. Most importantly they are talented. That got them exposure. Concept albums.
Then they were the first indy band to win a grammy for best album.

This is the type of thing the music industry needs to have in the mainstream.

If Timmy wants to spend 20 Billion dollars to make the industry better and if he is successful I say go for it. In the long run it is worth it.
 
A la carte...

I think it would be cool to get music in basically garageband format. So, you could listen to it complete, then try just listening to it with only the drums, then without vocals, etc.

Or we could just buy a song's drum track for a quarter, the bass-line for another, keyboards, guitars, vocals... until one fine day & before we even know it, we've got the whole damn song paid off ...

No, but seriously, I like your idea... ;)
 
Last edited:
Are you ****ing kidding me???

A "new music format"???

Holy ****... Apple needs a serious smack of reality.

STOP WITH THE PROPRIETARY ******** APPLE!!!
 
Better music would make me buy more.

There are a LOT of bands out there that never get the kind of exposure needed to boost music sales.

Example :

Arcade Fire.

They made their own distribution system. Produced their own music. Most importantly they are talented. That got them exposure. Concept albums.
Then they were the first indy band to win a grammy for best album.

This is the type of thing the music industry needs to have in the mainstream.

If Timmy wants to spend 20 Billion dollars to make the industry better and if he is successful I say go for it. In the long run it is worth it.

U2 played "Wake Up" before every concert in 2005/2006 and certainly got a lot of U2 fans exposed to AF. That is how I discovered AF.
 
Hilarious statement. U2 was around long before anyone ever heard of the Black Eyed Peas or Lady Gaga, both of whom will be answers to trivia questions in 10 years. Maybe 5.

Wrong, the BEP have been around just as long as U2. Before they hit it big on the charts, they started off in the making undergriund hip hop records
 
That's because the average Joe (or Jane) can't hear, or detect the difference in quality

Nor can the vast majority of "audiophiles" if they try and pick out the difference in an ABX test.

If you all know better than Apple, how come you're not busy running Apple?

Same reason as the people who laughed at new coke weren't running the coca cola company (as well as every other corporate screwup). Just because someone is running a company doesn't mean they are going to magically make every decision better than anyone else on the planet.

Apple released ping, MobileMe, the cube, and an iPod with no buttons. Do you not agree that the vast majority of the general public that panned those knew better than Apple?

Or maybe this is an internet discussion board and there are other options besides "i know better than Apple" and full on sycophant.
 
It's all in the details. A print of the Mona Lisa is nothing like seeing the real thing. Music is like that too. A compressed AAC file is deader sounding than an uncompressed AIFF. But AIFF isn't practical when bandwidth and storage is limited. So a new format that is less compressed than AAC but still retains AAC's file size frugality would be a beautiful thing. Personally, I use ALAC right now, a little compressed and somewhat large files, but not as large as AIFF.

That said I don't know how that sells more music b/c the era of big home audio is dead and portables are not going to sound much better even w/ an improved format. The real problem w/ the music industry IMHO is lack of talent. There are a lot of one-song wonders and one decent cut albums out there now, and nothing really new sounding.

The real Mona Lisa is actually a huge waste of time. I would much rather see a print than the real thing from 30 feet away.
 
U2 played "Wake Up" before every concert in 2005/2006 and certainly got a lot of U2 fans exposed to AF. That is how I discovered AF.

That's the kind of thing that sticks in your mind while attending a concert.

People milling about and you hear some band playing over the P.A. system and people start wondering who the band is.

That is one very good way to get the music out.

I was exposed to AF one night watching Dave Letterman. He has a habit of having bands on his show that nobody knows.

Stephen Colbert did it a couple days ago with a 3 piece band of 13 year old kids. They were great.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.