Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Beatles Exclusively on iTunes?

I find it hard to believe that anyone doesnt already have any Beatles tunes they want already.
Still if its good PR for Apple and further marginalises the zoon, thats OK by me.
 
Paul McCartney born in 1942 once asked,

"Will you still need me,
will you still feed me
when I'm sixty-four?"

Most people will probably be in the Heather Mills camp and give an enthusiastic, Hell, no!

My admiration of The Beatles has faded over time, and I suspect that I am not alone. Nevertheless, I hope that Apple can work this deal out so that those who still care can get access to their favorite music on the best device out there.
 
If I were them I'd go with iTunes as you'll sell more songs, anyway hopefully they'll go out of copyright in 2012 in the UK.
 
gugy said:
is this really a big deal?
Seriously, The Beatles were great, I would think by now most people have their songs.
Click to expand...
I'm often surprised to meet a new Beatles fan who "inherited" their interest from their parents. And the publicity surrounding an iTunes debut would add to that interest.

I wonder if they'll have a "complete catalog" package?
 
IJ Reilly said:
My point is, the ping-pong effect, when it was used, was deliberate. It does sound strange now, but I remember when these albums came out people listened to them on headphones and thought the effect was cool.

I'm no Beatles historian by any means, but correct me if I'm wrong: weren't the first albums recorded in mono? The stereo versions were later, rather crude simulations of stereo, which is why they never made it to CD.
Click to expand...

You are correct sir. I'd also agree with you that Rubber Soul and Revolver are the two best albums. They should not be interfered with.
 
Doctor Q said:
I wonder if they'll have a "complete catalog" package?
Click to expand...

Now that would be expensive!!!

I like the idea of The Beatles catalog being available on iTunes, but for me, I'd be most interested in getting CD's of the remastered music so I can rip at my preferred bit rate. :)

Is this all part of Paul's plan to stay solvent through his divorce? :rolleyes:
 
Swarmlord said:
Sweet! I have a shortage of my favorite Beatles songs on my iPod. Most of my Beatles CDs had at least one scratch that prevented proper ripping into iTunes.

Apple, you have that fixed in iTunes yet? I'd like to see the Cancel button actually work and also the ability to selectively rip or bypass any one song I want to on my disk.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? For starters you don't have to rip an entire album, duh!

Also if a disc is scratched, try this before you abandon ripping it, go into Advanced; choose Importing; check off Using error correction when reading Audio CDs. This will slow the import, but all CDs have redundancy build in, which allows for scratched discs to work.
 
£10 says Paul and maybe Ringo will have a live video hookup into MacWorld 2007 to announce the exclusive.
 
Nothing but good for Apple. Other "holdouts" may fold?

Personally I see this as a big deal for a reason not many others have mentioned: bringing in the holdouts.

The Beatles are the big one of course, but the others (Rolling Stones, Led Zepplin, etc.) are still unsure about the whole digital music thing. If the biggest hold-out finally folds and goes for sale on-line, others will follow.

(and yes, I'm not exactly sure if the Rolling Stones or Led Zepplin are "holdouts", but they're not on iTunes or anywhere else that I can see... surely there are others?)
 
gugy said:
is this really a big deal?
Seriously, The Beatles were great, I would think by now most people have their songs. How many Lp's and Cd's they sold? How many Millions.
The only positive thing from this outcome is that Apple Corps will stop filling lawsuits against Apple Computer. Besides that, I see no point as this being a big deal.
Click to expand...

Basically this is a very big deal. The Beatles catalog is similar to the Star Wars movies. The release of the material on a particular platform or format gives final legitimacy to the format.

Think of the Beatles catalog as the crown jewels of music (as the Star Wars movies are the crown jewels of movies, we'll be seeing but BlueRay and DVD-HD courting Lucas Films, whichever format they chose will be the standard, you may not agree, but that's just the was it goes).

Also there are quite a few people who have packed away their albums and CDs, but then they're reminded of a classic Beatles song and it's easy for them to spend the money to re-purchase the album than go into storage and then rip it. And if the sound quality is better!

How can the sound quality be better, well in the 80's and 90's a lot of stuff was either rushed out (not the case in the Beatles catalog) or the technology was not up to par (which is the case), so it's possible that an iTunes version may actually sound better than the initial CD release of the Beatle catalog from the late 80's.
 
MikeAtari said:
Geez, this is a MONEY LOSER if there ever was one.
I loved the beatles when I was 6.
But, these days who's going to be buying these tracks!!!
Click to expand...

If they are remastered, I will buy their entire catalog. Of course, I'd be buying on CD and not iTunes most likely. Unless iTunes has some kind of exclusives or a great price for the collection.

And for the record, I'm only 25, and I didn't hear The Beatles' music from my parents. :)
 
Leoff said:
Personally I see this as a big deal for a reason not many others have mentioned: bringing in the holdouts.

The Beatles are the big one of course, but the others (Rolling Stones, Led Zepplin, etc.) are still unsure about the whole digital music thing. If the biggest hold-out finally folds and goes for sale on-line, others will follow.

(and yes, I'm not exactly sure if the Rolling Stones or Led Zepplin are "holdouts", but they're not on iTunes or anywhere else that I can see... surely there are others?)
Click to expand...

Add Frank Zappa to that list.
 
Doctor Q said:
I'm often surprised to meet a new Beatles fan who "inherited" their interest from their parents. And the publicity surrounding an iTunes debut would add to that interest.

I wonder if they'll have a "complete catalog" package?
Click to expand...

Granted, for new fans might be a good thing. I wonder how many new fans the Beatles have nowadays? Plus, their parents might have the songs already on cd or lp. and of course you can always go to your local cd store and buy their music.
Sorry, I don't think adding the Beatles is a big deal at all.
The only thing it might be interesting is to buy their whole complete catalog of songs just like Apple did with U2 Complete for a good price.
 
Case-sensitive said:
Add Frank Zappa to that list.
Click to expand...

Sometime I wonder if people actually use the products they talk about here.

The Rolling Stones have been in the iTunes music store for over a year. The currently have over 59 albums there and a new ep was released, I'm Free, just a couple of weeks ago.

Frank Zappa was on iTunes last summer and has since been removed. It was basically the albums that RYKODisc had re-mastered and released. There appears to be something going on with the Zappa Family Trust and RYKODisc over the rights.

Led Zepplin has never appeared on iTunes. However, Radio Head was on for a short time, but everyone who like Radio Head has already bought their one good album, The Bends.
 
Case-sensitive said:
Not of itself no - but imo a remastered collection will sell millions. How many fans, old and new, will shell out again to hear them?
Click to expand...
really? I am skeptical.
Unless like I said a whole package with a very attractive price. Hopefully with a bitrate better than 128.
 
whatever said:
Sometime I wonder if people actually use the products they talk about here.

The Rolling Stones have been in the iTunes music store for over a year. The currently have over 59 albums there and a new ep was released, I'm Free, just a couple of weeks ago.

Frank Zappa was on iTunes last summer and has since been removed. It was basically the albums that RYKODisc had re-mastered and released. There appears to be something going on with the Zappa Family Trust and RYKODisc over the rights.

Led Zepplin has never appeared on iTunes. However, Radio Head was on for a short time, but everyone who like Radio Head has already bought their one good album, The Bends.
Click to expand...

Strange. I could have sworn I'd heard the Rolling Stones weren't on iTunes yet. Personally I HATE them, that's why I never checked.

Any other musicians not in the iTunes music store yet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back