I won't be subscribing to Beats until it is part of iTunes Match not going to subscribe to another Apple product when it can easily be part of iTunes. Nice try Apple but another logic fail here.
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.
iTunes Digital Music Sales Fall 13 Percent as Apple Prepares Beats Music Refresh
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is something pleasing about opening a physical package/object/item in a way that just a digital download isn't. Not to mention that a good number of CDs still come packaged with information which you would not receive with a download.
I use iTunes Match, which enables me to listen to commercial-free iTunes Radio; and I have 'stations' generated based on artists I like.
I have discovered quite a few artists this way (you can look at your streaming/play history and see what you heard); then, when I'm in the mood, I shop for the CDs (usu., online!)
----------
One of my favorite childhood memories is that of the many hours I spent with my first favorite album - I was around five - and the album was Carole King's "Tapestry". I loved the 'journey' that the songs/cycle provided as a whole as well as the individual songs. Still love that to this day (full album vs. singles).
I think that if it is just pop music...well, I probably wouldn't be buying either a single OR the album! Pop grows stale very quickly.
DRM hasn't been on most iTunes music purchases or a while now. And it got removed from older purchases as well assuming the label allowed it. Apple isn't responsible for forcing DRM on your music.
^
This!
I do the same because of quality! I go a step further and port these files over to my iPhone at 256kbps for portability. However, when playing music on my home system it gets played at the highest resolution possible.
----------
^
Spot on!
There is nothing better than hearing high resolution audio on a quality home system and the same goes for Blu-ray! It can be an emotional experience!
you can listen to _whatever you want - whenever you want_ with beats.. it's not like a radio station that only feeds a set sequence of songs.
While I like spotify more having to have an app on a computer sucks. I can't download any apps on my work computer. I'm a google play music all access guy because it's web based and I can use it work. That and I got it at the introductory 7.99 so its cheaper. Spotify has a bit more content though
Maybe because people want high-quality music, not outdated AAC 256 kb/s crap
That's certainly not what's holding me back from using iTunes more. Forst, I cannot afford headphones that cost as much as the iPhone itself. Second, I, like many people my age, have degraded hearing so that additional information in the high frequencies would make no difference. (I am reminded of Spinal Tap's guitar that dials up to 11).
What does make me buy less from iTunes is iTunes. In iTunes if you click on a suggested song (as I do often by accident), you can't hit the back button and expect the same suggested songs because the suggestions change. That's amateurish GUI in my opinion. This has happened a number of times for me - I inadvertently hit the song title rather than the teeny-tiny button for playing a sample.
In any case, no way in Hades I pay a subscription fee monthly for Beats music, or any other service. I either like to purchase the song so that it is stored locally, or I listen to internet radio.
I've been trying both BEATS and SPOTIFY the last month.
They both have play-offline modes, both mobile apps seem on par (neither is great).
Big killer for Beats is there's no desktop app, just a web-client. And you can't create a *new* playlist using the web-client. You must first create the playlist in the mobile app...then add tracks using the web-client. And it seems like there are unnecessary extra clicks just to get a song added.
For creating/managing multiple playlists - spotify has it for now. As soon as they add Beats to iTunes I'll have another look.
They both have play-offline modes, both mobile apps seem on par (neither is great).
Big killer for Beats is there's no desktop app, just a web-client. And you can't create a *new* playlist using the web-client. You must first create the playlist in the mobile app...then add tracks using the web-client. And it seems like there are unnecessary extra clicks just to get a song added.
For creating/managing multiple playlists - spotify has it for now. As soon as they add Beats to iTunes I'll have another look.
Artists are having enough trouble with royalties on the $10 subscription-based services. I could never in good conscience pay for a bargain-bin $5 service.
I have the same feeling regarding this that I do regarding Netflix: streaming is great, but it doesn't replace knowing that I *own* the content. Too bad more people don't feel the same, I think the artists get more when people actually buy their music...
That said, I don't listen to a ton of music anyway, I'll probably end up cancelling Spotify, I'd signed up to try it now that it's here in Canada but I just don't listen often enough to justify it.
I am deluged pummeled drowning in free music. Why in the world does anyone pay for it any more?
The only thing I can think of is it's just old people who are in the habit of paying for it and I guess they're just slow to figure out what happened.
I can't imagine young people paying for music, not now, and not for the rest of their lives.
The only thing I can think of is it's just old people who are in the habit of paying for it and I guess they're just slow to figure out what happened.
I can't imagine young people paying for music, not now, and not for the rest of their lives.
Nope, not really true.
MOG, and now Beats, as well as most other streaming services, use 320kbps files. Pandora tops out at 192kbps for the desktop paid subscription, 128kbps for all others, including Pandora-enabled receivers.
In all reliable double blind tests i have found, people generally cannot reliably tell the difference between lossless and higher bit-rate compressed audio (320kbps qualifies). And I am yet to see a single reliable test which shows that anyone can tell the differences between CD and SACD. The same goes for DTS/DD and the lossless audio found in many BRs, although often the lossless audio track has been reprocessed, so it will sound different than the lossy one (but it has nothing to do with the compression itself).
The bottom line is that a good recording at 320kbps should be practically indistinguishable from the same in lossless or higher bitrate format.
You are much more likely to hear issues caused by the recording process itself.
----------
It's because many dislike ads, or like convenience, or like consistent quality.
Plus, most decent people, young or old, are aware that "free" doesn't really exist. "Free" will be either ad supported, will have a promotional purpose, or will be some talentless Youtube yahoo. Real music, like most valuable things, is rarely truly free and never for long.
Then I hope you at least go to the artists whose music you steal's shows and purchase a ticket and/or merch.
They're putting their blood, sweat and own money into entertaining you. The least you could do is give em $10 for an album or $3 for a sticker.
Beatings by Dre, a known woman beater
Itunes is nice software. Great on MAC or WINDOWS.
Itunes is nice software. Great on MAC or WINDOWS.
Last edited:
I don't steal music. I never did. You are obviously not aware of where all the free and legal music is. Young people are.
It's probably one of the reasons why the old people running Apple got snookered into buying Beats. They're looking at their figures, they know the age of everyone buying music and they must have been sitting around in one of their endless committee meetings going "gee, why won't young people give us all their money." Because you are clueless Apple, and so are most of the old people. Spending all of your dwindling number of customer's money on a Rap artist ain't gonna fix things. Get up to speed or get run over.
I buy less, much less from iTunes because of the program itself. It is such a terror to use I don't want it open.
Now if Apple wants to charge a premium price for the new service, it better have something amazing to it. If it follows the company's recent trend you can expect it to be Beats stripped down at twice the price. With a flat UI.
Now if Apple wants to charge a premium price for the new service, it better have something amazing to it. If it follows the company's recent trend you can expect it to be Beats stripped down at twice the price. With a flat UI.
If it once again takes over a year to roll out iTunes Radio to the rest of the world I just say: Way to go Apple
I agree it's been ages, but isn't it because the Beats acquisition stalled iTunes Radio? Presumably iTunes Radio will disappear when Beats Music is revamped.
The streaming service could potentially be awesome. It would have a sexy UI and be integrated with Apple devices well. And 5 dollars!
Considering this quote from Steve Jobs...
'I think if you do something and it turns out pretty good, then you should go do something else wonderful, not dwell on it for too long. Just figure out what's next'
...I wonder what Apple needs to do to replace/upgrade iTunes.
If music sales are declining, and they're close to entering the television market, maybe they need a leapfrog product to replace iTunes.
Stream music, watch TV shows and films, as well as the ability to purchase and manage content on any device from any device.
Everyone says iTunes is bloated... maybe a complete rewrite (akin to Photos replace iPhoto) will ensure the program is lightweight and efficient?
I think Apple is more intelligent than we give them credit for. Everyone grumbles about iCloud but Apple are slowly reworking it: iCloud Drive replaces Documents in the Cloud, Photos is set to replace Photostream. What's next?
'I think if you do something and it turns out pretty good, then you should go do something else wonderful, not dwell on it for too long. Just figure out what's next'
...I wonder what Apple needs to do to replace/upgrade iTunes.
If music sales are declining, and they're close to entering the television market, maybe they need a leapfrog product to replace iTunes.
Stream music, watch TV shows and films, as well as the ability to purchase and manage content on any device from any device.
Everyone says iTunes is bloated... maybe a complete rewrite (akin to Photos replace iPhoto) will ensure the program is lightweight and efficient?
I think Apple is more intelligent than we give them credit for. Everyone grumbles about iCloud but Apple are slowly reworking it: iCloud Drive replaces Documents in the Cloud, Photos is set to replace Photostream. What's next?