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

iTunes... How many songs in your library... how many Purchased from iTunes?

4111 files in the library, although that includes some audiobooks and radio programs, so they aren't all songs. 23.2 days, 25.85GB.

Of that, 361 came from iTMS, 287 of which are music.
 
9538 songs
80 itunes

But, it's quite misleading, b/c I think I had about 100 songs from itms, and then managed to loose my entire itunes library, including those songs. So, I got them again, but didn't bother with legal forms of doing so, as I had already paid for them.

Also, most are in album form, so I paid less. Most of all was the Magnetic Fields "I thought you were my boyfriend" EP which for the longest time had three songs listed at 99 cents each, or the whole album for 49 cents. Needless to say, I only wanted one song, but...
 
haiggy said:
2812 songs, 7.5 days, 11.37 GB


How come some of you with like 6k songs takes up 60GB?! :eek: Super high encoding or what?
Click to expand...
A large part of my collection is encoded in Apple Lossless format, hence the large size.
 
2796 songs, 255 purchased from iTMS. The rest were copied from my CDs except for a few which are me playing piano.
 
unispherephoto said:
Stealing and sharing are in no way the same thing. To equate trading a song or album with stealing a pair of pants is both inaccurate and unfair. Would you hesitate to accept a burned mix cd from a friend? As someone else mentioned, it is only recently that the RIAA has decided to make music sharing an issue - yet its been happening for more than 20 years. Maybe record companies should start making us want to buy cds by lowering the outrageous prices and paying their artists more than 1% of sales.
Click to expand...
If your friend bought a movie ticket, could you share it with him? It is accurate to say that trading music with others is stealing, which is why P2P users are being charged. If you like an artist, you should go out and support them by buying the CD. When you just rip your friend's copy of it you are hurting that artist.
Also, what is your source for record companies paying the artist 1%? I'm not discounting or crediting that number, but I'm just curious. Isn't the standard publishing rate something like 8.76 cents per song per album? What about mechanicals too? How does the money get split up among the intellectual property created within the band? What about the copyright of the actual recording?
Your quote about how record companies should start making us want to buy cds ... by paying their artists more may be conceived as contradictory. Maybe you meant something else and I am misinterpreting, but it seems like you are concerned with the welfare of the artist and wish not to screw them over like some record companies do. However, wouldn't not paying for the artist's record and instead ripping it from a friend hurt that artist?
 
I have 278 MB / 17 hours / 24 songs purchased from iTunes. The majority of the purchases were the free political speeches available on iTunes a while back (probably still available).

Only 8 iTunes purchases are actually songs, of which 3 are rock, 2 are electronic, 2 are pop, and 1 is hip hop. :)
 
2A Batterie said:
If your friend bought a movie ticket, could you share it with him? It is accurate to say that trading music with others is stealing, which is why P2P users are being charged. If you like an artist, you should go out and support them by buying the CD. When you just rip your friend's copy of it you are hurting that artist.
Also, what is your source for record companies paying the artist 1%? I'm not discounting or crediting that number, but I'm just curious. Isn't the standard publishing rate something like 8.76 cents per song per album? What about mechanicals too? How does the money get split up among the intellectual property created within the band? What about the copyright of the actual recording?
Your quote about how record companies should start making us want to buy cds ... by paying their artists more may be conceived as contradictory. Maybe you meant something else and I am misinterpreting, but it seems like you are concerned with the welfare of the artist and wish not to screw them over like some record companies do. However, wouldn't not paying for the artist's record and instead ripping it from a friend hurt that artist?
Click to expand...

So 1% was an arbitrary figure, but if 8.76 cents is right, that still only equals about 6% per album. My argument is not that the artists do not deserve or need these earnings - of course they do. But it seems to me that the number of people sharing music will not significantly reduce record sales; record companies hurt the artists more by charging so much for such an inexpensive product and making an unfairly disproportionate profit. I purchase music when i know i am supporting the artist directly, whether from an independent label or straight from the artist.
 
2620 in library. 295 from iTMS uk.

Occasionally I get introduced to something I've not heard before (via a 'recommendation' or iMix) but I think I've basically got everything from the back catalogue that I want. I check the 'just added' list each Tuesday and browse certain genres to look for new stuff. My purchase rate has dropped accordingly, but I'm still a big fan and will purchase all my music at iTMS if it's available.
 
7944 songs, 20:16:21:01 total time, 30.41 GB. I've got to get a bigger HD for my iBook very soon...

0 from iTMS, as it's not avaliable in Norway. That is no problem, though, as long as I can go in to any public library and borrow any CD I want, and legally rip/copy it. Haven't used "the other option" in ages and actually replaced most of those (limited) earlier acquisitions... :cool: :D

Ripping all new (and re-ripping my entire CD collecion) in aac@128. Excellent sound/space-ratio. It beats the socks of the quality of mixed tapes I used to make from my LP's back in the 80's... ;)

Related question: Anybody ripped Metallica "...And Justice For All"? At what bitrate does that album actually sound good, short of lossless? I've tried mp3 and aac at different rates and it sounds like s*it, nomatter what (unless I play it straight from the CD, of course)... :(
 
ITMS numbers

The figures look like what I expected. People with large collections have relatively fewer ITMS purchases, while those with smaller collections tend to have a larger percentage of ITMS purchases.

I should have included the question of age. I have a feeling the younger demographics (thus building music collections / developing tastes) may have a larger percentage of ITMS, while the older folks (more time to collect CDs, more decided musical tastes) probably purchase new music less often, and are more inclined to purchase by CD.

I'm 31. I've been purchasing CDs since 1987. Began burning CDs (whole albums) in 1998 (mostly from friends / library). I never stored music on my computer until I got my mac. Now, basically all of my collection is in my iTunes library. Plus, it is all synced to my iPod for mobile and home listening.

However, since I got my mac in March, 2004 I haven't purchased a CD. While my purchases are rare (1-2 albums / month), they have all been from ITMS. I just think the convenience wins for me. I can't tell a difference between 128kbs AAC, 160kbs MP3 or the standard CDs I own. I guess my ear / equipment isn't descirminating enough.

I back up every purchase from ITMS on CD-R... these I use in the car. They sound good to me.

Anyway, enough rambling. I think Apple has done an amazing job of making digital music a common / well understood experience for millions. They have also effectively locked in millions of potential purchasers with the iPod, and millions more with the free iTunes software. IMHO history will show this as one of the most brilliant marketing strategies of all time. Kudos to them.

-alywa
 
alywa said:
However, since I got my mac in March, 2004 I haven't purchased a CD. While my purchases are rare (1-2 albums / month), they have all been from ITMS. I just think the convenience wins for me. I can't tell a difference between 128kbs AAC, 160kbs MP3 or the standard CDs I own. I guess my ear / equipment isn't descirminating enough.
Click to expand...
I have to say, convenience (and usually lower price) wins most times for me too. Usually, the only time I'll buy the CD is if it's from a band that I REALLY love. If it's just a album I'd like to have, the convenience of iTMS rules.
 
Sneaking into the movies isn't stealing, it's trespassing.
Copying music isn't stealing, it's a copyright violation.

Something can be wrong without it being stealing. By claiming that copyright violations are "stealing," copyright advocates are misleading people.

Why do we think libraries are "good" but downloading music is "bad"? Think about it. Checking out a book from the library has more in common with downloading music from the 'Net than robbing someone on the street does.

If you let someone listen to "your" music at your house, that's legal, even though they didn't pay for the music. If you run a bar with a cover charge, you're not allowed to let people listen to "your" music without paying royalties. Is that fair?

It is 100 percent legal to copy a recipe without paying anyone. Is that fair? Is it stealing?

Copyright law is something completely separate from "stealing" or "not stealing." Please don't confuse the two.
 
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