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.
Jimmy Iovine to Apple: 'You Have a Hole in Music Right Now; Let Me Plug It'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
27" iPhone? Whoa.
Little screens on the iPhone is the problem he was referring to. It's better on iPads true. But the point is the ui isn't optimized for small screens super well, and since all their phones (their single best selling product in history) have small screens (Yes, even the 6 Plus, compared to an iPad Mini), well... it's a bit of a problem.
Yes, a positive comment spotted in the wild!
I'm excited too
Positive comment on MR? Preposterous!
I wouldn't mind seeing iTunes on an Android device, but that's never going to happen. There are decent ways of getting iTunes content (even DRM'd) into an Android device now so I'm more than sure it won't happen.
Although, if there was no iTunes, I'd still be out in the wild buying CDs. I don't think anyone has really come up with a solid alternative to that ecosystem.
One caveat, I haven't given Amazon a try.
I agree. The article doesn't seem all that convincing. A lot of graphs to try to convince us that paying artists based on "listeners" rather than "plays" is fairer. I'm not sure I buy that on a large scale.
My question, is why in 2014 is the highest sample you can get of any Song on iTunes a 256k AAC+ file...I have listened to numerous albums on iTunes and compared them to the CD versions, vinyl versions and the quality dropoff with 256k AAC is SUBSTANTIAL - you lose the deep, rich, tight bass and the razor sharpness of mids and trebles with this compression than Apple insists on using with all their music..
I wish I could download 44khz 16-bit uncompressed audio from Apple iTunes, I would spend the 10-15 minutes to download a 700MB album, given the quality is 100% to the original.
BUT, you can't have this with iTunes...
Really, if you want the original quality you have to download raw WAV file downloads at about 40MB a tune, and some sites do offer this service (Beatport)
I would be willing to pay extra and open-armedly welcome this service if Apple would do something about it. It would require them re-ripping all their Library from the masters (CD, CDR) and offering them as AIFF or WAV.
I think people would like this, and do want it. People can hear the crap-qual of the current audio offerings, once they have heard it next to the original cut.
What do you all think?
I bought a movie in the iTunes store yesterday. It took almost three hours to get it on my computer. Also during the last three days Apple told me three times that my (completely useless in Europe as it turned out) iTunes Match subscription is expiring.
The thing is, there are just better services around for a long time, and it's not because of some plug that Iovine wants to plug in a hole, it's just because Apple doesn't really try any more. I mean, come on, under 1 MB/s download? I swear I know services that have similar speed restrictions, but they don't cost me 14 EUR to download a movie.
The thing is, there are just better services around for a long time, and it's not because of some plug that Iovine wants to plug in a hole, it's just because Apple doesn't really try any more. I mean, come on, under 1 MB/s download? I swear I know services that have similar speed restrictions, but they don't cost me 14 EUR to download a movie.
Every time I see that photo, I wonder if Jimmy or Tim twisted Dr. Dre's thumb to get him to sign on.
My question, is why in 2014 is the highest sample you can get of any Song on iTunes a 256k AAC+ file...I have listened to numerous albums on iTunes and compared them to the CD versions, vinyl versions and the quality dropoff with 256k AAC is SUBSTANTIAL - you lose the deep, rich, tight bass and the razor sharpness of mids and trebles with this compression than Apple insists on using with all their music..
I wish I could download 44khz 16-bit uncompressed audio from Apple iTunes, I would spend the 10-15 minutes to download a 700MB album, given the quality is 100% to the original.
BUT, you can't have this with iTunes...
Really, if you want the original quality you have to download raw WAV file downloads at about 40MB a tune, and some sites do offer this service (Beatport)
I would be willing to pay extra and open-armedly welcome this service if Apple would do something about it. It would require them re-ripping all their Library from the masters (CD, CDR) and offering them as AIFF or WAV.
I think people would like this, and do want it. People can hear the crap-qual of the current audio offerings, once they have heard it next to the original cut.
What do you all think?
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Here are my thoughts:
Most of the whining musicians are colossally ignorant. They have little understanding of the history of recorded music, let alone the terms of their own contracts. Many label acts don't understand that the streaming terms in their contracts with their label are not indicative of what Spotify actually pays out. Many are just ignorant and bitter in general, and they haven't yet figured out that they are not entitled to a career in the music industry just because they want one.
And hell, even in the heyday of recorded music, most acts made their money on the road, and merch plays as big a part of it now as it ever has.
Artists have more tools to reach people and more ways to sell themselves as a product than ever before. The problem isn't Spotify, it's that far too often, the product just isn't that good. Same as it ever was.
And for the record, I'm a working musician in Nashville who knows and works with a great many working musicians. I'm not trying to throw musicians under the bus for the sake of doing so, most are good people, but there is just a tremendous amount of ignorance and resistance in this industry right now. All of the whining and proliferation of misinformation gets very, very, very old, and it's not helping anyone or improving the overall situation at all.
hah, planned
the only thing jimmy iovine had planned was conning someone, anyone, into paying a crapload of money for his company
mission accomplished
I swear there's a wormhole around here. This post seems to have appeared from 2005.
You know Apple did try to solve some of those points in the past. It was called Ping
. It was supposed to provide more info about artists, their current whereabouts and tours, updates when they might come to you. All directly from the artists themselves. The service had a lot of promise just wasn't followed through all the way to make it great.That's where Beats fam comes in. These guys could take something like that far further than Apple could have ever done alone. And create a slick app. The Beats Music app is great. These guys bring a lot to the table, really gonna inject some much needed excitement in the music biz. I just hope they're thinking much bigger than a streaming service. On top of that, their marketing and pop culture sensibility is even above Apples at this point. Which is a big part of making a dent in a pop culture scene like the music industry.
Plugging the Wrong Hole
There's a hole to be plugged but they are looking at the wrong side of the....equation.
Streaming, even in the subscription form is a dud. The money being brought in is less than the cost in royalties. Apple likes big margin markets and subscription streaming has negative margins. Apple got sold like a cheap hooker.
Two things have come together that will set the trend: super inexpensive flash storage, and high-res DSD, FLAC and other formats. This could be a kinda new category for Apple. New iPods with 250GB+ storage and non-compressed audio formats. These pocket music players are being sold right now mostly above $500 and as much as $2,000 for the device. If iTunes started delivering those high-res formats they preserve the power of iTunes and Apple could sell another high margin piece of hardware.
With the hiring of Tomlinson Holman I think Apple is on this problem. Tomlinson will plug the right hole and Apple will squeal with joy as the money starts flowing in from music once again.
There's a hole to be plugged but they are looking at the wrong side of the....equation.
Streaming, even in the subscription form is a dud. The money being brought in is less than the cost in royalties. Apple likes big margin markets and subscription streaming has negative margins. Apple got sold like a cheap hooker.
Two things have come together that will set the trend: super inexpensive flash storage, and high-res DSD, FLAC and other formats. This could be a kinda new category for Apple. New iPods with 250GB+ storage and non-compressed audio formats. These pocket music players are being sold right now mostly above $500 and as much as $2,000 for the device. If iTunes started delivering those high-res formats they preserve the power of iTunes and Apple could sell another high margin piece of hardware.
With the hiring of Tomlinson Holman I think Apple is on this problem. Tomlinson will plug the right hole and Apple will squeal with joy as the money starts flowing in from music once again.
Wow.... You nailed it. I would happily pay a premium for a full music service like what you imagined.
You should email that to Lovine