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

The Beatles Appear in iTunes Store

Streethawk said:
Yep, why the hell they hyped this I don't know. There's nothing memorable about a release of 40-odd year old songs.

Really, Beatles fans will already have the music. The rest of us, those of us with taste, don't care whether you sell it or not anyway.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not the first to say this, don't have time to read 500+ posts right now. But seriously? This is hype? A >24 hour teaser and a news release.

Wow, 'hype' has really tanked as a concept. Are you people the type that cheer for "moral victories" by your college football team for only losing by 20 to a real team?
 
kingtj said:
I'd agree that this announcement was over-rated. I mean, just because Apple had a long feud with The Beatles' record company over their name doesn't mean the REST of us really care that they finally got that all resolved. (And IMO, the entire thing was B.S. from day 1, because NOBODY would ever confuse the Apple Corps. record label with Apple Computer - EVEN after Apple started selling music online. If anything, The Beatles and Apple/Steve Jobs are among the most well recognized names out there! You'd be hard pressed to put any two other business entities up against each other who the general public would have a BETTER idea about.)

That said though? The Beatles, as musicians ... overrated?! You may not like their music at all, but have you even paid any attention to your history? The frenzy they got their audiences into is pretty much unrivaled today. (How many concerts do you go to now where women regularly faint over the sight of the musicians?) They were really pioneers of rock music in MANY ways, including becoming a big influence for many musicians to come, decades later. They did a lot of cool, experimental things with respect to recording techniques too, and were probably one of the first bands to use a symphony orchestra as backing tracks for a song of theirs.
Click to expand...

Best post of the thread.
 
You negative people are helping Apple. Keep it coming!

To all you lameo's that are doing nothing but sitting on your asses writing horrible comments about Apple's marketing style, you're actually helping them. You're doing exactly what Job's wants you to do. Congrats!! :). As long as you keep talking about them rather positive or negative the more popular they get and the more free advertising they get and the more iTunes will get sales of the Beatles and anything else, so thank yourselves for all the bad comments, you're making Apple richer. Keep it coming. :) Any other tech company could only dream of such free advertising. Ha ha!
 
JGowan said:
Honestly -- this is boring. However, Apple really didn't OVERHYPE it. We did. The media did. Apple put a little graphic on their website the day before it released. Other companies only wish that a such a graphic could garner this much attention, speculation and advertisement.

But where is the Beatles iPod, iPhone or iPad? That's the announcement I expected too. If U2 got not one, but two special iPods, certainly there should be some special kit for the Beatles.

I wish this endevour the best (gosh it's been wondered since the beginning of the store) and I hope many new fans are created because it. The Beatles are timeless and deserve a way to be quickly accessed from here out -- however -- those who have loved them since forever have had their LPs, 8-tracks (?) Cassettes and CDs for years and have bought their stuff multiple times. Many millions of us bought their Box Collections on 9-9-9 just last year.

Edit: only a Fool on the Hill would spend $150 on this as the actual-physical-CDs-box-set is $130 on amazon.com. However, there are fools on hills and a sucker born every minute.
Click to expand...

Good post. Sums it all up nicely.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
mrblack927 said:
Actually, it's absurd to categorically say that no one can tell the difference. I'm not an idiot. I know what the placebo effect is and I wouldn't have spent the time/effort/money on maintaining a lossless audio collection if I couldn't tell the difference. I have a pair of JH Audio headphones for work and a much, much more expensive home audio setup at home. On that hardware not only can you hear the difference, it's apparent. If someone comes over and plays an MP3 cd or something on my system it sounds noticeably "off". That's because the speakers can reproduce a much wider range of frequencies and you can hear the clipping from the compression.

Most people don't care about sound quality and won't spend more than $100 on headphones anyway (hell, most people just use the stock apple earbuds). If that's you, great. To each his own. All I'm saying is that some people, like myself, do. Don't fault us for wanting actual high quality sound on our music devices.
Click to expand...

Hear hear. Finally someone else who agrees with me...
 
redkamel said:
I guess never forget the day even the mac lovers on macrumors say Apple jumped the shark.


That was the stupidest announcement I'd ever heard. Things I would have never forgotten include (whether they are real/dream, good/bad, I want them or not, or whatever)

-A demo of lightpeak working on a MBP with multiple peripherals, and an announcement of a launch date and full industry/partner support and rollout, including windows.

-New macbook designs: clear? white andonized metal?

-All MBPs losing their discdrives and gaining SSDs with a minimal price bump

-Lion being launched REALLY early

-Displays that can go 3d at will, with manipulable technology like a kinect camera

-iTunes cloud (maybe)

-The deletion of Ping (oh man, that would be memorable!)

Adding a band to itunes, thats been around for 40 years and that everyone has the songs already? Maybe a big day for Steve. No one else missed a beat at work today. I actually had my hope up for a second though.
Click to expand...

It said announcement from ITUNES. Except for your cloud (maybe), none of that has anything to do with iTunes.

Reading comprehension is important
 
Apple would never release a new technology or software update without a big event. I guess the home page splash for the Beatles is fitting.
 
mrblack927 said:
Actually, it's absurd to categorically say that no one can tell the difference. I'm not an idiot. I know what the placebo effect is and I wouldn't have spent the time/effort/money on maintaining a lossless audio collection if I couldn't tell the difference. I have a pair of JH Audio headphones for work and a much, much more expensive home audio setup at home. On that hardware not only can you hear the difference, it's apparent. If someone comes over and plays an MP3 cd or something on my system it sounds noticeably "off". That's because the speakers can reproduce a much wider range of frequencies and you can hear the clipping from the compression.

Most people don't care about sound quality and won't spend more than $100 on headphones anyway (hell, most people just use the stock apple earbuds). If that's you, great. To each his own. All I'm saying is that some people, like myself, do. Don't fault us for wanting actual high quality sound on our music devices.
Click to expand...

If you wanted the highest quality Beatles songs you would have already bought vinyl, played them once and recorded them at the highest bit rate and lossless compression by now.
 
"Today, Apple is announcing to the world that millions of baby boomers still don't know how to rip mp3 files from their record collections."

Saw that on Twitter. Made me laugh. :D
 
mrblack927 said:
I'm saying I have done an ABX test. So have all of my friends at one point or another when they've been at my place. Most people don't believe it can make a difference so I let them pick the song and put them to the test. I get the lossless version, make a copy and downsample it to 320, let them listen to each once, then play one randomly to see if they can tell if it's lossless or compressed. So far no one has gotten it wrong...
Click to expand...

Again unless you do proper ABX test and show results we can't take what you are saying as truth.
 
rockinred said:
Come on! I am over 35 and say lame, lame, lame. I think people just want to vent on here. No need to start taking shots an intelligence or iq related to taste in music or the Beatles.

Would it be better if this thread was filled with posts like:

"OMG, THIS IT! The moment I have been waiting for all my life".... my iTunes experience will never be the same again now that this is available.

No thanks... I say call it how everyone sees it. Silly.
Click to expand...

I'm 39. Not a big Beatles fan. My dad loves it. It's more his generation. But I am still old enough to get the relevance and not mistakenly think nor claim that Michael Jackson was bigger. Sure on a site like this that has been taken over by 15 year olds, it is going to go right over their heads. I got that. What is probably pissing people off the most is that they have come to expect huge news from Apple, iPhones, iTunes and App Stores, iPads, etc. Steve's One More Things most likely make this feel like a let down.

News flash. They didn't have a media event. Talk about the state of Mac, iTS, iPhone and iPad sales, and then say today we are introducing the Beatles catalog on iTunes. Nope nope, nopety nope. They told everyone to check Apple.com and iTunes today at x time and we did. Got your attention, now you know.

If you feel duped, feel free to boycott Apple products. I certainly won't care.
 
BlackMangoTree said:
Totally agree 256 there is no way 99.9% of people could hear a difference.
Click to expand...

sure they can. but like someone else said, most people don't have good enough equipment to be able to hear the difference. 99.9% though? please. and you don't need super expensive equipment to tell the difference. a decent pair of bookshelf speakers and a half decent receiver are enough to illustrate the difference in resolution. call it 90% of people who don't care and/or could tell the difference. admittedly, i'm biased. i have a nice stereo system with a very capable D/A converter. still a little bitter that Apple charges the same for 256k as other retailers charge for CDs. if they offered lossless versions at the same price, i'd be supremely happy with the apple store.

as for the beatles, i'm glad the store is offering them now. tons more revenue now for apple, and for me as a shareholder. of course i think it's a little absurd how they advertised the announcement. but can someone explain why most people here seem to have such strong (negative) feelings about this? disappointed is one thing. seems like there is a lot of anger here.
 
Over hyped? From what I have seen around the internet today, all the hype was done by other outlets besides Apple :rolleyes:.
 
This shouldn't have been hyped so much....BUT it shouldn't have gotten a single negative either.

Beatles on iTunes is a great thing.
 
mrblack927 said:
Actually, it's absurd to categorically say that no one can tell the difference. I'm not an idiot. I know what the placebo effect is and I wouldn't have spent the time/effort/money on maintaining a lossless audio collection if I couldn't tell the difference. I have a pair of JH Audio headphones for work and a much, much more expensive home audio setup at home. On that hardware not only can you hear the difference, it's apparent. If someone comes over and plays an MP3 cd or something on my system it sounds noticeably "off". That's because the speakers can reproduce a much wider range of frequencies and you can hear the clipping from the compression.

Most people don't care about sound quality and won't spend more than $100 on headphones anyway (hell, most people just use the stock apple earbuds). If that's you, great. To each his own. All I'm saying is that some people, like myself, do. Don't fault us for wanting actual high quality sound on our music devices.
Click to expand...

I like to think that I like high quality sound. I listen for and buy equipment that gives me a sense of the soundstage, natural sound in the voice and instruments and various other things I find important.

I don't care how wide a range of frequencies a speaker can reproduce; a perfect human ear can only hear 20-20000. Most people's ears, especially as we age, are much more limited than that. I personally only go up to about 15500 and I'm 41 years old.

There's also the subtle psychoacoustical magic that happens when you "know" you are playing lossless and when you are playing mp3/AAC. I'm willing to bet you've never done a true blind ABX test. Do it one day with your best headphones (mine are Grado RS1s) and compare a lossless file to a file encoded at 256kbs. If you can pass that test, then congratulations, you have golden ears and impeccable equipment. Enjoy! But you can't argue the fact that for most people, even with really good, but not the best, equipment there will be absolutely no difference between 256+ and lossless. That's just plain science.
 
If anyone cares to remember the hype is all about the lawsuit between the Apple record label and Apple computer who had sued each other over the right to use the name Apple.

All this overhype hysteria is because of those lawsuits and Apple bending over backwards to promote Apple records' main product line, that being the Beatles.

BTW Apple, while I may understand it, I think I'm losing more and more respect for your company and products. After being slugged with a $5500 roaming fee on 200mb of data for when I took my girlfriend who is from a very poor family in the 3rd world nation of the Philippines and proposed to her. How rude to be slugged with an extortionist roaming fee and not only that, that $5500 roaming fee could pay for her 5 sisters' education right through University graduation.

Shame on you Steve Jobs!!!
 
BlackMangoTree said:
Again unless you do proper ABX test and show results we can't take what you are saying as truth.
Click to expand...

Okay, there's obviously no pleasing you. Here's an idea, why don't you show data supporting your claim that no one can tell the difference between lower and higher bitrate samples.

The null hypothesis is that significantly higher bitrate music (1411 vs 320) will sound better. The onus of proof is on your end.
 
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