U2's Bono on Collaborating With Apple: 'They Let Us Into the Labs'

[MacRumors]

With the launch of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus, Apple announced a partnership with U2 that saw the band's latest album distributed to iTunes users for free. In interviews following the launch of the album, U2's manager suggested Apple and U2 had formed a "long-term" relationship that would see them collaborating on additional projects, and now U2 frontman Bono has shed a bit more light on the partnership.

At the Web Summit in Dublin that VentureBeat attended, Bono told the audience that Apple "let us into the labs," suggesting the band's been able to work with Apple on unreleased products and services. Bono went on to share a story about an interaction with Steve Jobs that hints at what U2 and Apple might be doing.

Image via Chris O'Brien of VentureBeat​

​

To illustrate the kind of concepts U2 and Apple might be exploring, Bono told the story of being in a house in France with Steve Jobs a decade ago. Bono looked at a version of iTunes being displayed on a TV screen and asked Jobs if he liked design so much, then "why does that look like a spreadsheet?"

Bono said he had wondered why the album covers displayed on iTunes weren't interactive or why they didn't display archival photos, lyrics, or 3-D versions of band members: anything that would make for a more engaging visual experience with fans to complement the music.

Jobs replied that the operating system and the technology didn't quite exist yet for such an experience.

"But it does now," Bono said.

Over the course of the last few years, Apple has been facing declining music downloads, which has led the company to launch iTunes Radio and purchase streaming music service Beats Music. There are rumors suggesting Apple is planning both a dramatic overhaul of iTunes and a rebranding of Beats Music, possibly merging the two into one all-inclusive service, and it's possible U2 is offering advice on new iTunes features.

Apple has also been aiming to get artists more involved in the music distribution process. In a recent interview, Apple employees and Beats co-founders Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine said Apple's goal was to bring together the people who create art with those who distribute it, which has been evidenced in the company's recent endeavors with U2.

In addition to his comments on what the band might be working on with Apple, Bono told the audience that U2 "wanted to work with the creative people at Apple, and that Jony Ive is a guy he'd "like to be in a band with. He'd be like a bigger Edge." He also commented on the negative reaction that the "Songs of Innocence" album garnered from some users, which he apologized for in October, saying "We got a lot of people who weren't interested in U2 to be mad at U2. I would call that an improvement in the relationship."

Article Link: U2's Bono on Collaborating With Apple: 'They Let Us Into the Labs'

 

[herocero]

hopefully Bono's secret sauce that has resulted in U2's latest turd albums didn't infect those in the lab.

 

[DeanL]

 

[Klae17]

I'm sorry but U2 isn't going to get me to buy new albums. It's funny how Taylor Swift pulls out of streaming and her album sales skyrocketed!

 

[Patriot24]

I wonder if the projects U2 is working on are related to the projects Trent Reznor is working on?

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

3-D versions of band members

Bono is completely full of himself if he thinks I want a 3D version of himself, or anyone else from U2.

On a more serious note, this is dumb. I don't want a 3D version of anyone from any band, whether I like the band or not. If I like the band a lot I might want to go to the concert, but that's for the entire experience, not just so I can see the members of the band.

 

[mac8867]

Man... isn't there anything better to put on the MR Front Page... I though we established, and Bono acknowledged, we don't give a SHI#$^% what U2 has to say.

 

[copykris]

i don't think bono has any idea how irrelevant his band has become since zooropa

 

[Patriot24]

It's funny how Taylor Swift pulls out of streaming and her album sales skyrocketed!

Yes, screwing your loyal fans that pay $9.99 per month for access to your music via streaming services into paying an additional $9.99 to buy a CD at Target is "funny".

 

[JHankwitz]

I'm sorry but U2 isn't going to get me to buy new albums. It's funny how Taylor Swift pulls out of streaming and her album sales skyrocketed!

If you can't get it free via streaming, you gotta buy it. Swift move!

 

[markfc]

I hate Bono but ;

"We got a lot of people who weren't interested in U2 to be mad at U2. I would call that an improvement in the relationship."

Made me laugh. Here Bono, have a GoodBoy sticker for the day.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

I'm sorry but U2 isn't going to get me to buy new albums. It's funny how Taylor Swift pulls out of streaming and her album sales skyrocketed!

Did they? I'd be quite surprised if that happened.

Personally, when a band announces their decision to try to pull me into the past, I inform them that I'm uninterested in their musical time machine and that I won't be listening to their album until they return to the present day (Spotify). There's hundreds of artists that I like, and most of them are on Spotify. I can live without Rammstein and the few other bands that insist on not being on Spotify. I figured other people felt similarly about the whiney bands that aren't content with getting paid for listens.

On that note, good bands get paid better via Spotify than bands not on Spotify over the course of several years. In the old world model, bands got paid once for an album whether it was any good or not. In this new model, if you make a timeless album, I'll listen to it again and again over the years so you'll get a higher reward, and if your album is a flash in the pan that I listen to 5 times before I'm tired of hearing it, you get next to nothing. Good artists should prefer this new model. Crappy artists (pop) know that this new model is fairer and want to stick with the old crappy one.

 

[copykris]

Yes, screwing your loyal fans that pay $9.99 per month for access to your music via streaming services into paying an additional $9.99 to buy a CD at Target is "funny".

let's hijack this thread and talk about the amazing genius of taylor swift a lil, shall we?

 

[JHankwitz]

Yes, screwing your loyal fans that pay $9.99 per month for access to your music via streaming services into paying an additional $9.99 to buy a CD at Target is "funny".

How is that screwing loyal fans. For that single $9.99 payment, you get unlimited plays. That's a bargain. Streaming just is not worth the ongoing cost.

 

[nikon1]

I'm hoping for much higher bit rates being supported in iTunes - as well as a simplified iTunes interface (circa 2007). Not holding up much hope for # 2 though!

 

[thefredelement]

Wouldn't it be cool if the artist could ditch labels and just release onto iTunes?

 

[Patriot24]

let's hijack this thread and talk about the amazing genius of taylor swift a lil, shall we?

I don't want to talk about Taylor Swift anymore than anyone else, but it is relevant to the discussion. The kinds of shenanigans that she pulled are exactly the kinds of things that a new music model will have to defend against/do away with. It is extremely difficult to sell consumers on the benefits of streaming services when major artists are yanking their entire libraries off whenever they feel like it.

These are problems that Apple needs to solve if they're going to survive and perhaps win in the new age of streaming music.

 

[mj1108]

Bono said he had wondered why the album covers displayed on iTunes weren't interactive or why they didn't display archival photos, lyrics, or 3-D versions of band members: anything that would make for a more engaging visual experience with fans to complement the music.

Sorry Bono, when listening to music nobody is going to sit there and look at iTunes.

 

[BornAgainMac]

He had a perfect chance and blew it. He could have said "Make the bloody iTunes focus on Music. TV Shows and Movies can be handled separately."

 

[Patriot24]

How is that screwing loyal fans. For that single $9.99 payment, you get unlimited plays. That's a bargain. Streaming just is not worth the ongoing cost.

This is no different than the current conversation around Apple Pay and CurrentC.

Consumers are happy with streaming services and the benefits they offer. Then someone comes along, rips out their end of the system, and tells consumers that it is for their benefit.

If people were content buying CDs, they'd buy CDs. That hasn't been the case for the better part of a decade.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Streaming isn't free.

I remember when Napster hit the scenes back in 1999-2000 timeframe.

If I bought the album, does the license die with the media? I mean, if I bought the physical album, the question was, could I download from Napster (back when it was a torrent like thing) Bob & Doug's Great White North album that I purchased, and left on the dashboard in the Phoenix summer and it was destroyed?

 

[gugy]

Lets the U2 and Bono bash contest begin.

 

[JackieInCo]

hopefully Bono's secret sauce that has resulted in U2's latest turd albums didn't infect those in the lab.

I downloaded it but still have not listened to it. I'm afraid to.

 

[Julien]

Wouldn't it be cool if the artist could ditch labels and just release onto iTunes?

Yes, but labels do discover and promote talent that would be otherwise overlooked in the 'clutter'. So while it's fashionable to dislike labels (and they have earned most of the dislike) it does cut both ways.

 

[bradkrischel]

Isn't he basically describing iTunes LP?