Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in
  • Preferences

Hot Comments

Comments: 306 +-   Why Won't Apple Sell Your iTunes LPs? on Tuesday October 13, @08:52AM

Posted by timothy on Tuesday October 13, @08:52AM
from the can-anyone-think-of-a-reason? dept.
applemedia
music
money
jfruhlinger writes "Over the weekend there's been a bit of controversy over the fact that Apple has effectively shut indie artists out of the iTunes LP market by charging $10,000 in design fees. But the real question is why Apple is in charge of designing the new iTunes LP at all, since the format is based on open Web design technologies. There's at least one iTunes LP already available outside the iTunes store. Why won't Apple sell it?"
story

Related Stories

Submission: Why won't Apple sell your iTunes LPs? by jfruhlinger (470035)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Why Won't Apple Sell Your iTunes LPs? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • LP? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Thelasko (1196535) on Tuesday October 13, @08:54AM (#29731239) Journal
    I don't use iTunes so I must be missing something. Do they sell Long Play records on iTunes or does LP stand for something else?

    • Re:LP? (Score:4, Funny)

      by Cheesetrap (1597399) on Tuesday October 13, @08:58AM (#29731279)

      It's part of that retro-is-new thing, all the kids are doing it, it's alltuhh-9ytujhff all the rage (sorry, electric typewriter keys got stuck - one of the hazards of being cool).

      • Re:LP? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Cheesetrap (1597399) on Tuesday October 13, @09:12AM (#29731415)

        Oh, and in case anyone was wondering, what they're calling an 'LP' is essentially a DVD-style menu for your album. With pics, lyrics and bio - you know, the kind of stuff any 5-year-old can get from google or can be auto-loaded by many modern music players (WinAMP, Amarok, take your pick).

        So on a scale of usefulness from "necessary for human survival" to "would rather have my balls in a vise", it scores about a "meh".

        • Re:LP? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by mmeister (862972) on Tuesday October 13, @10:01AM (#29732085)

          Actually, there is more. They showed the Doors LP which contained exclusive interviews and other video media. The idea is to get you to buy the whole album instead of just a track or two. I don't think they're really charging much more for it, maybe an extra $1, although the one's I've looked at seem to contain more songs than the standard album.

          Whether it works out or not, I at least give them credit for trying to add some additional value to the digital media and provide some better incentives to buying whole albums.

          • Re:LP? (Score:5, Informative)

            by jitterman (987991) on Tuesday October 13, @10:11AM (#29732223)
            Another example: the new Alice In Chains release includes a few tracks that are (according to iTunes) not on the CD release. For all those who are completists and want to stay "legal" will probably think this is a good thing. Also, the cost of the album is (for now) $9.99, whereas the cost of the various tracks (and you can't get the bonus tracks without buying the album, so they don't even count towards this cost) add up to more than that.

            • Re:LP? (Score:4, Interesting)

              by Khyber (864651) <khyberkitsune@gmail.com> on Tuesday October 13, @01:59PM (#29735217) Journal

              According to itunes it's not on the Cd release, but in just a couple of years when a new compilation album comes out it'll be very likely guaranteed that those tracks will be on the disc.

              I've got a pre-Sap/Jar of Flies dual demo vinyl with the AiC logo engraved on the back - a REAL LP with songs never released on the official albums and STILL unreleased to this day.

              iTunes doesn't have any real exclusives - those that actually know the band have the real exclusives that the rest of the world will never hear. Another example, "The Prince," written by Diamond Head and covered by Metallica, was originally on the Black Album (The Thompson Original Master Tape, anyways) and never made it to the final cut, instead appearing later as a b-side to One and Harvester of Sorrow singles and on the Garage, Inc album. Also, the original title to song #5 on the same Black Album - "Whereever I May Road" yes, not roam, ROAD.

              There hasn't been a real "exclusive" in the music market since digital distribution. No mispresses, no off-recordings, nothing that makes anything unique and awesome anymore. Can't carve a shitload of grooves into an optical disc like we did with a vinyl LP and still expect it to play!

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by mmeister (862972)

              iTunes store already has "complete my Album" which lets you buy the rest of the album, getting credit for the tracks you've already bought.

              In most cases, albums are generally cheaper than buying all the tracks individually. Based on my experience, it seems to be the case for about 80% of the albums I've looked at (YMMV). And the new LPs even more so (more like 95%).

              As someone else pointed out, the LP appears not to add additional cost to the album to the consumer, so it is throwing in extra goodies to encou

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by mmeister (862972)

              The tracks are standard 256-bit AAC. No DRM on audio (not sure about video). The videos also come as individual files.

              While the format is web-based, it's not a browse to a website solution.

              My guess is that the iPod app for iPhone will have to be updated to support the extras. Same is true for AppleTV. All the components to support it are there, but they need to be put together.

              I think you're seeing one early step in a multi-step process.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          "if they had been good, they would have played on the radio"

          you're joking, right?

        • Re:LP? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Vindicator9000 (672761) on Tuesday October 13, @10:06AM (#29732155)
          For real? I've heard people complain that new albums only have a few good songs, and thought it was bunk... if that's the case, you're not listening to the right bands to begin with. Now old albums only have a few good songs?

          What about Zoso? Dark Side of the Moon? Tommy? Van Halen I? Bookends? Electric Ladyland? Brothers in Arms? 2112? I could go into modern examples too, starting with everything Dredg has ever made, and finishing with everything Muse has ever made

          There are thousands of albums that are great, start to finish. What's killing the music industry is not piracy, it's the fact that people no longer have the attention span to sit through a great album, and aren't willing to pay album prices for the singles that the radio has drilled into their heads.

          • Re:LP? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by jandrese (485) <kensama@vt.edu> on Tuesday October 13, @10:21AM (#29732337) Homepage Journal
            I'd argue that albums where every song is solid is the exception, not the norm. In fact it's pretty rare. There are some famous albmus where everything was good, but far, far more where there are a couple of good songs at the front, a bunch of filler in the middle, then one good song at the end.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by TheRaven64 (641858)

              I'd argue that albums where every song is solid is the exception, not the norm

              True, but then bands that don't suck are also the exception, not the norm. It's pretty easy to find entire albums that are worth listening to if you stick to bands that don't suck...

          • Re:LP? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by jvkjvk (102057) on Tuesday October 13, @11:11AM (#29732979)

            I think it's insightful to his mindset when he says "if they had been good, they would have played on the radio".

            After that, it's easy to see where he's coming from, not that I agree with this premise.

          • Public service announcement.. (Score:5, Insightful)

            by msimm (580077) on Tuesday October 13, @11:40AM (#29733353) Homepage
            As one of you old farts myself let me just say: the more things change the more thing stay the same. Music is still good and people are about as smart as they've ever been and many new albums are good start to finish, but people are exposed to MUCH more music then they have ever been before and digital distribution has absolutely de-emphasized the importance of the concept of album and either of these things might have something to do with the finicky, song-based approach many listeners take today.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by alen (225700)

      nope

      they want you to buy a whole album and not a few songs so they sell you an LP which is all the songs, a few videos, and DVD type making of crap that you can only view on a computer

    • Re:LP? (Score:5, Informative)

      by LordKronos (470910) on Tuesday October 13, @09:08AM (#29731359) Homepage

      The LP is part of the move toward providing a more complete product back like they did with CDs, cassettes, and vinyl. With those things, you typically got extra stuff, like elaborate cover and inside art, and song lyrics, and with CDs there could be a data track with videos and other stuff. These are things that have gone by the wayside with digital downloads. Now that we are reaching the point where CD's are becoming a thing of the past for a much larger number of people, there has been an outcry about the loss of all of those extras. The digital LP is a focus to get those things back, so you can have all your extras for the complete experience.

    • Re:LP? (Score:4, Informative)

      by MagicM (85041) on Tuesday October 13, @09:08AM (#29731365)

      From gizmodo [gizmodo.com]:

      iTunes LPs: These are effectively like bonus CDs for digital albums. Each one comes with extra songs that you only get if you plunk down nearly $20 on the whole album -- you can't download these individually. Along with that, you get video content -- in most cases, live concert recordings -- as well as photo albums and lyrics, which serve as a sort of modern-day liner notes, I guess? It's a bit like buying one of those loaded-up "Digipack" CDs record companies used to release, except on iTunes.

    • Re:LP? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DECS (891519) on Tuesday October 13, @03:59PM (#29736965) Homepage Journal

      The idea is that "iTunes LP" would serve as the non-song content you used to get when you bought an album: the beautiful LP cover, lyrics, and other stuff. But upgraded to the digital era.

      The problem with this non-story is that Apple isn't selling iTunes LP extras, it's giving it away when you buy the regular album associated with it.

      It was a defensive move to prevent the labels from inventing their own proprietary format instead. iTunes LPs are just self-contained websites built using web standards: HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Apple created a JavaScript framework called TuneKit to allow these "self contained websites" to interact with iTunes, playing content etc.

      The same format is used to deliver iTunes Extras, the same bonus format for movies. Essentially, both are designed to make extremely easy to author bonus content that labels and studios (including indies) can use to add value to their existing work.

      Obviously, Apple doesn't want to launch the new format with a bunch of crap, and taint it with mocking commentary that equates garbage or wierdo music with the format. So it launched the new format with iTunes 9 using a dozen big music acts and a similar number of recent movies. There has been the typical hysterical fit from poorly sourced, half-right "tech news" pieces that claimed Apple hates indies and will charge $10,000 (!) to develop the titles.

      This is clearly all uninformed bullshit because there's no way Apple would develop content for third parties for just $10,000 a pop. Not even a professional authoring artist would do these for that kind of budget. Compare the free involved with authoring a DVD or BluRay disc, or creating all the artwork for a band's website or a multimedia CD-ROM.

      Slashdot picked up the story and keeps trying to bump it up into the air because it sounds bad for Apple. The reality is that this is the best possible album format design anyone in the FOSS community could have hoped for. It's open, you can built it yourself, and kids can even apply some remedial HTML skills to remix their own content downloads. It's the web with a minimal business model.

      New iTunes LP and Extras built using TuneKit Framework, aimed at Apple TV [roughlydrafted.com]
      Why Apple is betting on HTML 5: a web history [roughlydrafted.com]
      Apple plans to open iTunes LP for independent labels [appleinsider.com]

  • The answer is simple. The labels have made quiet little threats to pull hot product if Apple doesn't charge $10,000.

  • XXS and other issues (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Foofoobar (318279) on Tuesday October 13, @09:00AM (#29731301)
    It is quite likely that if they let people design their own LP's then Apple has to vet them for programming issues like cross site scripting especially if it allows HTML, Javascript or other languages to be active within them. And they just don't have the time to go over everyones code.

    In which case, they need to come up with a standardized couple of formats in which people can plug in artwork, videos and other data to create their own LP.

    • True - they should just use that famous Apple software innovation to create an IDE and then sell it... then anyone could create their own "LP" and distribute it... oh gawd I can only imagine what nice old aunt Betty will churn out for her grandkids and quilting club!!!

  • That's easy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tridus (79566) on Tuesday October 13, @09:04AM (#29731319) Homepage

    Because Apple is a big corporation primarly interested in making money. Getting $10000 in design fees is a handy way of making $10000 more then if they just let you put it up for free.

  • I might be able to answer that question if I knew what "LP" meant in this context; come on people, enough with the obscure acronyms, put what it means in the story summary.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MBCook (132727)

      LP. Long Play. Synonymous with record albums; you know the big black CD like things that you read with needles.

      It refers to iTunes songs with bonus content like pictures, lyrics, stories, video clips, etc attached instead of just bare music.

        • More so with the large decorated cardboard sleeves that hold the large black old timey records than the large black old timey records themselves.

  • These things are a last attempt to try and make "albums" relevant. They don't matter. Albums are an ex-parrot. They're pushing up the daisies. They're singing in the... no, that's it, they're not singing at all. That's the problem. They're tragically unhip.

    • Re:Who cares? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ReneeJade (1649107) <reneejadew@gmail.com> on Tuesday October 13, @09:35AM (#29731679)
      I disagree that albums are unhip or dead or anything like that. Anyone who is serious about their music knows that a complete LP should be, and often is, a single work of art. Many artists put a lot of effort into selecting and arranging songs on an album such that it reads like a single story. Albums may be dead among the teeny-boppers, but anyone over the age of 18 who loves music should appreciate the importance of albums. I agree with "who cares" though. I wish people would go down to their local CD shop and buy a record and support a small business instead of feeding some giant middle man like apple. Then you can read the lyrics, see the art, put the songs on your HDD, lend it to your family and do whatever you want with it. I hope albums and CD stores stay alive.

  • MP3 had a lot of crap, and by crap I don't mean "bad taste, but will sell reasonably well." It was the sort of stuff that is obscure because even with wide exposure it wouldn't get many fans.

    My guess is that Apple wants to discourage said bands from participating so that most of the stuff that gets on there is of decent quality by serious artists not some fly-by-night garage band that cobbled together a CD using an Audacity tutorial.

  • Marketing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bjourne (1034822) on Tuesday October 13, @09:34AM (#29731671)
    So that Slashdot will have something about it to write, to generate buzz about this new "iTunes LP" thing no one has ever heard about.

  • Apple says there is no $10,000 charge (Score:5, Informative)

    by chrisgeleven (514645) on Tuesday October 13, @09:36AM (#29731703) Homepage

    http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1038901&c=1 [musicweek.com]

    However, an iTunes spokesman says the fee is fiction. “There is no production fee charged by Apple,” he says. "We're releasing the open specs for iTunes LP soon, allowing both major and indie labels to create their own.”

  • Story is bogus; either way I don't care (Score:3, Informative)

    by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on Tuesday October 13, @12:19PM (#29733865)

    Guess I could've stopped after typing the subject... but anyway. I'm old enough where I still have LPs in a box somewhere. Thinking back to how often I looked at the liner notes, extras, etc. - the total for a given album varies between zero and one. I just wanted the music back then, and that's the case now.

    I do find it funny (but not surprising; I've been on Slashdot too long to have high expectations) that people here are reacting with outrage, even though the story's been shown to be bogus - Apple says they're not charging a fee for this. Being the control freaks they usually are, they're working on opening it to everyone rather than just letting it out there: "We're releasing the open specs for iTunes LP soon, allowing both major and indie labels to create their own. There is no production fee charged by Apple."

    • Re:Can anyone think of a reason? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Tuesday October 13, @09:09AM (#29731373) Homepage

      I can.

      What if this is to prevent labels from dumping crud into the iTunes store and making iTunes LP look like a joke? By forcing the studios to commit at least so much money to the project, they may only do it for bigger bands and when they can do a good job, instead of just putting 20 images together and just saying "Look! It's an LP" for everything in their catalog.

      Basically, this may be a way to help with initial quality control.

      The question is if it continues or not. Whether it's adjusted up or down, how it starts to work with indie labels, that will be the question.

    • Re:Groan ... Pay More Money for What Exactly? (Score:5, Informative)

      by shinma (106792) on Tuesday October 13, @09:23AM (#29731523) Homepage

      Extractor? On a mac, you just have to rightclick on the LP file and do a "show package contents." It's just a bundle that uses HTML5/CSS3.

      Doesn't take a lot of work.

    • Re:Groan ... Pay More Money for What Exactly? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by RobotRunAmok (595286) on Tuesday October 13, @09:24AM (#29731533)

      I believe that Apple wants to control -- to "curate" -- the new experience of the LP while it is in its nascent stage of marketing. They want to sell these things, they want to convince people they are worth buying, and to accomplish that they cannot let the floodgates open for every garage band to participate before some kind of clear quality benchmarks are established.

      Let's face it: There is a lot of great Open Source software. Open Source design? Not so much...

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jo_ham (604554)

      No negative moderation needed really, just the link to the story where Apple denies it is charging this 10k fee.

      http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1038901&c=1 [musicweek.com]

      I actually think a fee of some sort here would be advisable for the "LP" so that there was at least some barrier to entry so that you couldn't just add a couple of photos and call it an LP and charge £25 for it. If there's a small barrier to entry (10k is not small really) then it would prevent (hopefully) dilution

Search
One person's error is another person's data.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.