The Beatles On iTunes 551
Yesterday Apple put a big old teaser up on their homepage for an unknown
announcement to occur today. Speculation ran rampant from the delayed
iOS 4.2, to iTunes Streaming to a release of the Beatles catalog on the iTunes
store. Well, it was the latter. They have 13 albums on the store now, and a $150
box set. So here's hoping that we get that iPad multitasking yet this November.
Big (Score:2, Interesting)
If you don't already.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Good, but overrated products (Score:5, Interesting)
In a way, Apple and The Beatles are very similar. Both were pioneers in their industries. Both had throngs of loyal fans willing to do anything for them. Both are scarcely more than a thin veneer over the status quo.
It's a bit poetic that these two entities which have been at each other's throats over who has the right to call themselves a fruit now are hand in hand making money off the panting masses.
Apple's done it again.
Sosumi (Score:5, Interesting)
And yet there's the trademark dispute over the Apple brand, the Beatles owning Apple Corps, and Jobs having Apple Computer.
When new sounds for System 7 were created, the sounds were reviewed through Apple's legal department and they objected that the new system sound alert "chime" had a name that was "too musical", under the recent settlement. The creator of the new sound alerts for System 7 and the Macintosh Startup Sound, Jim Reekes, had grown frustrated with the legal scrutiny and first quipped it should be named "Let It Beep", a pun on The Beatles' "Let It Be". When someone remarked that that wouldn't pass legal's approval, he remarked "so sue me." After a brief reflection, he resubmitted the sound's name as sosumi (a homophone of "so sue me"), telling the legal department that the name was Japanese and had nothing to do with music.
Jobs' Narcissism (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, this announcement's hype is testament to Steve Jobs' narcissism, and whatever is the corporate version of "narcissism" (monopolism?) over at Apple Records. Apple Records has been suing and attacking Apple Computer since the Apple ][, claiming "trademark" rights that don't exist (computers aren't music, even when computers play or sell music). "Beatles on iTunes" closes the "Apple vs Apple" spat that has kept Beatles music from Apple users for so long, even when it there was no possible combo. Which is probably a lot bigger deal to Jobs and Apple Records than it is to the public, even if Apple's music distribution is #1 and the Beatles recordings are still among the most popular music in the world.
Because Steve Jobs is a Baby Boomer whose narcissism crossed with Apple Records' narcissism is bigger than even the narcissism of the entire rest of the "Me Generation".
Re:If you don't already.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Agreed. I think the Beatles inspiration at the time is worth a hell of a lot more than their music.
* - Paul pushed Badfinger and basically kick starting the Power Pop genre
* - Lennon inspired Harry Nilsson to release some absolutely classic albums
* - They acted as a think tank for George Harrison. George Harrison's All Things Must Pass is worth more than the collective whole of the Beatles catalog, imo
* - Basically caused Brian Wilson to go nuts. We wouldn't have Pet Sounds or Smile without the Beatles.
* - Without the Beatles we wouldn't have The Monkees. Without The Monkees, Michael Nesmith probably wouldn't have had a solo career. Michael Nesmith basically stands in equal footing with Graham Parsons as far as creating the Alt Country genre. You can think of Michael Nesmith and Graham Parsons as the 70s versions of Jay Farrar and Jeff Tweedy as far as Alt Country importance goes.
You can't deny the impact they had at the time, although you can debate the merits of a lot of their catalog until you're blue in the face.
Re:If you don't already.... (Score:1, Interesting)
We'll make that comparison if Justin Bieber is still as popular in ten years and actually does something to advance music. I'm guessing that the machine will have chewed him up and spit him out long before then, but he won't care because he'll still be rich as hell.
Re:Jobs' Narcissism (Score:1, Interesting)
Erm, no.
The Beatles incorporated Apple Corps ("It's a pun" said Paul at the time) as a technology company as well as a record label. Lennon knew somebody who claimed to be able to build a revolutionary new recording system (which never actually materialised) so the articles of association of the company included relevant language to that effect.
When Apple Computer started up, the Beatles took notice, but agreed to let Apple poach on their preserve as long as Apple kept out of the music business. It is alleged that (for whatever reason) Apple chose to renege on their undertaking. Consequently The Beatles chose to exercise their hard-won right to decide where and by whom their music would be sold.
The Beatles do not forget a slight: when Sean Penn made the movie "I Am Sam" he wanted to use Beatles songs on the soundtrack. However, in his younger years he had taken part in a movie for George Harrison ("Shanghai Surprise" - remember that?) and during his involvement gave George Harrison a lot of grief. Consequently his request (although it was made after George Harrison's death) was torpedoed by the remaining Moptops and Sean had to use cover versions.
So this announcement demonstrates the power of forgiveness, the power of Alzheimer's or the power of money, depending on how cynical you are.
Re:Re-buyers already have it on CD, so why bother? (Score:0, Interesting)
You know.
If they would put out the box sets, more specifically, the MONO remastered box set they did a year or two ago...and put on iTunes in a lossless format, for a reasonable price.
I'd buy them.
Do you even have a clue how good 256kbps AAC sounds?
If you feel like throwing away more than half your storage for audio files (see what I did there?) that not one person in 10,000 could reliably distinguish from the original in blind ABX tests [hydrogenaudio.org], then by all means go for it.
Meanwhile, the rest of us will already be enjoying the content BEFORE we become too old to hear the difference, waiting for "the perfect version" to be released.
Life is a series of compromises. 256k AAC is a pretty small sonic compromise in the overall scheme of things.
But perhaps for you, what we are REALLY talking about is the compromise your personal mindset would have to go through...
Re:Re-buyers already have it on CD, so why bother? (Score:3, Interesting)
Meanwhile, the rest of us will already be enjoying the content BEFORE we become too old to hear the difference, waiting for "the perfect version" to be released."
I have a stereo where you can hear the difference my friend.
And given that...why would I NOT want to purchase the highest quality (lossless) that could be easily available...and rip it to lesser quality formats for environments that are not ideal for listening (car, gym on iPod...etc).
And come on..storage isn't any type of restriction these days. 1 TB drives are going for under $89 these days. But if I downloaded lossless from iTunes (broadband connection is plenty fast)..I'd burn them on CD or DVD or the like for long term storage as well as for my media computer hooked to the stereo.
What can I say, I like to get the best version possible of anything I do these days at this point in my life. Why not? It is about quality over quantity.