Did Apple swerve us, or are we just a bunch of nincompoops? (I vote for the latter.) So, so many people were expecting to see The Beatles finally show up on iTunes, if not the event itself, yesterday. Nearly 24 hours later, you’re still unable to buy “Help!” from Steve Jobs’ little store. Huge deal, or should we all just move on with our lives? And is the band making a mistake in ignoring the largest music store on Planet Earth?
You all know my opinion when it comes to The Beatles and the iTunes Store: it doesn’t matter to me (and I’d imagine to many of you, too) because I could very easily rip Revolver (or download it from What.cd) and put it on my device of choice. That’s what I said in our live podcast yesterday, that the move to the iTunes Store would be done merely to get a mention on NBC Nightly News at 6:30pm. “In other, non-healthcare news, The Beatles are now available on iTunes. Ask your children and grand-children what that means. We’ll be back, after these messages.”
So, personally, The Beatles not being on iTunes doesn’t affect me in the least. Again, I’m not anti-Beatles, it’s just that I’ve known how to rip a CD for at least 10 years now. (And look, if you’re considering buying The Beatles off iTunes, then you’re obviously not too concerned with sound quality, as you listen on your iPhone in the subway or at the gym. So what if the CDs were terribly processed, you’ll be listening on a cheap portable device on cheap headphones. Real audiophiles would have ponied up for the vinyl ages ago.)
What I would be concerned about, though, is: Is the band making a mistake? The Beatles probably are never going to be hotter than they are this week (save some sort of tragedy), what with the release of The Beatles: Rock Band and that super awesome re-mastered collection. Why not score the hat trick, and put your albums up for sale on iTunes to go along with those other two major releases? My guess is that the band didn’t want to cannibalize sales of the physical album by finally going digital. How horribly short sighted.
Picture this: some 15-year-old kid plays The Beatles: Rock Band with his friend. Do you think this kid has $180 (or $260 at retail) to spend on that re-mastered collection? Nope, but I bet he received an iTunes gift card or two for his birthday.
Its not the beatles choice, its the lawyers of both the beatles and MAC. They have to make a total agreement on royalty rights.
Its not the beatles choice, its the lawyers of both the beatles and MAC. They have to make a total agreement on royalty rights. Which when dealing with both MAC and the music industry, lets face it. It’s going to be a while. From what i hear they just got together on it the other day again, and couldnt agree.
Who’s this MAC character and what’s he doing talking to the Beatles?
***pumps fists & screams up at the sky*** YOKO!!!
It’s a legal issue with EMI. The Beatles never make mistakes.
Yes.
Yeah, what’s listening to music from the past without all the pops and scratches that come with LPs?
What is “NBC Nightly News at 6:30pm?”
Is it some sort of timed blog?
As far as I’m concerned, the only way to listen to Beatles as they were originally intended to be listened to is to sit by your cheap little transistor radio all day and hope “Come Together” comes on.
Seriously, I’m so sick of audiophiles and their nit-picking over things unimportant. If you can tell the difference between an mp3 and a 44.1 KHz wav without listening to them side by side – you need to get a life. It’s the music that matters. I can still enjoy “Let It Be” whether it’s an mp3, CD or 8-track, so who cares? Oh right, the owners of Rockford Fosgate and Polk Audio do. $700 for a speaker? Please.
Nods in agreement.
Hmmm…Maybe it’s unimportant to you but that doesn’t mean it is not important.
So, I don’t have a life because I love music, played music (drums 22+ years), have listened to plenty brilliantly recorded albums on of top notch systems of which I am now hooked because I know what that CD is supposed to sound like & want the reproduction to be accurate instead of this over exaggerated, bass filled garbage that you think is the same quality because you don’t have a clue as to what the differences are between Mp3 & CD quality .Wav??
There were probably two presentations planned for yesterday and one would have included a Beatles segment. The colourful iPods reminded me of the colours of the Sgt Pepper album. Too bad it didn’t happen – I’d guess Apple wouldn’t want to charge the very high price for this musical review.
i am loving all the beatles buzz. i found this funny article comparing the beatles rock band with the new guitar hero…worth a read for this of you interested: http://onthebutton.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/rockband/
The Beatles did the right thing by not going on iTunes. The idea of being able to buy single tracks, devoid of the accompanying album, is anethema to all true music lovers. The nice subtleties of the physical release don’t exist – the picture sleeve, accompanying booklet, nicely produced CD. I mean really I’m surprised that anybody can stand to buy digital tracks. Downloading is even worse, it makes cassette tapes sound decent. Mp3s sound so god-awful compared to CDs….F*ing bin them!
You know, somehow I think that with or without iTunes, these Beatles guys might just do ok.
Seriously though, obviously Apple still isn’t willing to do whatever it is they need to, in order to get The Beatles on iTunes, and Harmonix was willing to jump through the hoops to get them on Rock Band. I don’t see how it hurts the band to do things on their terms. It isn’t like they need iTunes to be successful. They are already the most successful band to ever live.
Unfortunately, trying to get the Beatles on iTunes is exactly the sort of situation where Apple doesn’t play well with others. Apple works very hard to always tip the perceived balance of power in their own direction. They are used to people coming to them, and agreeing to play on Apple’s terms. Apple isn’t very comfortable, or effective, in a situation like this, where they really have no leverage.
The Beatles could sell their remastered set nowhere but flea markets and county fairs, and that would have no negative effects on their sales. It would just make flea markets and county fairs hip for a couple years. The Beatles aren’t some flash in the pan boy band who needs to cash in on every impulse purchase they can get before they are forgotten. The people who want to buy their music are going to buy it, with or without iTunes. If and when Apple finally gets The Beatles on iTunes, it will be The Beatles adding value to iTunes, not the other way around.
lol @ gi joe
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
OK, clearly I’m missing something. I’m struggling with the logic of “it’s my way or the highway”. If you personally feel that the only way “truly experience” the Beatles catalog is to listen to an album in its entirety, that’s wonderful! Have at it and enjoy! To be frank, that is the only way I play the white album. But to say that others should not even be allowed to enjoy it “al a catre” seems ridiculous to me.
I think I gas to wait 20 minutes after the Re-Masters where officially release to find them posted in the News Groups although most where already up before the official release. If they won’t sell digital copies I guess the pirates will post then for free. Just a thought since I own all the original Beatles Albums isn’t legal for me to have digital copies of the song I mean sure I didn’t copy the album but still I have paid for the song once.
First of all, I think there are legal wranglings in the mix here. But the Beatles did the right thing in waiting to get the physical remasters out to shops, which longtime fans have been clamoring for. We wanted CDs with liner notes and the like to drool over. Mission accomplished.
Part 2, I agree, is ITunes. The announcement Wednesday about an LP feature is something that should finally get the Beatles on board. It is a great idea, because people will have to buy the entire album and not single tracks.
If something can be worked out to ensure people in the future listen to their work the way it was intended (full albums, not tracks) and enjoy the liner notes and videos via the IPod, it will work to everybody’s benefit.
I’m guessing they also wanted to sell as many copies of the new CDs this holiday season. So — I think they will come to ITunes in 2010 and ride another wave of commercial success.
Am I missing something, Its the friggen beatles. Oh well you cant buy them on Itunes. If you want them in MP3 format that bad go to a site like MP3Fiesta. Or something. And dont worry ITunes will still take that file, move it, copy it, and destroy it making it AAC format.
There ya go. Problem solved. IDK why the beatles all the sudden have so much publicity. But its lame.