Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Apple sells more than 1 million songs


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
66 replies to this topic

#1 of 67 OFFLINE   Marc Colella

Marc Colella

    Screenwriter



  • 2,607 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted May 05 2003 - 08:09 AM

http://www.msnbc.com...38.asp?0cv=CB20

Looks like MP3 will be the successor to CD, not hi-rez.

Apple created more music industry buzz in 1 week, than SACD and DVD-A combined has in 5 years.

#2 of 67 OFFLINE   Al B. C

Al B. C

    Supporting Actor



  • 645 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2002

Posted May 05 2003 - 08:12 AM

Apple created more music industry buzz in 1 week, than SACD and DVD-A combined has in 5 years.


You're certainly correct on that point, although I personally don't understand the attraction.

#3 of 67 OFFLINE   Justin Lane

Justin Lane

    Screenwriter



  • 2,149 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2000

Posted May 05 2003 - 08:19 AM

I am hoping this has got to be Apple owners supporting the new service just because it is Apple.

Quote:
Apple created more music industry buzz in 1 week, than SACD and DVD-A combined has in 5 years.


So true, and so sad. Lo-res and portability seem to be the future of music for the masses.

J

#4 of 67 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted May 05 2003 - 08:30 AM

I am very, very happy for Apple. They have done a great service to the music business by making more inexpensive music available and using the digital revolution to their advantage instead of randomly suing hapless college students which engenders even more cheating and animosity.

Quote:
Looks like MP3 will be the successor to CD, not hi-rez.


It's a bit early to predict, but I can counter this argument with the following scenario:

1. Market biforcates into two segments: (a) younger, more digital music download crowd that remains satisfied with MP3s - songs sell legally for $1 or less (b) older, or more technical music loving crowd with more emphasis on natural reproduction. Here hi-rez remains the best thing and more titles come out.

2. Record labels realize extra profits on DVDA/Super Audio (herein "hirez").

3. Labels push for more extras and other items only available on hirez. Redbook increasingly part of hybrid releases in either format.

4. Hirez prices lower with more competition, titles proliferate with more case studies and bands on board.

5. MP3 buyers grow up or get more into audio/home theater and decide to spend more money on better recordings.

6. Labels, while disgusted at lack of control of MP3 world, at least enjoy two different profit streams.

Wildcard: All hardware/software makers agree to yet another new single hirez standard based on higher density DVDs.

In this scenario, the MP3 crowd benefits hirez launch since it squeezes out redbook in favor of higher margined product. The high-end consumer wins with more hirez titles and lower prices via economies of scale. The low-end consumer benefits from lower costs and ability to just try a few songs before buying whole album. The record label wins by getting Pink Floyd, Stones, and other supergroup fans to buy new, improved hirez recordings as part of title replacement cycle. Bands win by pocketing more royalty dollars.

Posted Image
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#5 of 67 OFFLINE   Justin Lane

Justin Lane

    Screenwriter



  • 2,149 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2000

Posted May 05 2003 - 08:51 AM

Quote:
Wildcard: All hardware/software makers agree to yet another new single hirez standard based on higher density DVDs.


I could actually see this happening down the road. As more Universal players hit the market, we will begin to see more and more chipsets which do both PCM and DSD. By the time a standardized Hi-def system comes to be, both Hi-res formats may very well be standard features on many DVD players. They could design a new Hi-def format from ground up which handles either PCM or DSD. At that point we would probably see a new super DSD (double the sampling rate) and improved PCM (384 kHz stereo/192kHz surround) as well.

Of course a secure digital connection will be the key. Until the need for six analog cables is done away with, DVD-A and SACD for surround will remain in their small audiophile niche. It seems like the momentum for a secure digital connection has begun to run out of steam for both Hi-res formats, so who knows.

J

#6 of 67 OFFLINE   BrianB

BrianB

    Producer



  • 5,211 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 29 2000

Posted May 05 2003 - 08:53 AM

Quote:
Bands win by pocketing more royalty dollars.

Actually, that's something I've never seen mentioned on HTF - what's the artist royalities on an "average" higher priced SACD vs CD?
high resolution ipod featuring dlp hd programming is the best, almost as good as playstation 2 with wega windows media on a super cd! ps2 and tivo do dolby tv with broadband hdtv!

#7 of 67 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted May 05 2003 - 09:00 AM

Quote:
what's the artist royalities on an "average" higher priced SACD vs CD?


Last I checked it was a few dollars or less. But any kind of volume builds the total take quickly.

I know of audiophile labels that provide bands anywhere from $1-4 per disc in royalties for redbook CD. But remember these often go to payback advances...

Quote:
a new super DSD (double the sampling rate) and improved PCM (384 kHz stereo/192kHz surround) as well.


Justin, a number of engineers feel doubling the DSD sampling rate would be ideal.
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#8 of 67 OFFLINE   MickeS

MickeS

    Producer



  • 5,065 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 24 2000

Posted May 05 2003 - 09:09 AM

Singles sell for 99 cents each, and many albums go for $9.99.


Doesn't anyone else find that to be rather expensive? It'll be like $11 once tax and a CD-R is figured in to the price, that's only a few bucks less than a CD costs at the store, and then I get nice packaging too.

But it's nice that more services like these are coming.
/Mike

#9 of 67 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted May 05 2003 - 09:12 AM

Quote:
Doesn't anyone else find that to be rather expensive?


No because the average CD is around $12 and most have around 12 tracks or less, around a buck a song. And you have the convenience of not even leaving your home. Posted Image
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#10 of 67 OFFLINE   Justin Lane

Justin Lane

    Screenwriter



  • 2,149 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2000

Posted May 05 2003 - 09:15 AM

Quote:
Doesn't anyone else find that to be rather expensive? It'll be like $11 once tax and a CD-R is figured in to the price, that's only a few bucks less than a CD costs at the store, and then I get nice packaging too.


Not to mention that the sound quality is worse then a CD. I always thought selling an entire album online to download was foolish. These services may better fill the niche of the "single" which seems to have been all but done away with when it comes to CD.

J

#11 of 67 OFFLINE   MickeS

MickeS

    Producer



  • 5,065 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 24 2000

Posted May 05 2003 - 09:59 AM

Yeah 99 cents for a song sounds like a better deal, even though the price per song is higher that way in some cases. Unfortunately, they don't offer all album songs for sale individually, so you'll once again be forced to pay for a whole album or download the song somewhere else in some cases.
/Mike

#12 of 67 OFFLINE   Marc Colella

Marc Colella

    Screenwriter



  • 2,607 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted May 05 2003 - 10:32 AM

.99 cents does seem a little high, but you have to remember -you pay for exactly what you want.

.99 cents per song doesn't seem so high when it costs you $13 to have a CD with only 2 good songs (averaging $6-$7 for each song you want). The average consumer gets more value with a service like this - and they either won't notice the sacrifice in sound quality, or just won't care.

The market will dictate whether the price is too high in the long run. It can easily drop to .50 cents per song down the road.
Plus, I would imagine that we will see "sales" every once in a while and promotions that reduce the price significantly.

200,000 songs seems like alot, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. The record labels will see how successful this is and start up their own service no doubt. More and more CD/DVD players will offer MP3 compatability and portable MP3 devices will take off even more.

I found this quote to be quite impressive:

Quote:
Apple also reported that retail shoppers picked up 20,000 new iPod music players over the weekend. New, slimmer models went on sale Friday. Apple has received 110,000 new iPod orders since the new music players were unveiled on April 28.


#13 of 67 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted May 05 2003 - 11:37 AM

Quote:
Apple also reported that retail shoppers picked up 20,000 new iPod music players over the weekend. New, slimmer models went on sale Friday. Apple has received 110,000 new iPod orders since the new music players were unveiled on April 28.


I'm thinking about an iPod for plane travel. Can they now interface with an IBM PC?
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#14 of 67 OFFLINE   Marc Colella

Marc Colella

    Screenwriter



  • 2,607 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted May 05 2003 - 11:59 AM

Quote:
I'm thinking about an iPod for plane travel. Can they now interface with an IBM PC?


The current iPods were available for Mac and Windows. Really, the only difference is the filesystem. I purchased a Mac version last year before the Windows version was available, and just reprogrammed it for Fat32 so Windows can recognize it. Using EphPod as the software frontend.
You'll need a firewire card on your PC to move MP3s around.

The newly announced ones have both Firewire and USB 2.0, so it's definitely the way to go.

Been using it for around 9 months for my 2 hours of commuting per day, and the thing has been my savior.

#15 of 67 OFFLINE   Neil M

Neil M

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 240 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2002

Posted May 05 2003 - 01:03 PM

Wasn't the reincarnation of Napster supposed to have happened a while ago? I really can't see the new service lasting that long, especially when any person can get the songs for free!!!!! It's new and Apple users wanted to try it out. The real test is where it will be one year from now and when I look into the crystal ball, the answer is nowhere to be seen. There are plenty of arguments to be made on both sides but here is what I see happening if the service is successful. Retail stores will be hit hard!!! Think about it. I download an album for my iPod. Why in the hell would I spend another 11 or 12 bucks buying the cd all over again? People will stop buying cd's when they have to pay for mp3's. The sad fact is that people don't really care about quality just like they hate those black bars on their tv's. I know the music industry only cares about the money so the retail stores would be the victims of all this. The way I see it is that the music industry is desperate to make money off of a technology that they hoped they could control. But they couldn't control it and now they're playing catch-up. And they're using Apple to help them. I don't blame them for trying this. In fact, I'd probably do the same thing. This is all juat my opinion though. Feel free to disagree.

#16 of 67 OFFLINE   Camp

Camp

    Screenwriter



  • 2,303 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 03 1999

Posted May 05 2003 - 01:56 PM

Quote:
Doesn't anyone else find that to be rather expensive? It'll be like $11 once tax and a CD-R is figured in to the price, that's only a few bucks less than a CD costs at the store, and then I get nice packaging too.

Hmm...I didn't get charged taxes on either of my purchases. I guess this varies by state?

Quote:
I really can't see the new service lasting that long, especially when any person can get the songs for free!!!!!

"Any person" can get the songs for free but the vast majority of people don't. It's just too much trouble for people to learn the ins and outs of peer-to-peer sharing -especially when there is no guarantee in the quality of the file. Apple's real coup is how easy they made it. Like the iPod, it's a model of simplicity.

Quote:
Unfortunately, they don't offer all album songs for sale individually, so you'll once again be forced to pay for a whole album or download the song somewhere else in some cases.

Really? I haven't seen that yet. Can you site some examples?
I've seen several incomplete albums but I have yet to see an example of them listing songs that can only be purchased by buying the whole album.

#17 of 67 OFFLINE   Sathyan

Sathyan

    Second Unit



  • 298 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 16 2002

Posted May 05 2003 - 02:24 PM

Does anyone know if Apple's service include allowing the download of cover art?

#18 of 67 OFFLINE   Vince Maskeeper

Vince Maskeeper

    Lead Actor



  • 6,504 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 1999

Posted May 05 2003 - 04:29 PM

.99 cents does seem a little high, but you have to remember -you pay for exactly what you want.


And this will mark the final nail in the coffin of decent music having any commercial viability. It's bad enough currently, with "single" minded execs pushing computers to analyze files for "hit worthiness"-- when the market then allows you to completely disregard an album as a work or "whole" we will see this single oriented industry get worse.

And bands with a more "album" oriented style will pretty much evaporate from popular consumption.

Not good, not good at all.

-V
Need an introduction to home theater? Check out our FAQ and Primer!!

#19 of 67 OFFLINE   Al B. C

Al B. C

    Supporting Actor



  • 645 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2002

Posted May 05 2003 - 04:59 PM

Quote:
And bands with a more "album" oriented style will pretty much evaporate from popular consumption.

Not good, not good at all.

As much as I hate to agree with Vince's take, he's 100% correct. This definately caters to the 1 hit wonders.

Video killed the radio star was bad enough. This is worse.

Sad state of affairs.

#20 of 67 OFFLINE   Camp

Camp

    Screenwriter



  • 2,303 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 03 1999

Posted May 05 2003 - 05:12 PM

Interesting, the end of the album. I hadn't thought of that. It's a paradigm of older generations. Kids will never know the art they will be missing.

Quote:
Does anyone know if Apple's service include allowing the download of cover art?

Yes, cover art is included. Pretty good quality too.


Back to Music & Soundtracks



Forum Nav Content I Follow