In our discussion on the Apple iTunes/Apple Music settlement, it was brought up that one aspect of the settlement allows Apple to sell iPods (or other media) containing music files. This opens the door for a slew of targeted iPods, from near-disposable devices with a single, group of songs, or a single album all the way up to high-end versions containing an entire band’s catalog pre-loaded.
Flash-memory drives are now so cheap, software companies are starting to use them to ship software. H&R Block, for example, is selling the latest version of its tax-preparation software on a flash drive for $40 — the same price as the CD version. How much would it cost Apple to add a few music chips and some cheap earbuds?
Apple was prevented from doing this until now by the 15-year-old contract between Apple Corps, the Beatles’ music company, and Apple Computer. This contract precluded Jobs’ Apple from acting as a music company and from selling CDs or “physical media delivering prerecorded content … (such as a compact disc of the Rolling Stones’ music).”
Apple has been selling music as downloads for years, of course, but thanks to this clause, the company couldn’t sell an iPod with music already loaded onto it.
These cheap album iPods could be sold at bus stations and airports: instant music, no computer required. Bands could sell pre-loaded iPods at concerts, maybe containing the concert they just played. There could be Broadway show iPods, movie soundtrack iPods and iPods burned at retail stores with custom play lists.
It’s going to be the biggest change to the iPod since the iTunes online store debuted in 2002.
Do you agree that this could challenge the CD and other pre-recorded music?
Let me get this straight — so instead of a bunch of CDs and tapes cluttering up my house, I’m going to have piles of iPods — each needing charging or batteries?
Bah! Doomed to failure as a mass marketing item.
Good for promotion, though since you could send out your CD to the Grammy voters and not worry too much about it being pirated.
I’ll answer that last question with a resounding, “No!” Even if this question is only looked at from a music perspective it’s still a no. There’s something about owning your own copy of an album at a high quality recording that digital music won’t be able to touch. Look at vinyl, with a high quality needle and record player you can hear sounds that almost surely get lost in the translation with digital copies. Compression is killing music and eliminating the peaks and valleys that make a song what it is. If they’re going to even consider doing this, they had better have the music at a high quality and the user had better own the content beyond any shadow of a doubt.
#22 said: “Compression is killing music and eliminating the peaks and valleys that make a song what it is.”
Although we can argue that data compression (I imagine this is what you’re refering to since we’re talking about digital music distribution) does impact dynamic range, to me the kind of compression that is hurting music nowadays is the competition among some “musicians” and producers in the use of dynamic compression at recording/mastering level. This my-music-should-sound-louder competition is complete bull.
21,
You have a point about the clutter, but all Apple needs to do is allow the music to be downloaded into your iTunes library and the problem is gone. Then you have a simple package collection situation where you keep the iPods that commemorate or otherwise represent groups or events you want to remember.
For the record, I don’t believe the iPod will kill the CD. The Internet, broadband, and big hard drives are killing the CD. Media like the CD and DVD are going to become primarily a retail sales mechanism, as all other music purchases will be a packageless download. Then it doesn’t matter if you listen on a Rio, a Sansa, or an iPod, you aren’t listening to a CD.
As for audio quality, I used to be such an audiohile I’d rewire my speakers and pack my turntable with clay (yes, I’m old, too) to damp resonances. To see people who listen to music primarily with earbuds debate audio quality is amusing. I have a dock on my stereo for my iPod, and the music from it sounds good. Better than the radio, and only detectable from CD on A/B comparison.
When I want to listen to music for the experience (when not playing it in the background while working, for example), I’ll dust off my turntable.
#24
Wow, you were an audiophile!
I do some music production and I totally agree with you that the ear buds and boom boxes just don’t cut it — yet most people don’t know the difference.
These new close-monitor self-powered speakers can sound pretty good but I haven’t heard any that beat those big ‘ole dedicated amplifiers and gigantic wood speakers like we had in the analogue era.
I know from my studio experience, that quality sound equipment isn’t enough — you also have to treat the room.
As for the vinyl sounding better than the CD — I can’t really hear it myself.
25,
I think vinyl sounds “warmer” for lack of a better word. I also think that the various genuflections to the gods of fidelity and the tea ceremony involved in prepping and playing an LP make you appreciate the sound more in a way, too.
I was such a hard-core guy I used to hang in Noel Lee’s (Monster Cable’s founder) basement and perform comparative listening on cables and amps and such. I’ve gotten better, though.
One thing you have to take into account when comparing cd’s and lp’s is how much “interest” did the artist, the label and/or the engineer when doing the transfer.
But yes, 44.1/16 is not enough to get the same feeling as a good lp properly played.
Then again, you don’t have to deal with the RIAA eq curve with cd’s. With mp3 and other compressed/drm’d audio formats is another RIAA curve you have to endure. I think is called RIAA bend-over curve.
Bad idea. Bad idea. Bad idea.
While it would be great to immediately access your purchased music, there’s still nothing like getting a new CD or LP, admiring the packaging, pouring through liner notes, and holding the disc in your hands like it’s some sort of treasure. While most of my CDs rarely get played more than once or twice, I still treasure them all. For some odd reason, I have more of a satisfied feeling of ownership if I have the physical CD in my hands, rather than downloading a purchased album.
If we’re going towards specialized iPods, though, I’d say the first step would be in the software itself. The white background gets pretty bland after a while. Why not personalized backgrounds? Different color schemes? Album art that actually fills the entire screen? Zune did pretty well with that, but something tells me that the iPod could really pull this off.