In the interest of having something to say on my own site, I've posted there.

Please go read. Comment There. Comment Here. Whichever.

Good review.

Did you end up buying anything?

Not yet. But I may go back today for Dylan's 'A Hard Rain 's' Gonna Fall' -- that song has been running through my head all morning. It's worth 99¢ to get it outta there so I can focus...

On the audio nerd tip, Apple claims that their AAC format used at 128kbs rivals CD quality (generally 144kbs i think)
Any comments on that?
How do those transient highs sound?
Though I am a macaholic, i have not stepped into this foreign world of buying music through apple, and I don't know that I will until the catalog expands a hair more.
no results for:
Pixies, Jon Spencer, Fugazi (big surprise there! hah!), Jesus Lizard, Blackstar, Aphex Twin

Mos Def only returned other artists he had worked with not any of his albums.

I know, most of these are unlikely to be on the apple thing, but that's what i listen to, and won't use it if all they have is the big labels.

$.02

rock.

J

rob and i were just talking about this and he suggested i drop a few notes on this post. i, too, am an avid mac user and was shocked (literally, jaw on desk) when i started the updated itunes app and found the music store.

this app has a few distinct advantages that other pay-to-play sites have failed to pounce on. the first, obvious distinction is that the music store is seamlessly integrated into the itunes application. the jukebox/burner that we've grown to love is now the same place we can shop for and preview music. i purchased a track a little bit ago (yes, it was an exclusive track by sheryl crow, call me lame if you must...) and my jaw hit the desk again when i was treated to the fifteen second buy and download process. suddenly, the track is bought, downloaded, categorized in itunes and is playing. how cool is that?!

but beyond the application are some more subtle differences.

• the first is the manner in which you pay-to-play. unlike cdnow's first five tracks or single-track preview pages on other sites, you can view and preview every track based on the album. great interface design -- very similar to a finder window in os x -- doesn't hurt, either.

• the price structure is phenominal. no monthly fee, no 'renting' tracks. you pay a buck, you get the song. look through your entire cd collection and start counting all the tracks you never wanted, but had to buy because they were on the disc. multiply that by 99 cents, and grab some tissues.

• for many users, even as enticing as pirating is, low pricing and the opportunity to buy any track on an album quickly is just as enticing in my mind. if the music industry was looking for a resolution to the financial crunch they are experiencing from piracy, this is a good start. it will be interesting to see how many tracks are downloaded in the coming weeks.

what needs work? well, the catalog. it's a little thin. but it's still very early. i wonder if there is any news on negotiations between apple and other major labels to get their artists into the store.

just some thoughts. probably a little skewed because i've always loved apple, loved the simplicity of things they've made and enjoy watching the IT guy at work squirm when i tell him about how much fun my mac has become.

hope you all have a good weekend..

from an apple press release at :

“In less than one week we’ve broken every record and become the largest online music company in the world,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO.

we've seen the progress in one week; now it'll be interesting to see if that was a one week surge or if the sales continue to grow with additional labels and artists.[/i]

i have some serious reservations about Mark Morford's comments:

1) who/what/where is he citing that all the money but "a few cents" goes to the label. sure, it is easy to say and believe, but since each artist's contract is different...

2) why is it Apple's problem that the music industry is a corporate pigwallow? i fail to understand that by implementing a system that allows easy, cheap, and quick dissemination of musical works, Apple is now on the hook for not OVERHAULING the fucking music industry? gimme a break. that is 'ludacris' (and i don't mean the crappy rapper.)

believe what you want, but Morford appears to be just a paid hack. i see nothing substantive in his comments, other than feelings inappropriately applied towards the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

btw - i don't own a mac, so i have never even see iTunes.

i haven't really kept up on this whole topic since i have no intention of using it, but to me, .99 per track seems too much to pay for a download. 9.99 for an album seems better but still 2 or 3 bucks overpriced. I mean, i generally don't pay more than $10-11 for a cd anyway, why would i pay $10 for a downloaded version?

Give me $6.99 album downloads and i'd probably buy at least some albums through it (assuming their catalog includes the indie titles i'm looking for)

I doubt i'd use the per track feature at any price. I much prefer a monthly fee for unlimited d/l (ala emusic.com) for sampling new bands.

here's another opinion from yesterday's WSJ:

Apple force-feeds customers shit, calls it sunshine

This morning, Apple's Software Updater notified me that there was a patch for my iTunes 4 installation, a 4.1 patch that, according to the release notes, offers:

a number of performance and network access enhancements

including that it only allows music sharing between computers using iTunes 4.0.1 or later on a local network (in the same subnet)

So, in other words, Apple has "enhanced" iTunes so that it can't be used to play music from one computer on another if they're on different subnets (i.e., if you have a computer at home that you stream to from work). Apple's apologists say that this is to prevent "stealing," but there are many legitimate uses for the feature (imagine if Paul Frank "enhanced" his jackets by sewing the pockets shut to make them less useful for shoplifters).

Apple has removed a useful feature from its software, and its customers are out in the cold. I paid $50 or so for downloadable iTunes tracks, with the understanding that Apple had sold me something that would stream over the Internet. Yesterday, they had. Today, they took it away. And they called it an "enhancement." As Winston Smith said to O'Brien, "Don't feed me shit and tell me it's Victory Gin."

Sure, I could just skip the update, but how long will that work for? When 10.3 ships next year, will I be able to run an unupdated iTunes on it? Will I have to pickle a computer and keep from updating it in order to continue to use my iTunes music in the way I was promised I could?

Apple wants to be the leader of the Digital Lifestyle pack. The digital lifestyle is all about the fluidity of bits, the fact that all computers on the Internet are, in some sense, in the same place, no matter where they're physically located.

But Apple is choosing to screw its customers and kowtow to the entertainment interests who have, at various times, tried to ban the piano roll, the radio, the VCR, and the Internet. They're putting the desires of the companies that tried to ban firewalls ahead of the legitimate expectations of their customers. A digital lifestyle designed by Hilary Rosen and Jack Valenti is a world of "consumers" (us) and "producers" (them). It's the opposite of the iApps philosophy.

It's a world I don't want to live in. Link Discuss

from: http://boingboing.net

Has anyone had a listen to these downloads under a set of really good headphones? I'm just curious as to the quality you're paying for.

They sound as good as mp3.

Some are arguing that the quality is not as good as a CD.

Maybe not. I am sure that each file would sound better if they were tweaking them individually instead of batch compression.

At some point, it will be the responsibility of the label to tweak the files.

from CDbaby...

.........


Songs must be 99 cents each.

Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower.

Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks. So if you have a 5-song album, it can't be more than $4.95 to buy the full-length album.

Apple strongly recommends going even lower than $9.99. They'd like to see that price drop to make the full-album purchase even more desirable.

Only exception: if a song is over 7 minutes long, they won't offer it as a separate download. It will be available as part of the album only.

There is no cost to put your music on iTunes.

There will be no up-front advance from Apple.

Apple is reporting all iTunes sales to SoundScan!

SoundScan measures per-song not per-album.

So if someone buys your whole album, each track on the album is reported as a song sale.

SoundScan requested to do it that way. It was their idea, not Apple's.


About positioning and getting attention on iTunes


Apple has hired an editorial staff with backgrounds in music to decide what gets featured.

Editorial team makes decisions every day as to what goes where.

Big labels don't get preferential treatment.

"We pick music we like, and we think everyone else is going to like."

"We've had a lot of people offer money", but Apple refuses money, and has no plan to ever accept money for placement.

Even what looks like a banner ad at the top of the screen is put there by Apple.

When an audience member doubted they'd stay with this policy, they pointed to their 20 years of selling Apple computers, and never selling icons on the desktop or any of the other things that companies have offered to pay them a lot of money to do.

(Plus Steve Jobs reminded us they have $4.1 billion in the bank and are not in debt. They're not desperate for cash.)

They did admit that when a popular artist gives iTunes exclusive tracks, that may prompt Apple to make a banner an on iTunes promoting it.

Exclusive tracks (songs that aren't available on CD anywhere) sell amazingly well. They're the best sellers in whole store.

Occasionally they make a special featured artist page, with video, photos, a link back to the artist's site, and more. It seems this is just for very high-profile artists, though.

Top-seller charts on Apple only reflect the last 24 hours.


What you CAN'T do


You can not sell an album as album-only format without allowing the purchase of single-songs.

Can't search by record label, although you can see the record label on the album info page.

There will be no links from iTunes to your website, or to buy the physical CD.

Right now there are no sub-genres, only big genres. (rock/jazz/etc.)

They said "We're going to give you the same basic deal we gave the big 5 major labels".

Same deal. Same agreements. Same team of people. Same treatment, all-around.

"We have to be more efficient, though. We're not going to deal with 200 lawyers."

"Everyone is going to get the exact same deal. It's not negotiable. It's take it or leave it."

This is a reseller agreement: Apple buys at a wholesale price. Apple resells them to users. "No complicated or messy licenses."

Apple only deals with the partner/label. It's up to the label to pay the artists, writers, publishing, etc.

Rights are a 3 year term. For iTunes only, of course. This is totally non-exclusive.

THEY PAY EVERY MONTH!

EVERY artist in the store gets...

listed in new releases

found in searches (any search returns up to 250 songs for that artist)

in the "browse all artists" list (the text-based view)

an artist page (page showing all CDs by this artist, top downloaded songs, top downloaded albums, also bought...)

an album page: artwork, song list, top downloads, references to other artists

listed in cross-references to other albums ("people who bought this also bought...")


Marketing and Promotion


10 million customers have opted-in to receive a "New Music" email from Apple every Tuesday. Customers of iPod, iTunes, .mac, Apple eNews.

You can have a link directly on your site to point to your music on iTunes. (Of course the link will only work for people who have the iTunes software.)

Google has exclusive discounts for sponsored links into iTunes. Plus some personalized support.

Macs in 57 Apple retail stores are pre-loaded with playlists called, "Discover Indie Music". A chance at in-store play.


How to get the music to Apple


It's up to the partner/label to submit all the metadata (artist name, release date, song tiles, etc.), do the audio encoding, and upload the materials.

Every album needs to have a UPC Barcode!

You have to use their special Music Store Encoder tool for Mac OS X which will be released in 90 days or so.

Independent artists themselves, not with a label, can't use this. You have to go through an iTunes partner.

When asked if artists with their own label would be eligible, the iTunes guys had an odd answer, saying that this was invitation-only and they want to deal with those of us in the room.


Apple Does:

Marketing & merchandising
Advertising, PR, Retail, Direct
30-second Previews
Infrastructure of download & delivery
Credit card transaction

[/u]

Jawbreaker, do you have a link for this?