It's official: Apple has finally added the Beatles' back catalogue to its iTunes music service. Cupertino said that from today the band's 13 studio albums including Please Please Me, White Album and Rubber Soul are now available via iTunes. Additionally, Apple fans can also buy the Beatles' two-volume Past Masters and Red and …
Right, I've bought A Day In The Life for 99p, that's my Beatles collection sorted. Next announcement please.
Excited, bravo etc...
I imagine McCartney and the wives of the dead would be rather excited, surely the wrinkly old prunes and their estates stand to make a giant lump of royalties out of this... a few % of those $ multiplied by milions... I'd say bravo if t'were me!
But why the high price?
Eleven pounds for 45 year-old albums? And the music industry wonders why torrents are so popular.
That's What I Want
A cursory glance at amazon.co.uk and play.com suggest that these are fairly normal prices. Lot of shmucks out there.
Wait 5 more years and the copyright will expire.
Who knew there was such a thing as a digital fire-sale!
Well, I don't know right off what that is in US dollars...
...but to be quite honest, 45 year-old Beatles albums are among the only albums out there that I'd remotely consider paying that kind of money for these days.
Goo goo goo joob.
... for old rope anyone?
In related news...
bear shits in woods.
The Jobs hype machine is well and truly in overdrive.
I think if you had spent the last 4 or so years negotiating a contract with someone you would want to tell the world once you had won it.
Ringo Starr even said he was glad as he was getting tired of being asked about when the music would be on iTunes.
I don't understand this comment.
This is an announcement that some classic songs are now on iTunes.
Why is it Hype?
This is why it's hype
You may need a cached version but it shows why it's hype as at time of posting http://www.apple.com/uk/
That is called called "marketing". Any "hype" that existed was generated by the idiotic bloggers, social networkers and media outlets (Reg excluded, obviously!) that have nothing better to do. What is even sadder is that they fall for it every time and Apple know this! So, understandably, they take advantage of this free advertising. This is why Apple don't have to spend what Microsoft do on a new mobile OS/device release...
I am completely undewhelmed by this.
The beatles have been available via iTunes since it had the ability to rip CDs. Making the music available to purchase online is a massively minor victory for Jobs, and may infact show how weak he actually is in the music business. I don't doubt he had to make very painful sacrifices for this.
FWIW, I have had all the beatles albums on my ipod for yonks, no thanks to a baldy cupertinian or a oriental photographer on a power trip!
You can't buy just a few tracks with CD. You have to buy the entire album when you might only want a few tracks from each.
Downloads let you pick n mix, much to the annoyance of people like Pink Floyd.
Well, the thing is that the large majority of Pink Floyd albums are designed to be heard in their entirety, like a stage musical or an opera. Granted, the radio stations always only play one or two tracks off of albums like "Dark Side" or "The Wall", but that's like only hearing one song from one scene of "I Pagliacci".
The remaining Beatles said
We would have done it years ago but Yoko wanted to milk it for all she could as her income from John's estate had to pay for her singing lessons for the last 50 years.
How many times have fans paid now? LP, CD, Enhanced CD, remastered CD etc
re: how many times?
How many Beatles fans do you think will actually be buying it on iTunes? If they're fans, they'll have it already and will gain nothing from buying an iTunes copy of an album they already own. LP, CD, and the various enhanced or remastered versions - if they think they're getting better value, then fine.
Though it's funny, I've discovered a new kind of getting old. I saw the adverts for the remastered Red & Blue Albums and thought to myself "ooh, I remember when it was first remastered"...
re: re: how many times?
"Though it's funny, I've discovered a new kind of getting old. I saw the adverts for the remastered Red & Blue Albums and thought to myself 'ooh, I remember when it was first remastered'..."
My first "replacement" Beatle album purchase was around 1981, when I replaced my old LP of "Abbey Road", battered by four years on a dorm stereo, with a copy of the Mobile Fidelity Labs' famous half-speed remastered reissue LP on virgin vinyl.
Looking back we shall see this as historic as that famous day when the Wiliams, Caxton and Shakespeare, shook hands over the printing of the first "Collected Works of ..."
While my grasp of history maybe shaky I still think its pretty cool
Mine's the one with the White and Green Apple lapels ....
If you want them new buy them from Amazon from £3 less, you can even throw the CD away if you only want a digital copy..
Not to mention you can rip to any quality and size you want (I use dBPowerAmp for ripping @ 320).
That's it? That's the news?
Glad I didn't give enough of a shit in the first place to get my hopes up.
what a load of tosh! bludy anti-climax, i thought the itunes announcement was going to be something interesting!
Interesting iTunes announcement
We have a new oxymoron.
Must be christmas soon, AKA the greatest hits season....
Surely you mean Manchester?
One less place where you're safe from that dross.
Tomorrow things will never be the same
Tomorrow iTunes homepage will display picture of The Beatles and a heading of 'Yesterday'?
thanks steve for a day that i'll never forget......sorry what day is it again?
actually we've already got all those albums and more.....pink floyd next?
That's all nice and such, but what about the big announcement Apple said they were going to make today?
As I'm under 50 the Beatles means Mull of Kintyre, Linda McCartney Sausage Rolls, Imagine, hare krishna, The Frog Chorus, Give my Regards to Broad Street, Ebony and Ivory, and Thomas the Tank Engine...
Of which Thomas the Tank Engine has the most credibility.
sour grapin' it much?
"As I'm under 50 the Beatles means Mull of Kintyre, Linda McCartney Sausage Rolls, Imagine, hare krishna, The Frog Chorus, Give my Regards to Broad Street, Ebony and Ivory, and Thomas the Tank Engine..."
D'ahh, you're just pissed off because you missed out on all the good stuff... although you _do_ list "Imagine" in there. I always thought John's solo stuff totally frickin' ruled. I mean, "Imagine" vs. "Wings At The Speed Of Sound"? Jeezus, man; Paul really _was_ dead.
You forgot that one.
How do you download a Box Set?
YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A CAR
....but you would a Box Set!
YOU WOUDN'T DOWNLOAD A CAR
I read that as Sex Bot.
Too much time on the internets I think, especially a the thought crossed my mind, that i probably would.
AC as I am ashamed with myself.
A good day to bury indifferent news
A future royal wedding, a photographer off the public service payroll, The Beatles on iTunes. I know the phrase usually implies that there's some big news to mask the other stuff, but today I think the whole edifice is self burying — if there was one thing happening that it was difficult to care about rather than three then I'd probably at least try to consider it objectively. As it is, I think I'll just stick with the usual thoughts about things that are actually relevant to me.
Joyful? "Keeer-ching" more like! And £17.99 for the double albums, when the CDs are retailing for sub-£10 online?
I suspect the Beatles shall remain a cash cow for many years to come...
an Anonymous Coward sez:
"I suspect the Beatles shall remain a cash cow for many years to come..."
Damn' straight, man. That's because they were _awesome_, the same reason all those people -- and not just old people -- still dig Sinatra and Hank Williams.
Honestly...does anybody here think that in twenty years, you'll hear anyone at all utter the sentence, "I suspect that Taylor Swift shall remain a cash cow for many years to come..."?
I've been waiting for this
I've been waiting for this for so long. At last, Apple have proven their worthiness as an organization by bringing the Beatles to itunes. I had always felt that my music collection was lacking, but now that the Beatles are available to me, I can immediately go out and purchase these songs. I am sure I will enjoy songs by the Beatles, never mind that I tried listening to some a few years ago and moved away from it soon after. The audio quality must be so much better because it's on itunes. I can't wait to listen to it on my ipad while I tweet about it from my iphone.
I wish I had a womb so that Steve Jobs could impregnate me with the next visionary.
A bit late now isn't it?
Surely everyone who wants this stuff has already got the albums or helped themselves from the Kazaa shop years ago?
If you put it that way
It applies to pretty much every movie, TV show or Album released today.
Yes, but you haven't had
almost half a century to get your hands on those.
I don't expect to have any problems forgetting today.
I already have a fair chunk of the Beatle's albums on CD, and I don't use iTunes anyway, so this does not affect me.
So you're expected to pay more for an inferior quality download when the re-mastered lossless physical cds with real covers are no more than £7.99?
And don't get me started on the ideas of a downloadable "box set"......
CDs are not loss-less. As a digital sample, they lost everything between the sample bits. Admitted, that's not a loss that really matters, but it does put some perspective on things.
- I bought my Beatles collection on vinyl, and didn't understand why most wanted to spend $20-$30 (at the time) on a CD, rather than the pure analog audio of vinyl.
I still have the records, and no CDs; but I also have more Beatles on MP3 than iTunes.
While vinyl may be analogue, an in theory "better" than digital ie. CD's. In most cases they are decidedly inferior as actually playing them is a physical process that damages the surface, which is then picked up, along with any dust, in all it's analogue glory as a hiss in the background.
If there is any significant detail lost in sampling from one 44,000th of a second to the next, you'd be unlikely to notice it anyway.
Most of the differences you notice are probably more to do with the recording technology and digital processing than the method used to actually get it to you.
I had my copies decades ago - perhaps today's youth won't appreciate them
I was around when the Beatles did the CBS Ed Sullivan Show way back in February 1964 where they were paid standard rates but had first and last slots on three consecutive Sunday shows.
Parents didn't know what to do: first there had been legless Elvis Presley whose legs, and more particularly, his hips were kept out of frame because of the alleged sexual implications from their movements.
Now uptight, short back and sides, Americans were faced with these four hairy foreigners who practically put a large debt in the haircutting business as American youth emulated their new musical heroes.
With today's technology, copies will be on-line Torrents tomorrow.
...or, perhaps today's youth WILL...
My youngest sister had just been conceived when the Beatles played their first Ed Sullivan gig, and she ended up being even a bigger fan than I am (age seven when they first played the Sullivan show).
About six or seven years ago, I went into a record shop looking to finally replace my old LP copy of Pink Floyd's "Meddle". Miracle of miracles, I found it -- and in the "Special" bin, at that. So, I take the CD to the counter to pay for it, and there's this college kid running the register with sloppy grunge hair, ripped baggy grunge pants and a beat-up Soundgarden t-shirt, post-punk all the way. I brace for sneering contempt as I slide my CD reissue of a pre-Dark Side Floyd album across the counter. The kid takes it to ring it up, and his eyes light up. "Wow! 'Meddle'! What an awesome album! I really love old Floyd, man..."
...and I thought, "jeez, maybe there's still hope..."
Title? What Title?
on-line Torrents *TOMORROW*? Methinks you have been sleeping. Also, most of them are available as ISOs or lossless FLAC rather than pissy mp3.
Sorry, but ten quidlets for a 45 year old album encoded with the lossiest codec known to man seems like less than a bargain.
<cue series of "I love my MP#! You want lossy, try codec X" posts>
Beatles? Weren't they a popular beat combo around the time of Queen Victoria or something?
2 classes of music lover
Whilst the media likes to give the impression that the height of musical taste and talent is on offer with X-Factor, the availability of good music has never been greater.
I brought my first Beatles single (Help! if you must know) when I was six, lived through the pirate radio's and the setting up of Radio One, and remember the 70's and everyone going quiet in the school playground on a Tuesday afternoon when the Top Ten was read out over against-the-rules trannies (radios).
I've got three teenage kids now, and without trying to influence them in any way they have all developed very wide tastes in music. I often listen to the music they play, and their choice of modern bands shows that musical talent is alive and well and kicking ass. Bugger the Lady Ga-Ga, Katie Perry and Take That karaoke shows, bands like Muse, The Killers and Kings of Leon are the equal of anyone for the last 50 years, possibly with the exception of Queen and the Stones.
My youngest son is really into early Bowie, which I sang with my schoolfriends on the bus. My daughter plays drums and loves Pink Floyd and Green Day. Eldest son play guitar, loves The Who and Muse in that order.
Plenty of good music around, just don't assume the youth of today is musically illiterate because of what you read.
Beatles on iTunes = Meh!
- Vid Hubble 'scope snaps 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Windows 8.1 Update 1 spewed online a MONTH early – by Microsoft
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? Why can’t I walk past Maplin without buying stuff I don’t need?