$1 a song by Apple

Inline_guy

Inline_guy

Dockboy
The LA Times is saying that Apple is making a napster like service where you will pay one dollar to download a song in ACC format. You could burn it, or put it on your iPod, or just listen to it on your computer!

What do you think? If it is true, then I am excited about it. I would go for it in a flash.


Matthew
 
But I wonder if they would sell cd's at discounted rates, because there's no cd, just computer files? most cd's have 15 or 16 tracks, and 15-16 bucks is way too expensive. Ive ended up buying a lot of my cd's secondhand, just to save some money. buy mabye like $1 per track and then once you buy 10 tracks you get a few dollars off, or mabye they could sell songs as a cd... Sounds like it would have potential, just increasing the digital lifestyle theme that apple has been hitting on recently.
 
The plan contrasts sharply with Apple's previous marketing campaign for Macs, which rankled many music executives who felt it promoted piracy. Apple's advertisements were emblazoned with the mantra "rip, mix, burn," referring to the computers' ability to copy songs and record them onto CDs.
Click to expand...

I SINCERELY hope that this does not mean what it looks like... Apple will be giving us songs that are disabled in some way? Because if I can't rip, mix and burn songs I download, I won't have much use for them. I don't have an iPod or a laptop so I can't take them with me, which is where I would listen to them. That does not sound good!
 
$1/song is still too expensive, so it will fail if this is true. I still buy CDs and my iPod is 100% legit in terms of any mp3 on there being ripped from a CD I own.

At a dollar a pop this will add up to about 12 to 15 bucks for the average album, which seems high since you no longer own a physical copy of it. With a CD I can make as many copies as I want, so I have copies on my iPod, but I've also got several 10's of gigabytes of my CDs ripped at work. If they add digital rights management then you may only be allowed to have one copy, so it can be on your iPod, or at work, or...

I don't really know what an ACC is, and a google search didn't reveal anything helpful. Is it a lossy format like mp3? If so this is another point against it, since translating between two lossy formats usually makes pretty horrendous sounding audio and my linux box at work probably doesn't speak ACC.
 
Isn't aac supposed to be the "new mp3", in that it is a compressed format, which offers very close to CD quality, just like MP3 does, but presumably with smaller file sizes or whatever..
 
AAC is a compressed format that is better than CD quality. It is supposed to be the quality of the original source before even losing a little quality in the CD making process. So AAC is a good thing. And the article said Apple still wants you to be able to burn your CD's of music so there should be no loss if freedom. That is also the reason Sony may not get on board.

But regardless, I think $.99 a song is a great price. Music is not and should not be free. If you rather buy a whole CD then great, but I don't. I would like to able to just buy the songs I want, and then maybe if a really great album comes along buy that.

What you have to understand is that times are changing. Many very educated people think if something does not change soon the record industry as we know it, will collapse within the next 5 to 10 years.

The record and movie industry are dead set on protecting themselves and their artist. As someone who went to Art school I understand what it is to pour your heart into something, and then have people just think they can take it.

I think this is a step in the right direction for the record industry for Apple and for digital music.

Matthew
 
Originally posted by substrate
$1/song is still too expensive, so it will fail if this is true...

At a dollar a pop this will add up to about 12 to 15 bucks for the average album, which seems high since you no longer own a physical copy of it...
Click to expand...

I think this is great! For example. If I want the new Uncle Kracker song i'd go pay a $1 for it. However I wouldn't buy the whole CD for one song. Now this idea is to slow down file sharing. If you want the whole CD then go to Walmart, I don't think this service is targeting people who want the entire CD. The idea is for those people who just want a song or two.

Of course if you shop at Sam Goody than buying a whole album here would be cheap. ;)

Also, think of the possibilities of an artist putting out test songs. Instead of making whole album, they could put up a few songs and get feedback.
 
i agree with the 99 cents being too expensive...

but how about this? If you want to buy all the songs from a cd, it costs 60 cents per song, and if you just want a couple songs it costs 99cents?

kinda like a price break for buying a whole cd
 
I'm am pretty sure that Apple will also allow you to download an entire CD... the best part of this is that it will be a bit less then going out and purchasing it from the store since... Apple will not have any overhead, the record companies need not have any fancy packaging, and lastly the consumer supplies the're own media. So, we might be able to get those CDs for about 10-15% less then in the stores... very cool. Of course this will now hurt the record stores but you can never create any new business without destroying something else... nothing.

cars killed the horse and buggy industry
planes and trucks killed the rail industry
t.v. killed the radio
internet destroyed some brick and mortar
computers killed the abacuss industry
videos destroyed the movie theatre industry
Apple will now destroy Peaches, Sams Town, Tower & Virgin
 
.99 is not too expensive. If you buy a single you pay quite a bit more, dontcha? If the .99 give you the right to burn it onto a CD, to put it on your iPod and to play it on your Mac, that's quite a goodie. If it's also 'just another AAC file' that you could even *gasp* share...

Let it be true. Let it be a success. Let Apple add Windows compatibility three months after it starts. And suddenly Apple is the integrator of the record industry, the new SONY and the saviour of the music industry, too. Too much to dream of? ;)
 
I think this is a great idea also. This is what I wanted from a music service. But the songs I want instead of having to pay $15 for an older cd for one song that I want. I do hope they include older tracks instead of only newer ones.
 
Originally posted by moav

cars killed the horse and buggy industry
planes and trucks killed the rail industry
t.v. killed the radio
internet destroyed some brick and mortar
computers killed the abacuss industry
videos destroyed the movie theatre industry
Apple will now destroy Peaches, Sams Town, Tower & Virgin
Click to expand...

and I believe...
Video killed the radio star as well

I think it's a great move, I have downloaded many songs to find out they were crappy rips or fakes put out by the music industry, and there are many times that I don't want the whole album, just a few select tracks. I like the idea and, since it's Apple, it will be cool.
 
Apple will store 10,000 songs

4,998 Amy Mann songs
4,998 Barenaked Ladies songs
4 Moby songs

I am just nervous that they will only put up music Apple likes
 
Originally posted by banjo_boy
Apple will store 10,000 songs

4,998 Amy Mann songs
4,998 Barenaked Ladies songs
4 Moby songs

I am just nervous that they will only put up music Apple likes
Click to expand...

That would be more like Jon Anderson and Beach Boys :p
 
I had this idea three years ago and it's great to see Apple going with it (not that I was the only one who thought of such an obvious solution).

They even used my pricing model (buck a song). They'll need to offer discounts for entire albums, though.

Also, you can guarantee that somebody, somewhere will make an AAC to MP3 converter app that batch converts files. Slightly inconvenient, but a reasonable compromise to get legal, quality music so conveniently.

What may kill it is if they can't get enough big companies and enough songs/albums. They are gonig to need buttloads of songs to choose from, not just obscure startup bands and the like. EVERYBODY'S gonna have to play along for this to work.

Good luck Apple!
 
some people will just never be happy until everything in life is free. a buck a song is CHEAP!! Like Fryke said, try buying a cd single for a buck or even 2. even back in the days when you could buy an album (vinyl thingy with music) for about $4, a single cost a buck (ok, it had 2 songs). That was around 30 years ago.
I hear very little music these days that i would want an entire cd by the artist. but occassionally i hear a song i like. i still wouldn't pay the cost of a single cd nor will i pirate it. this would be a great solution for people like me.
for people that still want the whole cd, with packaging and the works, you can still go out and buy it at the price you're accustomed to.
 
Originally posted by themacko
I read that 4 of the 5 big record companies have pretty much agreed to Apple's proposal.
Click to expand...

I have to say I am excited about this prospect too. A buck a song is great! I will have a very hard time getting music off of it though. I am a bluegrass boy. Most bluegrass is on independent labels. But, I am not sad about that at all!
 
Originally posted by substrate
I don't really know what an ACC is, and a google search didn't reveal anything helpful. Is it a lossy format like mp3? If so this is another point against it, since translating between two lossy formats usually makes pretty horrendous sounding audio and my linux box at work probably doesn't speak ACC.
Click to expand...
Unless I am much mistaken AAC is at the heart of the audio portion of the MP4 format. I know I've made MP4s using Quicktime 6 and some helper apps. So far in my tests I have found the quality of the AAC-based MP4s to be quite superior to that of MP3s, not to mention the smaller file sizes. The one disadvantage that I have found in them so far is that they do not support ID3 tags, which means that having a lot of information about the song attached to the file does not work. Oh, and they seem to have some trouble with certain title/album names, for some reason...

I also have to say that I think $1 per song is fairly reasonable, though I have one suggestion and one concern. The suggestion is that they charge somewhere between $.25 and $.30 per minute, rather than a flat dollar. This way shorter songs will cost a bit less and those of us who would like longer songs will pay a bit more. My concern is that the files will be made available at something like 96- (roughly equiv to 128- MP3). Personally, when I rip MP3s I do it at 256-, and I like my MP4s at 192-.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top