iLounge

21

“@ a3rdleg:  That’s a question you should be asking the record lables (and the artists that they represent), NOT Apple. I’m sure if it was up to Apple they would make available every known song to man because in the long scheme of things it only helps Apple to have the largest database of recorded media available for purchase.”

Really? Is that why the “iTunes Originals - Death Cab for Cutie” album is a shell of it’s former self? Missing all of it’s original commentary tracks and all but one of the original 7 videos?

Posted by rainking187 on March 29, 2007 at 3:50 PM (PDT)

22

flatline response, clearly this isn’t an attempt to “unload copies of sundry album filler on an unsuspecting and apparently greateful public”. Not only are you being cynical for the sake of it, you’re just plain wrong.

Sure, it’s an attempt to sell more albums. If they had achieved this by jacking up single song prices, then of course we’d all be angry and that would be a slimy tactic. But they haven’t.

All that’s happened is that Apple has said that if you’ve already paid for a song and you want the album, we’re not going to make you buy that song again. Seems pretty straight forward and hard to argue with as far as I’m concerned.

Furthermore, I don’t know about you, but I’m a firm believer in the album as an artform, and I almost always buy albums, not single songs, and once again, it might just be the bands you listen to, but the albums I buy aren’t full of “sundry album filler”. Don’t whinge for the sake of whinging.

Posted by Nuke666 in Melbourne, Austalia on March 29, 2007 at 4:19 PM (PDT)

23

Nuke,

Wow. I stopped listening to Dad’s lecturing three decades ago. I don’t think I’m about to start listening to yours’ now. Besides, who’s whining? Simply because you claim to have better taste in selecting music and artists who pump their albums full of quality music? I didn’t realize that was even part of of my thought process. I was under the impression that I was making an observation. How mistaken of me.

For the record, I never said the rest of any particular album was necessarily garbage. But too many do have material that, put politely, wasn’t produced to same level as the perceived ‘heavy rotation’ tracks, especially those aimed squarely at the pop market. The record industry today—particularly in Popular Music—isn’t all that much different now than what it was back when I first started buying LPs in the ‘60s. Even if a person wants to go ahead and pick up the rest of a particular album, there’s always a possibility that not all of the rest of the material is really worth having. Even you stated that you typically buy albums, not singles (as do I). That alone feeds on this marketing model. Apple’s benevolence—and yes I DO admit that it is good of them to do this—in not double-charging for previously purchased tracks on the album is still enticement to get consumers to potentially pay something for material you (and perhaps most of the public) might ordinarily skip over if not for the ‘desire’ to go ahead and own the entire album. Even if buying half of the track would’ve been good enough.

Certainly the consumer still has the final decision on whether to spend the extra and buy the whole album over the few ‘must haves’. But Apple’s no double-charge enticement does makes the former purchasing choice all that much more appealing. Which is EXACTLY the sort of thing that an RIAA member would LOVE to hear and have the consumer act upon. So, again, how is this whining and not anything more than an admittedly cynical observation?

Posted by flatline response on March 30, 2007 at 1:07 AM (PDT)

24

haha they should have thought of doing this a long time ago. SO ridiculous. Besides, i dont even buy music from itunes. They are definetley the last place I go for music.

Posted by Jonathan on April 1, 2007 at 7:59 AM (PDT)

25

I have purchased a lot of music from Apple, and though I have it backed up, do you think they would really allow you to re-download the purchase again if you had a total wipeout?

Posted by neenac on April 1, 2007 at 12:10 PM (PDT)