MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Why would someone buy a CD with 2 or 3 good songs for $14.00 when they can buy those 3 songs for $3.00. The music industry need BETTER music!!!!!

@Jocko

Because some people still want the best quality of music possible coupled with high-fidelity headphones like the shure SE530

Jan 30, 08 - 04:23 pm Comment from: Gandalf

I'll try wearing an analyst's hat for a moment with an alternative comment.

The advent of Apple's iTunes Music Store, greatly increased the market for digital downloads which are far more profitable than CD sales and reduced free music downloadson file sharing networks.

Jan 30, 08 - 04:24 pm Comment from: Ampar

"Apple Computer Corp."

Psst. They're calling the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company by the name 3M now. U-Tote'm is 7-Eleven. The Haloid Company is now Xerox. Please catch up.

Enough is enough.

Their revenue is falling because the product they are bringing to market is not compelling people to pay for it.

Delivery methods will always evolve, so let's not try to mask the failure of a business to market valuable merchandise.

"The introduction of Apple Computer Corp.'s iTunes platform in 2001 sped up the downturn in the CD's popularity."

There is no evidence that iTunes killed the CD, but there is much evidence that iTunes increased demand for digital music file sales. CD and MP3/AAC are NOT mutually exclusive as most iTunes users (Macintosh and Windows) actually purchase more CDs than people who do not use iTunes and most music on an iPod is ripped from purchased CDs.

Where do these people get off with wording that is so wrong, yet can be misinterpreted as being correct by people who do not know better?

Jan 30, 08 - 04:46 pm Comment from: MaLvado

Lossless audio,

True, some do want the highest quality.

But demand has shown the majority prefer the convenience/portability of compressed music.

It's not Apple Computers. They have officially removed "Computers" from their name over a years ago.

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-computer-from-name/

It's mistakes like this that make me balk at their article, much as even the single typo on a resume/cover letter can cost you a job...

Jan 30, 08 - 04:50 pm Comment from: ElderNorm

They said ""Since the advent of music file-sharing in the late 1990s, sales of CDs have been on the decline," Wilkerson reports."

Yea, blame the decline on stealing vs the never ending greed of the music company. Sales of CDs will continue but like said above, we the buyer want VALUE for our money, not jets for CEOs of music companies.

en

Jan 30, 08 - 04:50 pm Comment from: Ampar

WS: Tell him.


http://www.marketwatch.com/news/mailto.asp?x=100+119+105+108+107+101+114+115+111+110&y=David+B.+Wilkerson&z=marketwatch.com&guid;={032256c8-ebfe-4afd-9641-3b1ff6f13ef6}&siteid=mktw

WS: remove the stick from your eye first...

"They have officially removed 'Computers' from their name over a years ago."

Apple used to be Apple Computer but "a years ago" has always been improper.

Jan 30, 08 - 05:21 pm Comment from: MCCFR

LOSSLESS AUDIo…

Sorry to disappoint you, but - even with a physical CD - you're already listening to music that's compressed, it just isn't as compressed as an AAC, MP3 or WMA file.

Headline should really read..

Consumers finally getting a fair deal from Universal Music Group, choosing 99 cent ala cart downloads instead of 2 good songs on a $21 cd.

I don't see how they can even call themselves "Universal".

Is anyone going to buy a Blue Ray player? I'm sure those discs will be declining in about 2 years.

Jan 30, 08 - 06:58 pm Comment from: Spark

"The introduction of Apple Computer Corp.'s [sic] iTunes platform in 2001 sped up the downturn in the CD's popularity."

I think that the iPod (and iTunes) came about as a result of totally crap albums released on CD. If CDs contained more than 1 or 2 good songs most people would have been content to continue listening to CD players. The iPod acted as a repository for the good songs people want to listen to. Even with iTunes' a la carte song selection, if CDs provided good value they would have retained strong sales because they are unarguably higher quality recordings.

@MCCFR...

What compression are you talking about? Are you under the impression that audio compression via a peak limiter or a leveling amplifier like an LA2A is the same as data compression? Wrong - not the same at all. Are you thinking that because recording studios record at 96k/24 bit and CDs are 44.1k/16 bit devices, CDs are therefore compressed? Wrong again. Audio recorded at high sample and bit rates are Sample Rate Converted and Dithered down to 44.1k/16 bit.

Jan 30, 08 - 08:25 pm Comment from: Zune Tang®

The problem is glossy CDs. Real audiophiles know the difference between glossy and matte CDs and if you listen to a glossy CD all day it has a damaging effect on your hearing.

The labels don't give customers choice and force them to buy glossy CDs without an option for matte. Just like Apple. Buh-bye Apple.

Your potential. Our passion.™

Jan 30, 08 - 08:59 pm Comment from: grok

I left my ability to distinguish lossless audio from compressed audio in the rear speaker cones of my girlfriend's Monte Carlo back in '83. Tinnitus tends to level out all the rough spots.

Jan 30, 08 - 09:27 pm Comment from: Hm...

"Since the advent of music file-sharing in the late 1990s, sales of CDs have been on the decline," Wilkerson reports. "The introduction of Apple Computer Corp.'s [sic] iTunes platform in 2001 sped up the downturn in the CD's popularity."

I always look for logical fallacies in the media to use in my classes. This statement is a great one conflating three items.
1. The implicit "CD's declined *after* file sharing debuted"
2. The explicit "iTunes *sped up* the downturn in the CD's"
3. Another implicit - attribute causation of the decline to both file sharing and iTunes.

My students are good enough to find the technical name: Post hoc, ergo propter hoc of the fallacy.

Thanks go to Wilkerson for such a nice example of specious reasoning!

Jan 30, 08 - 10:06 pm Comment from: The Other Steve

It was Napster that brought the decline in CD's. Napster was rewarded when someone payed them millions for the name.
Then the music industry started falling over themselves trying to support it because it wasn't Apple.

I think the music industry deserves what they are getting.

Or. . . is it all-you-can-eat music subscriptions that is hurting CD sales.
Do you know how easy it is to download all-you-can-eat music and then get past the copy protection?

Jan 31, 08 - 04:17 am Comment from: hagar57

Some old, same old. In the sixties and seventies, TV supposedly killed the movie business. Movies sure don't look dead to me!

Digital cameras killed the 35mm film cameras. Funny, how Canon, Olympus, and Nikon are still leading the pack. How? They recognised the trend and decided to be leaders, not whiners. The customers wanted digital, and digital they got.

Even Fuji and Kodak are doing fine in the digital age, despite the fact that their business with 35mm films crumbled. Only Agfa-Gevaert went belly-up, because they didn't see the signs of the times.

Jan 31, 08 - 04:34 am Comment from: MacSheikh

Come on Steve! Hurry up and launch iTunes Store in other countries (especially here in Singapore)! I can't wait to do my part to hasten the death of those greedy bastards! Gimme songs! Gimme movies! Gimme a reason to buy TV and a TB hard disk!

Thank you.

Coming up next: Video killed the radio star.

...just like cell phones are killing the land-line

cell phones: more expensive per minute, more expensive per handset, at lower quality, but that is trumped by convenience, portabillity, flexibility, and the "line to person" vs "line to location" nature...

...and then there will be the luddites, 60 yrs from now, who will still only use landlines because is still the only "true quality"

The very first post here, Jocko, got it spot on.

It's about the music dummy!!!

When 99% of the music output sucks you're going to get slower CD sales. When enough people get tired of buying expensive CDs only to find they like only 3 of the songs, they're going to quit buying CDs.

I'm actually amazed CD sales haven't totally tanked by now.
The vast majority of my son's collection is of music older than he is.
Eagles, Queen, Rush, LZep, Floyd, Kraftwerk, TDream, Genesis, JM Jarre, on and on. And that's just the rock and electronic stuff he has.

These guys gave us *musical composition*, not some spotty dufus on guitar going blang blang blang blang blang over and over. One or two songs like this are well and good, but a whole album of that??
No thanks.

Are you, y'know, one of *those*?

Can 99.9% of people actually distinguish different bitrates? Are those people complaining about "Quality," serious?

Whether I were to play you the same song from a pristine vinyl record, a CD, a 256k or even a 128k MP3/AAC file, would you seriously be able to tell the difference?

I'd rather have tens of thousands of songs in my pocket at 128k then a litteral room full of so called "high quality CDs." What do you propose? Hauling around a truck-sized trailer full of CDs everywhere you go perhaps?

@ This must be BS
Well, with most people's audio systems, probably not. But there are some people who do have very good audio systems. Some even have recording equipment with some very serious audio reproduction systems and speakers. In this situation, yes you would be able to tell the difference. Well, at least I can.