or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling - Page 3

post #81 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

I suppose you think Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, The Who, Genesis, Yes (to name just a few album oriented bands) were probably overated in their prime and are now has-beens......
Rock On!

Since you asked: Yes and Genesis - yes.

Don't take it personally.
post #82 of 114
Should "Echoes" or "Atom Heart Mother" cost 99 cents each?

To me, if an album is not worth listening to its entirety, then I just rip select songs into AAC and play them back on my mobile. Funny how almost every single song that I have on my mobile is from bands post 1990.

There might be no more than two dozen truly great albums made in the past 20 years, but plenty of good singles. This is the MTV generation, folks.

I'm glad Pink Floyd won this thing, as they obviously should.

Anyone who listens to Wish You Were Here and skips any of the tracks is
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #83 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebook View Post

Should "Echoes" or "Atom Heart Mother" cost 99 cents each?

To me, if an album is not worth listening to its entirety, then I just rip select songs into AAC and play them back on my mobile. Funny how almost every single song that I have on my mobile is from bands post 1990.

There might be no more than two dozen truly great albums made in the past 20 years, but plenty of good singles. This is the MTV generation, folks.

I'm glad Pink Floyd won this thing, as they obviously should.

Anyone who listens to Wish You Were Here and skips any of the tracks is

Only if you pause between tracks two and three to account for the time it takes to flip the record over.

I'm glad they won as a simple matter of contract law. Now it's up to them what they do about it.
post #84 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

If one million people want to download just one song off of a Pink Floyd album, the artists and labels should take their money and wish they come back for more and encourage more of the same behavior.

The one sure way to to encourage piracy it is to keep on destroying the ala-carte business model that has worked so well as it brings the price point down to a level nearly all can participate in.

All it take is one unhappy customer to turn them into permanent pirates.

So what if the album is a complete work?, the only reason albums exist in the first place is because of the medium designed to transfer the music to a customer.

Now that medium is individual electronic files and should be sold as such.

I sure this isn't used by other artists thinking they are going to make more by forcing albums with one or two good songs and the rest crap, because they are in for a wake up call.

The "medium" you speak off did not exist when PF albums were created. Aside from The Division Bell, every PF album preceded the digital age, so your argument makes no historic sense, as PF was not specifically writing music to distribute in a digital format.

As for piracy, I doubt that PF cares. With their wealth, why would they lose sleep on a few million bucks? Besides, most of the people who are downloading their stuff will either end up buying their LPs like I did or continue to rip singles only.

The point that most people seem to be missing is that just because iTunes is now available, it does not mean that bands no longer have the right to control distribution. In the past, if you wanted a single off a PF album, TOO BAD because the band rarely released any. Why should it be different now? It's the artist's choice, and it may be your choice to pirate their music.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #85 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerARSgm View Post

Of course, the same could be said about MEATLOAF. Will you be speaking up for him as well?

Hey don't let you Meatloaf !

Yeah. Pink Floyd is just flying off the store shelves. You need to over 60
to know who the even are. errr I'm over 60.
post #86 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkrantz View Post

What's stupid is BELIEVING that people will listen to an album in it's entirety, because it simply isn't true. No matter how much they want it to be.

This was true for the most part back when their albums were released. With LPs, most listeners chose not to skip songs. PF basically said at the time of their work, if you don't want to listen to all of our songs, then do not buy our album because we are not releasing singles (with a few exceptions). This was their stance, and they have chosen not to change it just because technology has moved on.

People, Pink Floyd is not a modern band, so stop comparing them to current artists.

Please stop romanticizing the past too. There were plenty of boneheads back in the '70s and '80s who used music as background fluff for their social activities too. This is not just a 21st century trend.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #87 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I really like one line in "Atom Heart Mother." Why can't I just buy that?

I also really like only one song on U2's latest album, but because U2 did not release it as a single, I cannot buy it on CD (I do not want compressed downloads).
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #88 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Once was enough, thanks. This isn't about artistic integrity, it's about greed.

Think before you type. Pink Floyd stands to LOSE money by not selling singles. How is this about "greed"? It's about greed for EMI and record tycoons.

Think before you type --this is the best adage for internet usage.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #89 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebook View Post

The "medium" you speak off did not exist when PF albums were created. Aside from The Division Bell, every PF album preceded the digital age, so your argument makes no historic sense, as PF was not specifically writing music to distribute in a digital format.


You read my post wrong or perhaps I didn't make it clear enough, but that's exactly what I meant.
post #90 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by azazel- View Post

You probably know this as 'background noise', in which you are subjected to the likes of Lady Gaga and Nickelback, probably in your workplace. You'd probably be better off continuing to ignore it.

I hate that background noise with a passion.
post #91 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by kruge View Post

No matter how much you might like to listen to Dark Side of the Moon, don't you want to, sometimes, just listen to Money?

No.

I listen to Pink Floyd and Radiohead on my speakers when I have the time to do so. If I want to hear singles, I just bring up 1990s pop music.

Besides, most of my PF listening is on vinyl anyway, so playing just one track is not practical.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #92 of 114
yawn ... I never liked Pink Floyd and I did grow up during the boom days of vinyl record stores.

And before you call me a "Menudo fan": I like complete classical symphonies, and any number of other different musical styles and artists, PF just never did anything for me (maybe it's the lack of mind altering substances in my life?).

More power to them to be allowed to package and sell their music however they like, it doesn't affect me (and I bet _most_ anyone else). True fans already own the complete catalogue and people like me will continue to ignore their music.
post #93 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post

To anyone that disagrees with the position of listening to/releasing only whole albums: go listen to The Dark Side of the Moon in its entirety.

Then come talk to me.

There has never been anything stopping anyone from buying whole albums instead of individual tracksif they want to. There has never been anything stopping owners of music CD's from playing individual tracks if they want to. The notion that Pink Floyd is somehow protecting the artistic integrity of their albums by forcing customers to buy them in their entirety is ludicrous.
post #94 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDreamworx View Post

[sarcasm]
I'm surprised more artists have not gone after radio stations for daring to play a single track instead of the entire album. That's how this problem started.
[/sarcasm]

Good point!
post #95 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post

To anyone that disagrees with the position of listening to/releasing only whole albums: go listen to The Dark Side of the Moon in its entirety.

Then come talk to me.

Long Duk Dong likey Dark Side of Moon when he was 12.

But not when he was 13.

No more yanky my wankee! Must go now!! Donger needs food!
post #96 of 114
How often did artists release a record or CD that had only two or three good songs on them and the rest were garbage intended to "pad" the rest of the recording space. For those of you old enough to remember buying records, how many albums did you own that actually had decent songs on side B?

Most people do not want to pay for cable TV "packages" of garbage channels that they do not want. How nice it would be to select and pay for just the five or six channels out of seven hundred that you actually want to watch. Why should music be any different in this regard? Is buying an entire album worth the trouble and expense, if all you want is two songs?

"Classic rock" and "lite rock" have had a good run, and they are about to join WWII big band music as "ancient" music on yet another "oldies" radio station: Something you listen to while pumping gas or doing the dishes on a Sunday afternoon. "Lite rock" is also commonly found at the dentist's office......
post #97 of 114
The medium is the message.

- Marshall McLuhan
post #98 of 114
I agree with Pink Floyd's right to want their albums sold as a whole. I have pretty much their entire collection on LP, and CD. I even had some on cassette. If I didn't own them, and was to purchase in mp3 format, I'd certainly get the whole album.

What I find funny though is that they have released some singles before.

http://www.discogs.com/Pink-Floyd-Mo...release/510353
http://www.discogs.com/artist/Pink+Floyd
post #99 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourgoises Pig View Post

Most people do not want to pay for cable TV "packages" of garbage channels that they do not want. How nice it would be to select and pay for just the five or six channels out of seven hundred that you actually want to watch. Why should music be any different in this regard? Is buying an entire album worth the trouble and expense, if all you want is two songs?

TV stations and cable companies are not artists. Thanks for making the point that PF has been trying to champion. They are the talent, not the corporations.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #100 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by toes View Post


More power to them to be allowed to package and sell their music however they like, it doesn't affect me (and I bet _most_ anyone else). True fans already own the complete catalogue and people like me will continue to ignore their music.

But you choose not to ignore an internet post about them. If you lost 1 minute posting about every band that you didn't care for, wouldn't you have wasted an entire lifetime? Or is PF somehow special in that you especially want to ignore them?

What is clear is that most trolls love to trash things that they do not like, even if they are needlessly offending people.

I don't care about the Stones much, but since they have sold hundreds of millions of albums, I'm not going to go out of my way just to criticize them. If I did, then I would be a low-life loser troll who is just flaming to tick people off. Get it?
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #101 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansky View Post

The notion that Pink Floyd is somehow protecting the artistic integrity of their albums by forcing customers to buy them in their entirety is ludicrous.

The only thing ludicrous is your thinking that Pink Floyd is FORCING customers to buy anything.
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
32" Sharp AQUOS (1080p) > 13" MacBook Pro 2.26GHz. 4Gb RAM . 32Gb Corsair Nova SSD >>> 500Gb HDD
Reply
post #102 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

with all due respect, you need to read what was written, and this is not the first time you have projected your feelings on to what I have written, and not responded to what I actually wrote. First, you do understand the term "in general" do you not. The term refers to the majority, more than 50%, and the statement stands. Few youth will put on some music and sit and listen to it, without doing something else. For most, music is an addition to an activity, listening is not THE activity.

Not to derail the topic, but there are so many things wrong with this statement. First, "in general" does not mean majority. Generality means abstracting from the specifics in order to talk about something that applies to an entire subject as a whole, or to every member of the subject. Something that's true in general is a rule that applies to everything under discussion, and cases where it's not true are exceptions to the rule, the specifics that we abstract from when talking in general. Second, even if you only meant to say that the majority of youth cannot appreciate music, the statement is problematic. What sort of data do you have to draw this conclusion? No doubt anecdotal evidence from personal experience that has shaped your stereotypical view? Do you also talk about how black people are lazy "in general" because you happen to live around unemployed black people?

To get back on topic a bit, I think Pink Floyd's decision makes sense. Some of their albums are clearly intended as a coherent work from beginning to end. That said, this thread has a distinct "get off my lawn you damn kids with your loud music" quality to it that is unsettling. I use that expression deliberately because this sort of criticism of the artform and appreciation of a different generation is nowadays the subject of mockery and satire, and yet it is surfacing here for some reason. I would have thought that in this modern age people are enlightened enough to know that there are no objective standards of art and culture and are aware of the constructed nature of their own standards and tastes. One should be able to appreciate the fact that genuine artistry and culture underlie the works that one oneself may be unable to enjoy.
post #103 of 114
[QUOTE=solarein;1588789]Not to derail the topic, but there are so many things wrong with this statement. First, "in general" does not mean majority. Generality means abstracting from the specifics in order to talk about something that applies to an entire subject as a whole, or to every member of the subject. Something that's true in general is a rule that applies to everything under discussion, and cases where it's not true are exceptions to the rule, the specifics that we abstract from when talking in general. Second, even if you only meant to say that the majority of youth cannot appreciate music, the statement is problematic. What sort of data do you have to draw this conclusion? No doubt anecdotal evidence from personal experience that has shaped your stereotypical view? Do you also talk about how black people are lazy "in general" because you happen to live around unemployed black people?

I have to ask, are you Gazoobee's relative? Your logic is flawed in at least a couple of ways. First, the process you describe is one of generalization. Second, if something applies to everything, then there are no exceptions. To the extent that there are exceptions, then the generality applies to the majority.

Like Gazoobee, you make assumptions about me, apparently based on your own preconceptions, biases, and apparently unregulated emotional reactions, as you know little or nothing about me. The data are not based on personal anecdotal experience. There are any number of articles in the popular press that have discussed the paucity of younger audiophiles (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-10212786-47.html). Go to any of the audiophile boards, and the topic is not uncommon.

I have to assume that you must have some sort of racial bias against African Americans, because I have never once brought the topic up. On the other hand, both yourself and Gazoobee seem obsessed about making racial slurs towards African Americans, and bringing race into a topic that has absolutely no racial overtones to it. Indeed, you have no what my racial background is, and yet, you apparently wish to somehow denigrate what I have said by using an all to common McCarthyist smear.
post #104 of 114
I understand that musical tastes are subjective and vary from person to person but you are completely off your rocker to dismiss Pink Floyd as a "no talent group". Let me sum up the numbers for you. Dark Side of the Moon--45 million sold with 250k sold every year on average. It stayed on the billboard 200 for more than 13 years (by far a record), is number 3 all time behind AC/DC Back in Black(#2) and Michael Jackson Thriller (#1). The Wall--30 million sold for a double album (unheard of BTW). That is 75 million sold between just two albums! Comparing them to the Beatles is pointless as the Beatles were a singles band early on (not one album in the 20+million sold bracket). I like both bands but Pink Floyd has succeeded where few bands have (outside of The Who). Their albums have sold throughout time without people trying to "cherry pick" for singles (with rare exceptions. That is the way they have always created their albums. Not as a collection of singles but as one complete work where one song melds into another song.



Quote:
Originally Posted by davesmall View Post

Why would anyone want to purchase an entire album by a no talent group like Pink Floyd? As I recall they've had zero good songs and one passable average song (the Wall) in their entire history.

They're nothing like the Beatles who had nothing but good songs.

They're in the same category with other untalented groups who've maybe had one or two good songs in their entire career (eg: Steely Dan, Grateful Dead, Moody Blues, etc.) along with a ton of garbage.

I might pay 99 cents for the wall but I wouldn't pay $1.10 for their entire collected works.
post #105 of 114
I am 37 and have listened to them since I was ten.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fred 1 View Post

Hey don't let you Meatloaf !

Yeah. Pink Floyd is just flying off the store shelves. You need to over 60
to know who the even are. errr I'm over 60.
post #106 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

Just get it for free on Limewire. I am sure that will make them a lot more money.

Pink Floyd my ass!!!!

Limewire? Did I just wake up in 2001?
post #107 of 114
It's interesting you mention Thick as a Brick, the two songs that comprise the album are "album only" on iTunes, you can only buy the whole album.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I guess you've got a lot of listening to do! Here's a list of a handful to get started on (ranked from from easier to harder): Tommy (The Who), Quadraphenia (The Who), Thick as a Brick (Tull), Apostrophe (Zappa), Uncle Meat (Zappa), Apocalypse (Mahavishnu Orchestra).

Can give you many more.....
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #108 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

There is no use arguing. The youth of today has never developed the listening skills to appreciate music, or true talent.

Music these days is not generally viewed as an art form, but simply as either background music or entertainment, hence the death of the (concept) album and the rise of the single that can be digested in roughly 2.5 minutes.

The albums created by Pink Floyd (or rather Roger Waters) were to music today as a novel is to a one-liner. Just like you can quote a paragraph from a novel because it's interesting, you can also play a single song out from Pink Floyd. But if that's how you got they're music, you were doomed never to get their music. And Roger Waters was a very deep thinker (and Gilmore a great guitarist).

But although there's a number of groups that make similar claims, but I honestly don't know of anyone else who really did that well--told a cohesive story over the course of an album. (Edit: yeah there's examples already given by others: Tommy is certainly one) No doubt there are examples. The one cited above (Meatloaf)... I don't think that's one of them, though. Metallica and AC/DC certainly aren't examples. Perhaps they put some effort into balancing portions of their album, like an abstract painter tries to have bright colors here to counterbalance the dark colors there (Rush did that, for instance, and so did ELO), but nevertheless it wasn't the same. I liked AC/DC when I was a kid, but they were one of those quintessential bands where I'd buy a whole album to get one song, and that got frustrating.

But there was still a point to album-only sales though. I'd but a whole album of Rush to get one song, and then I'd discover that I liked most every other song on that album. Yeah radio stations started the process of breaking the album and played only singles, but even really good albums, there'd only be a song or two played by the radio stations. Sometimes my favorite songs from an album were never to heard on radio.
post #109 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post

But although there's a number of groups that make similar claims, but I honestly don't know of anyone else who really did that well--told a cohesive story over the course of an album.

How about Joe's Garage (Zappa)?

I fully and wholeheartedly agree with your and a few other's point about PF albums and why they propably chose to do this change.

Regs, Jarkko
post #110 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckh1272 View Post

I understand that musical tastes are subjective and vary from person to person but you are completely off your rocker to dismiss Pink Floyd as a "no talent group". Let me sum up the numbers for you. Dark Side of the Moon--45 million sold with 250k sold every year on average. It stayed on the billboard 200 for more than 13 years (by far a record), is number 3 all time behind AC/DC Back in Black(#2) and Michael Jackson Thriller (#1). The Wall--30 million sold for a double album (unheard of BTW). That is 75 million sold between just two albums! Comparing them to the Beatles is pointless as the Beatles were a singles band early on (not one album in the 20+million sold bracket). I like both bands but Pink Floyd has succeeded where few bands have (outside of The Who). Their albums have sold throughout time without people trying to "cherry pick" for singles (with rare exceptions. That is the way they have always created their albums. Not as a collection of singles but as one complete work where one song melds into another song.

I agree, musical tastes are highly subjective. Fragmentation of musical tastes in the market ensures that fewer bands will ever earn that kind of money. For example, not every teenager automatically gravitates to classic rock today as was the case throughout the mid-late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s.

Regarding your other statements: Be careful! Marketing has absolutely nothing to do with quality.
post #111 of 114
I understand the whole marketing/quality concept. My point was this person thought PF is "a no talent group". I'd say with so many albums continuing to sell after all these years plus being the fathers of quadrophonic sound make them just a little bit more than a "no talent group".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourgoises Pig View Post

I agree, musical tastes are highly subjective. Fragmentation of musical tastes in the market ensures that fewer bands will ever earn that kind of money. For example, not every teenager automatically gravitates to classic rock today as was the case throughout the mid-late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s.

Regarding your other statements: Be careful! Marketing has absolutely nothing to do with quality.
post #112 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by applebook View Post

Think before you type. Pink Floyd stands to LOSE money by not selling singles. How is this about "greed"? It's about greed for EMI and record tycoons.

Think before you type --this is the best adage for internet usage.

My interpretation is that PF may have assumed that those who would otherwise have just cherry picked tracks will be forced to purchase entire albums in order to get the tracks they want.

Before iTunes, this is the model that prevailed.
post #113 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

The issue was they were not allowed to sell it as a single album length track.

No, the issue is that EMI licensed the tracks to be sold individually.
PF wants the full album to be the only option when purchasing.
A single album, length track was never an issue.
Quote:
Now with the iTunes album format they probably will allow it, but previously, they asked and were denied.

Now only a full album with a half dozen individual songs will be sold. You will not be able to purchase individual songs.
I doubt very, very much it will be a single album length track.
post #114 of 114
That's their business. They are the kind of group where I've heard everything they did, as it is mostly at least 30 years old. Very doubtful I would buy the albums, but I might buy a song if the mood hit me.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling