iTunes Music Store Tops Two Million Song Downloads
CUPERTINO, Calif., May 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --
Apple(R) (Nasdaq: AAPL) today announced that over two million songs have been purchased and downloaded from its revolutionary iTunes(R) Music Store since its debut 16 days ago. Continuing the trend set during the first week, over half of the songs purchased to date were purchased as albums, further dispelling concerns that selling music on a per-track basis will destroy album sales.
"Response to the iTunes Music Store has been phenomenal -- we've clearly hit a chord with users," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO. "We're adding new songs every day, giving music lovers even more reasons to legally download their favorite music."
...
Over 4,300 new songs were added to the iTunes Music Store yesterday, including five albums from The Doors; new featured artist Fischerspooner's album "#1" plus an exclusive remix of their hit "Emerge;" new albums from Cold, Lizz Wright, and the Yeah Yeah Yeahs; pre- elease tracks from upcoming albums by Michelle Branch, Da Brat, Jesse Harris and Kenna; and, completing her catalog of music now available on the store, Alanis Morissette's albums "Under Rug Swept" and "Supposed Former Infatuation Junkie." Additionally, albums representing diverse genres of music -- from rock and alternative to jazz and classical -- were added from artists including John Coltrane, Charles Mingus, Nina Simone, Paul Oakenfold and Staind.
I don't know about removing music, but if there are exactly ZERO purchases and it is eating up store space I don't mind if they put it into a backup.
there is no store space to be eaten up... if you want a song, search for it... there is NO reason (other then licensing issues) to pull music off the store...
and most of the songs taken away were bought by someone anyway... thats why they noticed they were missing...
Songs and artists are being removed are because of issues with the artist and his or her legal reps. Many performers do not have digital rights in their contracts... i.e. the Beatles.
Songs and artists are being removed are because of issues with the artist and his or her legal reps. Many performers do not have digital rights in their contracts... i.e. the Beatles.
I don't follow MacsRGood4U, just like BRussell said, if they didn't agree they wouldn't be there in the first place. And what, do they suddenly shun MONEY? I'm sure most unlisted artists are clamoring with their labels to get listed ASAP. This is a 'brave new world' of music.
And for Paul, I guess I should have said 'fewer' purchases instead of none. Perhaps if too many people preview a song but don't buy it it gets pulled. And I'm not talking about HD space. Lord knows ONE server could probably hold all the files, but I'm talking about the server App itself. In order to keep the queries fast and accurate it needs to stay lean and not get 'fat' with data searches. Hence the parsed searching when it does a 'refresh'. It loads in sections so as not to bring the system to a halt everytime we click ITMS in iTunes.
The bandwidth and server application are the real beasts of burden and I don't doubt that they are being heavily taxed by the Mac community. (particularly since demand is FAR exceeding what they exepected by about 4 times)
In any case, I think I may still have a point Paul. (but I have been wrong before and will undoubtedly be wrong again)
Here's an interesting quote from this CBS Marketwatch article:
Quote:
But analysts and investors expect ITunes to take off when Apple makes its music store available for the Windows/Intel users. If 10 percent of the Windows-Intel market downloaded music, sales would come to around $20 million a week -- worth annualized earnings of 62 cents, according to analyst Kevin McCarthy at CS First Boston.
I assume they mean that Apple's share would be $20 million per week. Over the course of a year with windows users, Apple would be adding a cool $1 billion in revenue. Assuming a constant flow of $20 million per week, of course.
Good question. Being in the music business I can tell you that lawyers get involved even if the artists give an ok. Label lawyers may interpret contracts differently then artists' lawyers. It happens all the time. When they do, and sometimes it's after the fact, problems can occur. A representative of an artist may also be looking for a better deal for his client or may simply be playing hard ball. This is the real world I'm afraid. Removing tracks from the store could also just be a technical issue. Perhaps the performer was not satisfied with the quality. If a label provided Apple with rights for download that it didn't have then it isn't Apple's fault.
What I don't understand is why they only have 250,000 "songs" for sale. The major labels control lots more music than that. LOTS more. Sure, if I searched around on the iTMS I could find plenty of stuff to buy. But if I do it the other way around, that is if I think of something I want and then look for it on the iTMS I have so far had no luck at all. My hit rate is higher at the local used record store.
What I don't understand is why they only have 250,000 "songs" for sale. The major labels control lots more music than that. LOTS more. Sure, if I searched around on the iTMS I could find plenty of stuff to buy. But if I do it the other way around, that is if I think of something I want and then look for it on the iTMS I have so far had no luck at all. My hit rate is higher at the local used record store.
I agree.. I would have expected them to start adding songs at a much faster rate. 3200 songs last week, and 4300 total now. That means their rate has actually dropped?
I read in an article (can't remember where) that Apple's selling 200,000 songs, a fraction of the current 1 million in print, which is in itself a fraction of the 5 million recorded. Shoot for the stars, Apple.
There will be a million songs on line by the end of the year and I bet there will still be complaints. In that case, go buy the CD!
Problems are cropping up per this:
LA Times: iTunes music sharing 'stirs piracy concerns'
May 14 - 16:50 EDT__ In a Los Angeles Times article (free subscription required) published today, staff writer Jon Healey says that iTunes 4 and its Internet music sharing option is "giving record labels and music publishers a new worry about piracy." He writes, "In the two weeks that iTunes has been on the market, several Web sites have sprung up to help users find others who are sharing songs online. And some adept programmers have developed a way to let people copy those songs." Cary Ramos, an attorney for the National Music Publishers Association, is quoted in the article as saying, "It sounds as if it is a hole in the security that needs to be closed. I don't know what Apple can do to achieve that, but I would certainly hope that they would take steps immediately to address this issue
Over 4,300 new songs were added to the iTunes Music Store yesterday
so 4300 this week....3200 the week before...so they are adding faster now....don't worry, the store is only 2 weeks old...they will keep adding songs and soon the selection (currently at 207,500 songs) will be 300,000...then 400,000 etc etc...by a year in the iTMS will likely have a million songs, will be available to mac and pc users and will allow sells and downloads to the US, Canada, the UK, Australia and probably parts of Europe, Japan and South America...that would be a wonderful achievement for any business to pull off in a years time....
g
i see asian and eastern european markets as taking more time and thought, but i could very easily be wrong...
so 4300 this week....3200 the week before...so they are adding faster now
My mistake, I must have misread the press release.
Quote:
There will be a million songs on line by the end of the year and I bet there will still be complaints. In that case, go buy the CD!
I'd be the last person to complain if this turns out to be true. But who says? If they continue at this rate, they won't even tease half that. Don't peg me as a critic, though.. I love the iTMS, I just thought that they'd be adding more music faster. Maybe it's the labels' fault, or maybe they just want to be conservative with their resources.
This might not reallybe an issue, but one way to think about it is that human beings are dong the encoding. If that's the case, I would rather have fewer songs added but with better (potential) encoding by people who are doing a careful job.
If I'm not mistaken, Apple has taken it upon themselves to do the encoding, probably as another carrot to minimize cost and risk for the labels. Once this service is proven to have legs, I wouldn't be too surprised if, at some point, Apple invited a few engineers from each label to Cupertino to teach them the encoding software they're using (it's not iTunes!) so that the labels could start ripping tracks from master tapes themselves and sending them to Apple. That would greatly increase the rate at which new songs were added, and it would also drop the cost, since the engineers would be in much closer proximity to the masters.
That'll be an especially useful arrangement for independent labels, and for back catalogs.
I haven't heard about the number of added tracks though.
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
...I wouldn't be too surprised if, at some point, Apple invited a few engineers from each label to Cupertino to teach them the encoding software they're using (it's not iTunes!)...
Hm, another piece to their emagic/ pro software catalog in the future? I'm curious what they've been using and in what the state its UI is in.
Comments
iTunes Music Store Tops Two Million Song Downloads
CUPERTINO, Calif., May 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ --
Apple(R) (Nasdaq: AAPL) today announced that over two million songs have been purchased and downloaded from its revolutionary iTunes(R) Music Store since its debut 16 days ago. Continuing the trend set during the first week, over half of the songs purchased to date were purchased as albums, further dispelling concerns that selling music on a per-track basis will destroy album sales.
"Response to the iTunes Music Store has been phenomenal -- we've clearly hit a chord with users," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO. "We're adding new songs every day, giving music lovers even more reasons to legally download their favorite music."
...
Over 4,300 new songs were added to the iTunes Music Store yesterday, including five albums from The Doors; new featured artist Fischerspooner's album "#1" plus an exclusive remix of their hit "Emerge;" new albums from Cold, Lizz Wright, and the Yeah Yeah Yeahs; pre- elease tracks from upcoming albums by Michelle Branch, Da Brat, Jesse Harris and Kenna; and, completing her catalog of music now available on the store, Alanis Morissette's albums "Under Rug Swept" and "Supposed Former Infatuation Junkie." Additionally, albums representing diverse genres of music -- from rock and alternative to jazz and classical -- were added from artists including John Coltrane, Charles Mingus, Nina Simone, Paul Oakenfold and Staind.
...
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
I don't know about removing music, but if there are exactly ZERO purchases and it is eating up store space I don't mind if they put it into a backup.
there is no store space to be eaten up... if you want a song, search for it... there is NO reason (other then licensing issues) to pull music off the store...
and most of the songs taken away were bought by someone anyway... thats why they noticed they were missing...
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
Songs and artists are being removed are because of issues with the artist and his or her legal reps. Many performers do not have digital rights in their contracts... i.e. the Beatles.
Then why did they get on in the first place?
I don't follow MacsRGood4U, just like BRussell said, if they didn't agree they wouldn't be there in the first place. And what, do they suddenly shun MONEY? I'm sure most unlisted artists are clamoring with their labels to get listed ASAP. This is a 'brave new world' of music.
And for Paul, I guess I should have said 'fewer' purchases instead of none. Perhaps if too many people preview a song but don't buy it it gets pulled. And I'm not talking about HD space. Lord knows ONE server could probably hold all the files, but I'm talking about the server App itself. In order to keep the queries fast and accurate it needs to stay lean and not get 'fat' with data searches. Hence the parsed searching when it does a 'refresh'. It loads in sections so as not to bring the system to a halt everytime we click ITMS in iTunes.
The bandwidth and server application are the real beasts of burden and I don't doubt that they are being heavily taxed by the Mac community. (particularly since demand is FAR exceeding what they exepected by about 4 times)
In any case, I think I may still have a point Paul. (but I have been wrong before and will undoubtedly be wrong again)
But analysts and investors expect ITunes to take off when Apple makes its music store available for the Windows/Intel users. If 10 percent of the Windows-Intel market downloaded music, sales would come to around $20 million a week -- worth annualized earnings of 62 cents, according to analyst Kevin McCarthy at CS First Boston.
I assume they mean that Apple's share would be $20 million per week. Over the course of a year with windows users, Apple would be adding a cool $1 billion in revenue. Assuming a constant flow of $20 million per week, of course.
theFly
www.flyonthemac.com
Rumors You Can Bet On
Then why did they get on in the first place?
Good question. Being in the music business I can tell you that lawyers get involved even if the artists give an ok. Label lawyers may interpret contracts differently then artists' lawyers. It happens all the time. When they do, and sometimes it's after the fact, problems can occur. A representative of an artist may also be looking for a better deal for his client or may simply be playing hard ball. This is the real world I'm afraid. Removing tracks from the store could also just be a technical issue. Perhaps the performer was not satisfied with the quality. If a label provided Apple with rights for download that it didn't have then it isn't Apple's fault.
I'm happy!
I finally found Sanctuary's cover of White Rabbit
woohoo!!
I can sense an addiction coming on... especially if I ever decide to blow the ungodly amount of money Apple wants for the ipod
Originally posted by JBL
What I don't understand is why they only have 250,000 "songs" for sale. The major labels control lots more music than that. LOTS more. Sure, if I searched around on the iTMS I could find plenty of stuff to buy. But if I do it the other way around, that is if I think of something I want and then look for it on the iTMS I have so far had no luck at all. My hit rate is higher at the local used record store.
I agree.. I would have expected them to start adding songs at a much faster rate. 3200 songs last week, and 4300 total now. That means their rate has actually dropped?
I read in an article (can't remember where) that Apple's selling 200,000 songs, a fraction of the current 1 million in print, which is in itself a fraction of the 5 million recorded. Shoot for the stars, Apple.
Problems are cropping up per this:
LA Times: iTunes music sharing 'stirs piracy concerns'
May 14 - 16:50 EDT__ In a Los Angeles Times article (free subscription required) published today, staff writer Jon Healey says that iTunes 4 and its Internet music sharing option is "giving record labels and music publishers a new worry about piracy." He writes, "In the two weeks that iTunes has been on the market, several Web sites have sprung up to help users find others who are sharing songs online. And some adept programmers have developed a way to let people copy those songs." Cary Ramos, an attorney for the National Music Publishers Association, is quoted in the article as saying, "It sounds as if it is a hole in the security that needs to be closed. I don't know what Apple can do to achieve that, but I would certainly hope that they would take steps immediately to address this issue
Over 4,300 new songs were added to the iTunes Music Store yesterday
so 4300 this week....3200 the week before...so they are adding faster now....don't worry, the store is only 2 weeks old...they will keep adding songs and soon the selection (currently at 207,500 songs) will be 300,000...then 400,000 etc etc...by a year in the iTMS will likely have a million songs, will be available to mac and pc users and will allow sells and downloads to the US, Canada, the UK, Australia and probably parts of Europe, Japan and South America...that would be a wonderful achievement for any business to pull off in a years time....
g
i see asian and eastern european markets as taking more time and thought, but i could very easily be wrong...
Originally posted by thegelding
so 4300 this week....3200 the week before...so they are adding faster now
My mistake, I must have misread the press release.
There will be a million songs on line by the end of the year and I bet there will still be complaints. In that case, go buy the CD!
I'd be the last person to complain if this turns out to be true. But who says? If they continue at this rate, they won't even tease half that. Don't peg me as a critic, though.. I love the iTMS, I just thought that they'd be adding more music faster. Maybe it's the labels' fault, or maybe they just want to be conservative with their resources.
That'll be an especially useful arrangement for independent labels, and for back catalogs.
http://www.macminute.com/2003/05/20/itunes2
I haven't heard about the number of added tracks though.
Originally posted by Amorph
...I wouldn't be too surprised if, at some point, Apple invited a few engineers from each label to Cupertino to teach them the encoding software they're using (it's not iTunes!)...
Hm, another piece to their emagic/ pro software catalog in the future? I'm curious what they've been using and in what the state its UI is in.
Originally posted by OSXaddict
Heck, there is a Wynton Marsalis song (In the sweet embrace of life) that is 54 minutes long! for 99 cents!
Awesome one! Thanks for the tip - sometimes this 99c thing really works out. Too many partial albums though: hate that.