If you're really so pure, why do you let radio stations play just one song at a time from an album, instead of the whole album straight through? That's defacing your art, isn't it?
Of course, rappers like Jay-Z forget that the music industry was born and thrived under the era of 45's and long playing single '33's.
These guys are all about the money, and their music is not art.
In case, some rapper thinks I'm some white bigot, I'm not. I'm African American who loves GOOD music, not most of the crap out there that poses as music.
Jay-Z needs to be thankful for a iTunes, because without it, he will not get any profits, as people will once again go back to illegally downloading music.
I personally like iTunes, because I can guarantee I get good quality sounds, and also, I get to sample what is out there before I buy. I buy more music now than I have since the early 90s, thanks to iTunes.
Get over Jay-Z. Few people really are feeling sorry for you.
"Some people find it hard to understand my man Jay-Z's decision not to let iTunes break up his American Gangster album and sell it as single tracks," he wrote. "They say he's fighting the future and losing out on sales from fans who only want to download singles. But I say it was a stand somebody had to take in the music industry. Jay is speaking for all of us."
First off, these artists have to realize that they are the ones that made itunes so popular in the first place. Consumers where getting tired of paying full price for a CD and getting only one good song and the rest of the CD filled with skids that talk about how they have so much money and what they do with it. So start filling your CD?s with good music and don?t fill your album full of crap, and I wouldn?t mind buying a full CD.
Why can't artists just dub an album that is made up of one track, so that when it is put on iTunes, the album runs together. If the artist truly wants a single entity to be purchased, then he/she should make their "glorious" creation how they want it to be sold. This master track could even be sold as a full CD in terms of price. If you create a split up CD from the get-go, you only open the door to people wanting to buy the specific sections.
The whole purpose of the track-by-track purchasing scheme is to give the customer a choice. Often times, artists have both good songs and filler material. Only if you like it, should you have to buy the filler. This is the primary reason for the 'Complete my album' function within the iTS. If the customer deems the album worth thier money after purchasing songs individually, then the customer can choose to endorse the work of the artist through the purchase of the entire CD. The artists need to stop pretending that they are almighty gods, and come down to earth. MAKE GOOD MUSIC, AND THEY WILL COME!
If they do that, then it sells at the price of a song. Besides, it's a load of crap. If they want any airplay for their music at all, it's got to be as individual songs. no one will play an entire album more than once, as a gimmick.
If they do that, then it sells at the price of a song. Besides, it's a load of crap. If they want any airplay for their music at all, it's got to be as individual songs. no one will play an entire album more than once, as a gimmick.
If they want airplay of "individual songs" then why do artists complain about spliting up albums in the first place?
Physical CDs are sold as split up into tracks. Why should iTS albums be any different. My point is that there should be consistency in the incessant bitching of the artists before they have a leg to stand on.
Jay Z and Dupri are being ridiculous. Trying to say the individual songs must be purchased as an album is ridiculous. Some songs will be good and some will totally stink.
that is why "the industry" sold singles of popular songs for so long.
Apple takes the concept and makes it the best thing for THE CONSUMER!
Wow! Novel!
Now vivendi and one individual artist want to make things go back to the confusing and consumer beware no mans land that it was before.
Hey Dupri, apple already respects the "craft," that is why they designed a LEGAL download system that no only works, but gets people who would never buy your stuff to get to sample it from the comfort of their home and download the parts they like.
I would never buy a "trick Daddy" album, but I did download the "let's Go" song, because I was able to hear and download it on iTunes. If I had to buy the whole album for that song, I would go without.
These guys need to shut up and either withdraw their stuff quietly or respect Apple's "craft" which enables them to reach broader audience.
If they don't like it, fine withdraw, but shut up about your "craft" and trying to get others to follow your dubious lead. Why not just be honest and say that you just want to force people to pay more. Some people will pay you more and some people will steer clear.
Have any of you idiots ever listened to a concept album?
Pink Floyd's The Wall
Queensryche's Operation Mindcrime
My Chemical Romance's The Black Parade
Just like a movie, there will be some stand-out exciting moments (songs as opposed to movie scenes) and then there will be less interesting moments that are there to move the narrative along. The opening track to Operation Mindcrime isn't even an actual song, yet it sets up the 15 tracks to follow. Without it, the album loses quite a bit of meaning.
But you don't see them offering to sell you only the exciting moments of a film do you?
Sorry, but I think the artists should be free to distribute their art in whatever form they want not have it dictated to them by Apple or the "experts" commenting on this site. If the consumer doesn't like the way it is offered, they simply won't buy it.
And could everyone please skip the BS arguments that if it's not on iTunes people will just skip to the P2P networks to find it? A load of crap. If P2P is their inclination, they're skipping straight to that instead and using iTunes as a last resort.
And could everyone please skip the BS arguments that if it's not on iTunes people will just skip to the P2P networks to find it? A load of crap. If P2P is their inclination, they're skipping straight to that instead and using iTunes as a last resort.
Sorry your wrong.
See it all the time, people go to itms if its not there they download it from p2p. They go to itms first as they know its good quality and cheap. Its the easiest option ( which is why it is so successful )
Looks like Verizon is pulling a semi-Apple (DRM free) move to shake it up. That should be seen as a desperate move to make up market share and become more appealing for some.
From what I understand, Versizon is only catching up with the market as it is over here in Britain. If you go into Carphone Warehouse to buy a phone, more often than not (in my experience anyway) the phone comes without a lock of any kind and without an modification to the OS. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. the iPhone (although O2 haven't changed the OS) and the SE V range, which are commissioned specifically for Vodafone.
From what I understand, Versizon is only catching up with the market as it is over here in Britain. If you go into Carphone Warehouse to buy a phone, more often than not (in my experience anyway) the phone comes without a lock of any kind and without an modification to the OS. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. the iPhone (although O2 haven't changed the OS) and the SE V range, which are commissioned specifically for Vodafone.
I think that you will find that you only get unlocked handsets on O2 and Vodafone (unless they are network exclusive or branded) as all T-Mobile and Orange handsets are network locked. Even MVNO operator Virgin Mobile now network locks their handsets (But they offer free unlocking after a few weeks of use)
JD, Jay Zee... whatever. They have no clue. The record companies have had a gun to our head for years. We have been force-fed crap for years just to buy one or two good songs that we really want.
The solution is simple, produce a CD that is ALL good, and we'll buy it all.
They can crap on Apple all they want, but the iTunes model is a huge success. Their customers are happy, and the few that aren't can get their music any other number of way. Some legal, some not.
Whiny artists like that make themselves sound like complete and total knobs!
I don't think the Syracuse, NY (mini) store could really be called a flagship store... and unlike the rest of the mini stores, our nearest full size store's in Rochester, 80+ mi away.
See it all the time, people go to itms if its not there they download it from p2p. They go to itms first as they know its good quality and cheap. Its the easiest option ( which is why it is so successful )
The arguement is very far from BS.
I have to second you on this one. If its on iTunes i'll buy it there. Its good, legal, secure and fast. If its not there (like Galactica Razor for instance)....well I have the following choices :
1./ wait until it comes to the Belgian ITS (one word : never)
2./ wait until it comes out on DVD in Belgium (in about four years and the version sold on Amazon.com is a region 1 DVD....)
3./ wait until it comes to the US ITS (two word : Jeff Zucker)
4./ download it via BitTorrent
I mean it is the media industry itself that forced me back to illegality on that issue.
Why can't artists just dub an album that is made up of one track, so that when it is put on iTunes, the album runs together. If the artist truly wants a single entity to be purchased, then he/she should make their "glorious" creation how they want it to be sold. This master track could even be sold as a full CD in terms of price. If you create a split up CD from the get-go, you only open the door to people wanting to buy the specific sections.
The whole purpose of the track-by-track purchasing scheme is to give the customer a choice. Often times, artists have both good songs and filler material. Only if you like it, should you have to buy the filler. This is the primary reason for the 'Complete my album' function within the iTS. If the customer deems the album worth thier money after purchasing songs individually, then the customer can choose to endorse the work of the artist through the purchase of the entire CD. The artists need to stop pretending that they are almighty gods, and come down to earth. MAKE GOOD MUSIC, AND THEY WILL COME!
Why can't you allow that an artist might have some artistic intent other than that each song should stand on it's own and work equally well regardless of content. Shouldn't the artist's intent have some value in figuring out how the work is going to be put out. Yes, most albums are crap beyond the first couple of songs. But a lot of people put a lot of work and thought into how an album of songs fit together. Some songs work best in context and serve to set up other songs. The album is a 40 years old plus format and people still want to express themselves through it.
When Apple starts to dictate how an artist can put out his or her music in this way then it is no better than the idiot record labels. Why can't some songs be designated as singles and others as album only. That would easily take care of both the artists' need for the integrity of the whole and the casual fans need to buy only one or two songs.
"We don't tell you to break up your computers into bits and pieces and sell off each thing,"
The difference is that songs have ALWAYS been sold as singles on 45s, cassettes and then CDs. Even Pink Floyd released a single off of The Wall.
These are people who don't understand their audience. Morons.
Yeah, but not every song. Pink Floyd released a single, not a series of 13 singles. If you want to talk historically, most albums yielded 2 or 3 singles at most. The rest of the material was available by buying the album. Try to get your facts straight before you start throwing around words like "morons."
Have any of you idiots ever listened to a concept album?
Pink Floyd's The Wall
Queensryche's Operation Mindcrime
My Chemical Romance's The Black Parade
Just like a movie, there will be some stand-out exciting moments (songs as opposed to movie scenes) and then there will be less interesting moments that are there to move the narrative along. The opening track to Operation Mindcrime isn't even an actual song, yet it sets up the 15 tracks to follow. Without it, the album loses quite a bit of meaning.
But you don't see them offering to sell you only the exciting moments of a film do you?
Sorry, but I think the artists should be free to distribute their art in whatever form they want not have it dictated to them by Apple or the "experts" commenting on this site. If the consumer doesn't like the way it is offered, they simply won't buy it.
And could everyone please skip the BS arguments that if it's not on iTunes people will just skip to the P2P networks to find it? A load of crap. If P2P is their inclination, they're skipping straight to that instead and using iTunes as a last resort.
One would think the answer is simple; a concept album, as others have pointed out, could easily be made such that the entire group of 'required' tracks are seamlessly made as one track and therefore sold and downloaded as one unit.
I have not checked, but Classical music is in a similar situation, one section from a Max Bruch's violin concerto alone would not do justice to the entire work.
Whether such a grouped set of tracks can be priced as an entire album or only as a single track is a question I don't know the answer to and perhaps the iTunes model would not allow this at present. Does any one know the answer, can you buy a single movement from a classical album?
So I can see an argument for an entire album being made in certain situations, after all, you can't buy Chapter 3 of Harry Potter's 3rd adventure! Hey maybe that's the answer for this guy... RAP eBooks lol.
Yeah, but not every song. Pink Floyd released a single, not a series of 13 singles. If you want to talk historically, most albums yielded 2 or 3 singles at most. The rest of the material was available by buying the album. Try to get your facts straight before you start throwing around words like "morons."
Ah, semantics...
Yes, but they did release a single, which means just one track for sale by itself off of an album clearly intended to be listened to as a whole. One track. The "best track" as deemed by the record company or whoever. One track alone. The point stands that the precedent is there that even concept albums are not exempt from division by the record companies or the artists. It's disingenuous at this point for artists or record companies to say that it can't be done.
And last time I checked (which was 30 seconds ago), The Wall was available on iTunes for download as separate tracks, so yeah, that equates to 13 singles. The fact is that if you like a single song, chances are you'll like (or at least want to own) the entire album. That's why artists release singles in the first place.
Yes, but they did release a single, which means just one track for sale by itself off of an album clearly intended to be listened to as a whole. One track. The "best track" as deemed by the record company or whoever. One track alone. The point stands that the precedent is there that even concept albums are not exempt from division by the record companies or the artists. It's disingenuous at this point for artists or record companies to say that it can't be done.
And last time I checked (which was 30 seconds ago), The Wall was available on iTunes for download as separate tracks, so yeah, that equates to 13 singles. The fact is that if you like a single song, chances are you'll like (or at least want to own) the entire album. That's why artists release singles in the first place.
Moron.
Well, these aren't really semantics. I believe that artists should be given the right to determine that some songs are available as singles and others as album only tracks. If, on a rare occasion, one wants to have no singles, that should be their prerogative. Sales will most likely suffer. But Apple should be flexible. What skin off their back is it?
with regard to "The Wall" now being available a la carte, I would say that it's status as a whole and united work is now fully established enough that they can do such a thing freely and not feel they didn't get their point across. But maybe a generation from now they might think of that as a mistake. Who knows? But if contemporary artists are trying to be more ambitious about how they create music, I would think it would behoove us to support it, not dismiss it out of hand, even if every masterpiece will probably be counter-balanced by five pretentious, over-blown pieces of crap.
And a question, are you calling me a moron or is that how you are signing your name?
Nobody would ever call the teeny-weeny cramped Apple store in the wannabe-fashionable Country Club Plaza shopping district of Kansas City a flagship. I mean, it's (slightly) better stocked and staffed than CompUSA, but no bigger than a couple moderately sized store aisles.
However, they make up for the limited floorspace by having no parking. It interesting to watch someone try to hand-carry a Mac Pro and a Cinema monitor a few blocks down the street to a multi-level underground parking garage.
Comments
If you're really so pure, why do you let radio stations play just one song at a time from an album, instead of the whole album straight through? That's defacing your art, isn't it?
I would love to hear his answer. Excellent point.
These guys are all about the money, and their music is not art.
In case, some rapper thinks I'm some white bigot, I'm not. I'm African American who loves GOOD music, not most of the crap out there that poses as music.
Jay-Z needs to be thankful for a iTunes, because without it, he will not get any profits, as people will once again go back to illegally downloading music.
I personally like iTunes, because I can guarantee I get good quality sounds, and also, I get to sample what is out there before I buy. I buy more music now than I have since the early 90s, thanks to iTunes.
Get over Jay-Z. Few people really are feeling sorry for you.
First off, these artists have to realize that they are the ones that made itunes so popular in the first place. Consumers where getting tired of paying full price for a CD and getting only one good song and the rest of the CD filled with skids that talk about how they have so much money and what they do with it. So start filling your CD?s with good music and don?t fill your album full of crap, and I wouldn?t mind buying a full CD.
New flasgship Apple Store! Yes!
Here's an idea:
Why can't artists just dub an album that is made up of one track, so that when it is put on iTunes, the album runs together. If the artist truly wants a single entity to be purchased, then he/she should make their "glorious" creation how they want it to be sold. This master track could even be sold as a full CD in terms of price. If you create a split up CD from the get-go, you only open the door to people wanting to buy the specific sections.
The whole purpose of the track-by-track purchasing scheme is to give the customer a choice. Often times, artists have both good songs and filler material. Only if you like it, should you have to buy the filler. This is the primary reason for the 'Complete my album' function within the iTS. If the customer deems the album worth thier money after purchasing songs individually, then the customer can choose to endorse the work of the artist through the purchase of the entire CD. The artists need to stop pretending that they are almighty gods, and come down to earth. MAKE GOOD MUSIC, AND THEY WILL COME!
If they do that, then it sells at the price of a song. Besides, it's a load of crap. If they want any airplay for their music at all, it's got to be as individual songs. no one will play an entire album more than once, as a gimmick.
If they do that, then it sells at the price of a song. Besides, it's a load of crap. If they want any airplay for their music at all, it's got to be as individual songs. no one will play an entire album more than once, as a gimmick.
If they want airplay of "individual songs" then why do artists complain about spliting up albums in the first place?
Physical CDs are sold as split up into tracks. Why should iTS albums be any different. My point is that there should be consistency in the incessant bitching of the artists before they have a leg to stand on.
Jay Z and Dupri are being ridiculous. Trying to say the individual songs must be purchased as an album is ridiculous. Some songs will be good and some will totally stink.
that is why "the industry" sold singles of popular songs for so long.
Apple takes the concept and makes it the best thing for THE CONSUMER!
Wow! Novel!
Now vivendi and one individual artist want to make things go back to the confusing and consumer beware no mans land that it was before.
Hey Dupri, apple already respects the "craft," that is why they designed a LEGAL download system that no only works, but gets people who would never buy your stuff to get to sample it from the comfort of their home and download the parts they like.
I would never buy a "trick Daddy" album, but I did download the "let's Go" song, because I was able to hear and download it on iTunes. If I had to buy the whole album for that song, I would go without.
These guys need to shut up and either withdraw their stuff quietly or respect Apple's "craft" which enables them to reach broader audience.
If they don't like it, fine withdraw, but shut up about your "craft" and trying to get others to follow your dubious lead. Why not just be honest and say that you just want to force people to pay more. Some people will pay you more and some people will steer clear.
Have any of you idiots ever listened to a concept album?
Pink Floyd's The Wall
Queensryche's Operation Mindcrime
My Chemical Romance's The Black Parade
Just like a movie, there will be some stand-out exciting moments (songs as opposed to movie scenes) and then there will be less interesting moments that are there to move the narrative along. The opening track to Operation Mindcrime isn't even an actual song, yet it sets up the 15 tracks to follow. Without it, the album loses quite a bit of meaning.
But you don't see them offering to sell you only the exciting moments of a film do you?
Sorry, but I think the artists should be free to distribute their art in whatever form they want not have it dictated to them by Apple or the "experts" commenting on this site. If the consumer doesn't like the way it is offered, they simply won't buy it.
And could everyone please skip the BS arguments that if it's not on iTunes people will just skip to the P2P networks to find it? A load of crap. If P2P is their inclination, they're skipping straight to that instead and using iTunes as a last resort.
And could everyone please skip the BS arguments that if it's not on iTunes people will just skip to the P2P networks to find it? A load of crap. If P2P is their inclination, they're skipping straight to that instead and using iTunes as a last resort.
Sorry your wrong.
See it all the time, people go to itms if its not there they download it from p2p. They go to itms first as they know its good quality and cheap. Its the easiest option ( which is why it is so successful )
The arguement is very far from BS.
Looks like Verizon is pulling a semi-Apple (DRM free) move to shake it up. That should be seen as a desperate move to make up market share and become more appealing for some.
From what I understand, Versizon is only catching up with the market as it is over here in Britain. If you go into Carphone Warehouse to buy a phone, more often than not (in my experience anyway) the phone comes without a lock of any kind and without an modification to the OS. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. the iPhone (although O2 haven't changed the OS) and the SE V range, which are commissioned specifically for Vodafone.
From what I understand, Versizon is only catching up with the market as it is over here in Britain. If you go into Carphone Warehouse to buy a phone, more often than not (in my experience anyway) the phone comes without a lock of any kind and without an modification to the OS. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. the iPhone (although O2 haven't changed the OS) and the SE V range, which are commissioned specifically for Vodafone.
I think that you will find that you only get unlocked handsets on O2 and Vodafone (unless they are network exclusive or branded) as all T-Mobile and Orange handsets are network locked. Even MVNO operator Virgin Mobile now network locks their handsets (But they offer free unlocking after a few weeks of use)
The solution is simple, produce a CD that is ALL good, and we'll buy it all.
They can crap on Apple all they want, but the iTunes model is a huge success. Their customers are happy, and the few that aren't can get their music any other number of way. Some legal, some not.
Whiny artists like that make themselves sound like complete and total knobs!
The difference is that songs have ALWAYS been sold as singles on 45s, cassettes and then CDs. Even Pink Floyd released a single off of The Wall.
These are people who don't understand their audience. Morons.
Guys, are there any Apple stores that you're NOT calling "flagship" stores?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/flagship
I don't think the Syracuse, NY (mini) store could really be called a flagship store... and unlike the rest of the mini stores, our nearest full size store's in Rochester, 80+ mi away.
Sorry your wrong.
See it all the time, people go to itms if its not there they download it from p2p. They go to itms first as they know its good quality and cheap. Its the easiest option ( which is why it is so successful )
The arguement is very far from BS.
I have to second you on this one. If its on iTunes i'll buy it there. Its good, legal, secure and fast. If its not there (like Galactica Razor for instance)....well I have the following choices :
1./ wait until it comes to the Belgian ITS (one word : never)
2./ wait until it comes out on DVD in Belgium (in about four years and the version sold on Amazon.com is a region 1 DVD....)
3./ wait until it comes to the US ITS (two word : Jeff Zucker)
4./ download it via BitTorrent
I mean it is the media industry itself that forced me back to illegality on that issue.
Here's an idea:
Why can't artists just dub an album that is made up of one track, so that when it is put on iTunes, the album runs together. If the artist truly wants a single entity to be purchased, then he/she should make their "glorious" creation how they want it to be sold. This master track could even be sold as a full CD in terms of price. If you create a split up CD from the get-go, you only open the door to people wanting to buy the specific sections.
The whole purpose of the track-by-track purchasing scheme is to give the customer a choice. Often times, artists have both good songs and filler material. Only if you like it, should you have to buy the filler. This is the primary reason for the 'Complete my album' function within the iTS. If the customer deems the album worth thier money after purchasing songs individually, then the customer can choose to endorse the work of the artist through the purchase of the entire CD. The artists need to stop pretending that they are almighty gods, and come down to earth. MAKE GOOD MUSIC, AND THEY WILL COME!
Why can't you allow that an artist might have some artistic intent other than that each song should stand on it's own and work equally well regardless of content. Shouldn't the artist's intent have some value in figuring out how the work is going to be put out. Yes, most albums are crap beyond the first couple of songs. But a lot of people put a lot of work and thought into how an album of songs fit together. Some songs work best in context and serve to set up other songs. The album is a 40 years old plus format and people still want to express themselves through it.
When Apple starts to dictate how an artist can put out his or her music in this way then it is no better than the idiot record labels. Why can't some songs be designated as singles and others as album only. That would easily take care of both the artists' need for the integrity of the whole and the casual fans need to buy only one or two songs.
And Apple might sell more albums that way.
"We don't tell you to break up your computers into bits and pieces and sell off each thing,"
The difference is that songs have ALWAYS been sold as singles on 45s, cassettes and then CDs. Even Pink Floyd released a single off of The Wall.
These are people who don't understand their audience. Morons.
Yeah, but not every song. Pink Floyd released a single, not a series of 13 singles. If you want to talk historically, most albums yielded 2 or 3 singles at most. The rest of the material was available by buying the album. Try to get your facts straight before you start throwing around words like "morons."
Have any of you idiots ever listened to a concept album?
Pink Floyd's The Wall
Queensryche's Operation Mindcrime
My Chemical Romance's The Black Parade
Just like a movie, there will be some stand-out exciting moments (songs as opposed to movie scenes) and then there will be less interesting moments that are there to move the narrative along. The opening track to Operation Mindcrime isn't even an actual song, yet it sets up the 15 tracks to follow. Without it, the album loses quite a bit of meaning.
But you don't see them offering to sell you only the exciting moments of a film do you?
Sorry, but I think the artists should be free to distribute their art in whatever form they want not have it dictated to them by Apple or the "experts" commenting on this site. If the consumer doesn't like the way it is offered, they simply won't buy it.
And could everyone please skip the BS arguments that if it's not on iTunes people will just skip to the P2P networks to find it? A load of crap. If P2P is their inclination, they're skipping straight to that instead and using iTunes as a last resort.
One would think the answer is simple; a concept album, as others have pointed out, could easily be made such that the entire group of 'required' tracks are seamlessly made as one track and therefore sold and downloaded as one unit.
I have not checked, but Classical music is in a similar situation, one section from a Max Bruch's violin concerto alone would not do justice to the entire work.
Whether such a grouped set of tracks can be priced as an entire album or only as a single track is a question I don't know the answer to and perhaps the iTunes model would not allow this at present. Does any one know the answer, can you buy a single movement from a classical album?
So I can see an argument for an entire album being made in certain situations, after all, you can't buy Chapter 3 of Harry Potter's 3rd adventure! Hey maybe that's the answer for this guy... RAP eBooks lol.
Yeah, but not every song. Pink Floyd released a single, not a series of 13 singles. If you want to talk historically, most albums yielded 2 or 3 singles at most. The rest of the material was available by buying the album. Try to get your facts straight before you start throwing around words like "morons."
Ah, semantics...
Yes, but they did release a single, which means just one track for sale by itself off of an album clearly intended to be listened to as a whole. One track. The "best track" as deemed by the record company or whoever. One track alone. The point stands that the precedent is there that even concept albums are not exempt from division by the record companies or the artists. It's disingenuous at this point for artists or record companies to say that it can't be done.
And last time I checked (which was 30 seconds ago), The Wall was available on iTunes for download as separate tracks, so yeah, that equates to 13 singles. The fact is that if you like a single song, chances are you'll like (or at least want to own) the entire album. That's why artists release singles in the first place.
Moron.
Ah, semantics...
Yes, but they did release a single, which means just one track for sale by itself off of an album clearly intended to be listened to as a whole. One track. The "best track" as deemed by the record company or whoever. One track alone. The point stands that the precedent is there that even concept albums are not exempt from division by the record companies or the artists. It's disingenuous at this point for artists or record companies to say that it can't be done.
And last time I checked (which was 30 seconds ago), The Wall was available on iTunes for download as separate tracks, so yeah, that equates to 13 singles. The fact is that if you like a single song, chances are you'll like (or at least want to own) the entire album. That's why artists release singles in the first place.
Moron.
Well, these aren't really semantics. I believe that artists should be given the right to determine that some songs are available as singles and others as album only tracks. If, on a rare occasion, one wants to have no singles, that should be their prerogative. Sales will most likely suffer. But Apple should be flexible. What skin off their back is it?
with regard to "The Wall" now being available a la carte, I would say that it's status as a whole and united work is now fully established enough that they can do such a thing freely and not feel they didn't get their point across. But maybe a generation from now they might think of that as a mistake. Who knows? But if contemporary artists are trying to be more ambitious about how they create music, I would think it would behoove us to support it, not dismiss it out of hand, even if every masterpiece will probably be counter-balanced by five pretentious, over-blown pieces of crap.
And a question, are you calling me a moron or is that how you are signing your name?
Guys, are there any Apple stores that you're NOT calling "flagship" stores?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/flagship
Nobody would ever call the teeny-weeny cramped Apple store in the wannabe-fashionable Country Club Plaza shopping district of Kansas City a flagship. I mean, it's (slightly) better stocked and staffed than CompUSA, but no bigger than a couple moderately sized store aisles.
However, they make up for the limited floorspace by having no parking. It interesting to watch someone try to hand-carry a Mac Pro and a Cinema monitor a few blocks down the street to a multi-level underground parking garage.