Why are so many dismissing the relevance of the Beatles?
Three reasons:
1) Mac fanboi anger at the Beatles/EMI/whomever's-responsible continually shunning the iTMS
2) the 'you just don't know' syndrome, i.e. commenters who are too young to really have experienced the major phenomena that was the Beatles in the '60s
3) justifiable annoyance at the whole 'will they, won't they' Beatles-iTMS storyline that keeps surfacing every few months with no resolution.
It's getting to be mostly #3 for me. As great as the Beatles are/were, this is getting old.
At some point you do have to kind of shrug and go "Eff you and the yellow submarine you rode in on". \
Apple getting the Beatles on iTunes will be the "Jump the Shark Moment" for digital music. It is that moment that will be latched onto by the press to come to symbolize the rise to prominence of digital content.
For most of us "technologically savvy" people it's not a big deal. For the media and mainstream it's going to hold the same significance as colour TV surpassing B/W. It will signify to regular people that Digital Content is here to stay. That the real significance.
You already know it. I know it. But regular people need symbols and this will be a big one.
I think you might be using "jump the shark" incorrectly. My understanding is that the
"jump the shark moment" would be the point at which iTunes store made a desperation
move to avoid falling into irrelevance. (unless that was what you meant)
Sure a lot of people posting about something they don't care about. That seems pretty funny to me. Apparently people felt strongly enough to type these.
Why are they even trying anymore. These talks are stupid... if they can't do it, then move on. It's not like it isn't easy to get their music.
Because they are the Masters, the creme de la creme, the Beethovens and Mozarts of their generation. They represent the very essence of Steve Jobs- why he enters to "Revolution" , why he named the company Apple, why he wears the John Lennon glasses- etc, etc.
The smart money would be for Apple to just sell a $19.95 training video on how to rip the Beatles cd's that have been available. The bulk of the folks interested in this are 50+ years old with most not knowing they can rip their own music to get the same thing.
Why are so many dismissing the relevance of the Beatles? The Beatles catalog was never remastered for CD, but that's been going on behind the scenes over the last several years. When the albums are reissued, along side the new Rock Band game and iTunes access, the Beatles will shoot to the top of the charts. We'll see yet another wave of Beatlemania, and a whole new generation of fans. Do not underestimate the power of their music.
The Beatles may have been "bigger than Jesus" but JC has more than a 2 generation lifespan, most of the fab four couldn't manage one!
Besides it's easy to why Sir Paul is stalling, upon the Beatles digital music launch he will make a stack and he needed to get rid of a little problem first. I bet his ex-wife would give an arm and a leg to get her hands on...
Well in the early days he was a guitarist with them, he switched to bass later, plus the bass guitar is still a guitar whichever way you look at it. He also played drums and piano, and probably loads of other things during his time in The Beatles
As my brother-in-law likes to say "nothing ever happens by itself". What he means is that there is almost always an organized buzz buildup to any significant event. A week or so ago Paul McCartney revealed the existence of an experimental electronic track. Today the deal with iTunes has stalled. The Beatles are "in the news".
They'll resolve this (probably before Christmas), repackage some tunes with a few new mixes, include some unreleased stuff, and everyone will make a ton of money off a band that broke up nearly 40 years ago.
I think you might be using "jump the shark" incorrectly. My understanding is that the
"jump the shark moment" would be the point at which iTunes store made a desperation
move to avoid falling into irrelevance. (unless that was what you meant)
"Jump the shark" originally referred to TV shows who's story lines had lost their way. Specifically, it's derived from a Happy Days episode where Fonzie jumps over a shark on water skis wearing his leather motorcycle jacket. The writers were clearly out of ideas and the show had "jumped the shark".
iTunes has recently passed Walmart to become the biggest music retailer. I don't think it's jumped the shark yet.
I think what iTunes needs/wants is the clout that the Beatles songbook gives them. Once again it pulls them a little step farther ahead than any of the other download services. Led Zepplin wouldn't hurt either...
just a friendly fyi....iTunes DOES have Led Zeppelin now. I just bought the entire Zeppelin Library for 99 bucks. What a deal.
Besides it's easy to why Sir Paul is stalling, upon the Beatles digital music launch he will make a stack and he needed to get rid of a little problem first. I bet his ex-wife would give an arm and a leg to get her hands on...
I suspect you are closer to the truth than any article will ever be.
Since virtually every performer in existence has issued CDs and since any CD can be transferred to an iPod, iTouch or iPhone, your arguments are not exclusive to the Beatles - you could argue that the entire iTunes store is not necessary.
But consumers like it because of ease-of-use, everything in one place, etc.
The Beatles were the most influential pop group of all time. While the average hip-hop, rap or boy-band consumer might not care much, just about every one else does. Their music is still played on radio stations of diverse formats and there are tons of cover versions of their songs. Some of the cover bands are also popular - the Fab Faux, which does note-for-note renditions of their songs played on the original instruments, recently sold out Radio City Music Hall.
Besides, as part of the move to iTunes, the entire Beatles catalog was supposed to be remastered and this would lead to the issuance of newly remastered CDs at the same time.
It's not that the Beatles will necessarily sell a lot of tracks on iTunes. It's that without them, there's a gaping hole that will always be there.
As for EMI, the company is such bad shape that no one will buy them. But if Apple could get it for a bargain price (or perhaps buying the assets, rather than the company), it might prove worthy if they get to exploit the content in any and all media. I'm sure the other labels would scream like hell if Apple even attempted it.
Comments
Why are so many dismissing the relevance of the Beatles?
Three reasons:
1) Mac fanboi anger at the Beatles/EMI/whomever's-responsible continually shunning the iTMS
2) the 'you just don't know' syndrome, i.e. commenters who are too young to really have experienced the major phenomena that was the Beatles in the '60s
3) justifiable annoyance at the whole 'will they, won't they' Beatles-iTMS storyline that keeps surfacing every few months with no resolution.
It's getting to be mostly #3 for me. As great as the Beatles are/were, this is getting old.
At some point you do have to kind of shrug and go "Eff you and the yellow submarine you rode in on".
...
Apple getting the Beatles on iTunes will be the "Jump the Shark Moment" for digital music. It is that moment that will be latched onto by the press to come to symbolize the rise to prominence of digital content.
For most of us "technologically savvy" people it's not a big deal. For the media and mainstream it's going to hold the same significance as colour TV surpassing B/W. It will signify to regular people that Digital Content is here to stay. That the real significance.
You already know it. I know it. But regular people need symbols and this will be a big one.
I think you might be using "jump the shark" incorrectly. My understanding is that the
"jump the shark moment" would be the point at which iTunes store made a desperation
move to avoid falling into irrelevance. (unless that was what you meant)
Rare vinyl album collection: $1000
Wall-mounted subs: $4000
for everything else there is torrent freeloading and file swapping!
Why are they even trying anymore. These talks are stupid... if they can't do it, then move on. It's not like it isn't easy to get their music.
Because they are the Masters, the creme de la creme, the Beethovens and Mozarts of their generation. They represent the very essence of Steve Jobs- why he enters to "Revolution" , why he named the company Apple, why he wears the John Lennon glasses- etc, etc.
but Paul was the bassist, not the guitarist.
Just sayin.
He was the bassist, but he was a guitarist first
Why are so many dismissing the relevance of the Beatles? The Beatles catalog was never remastered for CD, but that's been going on behind the scenes over the last several years. When the albums are reissued, along side the new Rock Band game and iTunes access, the Beatles will shoot to the top of the charts. We'll see yet another wave of Beatlemania, and a whole new generation of fans. Do not underestimate the power of their music.
The Beatles may have been "bigger than Jesus" but JC has more than a 2 generation lifespan, most of the fab four couldn't manage one!
Besides it's easy to why Sir Paul is stalling, upon the Beatles digital music launch he will make a stack and he needed to get rid of a little problem first. I bet his ex-wife would give an arm and a leg to get her hands on...
...Oops!
McD
but Paul was the bassist, not the guitarist.
Just sayin.
Well in the early days he was a guitarist with them, he switched to bass later, plus the bass guitar is still a guitar whichever way you look at it. He also played drums and piano, and probably loads of other things during his time in The Beatles
They'll resolve this (probably before Christmas), repackage some tunes with a few new mixes, include some unreleased stuff, and everyone will make a ton of money off a band that broke up nearly 40 years ago.
I think you might be using "jump the shark" incorrectly. My understanding is that the
"jump the shark moment" would be the point at which iTunes store made a desperation
move to avoid falling into irrelevance. (unless that was what you meant)
"Jump the shark" originally referred to TV shows who's story lines had lost their way. Specifically, it's derived from a Happy Days episode where Fonzie jumps over a shark on water skis wearing his leather motorcycle jacket. The writers were clearly out of ideas and the show had "jumped the shark".
iTunes has recently passed Walmart to become the biggest music retailer. I don't think it's jumped the shark yet.
I think what iTunes needs/wants is the clout that the Beatles songbook gives them. Once again it pulls them a little step farther ahead than any of the other download services. Led Zepplin wouldn't hurt either...
just a friendly fyi....iTunes DOES have Led Zeppelin now. I just bought the entire Zeppelin Library for 99 bucks. What a deal.
Besides it's easy to why Sir Paul is stalling, upon the Beatles digital music launch he will make a stack and he needed to get rid of a little problem first. I bet his ex-wife would give an arm and a leg to get her hands on...
I suspect you are closer to the truth than any article will ever be.
But consumers like it because of ease-of-use, everything in one place, etc.
The Beatles were the most influential pop group of all time. While the average hip-hop, rap or boy-band consumer might not care much, just about every one else does. Their music is still played on radio stations of diverse formats and there are tons of cover versions of their songs. Some of the cover bands are also popular - the Fab Faux, which does note-for-note renditions of their songs played on the original instruments, recently sold out Radio City Music Hall.
Besides, as part of the move to iTunes, the entire Beatles catalog was supposed to be remastered and this would lead to the issuance of newly remastered CDs at the same time.
It's not that the Beatles will necessarily sell a lot of tracks on iTunes. It's that without them, there's a gaping hole that will always be there.
As for EMI, the company is such bad shape that no one will buy them. But if Apple could get it for a bargain price (or perhaps buying the assets, rather than the company), it might prove worthy if they get to exploit the content in any and all media. I'm sure the other labels would scream like hell if Apple even attempted it.