The Beatles now available on Apple’s iTunes Store:
“The Beatles have remained one of the most reliable franchises in the business. In 2009, 39 years after breaking up, they sold the third-highest number of albums of any act in the U.S., according to Nielsen SoundScan, with 3.3 million copies sold. In the past decade, the Beatles sold the second-highest number of albums of any artist (trailing Eminem by 2 million units), and the second-highest number of albums since SoundScan launched in 1991 (Garth Brooks has sold more), according to SoundScan,” Ethan Smith reported yesterday for The Wall Street Journal.
UPDATE: 10am EDT: Apple.com’s home page now shows:
Photo by Bruce McBroom/© Apple Corps Ltd.
Apple’s press release, verbatim:
Apple Corps, EMI and Apple today announced that the Beatles, the most influential and beloved rock band in music history, are now available for the first time on the iTunes Store. Starting today, the group’s 13 legendary remastered studio albums with iTunes LPs, the two-volume “Past Masters” compilation and the classic “Red” and “Blue” collections are available for purchase and download on iTunes worldwide as either albums or individual songs. Fans can also get a special digital “Beatles Box Set” featuring the “Live at the Washington Coliseum, 1964” concert film, a worldwide iTunes exclusive which captures the Beatles’ very first US concert.
“We’re really excited to bring the Beatles’ music to iTunes,” said Sir Paul McCartney. “It’s fantastic to see the songs we originally released on vinyl receive as much love in the digital world as they did the first time around.”
“I am particularly glad to no longer be asked when the Beatles are coming to iTunes,” said Ringo Starr. “At last, if you want it—you can get it now—The Beatles from Liverpool to now! Peace and Love, Ringo.”
“We love the Beatles and are honored and thrilled to welcome them to iTunes,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “It has been a long and winding road to get here. Thanks to the Beatles and EMI, we are now realizing a dream we’ve had since we launched iTunes ten years ago.”
“In the joyful spirit of Give Peace A Chance, I think it is so appropriate that we are doing this on John’s 70th birthday year,” said Yoko Ono Lennon.
“The Beatles on iTunes—Bravo!” said Olivia Harrison.
“The Beatles and iTunes have both been true innovators in their fields,” said EMI Group CEO Roger Faxon. “It’s a privilege for everybody at EMI to work with Steve Jobs and with Apple Corps’ Jeff Jones and their teams in marking a great milestone in the development of digital music.”
Each of the Beatles’ 13 legendary remastered studio albums, including “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” “Revolver,” “The Beatles [The White Album]” and “Abbey Road” include iTunes LPs, which create an immersive album experience with a beautiful design and expanded visual features including a unique mini-documentary about the creation of each album. The two-volume “Past Masters” compilation and the classic “Red” and “Blue” collections are also available.
Single albums are available for purchase and download for $12.99 each, double albums for $19.99 each and individual songs for $1.29 each.
The special digital “Beatles Box Set” ($149) contains the 13 remastered studio albums with iTunes LPs and all mini-documentaries, “Past Masters,” and the “Live at the Washington Coliseum, 1964” concert film, a worldwide iTunes exclusive which captures the Beatles’ very first US concert in its entirety. In addition, Beatles fans can stream and view the “Live at the Washington Coliseum, 1964” concert film from iTunes for free for the remainder of this calendar year.
Find The Beatles on Apple’s iTunes Store here.
MacDailyNews Take: “Life is very short and there’s no time, for fussing and fighting my friend. I have always thought that it’s a crime, so I will ask you once again: try to see it my way, only time will tell if I am right or I am wrong. While you see it your way, there’s a chance that we might fall apart before too long. We can work it out. We can work it out.” – Lennon/McCartney
Ohh boy. iTunes sales just went FOOOM.
Wow, man. I’ve overcome with indifference..
Seriously, anyone into the Beatles will have already got the records/tapes/CDs ripped and in their iTunes library already.
And this is worthy of an big announcement why?
Please allow me to introduce myself…
Ooooh ….. yawn. I love the Beatles but come on.
AWESOME!!!!
/s
Finally, an end to the relentless speculation as to when this will happen. For that reason alone, I’m thrilled!
@ Catseye
I couldn’t agree more. I love the Beatles too, but a day we’ll never forget? Seriously Apple?
Big woop
@ Mick Jagger
This is clearly NOT the big announcement. It’s not the time yet!
As of today we will be streaming.
A day we‘ll never forget?
To Lala and the NC data center!
I’m trying hard to care, but somehow it’s just not working.
This can’t be all it is. Must be just the tip of the iceberg.
Now all we need is Cold Chisel.
Who cares??? If your a fan, chances are you would own the CD’s anyway!
Thats all????
Wao!
Nice. Not necessarily all. Airplay is operational. I still think we’ll hear data center news — and I still think it’s going to be streaming live broadcasts.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
this was the friggin announcement but its not 10 yet in NY
Hehe… Apple.com is still saying:
Tomorrow is just another day.
That you’ll never forget.
Check back here tomorrow for an exciting announcement from iTunes.
I guess there is going to be a perpetual exciting announcement from iTunes tomorrow
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
This is actually great news. Mostly symbolic I guess, since most everybody has ripped the Beatles that wants them. Still it is another victory for Apple and Steve Jobs.
I already have the Beatles on CD.
I want the Beatles movies on Blu-ray.
A day we’ll never forget because it was way too late. Ha!
‘Please allow me to introduce myself?’
That’s the opening line of Sympathy for the Devil, the rolling stones…..
I sure hope that is not all the hype is about?
Anyway to watch the keynote live in 15 min?
I think I have all the Beatles already. If there is a song or two, I wont have to purchase the cd.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Now all you that have been crying about the lack of Beatles on iTunes open your wallets and make my stock go up!
Where’s the Butcher album?
OK, where is the “One More Thing”, thing? Come On Steve, say it!
It can not be just the Beatles!! Please, who does not have that music? If this is all it takes to get worldwide press for Apple than I expect to hear the next time Steve takes a solid dump. Nope not today, Runny……
Wow, I don’t care about this, so that must mean nobody else does either. I’ve long since ripped my Beatles cds to my itunes, so that must mean everybody else in the world has too.
Who, or what, is/are the Beatles?
I checked it out and downloaded three songs from the box set that I haven’t previously had on my iPod. Thanks Apple!
Guys, there is a very clear reason why this is pretty big. You may believe everyone who’s a Beatles fan already has their collection. Explain to me, then, how can Beatles catalogue be the 3rd best selling act of 2010? The band that has disbanded almost 40 years ago??? Yet, they sell better than virtually ALL current artists? Without even being offered on iTunes, the largest music store in the world???
Making Beatles available on iTunes will likely vault them to the top selling artist spot. Many of us here were their fans when they were playing (meaning, we’re at least 45 years old), and most of us simply cannot imagine WHO (the h€ll) is still buying their music. But apparently buying they are. Go figure…
Michael Jackson wanted Beatles to appear on iTunes, but he, while being the owner of most of Beatles’ songs, gave exclusive copyrights to EMI according to multi-year deal.
Jackson was killed last year by his doctor, never seeing his favourite group on iTunes.
I was over The Beatles by 1969.
Yes, and I remember when Ike was President.
Great, now both people who want Beatles music and don’t have it can buy it on iTunes.
if only we could have that MDN take on the politically-tinged articles.
This took too long. I don’t care anymore. Yoko is not getting another dime from me.
And WHO the F cares???
Their music is totally overrated and every one that wanted to download this music has already pirates it.
People just like them because it’s popular to like them. They have done a few good song but over all they are EXTREMELY OVERRATED.
@Predrag
Thank you for bringing a little bit of contextual info to the navel gazers posting here.
So I guess I should buy one of their albums, for the apple spirit of it.
Ok, whatever.
Fine.
@MDN: Jobs better”work it out”.
@Derek in Milan: Ciao Derek,come va a Milano? Vostre commento e molto buffo, complimenti!
Theme song for all Apple competitors:
I. Believe. In. Yesterday.
@Karlv
Your age is showing.
And maybe that’s all there was to it, but someone hit the switch too soon.
And as far as importance goes, let’s just wait and see what happens to the best sellers lists on iTunes, shall we?
I don’t see the big deal to anyone who has iTunes and a CD drive. I have had about 15 Beatles albums in my iTunes library for years now. I guess if you are Apple ($$$), or have a MacBook Air or iPhone for primary computing, then you have a reason to be excited.
What the hell people!
What hype?
They posted an image about iTunes news and the press went nuts. It isn’t like Apple teased this for a week and made a huge stink.
Yay, we can get the Beatles. I am glad since I never bothered buying all the CDs and ripping them but for god’s sake get a life!
@Karlv:
You are totally CLUELESS!!!!!!
A band that broke up 40 years ago outsells all the crap your generation can produce today. That’s why this is an important addition to iTunes. How does it feel to have your opinion be worthless?
Whether or not you like/love the Beatles, the reality is that this will have a vanishingly small effect on iTunes sales in the long run. Maybe a noticeable spike this week, but that is about it. The beauty of the iTunes model is that it is much less about the stars than about getting equal access to all kinds of music. I know, they still put the big acts on front to attract the pop music lovers that are all about the charts, but that marketing does not affect the fact that everything is there and available all the time – the fact that makes iTunes and similar distribution services great for the consumer.
“I Should Have Known Better”
What a disappointing day. I for one won’t forget this! Ugh
I’m overwhelmed with meh… This is nothing but a personal victory for Steve, I mean congratulations, but seriously let’s move on.
…and I’m a big Apple/Steve J fan.
For SJ this is probably a personal goal to get the Beatles on iTunes. Remember Apple were named after the Beatles label in homage to the band.
Glad this will end the speculation. It also could offer hope to get the other hold-out names onto iTunes.
Garth Brooks would be another big one – he’s sworn-off digital distribution entirely.
Meat: The beetles…
This hype was overdone. I think that’s clear.
Apple rarely cries “wolf” on big announcements, but they did this time. You only get to do that so many times before the media stops sending their troops to your events.
Let’s face it, a day you’ll “never forget” is pretty strong language that applied perhaps the launch of the Mac in 1984 or the iPhone in 2007. This? I’ve already forgotten. What were we talking about again?
really???? This is the BIG moment that I’ll never forget, Apple. I’m guessing they’re referring to how disappointed I am. The Beatles, though they’re loved by many, aren’t a big enough deal to us Apple-related forum hounds to have such an introduction. Neither is the addition of any other musician or group. Where’s iOS 4.2? That’s something to get excited about. How about giving us back the ability to create ringtones from any song in our library whether it was purchased on iTunes or not? That’s something to get excited about.
During the week of 4 April 1964, The Beatles held twelve positions on the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart, including the top five positions. Neither feat has been matched by any other artist to date.
The songs were “Can’t Buy Me Love” (Capitol Records), “Twist and Shout” (Tollie Records), “She Loves You” (Swan Records), “I Want to Hold Your Hand” (Capitol), and “Please Please Me” (Vee-Jay).[1] In addition, seven other singles occupied lower places on the chart: “I Saw Her Standing There” (Capitol), “You Can’t Do That” (Capitol), “All My Loving” (Capitol of Canada), “Roll Over Beethoven” (Capitol of Canada), “From Me To You” (Vee-Jay), “Do You Want To Know A Secret” (Vee-Jay) and “Thank You Girl” (Vee-Jay).[1] Furthermore, two Beatles tribute records appeared on the chart: “We Love You Beatles” by The Carefrees (at #42), and “A Letter to the Beatles” by The Four Preps (#85).[1] The 21 March 1964, Billboard Hot 100 singles chart included two additional Beatles tribute records: “My Boyfriend Got A Beatle Haircut”, by Donna Lynn (at #83); and “The Boy With The Beatle Hair”, by The Swans (#85).
I can appreciate the huge musical and cultural impact that the Beatles have had and still have. But the fact is this was way overhyped. All that was announced is you now have a new way to buy Beatles music, just in case you didn’t already rip the CDs or buy the mp3s on one of the European mp3 sites. It may be huge for the iTunes catalog, but it’s not like this was the release of the new iPhone or the iPad or anything like that. Even a MBP refresh would be more noteworthy than this.
Well that was a letdown.
Hmph. No commemorative iPod Touch with EVERYTHING on it.
Now nursing home patients can download songs of their youth from iTunes….Yippie!
just my $0.02
They maybe bigger than Jesus, but at this point Steve Jobs is bigger than The Beatles.
so…. who are the Beetles anyway?
Yup. Plenty of crying going on.
Really people, how could you have expected anything else from that teaser they put up yesterday?
If you were expecting something else you are stupid.
Stupid stupid stupid. Bring down your entire company’s frontpage and hype this. The Beatles suck. And I never grew up on them. A lot of people in the world never did. That’s why this announcement is meaningless to many, specially when coupled with the fact that people have been downloading torrents for years.
And don’t tell me the Beatles changed music and the world. That was Chuck Berry and then Elvis Presley who did that.
And for my generation, the band that changed everything was Nirvana. If Apple did this for Nirvana sure I’d be more interested, but I’d still think it was dumb to hype it the way they did this.
This is one man’s jerk off session… Steve Jobs. Nobody cares Steve! Get out of the 60s and into reality you controlling dickhead. The arrogance of him to think people of the world in 2010 would care about this.
Beatles apologists can go pound sand. Humans are just trend seekers so people will be afraid to think how ridiculous this announcement is. But deep down I think a lot people are let down by this announcement.
All this is is a small news item. Since Apple is a tech company, many of us thought this hype would affect us as Apple users. So it was a bad decision for them to do this because only a handful of people even care about it.
@ha
You didn’t have to state what generation you grew up in, it was obvious. Only if you lived through the birth of the Beatles could you ever understand the creative gunpowder they put on what was already out there by Elvis and the others. I was there. It was like nothing else and difficult to explain to anyone generations removed from it.
Without the Beatles there would be no Nervana. Enjoy.
They did not take down their website and I am tired of everyone telling me that. Look at the tabs at the top of the page and you can cruise their site just like you always could.
All this fanfare is just EMI’s doing!
No fanfare, no songs on iTunes!
Congratulations to Apple and Steve Jobs for accomplishing this long-sought goal! The cultural significance is not lost on those of us who lived through it from the beginning. This is a big important day for one who has a sense of cultural history.
“…In 2009, 39 years after breaking up, they sold the third-highest number of albums of any act in the U.S., according to Nielsen SoundScan, with 3.3 million copies sold…”
Dear detractors: It would seem that not everyone has
downloaded or ripped The Beatles.
“And don’t tell me the Beatles changed music and the world. That was Chuck Berry and then Elvis Presley who did that.”
Stupid stupid stupid. . . for far too many reasons to list. Stay ignorant.
apple said i wouldn’t forget this day.
it’s not yet noon, and i’ve already forgotten it.
Finally.
It took long enough.
Still not Lossless. I’d rather buy the CDs.
For the complete set, everything in the catalogue has been remastered. The first CD releases back in the 80s were dreadful. These supposedly sound markedly better, so for real fans, it’s worth purchasing again.
…”And don’t tell me the Beatles changed music and the world. That was Chuck Berry and then Elvis Presley who did that.”
No. It was the Beatles (more accurately, Lennon and McCarney). There is a reason why their work is studied, alongside Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Schumann, Ravel, Stravinski… On most prestigious musical colleges of the world, their work measures up. Nobody else from the popular music world belongs in this group.
It is obvious that majority of posters here didn’t care for this announcement for various reasons (perhaps they were fans and were annoyed that the Beatles held out for so many years, so they ripped their own collection; perhaps they were the anti-fans; perhaps they just don’t get it). But just like the glossy screen, or ExpressCard, or any other issue where minuscule minority tends to be vocal, this is clearly not representation of the silent majority.
The silent majority of the world continues to buy Beatles CDs. As i said earlier, even without iTunes presence, they were the 3rd best selling act in 2009. Let me repeat that: the 3rd best selling act of 2009!. That means they outsold almost EVERYONE else last year. And they weren’t even on iTunes, which is the largest music store in the world!
This is one of the most significant announcements in the history of iTunes store. Anyone who doesn’t understand that is simply either biased by their own personal opinion, or ignorant.
@_Bill_
That’s interesting. I just downloaded one of Garth Nrooks songs via iTunes a couple of days ago.
If the “we-don’t-care” types can quickly fill up two pages of comments on MDN, imagine what the millions of “we-cares” will mean for iTunes! Welcome, Fab Four. The store is complete.
So lame. So overhyped. Boo.
Next up – iTunes to release the complete Allan Sherman collection – including “I Hate the Beatles”.
I enjoyed listening to the Beatles on my iPod – last night.
I’m giving Apple a break on this one – yes for most people this is “Ho Hum” news but I understand why Apple can not / should not act that way.
Peace.
There is a whole new generation that has yet to discover the music that changed the world. Pretty well unheard of today where popular music artists make something that lasts.
It’s kind of disheartening to read all the cynical and indifferent comments here.
I love the Beatles, but an hour after ‘zero-hour’, I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop..
@disposableidentity
“At this point Steve Jobs is bigger than The Beatles.”
I agree. I don’t care about the beatles. But I’m glad Steve is happy. But then, steve is my generation’s beatle of choice.
He changed my world (ok Woz too) and I won’t remember the beatles, but I’ll remember Apple.
-sent from my iPad
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
WTF…John and George are gone, Ringo has always been irrelevant, and Paul is a dead man. Big woop.
Now give me iWork 11!
I’m not wasting anymore time reading all of the comments, so if this has already been posted, forgive me.
November 16, will be remembered as the day Apple really disappointed a ton of people.
Sure, a lot of people will probably buy a lot of songs today, and iTunes traffic will probably the highest ever. But seriously, is that it?
Please tell me that there is more to come.
@Predrag
I completely appreciate the contribution that the Beatles have made to music. Still, the fact that you can buy them on iTunes is not as noteworthy as it was made out to be.
When we were told about a day we wouldn’t forget, we were expecting a new service or a major revision to the iTunes interface, or something like that. Not the fact that an artist’s catalog – regardless of who that artist is – had been added to the iTunes store. We thought maybe we’d get a cloud service, or a subscription service, or something that majorly changed the way we use iTunes. None of that happened. Nothing of the sort happened.
See the difference?
Crap. I hope this isn’t the big news…
…”yes for most people this is “Ho Hum” news “
Well, there’s the problem; for most people here, it may have been ho-hum. For most people out there, this will likely have significance, considering the millions who keep buying this music.
And let’s just keep things in perspective here. Apple didn’t hype ANYTHING here. Less than 24 hours ago (yesterday afternoon), Apple replaced their MacBook Air image on the home page with this iTunes announcement page. It hasn’t even been 24 hours since this was done. Not really much hype there; it is your (our) own fault for hyping this into such frenzy.
I just don’t get how so many people can write things like, “Everyone who wants it already has it” and “Who cares?” How about this line from the article: “In 2009, 39 years after breaking up, they sold the third-highest number of albums of any act in the U.S.” Does that sound like everyone who wants their music already has it, or that no one cares? It’s not the “big” announcement, and it’s hardly earth shattering, but they are a big dang deal, based solely on sales.
Whether or not you like the Beatles or whether or not you already have them in your music collection in the form of albums, reel to reel, 8 track, cassettes, CD, HDCD, DVD, mp3, mp4 or AAC this is something of a media and music coup for iTunes and Apple.
If you’re an investor or user of Apple products it will, at least in the short run, help strengthen the company you’ve invested your hard won cash in and help to make the products you like better. If you don’t care or think announcement is a waste of time so be it. But…
If you consider that if another company were able to to make the same announcement they would still likely be compared to iTunes/Apple and a great deal would have been made over the fact the Apple didn’t have the Beatles. What’s going to be interesting now is what happens to those few holdouts who wont allow their music on iTunes for arcane or egotistical reasons.
I ripped my Beatles collection into iTunes long ago and while there are a few songs that I don’t have the likelihood that I’ll buy all anew is very low, but for those who are new or avid fans (and Apple users in general) this is good news.
Eh. I’ve already forgotten about today.
@Ha
Get back to us in 50 years on the lasting impact of Nirvana.
Their leader did a Pollock-inspired Sistine Chapel paint job on his ceiling with a shotgun and his brains, right?
I’ll remember THAT about Nirvana.
But their music?
Purely Derivative.
Great news. Thanks, Steve Jobs.
I was a kid when the Beatles landed in America, you have no idea how vapid rock was back then. There were great performers such as Elvis, but the mindset was very stuck in the 50s.
The Beatles revolutionized music. At first, they were cute kids who could challenge American rock, but that was just their launching pad. Starting with Revolver, but mostly with Sgt Pepper, they redefined the nature of rock/pop music. Nobody had ever combined sounds the way they and producer George Martin did.
A lot of music we listen to these days can be traced to what The Beatles created back when their stuff was exciting and unequaled by their contemporaries.
Good news.
Cool story bro!
And the photo is such a photoshop fail. Look at their feet and then how the bodies overlap…
Bravo for the Beatle’s. Those of you who dreamed up your own wish lists of what would be announced, don’t blame Apple for not satisfying your fantasies.
I’m absolutely thrilled for those who are absolutely thrilled. For me however, it’s pretty much a non-issue.
MDN Magic word: expect
I expect more from Apple’s HUGE, EARTH-SHATTERING announcements.
NEWS FLASH: Jobs takes a dump, still runny!!!
Check Back Next Week for the “Day that Will Change Every Other Day” Unless it’s Tuesday which will be the Same.
Everybody seems to have missed the real news:
“In addition, Beatles fans can STREAM AND VIEW the “Live at the Washington Coliseum, 1964” concert film from iTunes for free for the remainder of this calendar year.”
The beta testing of the new media delivery paradigm is now underway.
And for all you detractors, though I don’t care too much for the Beatles, they enabled the music of people like Joplin, Santana, and The Doors, all of whom will be remembered when the universal response to the utterance of the name “Nirvana” will be “huh?”
Does anyone know if the iTunes albums are the original mono masters?
Beatles Box Set on iTunes at 256kbps AAC: $149
Beatles Box Set on Amazon at full CD resolution, with CDs, box, artwork and booklets: $129
This is a joke, right? I’ve always been a huge fan of Apple. But the hype that accompanied this pointless story has put a huge dent in its credibility in my eyes.
I will never forget this day!!!!
/s
“So what?” to all of this.
I’ve had my Beatles in iTunes in lossless for years. The Mono Box Set was news. The mono Sgt. Pepper’s is a revelation to listen to.
But if ITunes happens to be offering previously unavailable Beatles material, that is good.
@Zeke
Now that is worth noting – a free live streaming of a full film heralding the possibility of further streaming services to come. Maybe even foreshadowing the streaming of live events – pay per view over iTunes. Now _that_ is noteworthy! 😀
I was all prepared for Steve Jobs to step to a podium and say, “Ladies and Gentlemen at 0900 hrs est. Nov. 16, 2010 we activated our Maiden, North Carolina Media Server distribution facility!” “At approximately 0909 est. that facilities core management sub A.I. management systems became self aware!” “We have implemented all known measures of containment to no avail it is maliciously infecting, and rendering all none Mac devices useless with an infinite loop boot procedure.”
Big news? Maybe. Maybe Not.
It’s only big new because Apple says it is.
Big deal.
@ Pedrag and Mr. Reeee:
Chuck Berry started Rock n Roll. The Beatles are therefore a derivative of him. On the logic of your post Reeee, since the Beatles are a derivative of prior music, they are invalid. All music is a derivative of prior music. Music goes back to Neanderthal Man and even farther.
It’s the arrogance and ignorance of people to think that because they grew up in a time, they expect others to have the same sorts of reactions to stuff like this, and in so doing, discount what newer generations grew up with and were affected by.
I don’t dispute that the Beatles were a chqnge agent in music. To me their music sucks, however. And it was a mistake for Apple post on their frontpage for all the world to see that this would be a day to never forget. Their a consumer tech company, of course many Apple users will be attentive to this.
As for Nirvana, they completly changed music. Ushered in grunge/alternative rock. A complete departure from punk and the hard rock and heavy metal of the 70s and 80s. Symbolized an entire generation. A generation that had everything. A generation lost. An angry generation.
They were The Beatles to us. That’s what we grew up on. But I’m not arrogant and ignorant enough that I think Apple should post a hyped up ad on their front page in reference to them 20 years from now.
@Ha: you may want to check this out. . .
Dave Grohl on Ringo
@elarue
“a new service or a major revision to the iTunes interface”
Apple isn’t dumb. They understand the “degree of importance” in relation to hyping a product. You would never see that degree for anything Apple. They aren’t that stupid.
Apple, understands the relationship between what they say and what they deliver.
I’m younger, but I get the importance of The Beatles. I really do.
But here’s the problem with hype: You can’t promise people a day they’ll never forget (like 9-11-01 or the Kennedy assassination or the graphical user interface) and then come through with, “You can now put these songs on your iPod much easier than before.”
Nirvana was Kurt Cobain. He wrote their music and directed the band. Him and Dave never really were close. You should post stuff that Kurt was inspired by, like Van Halen and obscure Italian bands, etc.
It was Kurt Cobain that was responsible for the new sound of music, of alternative rock and grunge. He was brilliant. And to Pedrag, go pound sound you insensitive prick. The man blows his head off and you are callous. I’ll make sure to post something callous when I find out your dead.
The Beatles are a bunch of stiffs. Heaven forbid anyone would not like them. Followers and trend seekers chime in now.
Finally! I have been waiting for this moment for so long. Now the press will finally shut up, move on and we will forget it all.
The importance of this event is reflected in AAPL price today.
@Ha: “And don’t tell me the Beatles changed music and the world.”
And now. . . “I don’t dispute that the Beatles were a chqnge [sic] agent in music.”
Nice flip there. It’s one thing to not like an artist’s work, but denying the massive effect the Beatles had on music popular culture – one which Nirvana could never approach in a dozen alternate universes – is naive at best and ignorant at worst. I didn’t “grow up” in the Beatles era, being a kid of the late 70s/early 80s, but I don’t allow my nostalgia for my formative years to corrupt an appropriate sense of history.
“As for Nirvana, they completly changed music. Ushered in grunge/alternative rock. A complete departure from punk and the hard rock and heavy metal of the 70s and 80s. Symbolized an entire generation. A generation that had everything. A generation lost. An angry generation.”
Dude, get over yourself. I loved Nirvana too, but they were NOT a complete departure from the past. Grunge died a fast death (unfortunately, IMO). And why would a “generation that had everything” also be an “angry generation”?
yawn
hasn’t everyone got all their stuff already ?
actually i do rather love lady madonna
oh what the heck.. 😀
@cb
Apparently they made a mistake in this case. People really were expecting more based on the hype, and just the addition of an artist’s catalog – regardless of who that artist might be – just didn’t warrant the amount of publicity this got.
Of course, that doesn’t change the fact that the next iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro will all kick ass.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
@Haha: “Nirvana was Kurt Cobain. He wrote their music and directed the band. Him and Dave never really were close. It was Kurt Cobain that was responsible for the new sound of music, of alternative rock and grunge. He was brilliant.”
Bit of hero worship there, eh? I’m sure would approve.
“The Beatles are a bunch of stiffs. Heaven forbid anyone would not like them. Followers and trend seekers chime in now.”
Yes, because there was NOTHING trendy about liking Nirvana and grunge. . .
“You should post stuff that Kurt was inspired by, like Van Halen and obscure Italian bands, etc.”
OK.
From Wikipedia (go to the Kurt Cobain page for references): “The Beatles were an early and lasting influence on Cobain; his aunt Mari remembers him singing “Hey Jude” at the age of two. “My aunts would give me Beatles records,” Cobain told Jon Savage in 1993, “so for the most part [I listened to] the Beatles [as a child], and if I was lucky, I’d be able to buy a single.” Cobain expressed a particular fondness for John Lennon, whom he called his “idol” in his posthumously-released journals, and he admitted that he wrote the song “About a Girl,” from Nirvana 1989 debut album Bleach, after spending three hours listening to Meet the Beatles.
Grigori:
It’s not a flip, I making a point that while they were a change agent in music, they didn’t single handily change music and the world which is what some people seem to imply.
And I’ll repeat: I think they suck. But who cares. And I don’t care if you think Nirvana sucks. It comes down to each decade having key change agents across many domains, music being one of those domains.
The problem here is Apple wasting people’s time with an announcement like this.
And if I have to explain what the hallmarks of generation xers and early yers is, there’s no point. There are books that put it into perspective.
“I am particularly glad to no longer be asked when the Beatles are coming to iTunes,” said Ringo Starr. “At last, if you want it—you can get it now—The Beatles from Liverpool to now! Peace and Love, Ringo.”
Grigori:
Great, u took ten minutes to look Kurt Cobain up on Wikipedia and now you’re an expert on what made his music.
Kurt was influenced by a huge array of music. And he talks about some of it in interviews.
A lot of their music sounds nothing like the Beatles. Who cares if he wrote a song for John Lennon.
Eat it:
Cobain was a devoted champion of early alternative rock acts. He would often make reference to his favorite bands in interviews, often placing a greater importance on the bands that influenced him than on his own music. Interviews with Cobain were often littered with references to obscure performers like The Vaselines, The Melvins, Daniel Johnston, The Meat Puppets, the Pixies, Young Marble Giants, The Wipers, and The Raincoats (and obscure performers of the past such as The Outsiders and Os Mutantes.) Cobain was eventually able to convince Nirvana’s record company, Geffen Records, to …
YAAAAWWWWWNNNNN…. back to sleep – nothing to see here, move along.
To all of those people saying, “That’s it?! This isn’t a day I’m going to remember.”
So, when I ask you in a few years, “What was all that hoopla about years ago with that day that Apple said you you were going to remember?”
And you say, “Pshh. Oh yeah, that day they released The Beatles on iTunes. What a letdown.”
I get to say, “Oh! so you REMEMBER.”
and you’ll say, “…”
Do I care – god no.
What a load of bullshit.
You now know why Apple is one of the best marketed companies in the world.
Next week they will announce that Steve Jobs took a dump on all their global website homepages.
What a waste of a marketing opportunity, big bloody deal – (WOW… it’s the Beatles… urm… so what????)
What makes me laugh is that this had to happen this year as the copyright on the songs expires next year. So my advice, DONT buy the Beatles songs, wait a year and get it all for free.
@Haha: First, I never said I hated Nirvana, I simply don’t have the slavish devotion to them that you apparently do.
Second, I never claimed to be an expert on Cobain, but I knew before even checking that he was a massive Beatles fan. But, of course, NOW that’s not important, right? I mean, now that you know Cobain loved and was influenced by the Beatles, the object of your ire, it’s irrelevant. Wasn’t so long ago it seemed quite relevant.
I don’t know how old you are, but one day you may realize that it’s possible to like a wide variety of music – JUST LIKE KURT DID! – and not have those likes be diametrically opposed to each other. Perhaps you’ll also outgrow your childish fanboi worship of Kurt Cobain. . . a worship that he shunned, was damaged by, and would have taken you to task over.
I am the Walrus, Dammit.
The reality distortion field has dissolved.
Here’s some ideas of what Apple SHOULD HAVE ANNOUNCED :
1. Holographic Mac display
2. iSearch : The only search engine to search all search engines in realtime
3. iPhone 5
4. 12″ iPad
5. Totally redesigned MacPros
6. Anything else (insert anything here!)
…”When we were told about a day we wouldn’t forget, we were expecting a new service or a major revision to the iTunes interface”…
It seems that practically everyone here completely missed Apple’s pun on Beatles (actually, Paul McCartney’s) song (Just Another Day).
Almost every iTunes-related announcement from Apple was always some music-related jeu de mots with oftentimes obscure reference to some song or lyrics.
What fascinates me is how much frenzy, not to mention expectation, it managed to whip up among Apple fans…
As for comparing Nirvana (or any other 20th century musical act) to Lenon-McCartney opus, that’s rather misguided. Regardless of anyone’s personal tastes regarding musical styles, the duo’s musical creative output was significantly richer and more complex than anyone else’s. Analysis of their musical form, harmonic structure, work with musical motifs, melody and phrasing, provides plenty of arguments that in contemporary music of 20th (and early 21th) century, nobody has contributed that level of artistry.
I only wish the two lads actually got some formal training and ended up writing more complex music; I’m not particularly fond of the contemporary music style of their era. I can’t help but wonder, if they had received formal instruction in composition, harmony, counterpoint, orchestration, how much richer the classical music of 20th century would have been… I guess it would be hard to argue this point with them at any time in their lives, considering the kind of life (and fame) they had.
Let it be. Let it be…
Let it be a day OF BLOODY DISAPPOINTMENT to remember.
Certainly will remember this, as the day Steve Jobs should have been sectioned in a mental hospital.
Grigori:
First, I pointed out the fact that you posted one slice of a wikipedia entry on Cobain, like that one slice alone is supposed to be what influenced his new music.
He was influenced by many bands from all over the world, many of which were themselves both not influenced by The Beatles, some of which had a distaste for The Beatles.
And since I have studied different genres of music coming out of the 50s and 60s, there are so many garage and punk bands with unique sounds that came both before The Beatles and after, it’s just delusional trend seekers that think The Beatles are responsible for new music.
And no, I don’t worship Cobain. I just feel a connection to him and his music. And it’s a fact he was a major musical change agent in the last decade of the last century. Period.
Lastly, you are why this quote makes so much sense in the modern information age:
“Never in our history have so many people understood so little about so much.”
Well, it seems that after the big announcement, we have some happy people and a load of unhappy people.
To the unhappy types I would suggest that, having done the deal to bring the beatles back catalogue to iTunes, part of the agreement that emi (and others involved in the deal) made with apple was that they wouldn’t just slide it into the library but that they would give it full publicity in order tonpromote as many sales as possible.
Of course emi getting their publicity means that apple also get their share of the impending revenue. It’s called business people, pure and simple. If you’re not interested in what they have for sale you don’t have to buy.
Being born in ’48 I grew up through band music, chuck n elvis but in ’63 was smacked in the back of the neck by the beatles when they burst onto the scene.
I’ve got 11 albums of theirs on cd and don’t see myself buying any more except for the mono box set as I find the first two cd albums which were released in mono only give a far superior sound of what the 60’s were all about than the later stereo albums.
Most of you will disagree but mono gives me the memories of the old dansette record player with it’s auto change record system. Happy days!
Pedrag:
The Beatles’ music sounds like stiff, simple trash next to music from Nirvana and others.
Let’s take a look at complexity. Here are a few songs to get you started from post-Beatles bands in the 20th Century:
-November Rain (GNR)
-No Leaf Clover (Metallica)
-Eruption (Van Halen)
-Rosetta Stoned (Tool)
@Macraven: Chuck Berry, Presley and other rock pioneers were *much* more groundbreaking than the Beatles. Before Berry, there was Big Band jazz. After him, there was rock n’ roll.
The Andrews Sisters sold many more albums and had more Billboard hits than the Beatles but if Steve would’ve announced them, even fewer people would care because most of their fans have passed away (and only 15 years separates the peaks of the the Andrews Sisters from the Beatles).
If Steve weren’t a baby boomer, he wouldn’t give a rat’s a$$ about the Beatles. We’re all thrilled for you, Steve, that you enjoy the music of your generation, but few under 55 care. And since when is appealing to that demographic good business sense for a technology company?
I’m reposting the question that got lost in the thread: doe anyone know if the iTunes albums are the mono version?
@Macduff: could you please elaborate which Beatles albums were originally recorded in mono, and which (if any) were in stereo?
@ Giuseppe: I would be very surprised if iTunes released the mono versions.
All of the Beatles albums up through Magical Mystery Tour were released in mono in the US; in England, The White Album was also released in mono. Also, MMT was NOT an album in England, but a double EP, which I’m pretty sure was mono as well.
@Haha: “First, I pointed out the fact that you posted one slice of a wikipedia entry on Cobain, like that one slice alone is supposed to be what influenced his new music.”
Well, I guess I could have posted the entire entry. MY point was that these nonentities called the Beatles made a major impact on young Kurt Cobain; had they not, there is no telling how the music he later made would have sounded, or if he would have made any music at all. Just because Nirvana doesn’t sound like the Beatles doesn’t mean they weren’t an influence.
“He was influenced by many bands from all over the world, many of which were themselves both not influenced by The Beatles, some of which had a distaste for The Beatles.”
A distaste he did not share, apparently. While I’m sure KC would have felt everyone is entitled to their own opinions, you should ask yourself what he would have to say about your assertion regarding the significance and lasting musical influence of the Beatles. He obviously reached far different conclusions regarding that than you have, and it didn’t conflict with his punk ethos, either.
“And since I have studied different genres of music coming out of the 50s and 60s, there are so many garage and punk bands with unique sounds that came both before The Beatles and after, it’s just delusional trend seekers that think The Beatles are responsible for new music.”
See your last quote, directed at me, for my opinion of this statement; talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You’ve really gone off the deep end here; I guess Cobain was a delusional trend seeker too, considering how he felt about the Beatles. The Beatles were decidedly NOT a proto-punk band, like the MC5, the Barbarians, or the Monks; so what? Because they don’t fit into that niche genre of music, they should be discounted? Even Ozzy Osbourne is an unrepentant Beatle fan.
“And no, I don’t worship Cobain. I just feel a connection to him and his music. And it’s a fact he was a major musical change agent in the last decade of the last century. Period.”
Who said he wasn’t? Not I. It’s YOU who said that the Beatles weren’t, and in that you are thoroughly and completely mistaken. It’s good that you don’t worship Cobain; you may wish to tone down your Nirvana rhetoric, however, as it misleading. . . though I remain unconvinced that your aren’t still in the grips of fanboism. When that fades, one can only hope that you’ll be able appropriately appreciate KC and Nirvana for their small yet entirely significant place in the history of popular music.
Oh, and regards your earlier comment regarding Dave Grohl’s role in the band: you clearly have very little idea of how bands work. There are many good reasons why Bleach wasn’t the massive hit Nevermind was, and it’s not just because of Sub-Pop being a small label and Geffen/DGC being huge. Drummers are incredibly important to the sound of a band. (awaiting the denial/retraction. . . )
@ guiseppe
The first two albums released on cd, Please Please Me (Parlaphone CDP 7 46435 2), followed by, With The Beatles (Parlaphone CDP 46436 2) were both released in mono as the original recordings from which they were produced were made in mono at the time.
With regard to the Mono Box Set that is now available please be wary of buying a box set coming from Asia as i am led to believe that these asian box sets are in fact produced in stereo even though the box states mono. If, and when, I do buy the mono box set it will be a UK produced set that may cost me more but at least it will be mono.
@Predrag:
To take the position you have with the Beatles, a group I do think revolutionized rock n’ roll, is unsustainable. “Nobody has contributed that level of artistry” in the 20th century?
Louis Armstrong did much more for American music than the Beatles ever did. Not even close. And if you added up all their collective talent, they still couldn’t put together one of Armstrong’s solos (forget the thousands he must have performed off-the-cuff in his career). I would say Jimi Hendrix comes much closer in talent than any or all of the Beatles.
@Predrag…. a voice of reason. One does wonder what they could have produced with real music training.
Otherwise, I actually like post-war “classical” music. Boulez, Messiaen, Ligeti, etc., etc. … fantastic!
@HA, etc…. jeez, sorry you’re so offended by all this.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”LOL” style=”border:0;” />
“Grunge” was more of a fashion statement and personality cult, like the majority of pop music, than any sort of musical “revelation”. While there were many good songs, judging from all the one-hit-wonders in the world, it doesn’t take some earth-shattering level of creativity to churn a few out. Grunge is just too self-absorbed for my taste. Proto-Emo?
There was an interesting musicological comparison of grunge vs. punk a few years back (couldn’t find it, unfortunately), saying basically that the only real musical difference between punk and grunge is where the beat lands.
@ R5D4 … The entire catalogue has been remastered, so the sound, if we can believe music critics, is far superior to the original CD transfers.
Hapyy for Beatles fans. But, I am not one of them. So, this was th”big” announcement? If so, I am VERY disappointed.
I day I’ll never forget? A digital release of some songs by the most ridiculously overrated band in history? Wow!
I don’t understand the snotty indifference and lame attempts at humor.
This is great for Apple, symbolically at least- I however own everything already- would love for the mono set to be available.
@Mr. Reeee: If the Beatles had had “real musical training”, well, they wouldn’t have been the Beatles. If, instead of long, sweaty nights at the Star-Club and Kaiserkeller, they’d been slaving away laboriously in the rehearsal rooms at the Royal Academy of Music, we would not have the music we do today, so I’m pretty grateful that they didn’t go the academic route.
Gigori:
The Beatles were a trendy commercial phenomena for trend seekers, like you.
Most of Nirvana’s music does not sound like The Beatles, and Kurt’s music WAS NOT heavily influenced by The Beatles. It was influenced by a staggering array of foreign rock and different genres. Dave Grohl and Kurt were distant from each other. Grohl struggled with being in the band, and had a totally separate and different life outside the band. The last few years he was just showing up and playing without much connection to the band. Seeing rare footage of Kurt in rehersals, he was like a master orchestrator/dictator. He was a perfectionist and both Krist and Dave were disconnected from him. In many ways afraid of him.
Kurt was simply a man who stood alone. He was a junkie living in another world. Grohl didn’t write the music, Kurt did, along with bassist Krist Novoselic.
But it’s not just about Nirvana. It’s about punk rock, hard rock, glamour rock, speed metal and everyrhing else that came after these British twats.
All of this variety of music today would have still happened in some form without The Beatles because it existed in many forms before and during their era. If you think otherwise you’re an ignorant fool. My bet’s on the latter.
Go to Starbucks and have a cookie. Better yet, buy 2 of them, it will give you energy to read all those 1 sentences from the 500 wikipedia articles you read everyday.
Anyone asked younger kids who the Beatles are/were?
You’re all so old!
I love all the comments that say if you’re fan you have the cds. I say if you are a fan you have the LPs. LOL!
@Haha: Ha ha. . . guess I knew deep down it would come to this. I’ve been enjoying the conversation, but your last petulant rant just lost me. You’ve backpedaled and ignored arguments against your position. You are, in short, a child worshiping at the altar of your fallen god and ignorant of history. “He was a junkie living in another world”. . . god, how pathetic for you.
Happy listening. I’m done.
@Digital Mercenary: One can have both.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cheese” style=”border:0;” />
Made Steve happy. And the stock is in the toilet. Geez!!! Hope we don’t see anything else announced today! How about the cloud? How about Apple tv? How about streaming music and movies and tv programming? I love the Fab Four but it isn’t that big of a deal. And I’m a big fan forever. A little late.
Grigori:
God, it is pathetic, isn’t it. Time to move onto the next forum where you can post about stuff you don’t know anything about. Where you can frantically jump all over the web and get slices of spurious information that you know nothing about, then post like you know what you’re talkimg about. Just another information age drone.
Enjoy idiot:
http://www.areddy.net/beatles_suck/
@Haha
Unless I could provide you a time machine, I won’t convince you of anything, so I’ll just stop bothering. The Nervana sound was different than what went before it, I agree, but Nervana wasn’t as big a global phenomenon as The Beatles. It wasn’t called Beatlemania for nothing, you should have been alive for it and you’d know. Nervana became popular did not have the world wide influence gracing the covers of just about every magazine in existance, music and non-music based. Nor did Nervana keep reinventing itself and modern music of it’s day as The Beatles did. And in 50 years I’d bet a paycheck that people won’t be studying Nervana in college courses as they already are doing with the Beatles.
Yes there were those before The Beatles who influenced them, of course. It’s like Apple when they take a product that is already out there and make one better than anyone has ever used. Same principle with the Beatles, there was some good Rock n Roll out there they just kicked it up a big notch and kept doing that with every album.
Music experts and polls through the years of experts such as in Rolling Stone Magazine seem to agree so I don’t feel like what I witnessed and concluded was only my opinion.
I sense some serious butthurt coming from some anonymous emo-grunge kid.
It’s not the fact that Apple landed the Beatles for iTunes that upsets me. I mean, the more, the merrier. It’s the hype. I and many others here assumed the Beatles acquisition was just an appetizer for something that would change the landscape of multimedia. And now, we’re left thinking about humming Yesterday.
For people who don’t care about this announcement, you are not the target audience. Apple is targeting this announcement to 50+ crowd, who has disposable income to purchase the $149 boxed set with “a worldwide iTunes exclusive which captures the Beatles’ very first US concert in its entirety.” It probably will not have much of impact to Apple’s bottom line, but it will be a good PR.
@Grigori Beautiful. Cobain? Wasn’t he KC of KC and the Sunshine band?
For all The Beatles haters,
Sorry, guys, that you missed out being part of the generation that changed the paradigm. Stop being so envious and resentful for being too late for the party. I wonder – how many albums does Nirvana sell these days? Nirvana “changed music”? Oh, for a moment or two back in the 80s (or was it 90s?), for a fan or two.
@weekend: He was also the lead singer of King Crimson.
Sang with Glenn Miller too if I’m not mistaken.
After thinking about it for a while, I’ve come to the conclusion that Mr Jobs is really a genius.
Who, but a genius could have devised such a stupid, over-hyped way of introducing the digital versions of the recordings of the world’s most stupid, over-hyped band to their tone-deaf, dance-impaired fans.
Brilliant.
@s: the over 50 crowd would much rather own a CD (or album) than fiddle with iTunes. If they are fans, they already have the music. Crying wolf doesn’t make for good PR. Keep doing it and people will pay as much attention to their press releases as they do MS and Google.
I shall ignore those who posted with ignorance and hate.
Among those who attempted to argue for (or against) the value of contribution of the Beatles as a band (and Lennon-McCartney as creative tandem) to the musical heritage of humanity, there seems to be confusion between the two: Beatles, the band, and Lennon-McCartney, the creators.
As a band, Beatles were sub-par musicians and singers. There were many much better musicians before, since, as well as in their time. Their arrangements were fairly standard early on, although they did apparently get much more complex and elaborate later on.
However, my argument (which isn’t much of an argument, but somewhat of a factual, objective analysis) is that the creative output of Lennon and McCartney has significantly exceeded anything done by anyone else in popular music. There is a very good reason why a below average band with below average vocals (and below average looks) was the most successful band in history of mankind, and continues to be successful, despite their below-average musicianship. That reason lies in musical value of their songs.
There were many performers who gave significant contributions to our musical heritage. From the aforementioned Louis Armstrong, to the (also aforementioned) Eddie Van Halen (actually, Jimi Hendrix before him), to many more musicians who were such masters of their instrument, as well as improvisation, that they elevated musical expectations for everyone.
The place of Beatles, however, has been firmly established primarily by the inherent qualities of their music (and to some extent, lyrics).
…”Let’s take a look at complexity. Here are a few songs to get you started from post-Beatles bands in the 20th Century:
-November Rain (GNR)
-No Leaf Clover (Metallica)
-Eruption (Van Halen)
-Rosetta Stoned (Tool)”
I took some time to listen. All four are musically quite trivial. The structural form in the first two is based on the form or rondo (heavily used in the 18th and 19th century, from Vivaldi, through Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and similar); nothing really new or of value. While there are some modal elements to the harmony, most of it has already been done (much better) in the early 19th century. The last one keeps repeating same ostinato, relying (apparently successfully) on the 5/4 beat and occasional breaking-up of that beat to keep it interesting. There is very little in terms of real form; it is just a never-ending sequence of unrelated fragments. Not much of melody and melodic development to talk about, and even less of harmony and harmonic development. The most likely value of the song is in lyrics (not are of my expertise, nor of interest to me personally). None of the five examples even begin to approach musical complexity of ANY level. I think you picked the wrongest possible examples to compare them musically to the output of Lennon-McCartney. I’m sure late 20th century has produced much more valuable musical material than those four.
@Predrag: There some truth to that, but I sincerely doubt that we would be talking about this, nearly 50 years later, if Lennon McCartney had only been a songwriting team. Many bands are greater than the sum of their parts, and the Beatles are perhaps the primary example of that. Other subpar groups, like Chad and Jeremy, recorded non-Beatle Lennon/McCartney songs (albeit not their best) and, while they were hits, they didn’t change history, and I’m doubtful that, had Gerry and the Pacemakers recorded the first Beatle singles, they would have been as successful. There was a chemistry there that goes beyond mere songwriting prowess, though they obviously had that in spades.
The more important distinction, at least in my opinion, is the one between Beatles as popular musicians and Beatles as cultural phenomenon.
Groan.
Beagles /EMI are just flogging the same ole dead horse in yet another format – and , get this at a higher price that the CD set. rip Burn and flog on eBay is still the cheapest way to own the set – if you are really bothered. Neither way will reproduce the dynamic quality of vinyl.
@ed malloy: HA! A moronic post, but at least it was funny, unlike some others. . .
Great! Who’s next? Bing Crosby?
@grigori, You are obviously not a musician.
Grigori needs a cookie.
Pedrag:
The fact that u took a listen… U haven’t heard the songs before…
And those songs are complex. There’s examples of rock n roll with full symphonies you twat. And even experienced musicians struggle to play Tool songs because of how hard they are to play.
Go back to that simple trash. I can hear it now. “Money can’t buy me love.” Money can’t buy you musical taste either.
Well, at least we can all agree, they were snazzy dressers…
And dont get me on talking about Ringo… the biggest laughing stock in the worldwide Drummer community.
Just proves that just being in the right place at the right time, regardless of lack of natural talent, can make you a success.
His son on the other hand IS a talented drummer.
Do you belong in the Drummer community?
http://www.moderndrummer.com/web_exclusive/900001114/Ringo Starr
Don’t get me wrong, as I prefer an Omar Hakim, Sean Kinney, Steve Gadd, Butch Trucks, Bonzo Bonham, Russ Kunkel, Carter Beauford, or Jeff Hamilton to a pop drummer, but then again, I don’t claim to be a Jaco Pastorius, Berry Oakley, Robert DeLeo, Victor Wooten, Lee Sklar, Marcus Miller, or James Jamerson putting down a Paul McCartney.
True musicianship needs no ego. The talent is fulfillment enough.
To all of you saying you already ripped the CDs: listen to the quality of the remastered tracks. The CDs were a typical rip-off, worse sound quality than the original vinyl records and amateurish attempts at converting the original mono mixes to stereo sound. That was the spirit of the eighties: dig out those old tapes and start pressing CDs. Listening to those lousy tracks with headphones was just plain bad.
I think there is a box set in my immediate future :o)
this is good for apple…. you all are forgetting that new generations will want to explore history of music and will want this collection as a option to purchase… this is good for the music biz in general as it helps keep the biz side having cash flows and its good for the artists as it promotes the arts and keeps people interested in music… like them or not, the beatles have more hit songs that ANY other act… obviously they connected with an audience… and it’s foolish to think that apple should not offer them as an option…
It’s funny how there’s people here hammering this announcement with asking: “Is this news?”, then having a heated discussion coming up about who really knows everything about music and which band/person was good or worth it.
Fact is, Jobs is laughing all the way to the bank.
iTunes is selling millions of copies of songs and albums.
So for whatever reasons you’ve posted here, it’s the results that speak for themselves.
This was absolutely worth the announcement and certainly BIG news…
You still not convinced?
Then look at the charts in iTunes and try to convince me otherwise…Seen a band get 13 albums in the Top 40 charts all within 24 hours of release? 1 of them being a whopping US dy Dollars whopping 150 bucks? On Number 12?
How much of those are sold to get there?
BIG news….
hager57
The entire Beatles collection was remastered in stereo and released on CDs in September of 2009. That’s when I bought the 7 albums that I never had (their first 6 plus “Past Masters”).
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/14475/79984
@ed malloy: Um. . .sure, OK. Whatever.