Why I'm against the alliance with Apple

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Maybe if you ever got 1/10 as much money as U2 have you'd be thinking about this little U2/Apple co-op a lot differently. All I'm saying is I think you are looking at it far too critically.
 
womanfish said:


I'm really confused by your stance Traveller. You say it's all about money, marketing, and publicity. You make it sound as if U2 shouldn't do marketing and publicity???? They have done this their entire career. Print ads, tv appearances, videos, distributing to and lobbying radio stations, tours, movies (R&H), posters, t-shirts, buttons, keyrings, calendars, condoms, the list goes on and on and on.....

They are letting Apple use video of them singing a song. This is promoting their song and where to get it (iTunes). They are breaking into the online market like noone else. The music industry has been hit hard and while most other artists are back on their heels, U2 is moving forward into new territories. They were one of, if not THE first, to put their weight behind the original launching of iTunes. They like to push the technological boundaries, as we've seen with their innovative tours, and i see this as an extention of that.

I don't know how long you've been a U2 fan, but if you have been for a while, then you know that U2 has always wanted to and proclaimed that they want to be the biggest and best band out there. They have used marketing and promotion to do this for their whole career and this is just one part of a huge promotion for this album, like every other album before it.

And as for your "purist" comment. If you were truly a purist you would be listening to vinyl, but other than that, you know that you can download files in a lossless format which is the EXACT same quality as a CD, no data loss, and takes up half the storage space. It's still quite a bit bigger than an MP3, but it is lossless.

The iPod really is an awesome thing. I have 3600 or so songs on mine and can take it anywhere, play it at school, in the car, or work or home through my stereo. The quality of the files is your choice to make.

I am an assistant audio engineer, which means it's my job to hear quality differences in audio, and I have an extremely hard time hearing the difference between CD quality and an MP3 at 192kbps, let alone at 256 or 320. You should check it out.
Click to expand...

You have a hard time? My husband can tell the difference and he is a sound engineer.:) Nice to meet kindred spirits. I can even hear the difference. If I could download something where you'd lose nothing, sure, I'd do it. I have no problem with that. But, I've listened to whole albums on mp3's, then I go and buy the album and then say, "OH! They ARE a good band!" There is a HUGE difference in quality.

Still, I am open to one day being able to replace the cd, just like I'm open to one day being able to go digital (for a camera) without losing quality.
 
Lancemc said:
Maybe if you ever got 1/10 as much money as U2 have you'd be thinking about this little U2/Apple co-op a lot differently. All I'm saying is I think you are looking at it far too critically.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, and frankly I hope to find out what I would think with 1/10 of their income. Hmm. How much would that be?
 
U2Traveller said:


You have a hard time? My husband can tell the difference and he is a sound engineer.:) Nice to meet kindred spirits. I can even hear the difference. If I could download something where you'd lose nothing, sure, I'd do it. I have no problem with that. But, I've listened to whole albums on mp3's, then I go and buy the album and then say, "OH! They ARE a good band!" There is a HUGE difference in quality.

Still, I am open to one day being able to replace the cd, just like I'm open to one day being able to go digital (for a camera) without losing quality.
Click to expand...

I can hear the difference between MP3 and CD, just like I can between CD and vinyl. But at the highest kbps, in most normal listening situations, coming out of most peoples normal speakers makes virtually no difference. If you were talking about MP3's at 128kbps or even 160, then yes, there is an obvious and marked difference.

And yes, Apple Lossless is truly lossless and takes up about half the space of a normal CD file. Cool to be able to get rid of CD's at some point, but I still don't like not getting the booklet/liner notes/artwork, so I'm old fashioned that way. So if it's a band i really am into i always go to the store and get the cd instead of downloading. If it's someone I just like, but not a huge fan, i will use iTunes.

cool that your husband is an engineer. how long has he been at it?
 
U2Traveller said:


Why do they need more? I've always wondered what drives a person who already has over a 100 million to want to make more. Greed? Retire already and let somebody else make it.
Click to expand...

So U2 should retire, huh? If you thought they were making bad music now and wanted them to stop to preserve their legacy, I could see arguing for them to stop. Otherwise, you are clearly not a fan if you want them to stop. Why are you at this forum?
 
womanfish said:


I can hear the difference between MP3 and CD, just like I can between CD and vinyl. But at the highest kbps, in most normal listening situations, coming out of most peoples normal speakers makes virtually no difference. If you were talking about MP3's at 128kbps or even 160, then yes, there is an obvious and marked difference.

And yes, Apple Lossless is truly lossless and takes up about half the space of a normal CD file. Cool to be able to get rid of CD's at some point, but I still don't like not getting the booklet/liner notes/artwork, so I'm old fashioned that way. So if it's a band i really am into i always go to the store and get the cd instead of downloading. If it's someone I just like, but not a huge fan, i will use iTunes.

cool that your husband is an engineer. how long has he been at it?
Click to expand...

That's exactly how I feel about it. Mp3's are good enough for some things, but if it's a band I really love I have to have the cd. Maybe it does have something to do with something physical to look at, just like the commercials about a digital camera with people saying there's something missing...where's the picture?! It's nice to have something to hold to look at (plus it's still better quality).

He has been a sound engineer since he was 17. They actually made a cd of their band. He's just been involved with it ever since. He even has his name in the credits for one of Backstreet Boys' albums. Black and Blue, or whatever it's called. That's the only reason we have that album.

Now we have our own business, and he is working on an album for an up and coming group.
 
Last edited:
Lancemc said:


P.S. by the way, with the argument about Napster and other online music sources not being represented, I say "Good!". iTunes is THE best music player, and online music store there is. The most people that use itunes, the better it will get. I think the best product out there SHOULD get the most profit. In this case it is Apple and itunes. Maybe in a couple years it will change, when it does, I'll be there to support it, but until then this is how it is.
Click to expand...

Hey, I may even agree with you that iTunes and iPod is the best but other U2 fans may prefer one or more of the other stores but must go to iTunes to get some of their U2 stuff. Like I said previously, I hope this is a one time publicity/marketing thing like they did with Target a few years back.

Also, some have made the case that U2 is trying to further the online music industry. I think if they want to do that they and their record company should use their clout to get all of the stores to agree on standards.
 
BTW, how do you feel about all those bands (like Pearl Jam, etc.) who sell exclusive recordings through their website? Is that different from the Apple deal? Those fans also don't have any choice. It's that store or nothing.
 
U2Traveller said:


Why do they need more? I've always wondered what drives a person who already has over a 100 million to want to make more. Greed? Retire already and let somebody else make it.
Click to expand...
like you? People who talk like this usually die poor always whinning about the other person busting their butt making it.
 
Last edited:
mellyinsf said:

like you? People who talk like this usually die poor always whinning about the other person busting their butt making it.
Click to expand...

Agree totally! U2 to retire!? Never! Its slightly weird that people want U2 to retire because they have teamed up with a high tech company to promote a new medium to listen/play music on.

Slightly extreme!!!
 
Your missing the point about ipod, this is still in effect in its infancy, you got a problem that they are only endorsing one particular brand, can you not see it will be good for the genre as a whole? If this takes off then we will see a myraid of download companies where it will be the norm to release music on all the formats that are available, as it is, Apple ipod is the chosen son and when the floodgates open this will be all forgotten about, maybe apart from the fact people will be saying "remember when U2 really kickstarted mass consumer MP3s to the uniniatated?
Its the start of a techno and music revolution people! Wave goodbye to CD's (replace with your fave format!) lol
 
what a bomb! said:
Your missing the point about ipod, this is still in effect in its infancy, you got a problem that they are only endorsing one particular brand, can you not see it will be good for the genre as a whole? If this takes off then we will see a myraid of download companies where it will be the norm to release music on all the formats that are available, as it is, Apple ipod is the chosen son and when the floodgates open this will be all forgotten about, maybe apart from the fact people will be saying "remember when U2 really kickstarted mass consumer MP3s to the uniniatated?
Its the start of a techno and music revolution people! Wave goodbye to CD's (replace with your fave format!) lol
Click to expand...

Exactly, 10 years from now U2 will once again be considered groundbreaking
 
Maybe someone other than Apple should throw their weight behind an online music store. U2 are bad cause they're going with the best? No. Sony should get off there fucking asses and compete. The Sony store is shit. If U2 had partnered w/ Sony, they'd be asses.
 
MrBrau1 said:
Maybe someone other than Apple should throw their weight behind an online music store. U2 are bad cause they're going with the best? No. Sony should get off there fucking asses and compete. The Sony store is shit. If U2 had partnered w/ Sony, they'd be asses.
Click to expand...

I agree. I have tried two other online downloading sites. They don't even come NEAR iTunes. U2 joining forces with one of those second rate stores would say alot about the kind of quality that U2 wants to be associated with. By teaming with apple for promotion of the new single, they are showing that they know who is doing it right (or at least the very best for the time being). I really think this is about much more than money and promotion. I truly think that U2 cares about being on the forefront of the business. Now if U2's management and Interscope could get Soundscan/Billboard to make digital sales reflect on the charts, i think it would be a big step forward in the digital domain.
 
So I signed up with itunes when Vertigo came out and purchased as well as downloaded it. I liked the idea of iTunes so much that I have since purchased more music from it, from other artists. If it wasn't for U2 I probably would have never bothered with iTunes.
 
Just a side note- When you buy w/ Itunes, burn to a cd. If you bought 150 songs, and your hard drive crashed, you lost the tunes, no credit. So back it up! Burn audio cds!
 
U2's aliance with Apple can only make them richer in the end. Anything that makes U2 richer is good. It will only inspire U2 to make even more great music.

Cheers,

J
 
I think the point mkjc is making is that U2 have become part of Apple in the downloading business and are effectively giving Apple the opportunity to become the permanent market leader for the future of downloaded music. As other artists follow U2 and sign exclusive agreements (first access to songs, live concert downloads and unreleased tracks) with Apple and itunes you have essentially created a monopoly for Apple. I think two years from now this Apple-U2 merger will be the most significant event for online music along with the Napster suit.
 
mellyinsf said:

like you? People who talk like this usually die poor always whinning about the other person busting their butt making it.
Click to expand...

Is that so? You've got it ALL worked out, then? FYI, I wasn't talking about me. What U2 does doesn't affect me at all. I was talking about other up and coming bands like Coldplay. But, like my husband says, no band has the entire market.
 
barrett said:
I think the point mkjc is making is that U2 have become part of Apple in the downloading business and are effectively giving Apple the opportunity to become the permanent market leader for the future of downloaded music. As other artists follow U2 and sign exclusive agreements (first access to songs, live concert downloads and unreleased tracks) with Apple and itunes you have essentially created a monopoly for Apple. I think two years from now this Apple-U2 merger will be the most significant event for online music along with the Napster suit.
Click to expand...

barrett,

Though I don't agree that U2 have become part of Apple, I think the rest of your post makes my point better than I could. U2 and the U2 fan base are very influential in moving the technology of music. I don't want to see them hand market share to one retailer. Though many would agree that iPod and iTunes are good products most U2 fans support Apple not because of superior products but instead because they are now affiliated with U2.
 
david said:


:blahblah:
Click to expand...

:lol: I did the same thing to her yesterday. She is incredibly stubborn and refuses to admit that there is even a possibility that anything besides for money is a factor for the apple deal. Narrow minded people piss me off. Pathetic.
 
U2Traveller said:


Is that so? You've got it ALL worked out, then? FYI, I wasn't talking about me. What U2 does doesn't affect me at all. I was talking about other up and coming bands like Coldplay. But, like my husband says, no band has the entire market.
Click to expand...

This is not a zero sum game. If your good you will go far no matter what other bands are around.
BTW I'm not really sure where you are coming from so I won't take you seriously. Nothing you are saying really makes a good argument about anything.
 
mellyinsf said:


This is not a zero sum game. If your good you will go far no matter what other bands are around.
BTW I'm not really sure where you are coming from so I won't take you seriously. Nothing you are saying really makes a good argument about anything.
Click to expand...

Wait, let me get this one...greed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Ticketmaster app
Replies
3
Views
543
rosephile
R
Miroslava
Friday, February 23, 2024 - MSG Sphere - Las Vegas, NV
Replies
2
Views
527
Miroslava
Miroslava
dont_turn_around
Hello everyone!
Replies
1
Views
144
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
H
Filming ?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
rosephile
R
D
Looking for the best storyteller of U2 - Garage to Stadius
Replies
0
Views
285
Dave A
D

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom