Home Videos Photos Shop
PerezHilton CocoPerez Ariana Selena G. Kim K. Real Housewives PerezTV
| Filed under: Music MinuteKid RockTech TalkBusiness Blitz

Now that The Beatles' music is now available to download on iTunes, there aren't too many acts left that haven't agreed to put their tunes out onto the di… Read more…

29 comments to “iTunes Holdouts!”

  1. 1

    I agree with them 100% that it's their music so it's their choice… The artist should have the right to set the price, within limits.. some songs do cost more to produce then others.
    Example: Angelina's stupid new song should not cost the same as a Kid Rock or an AC/DC song.

  2. 2

    great ew.com rip off for a post

  3. 3

    i don't know where you get your info, but the smiths are absolutely available for download on itunes.

  4. 4

    there is variable pricing……

  5. 5

    Garth Brooks is amazing so he can do whatever he wants. I do see his point about selling albums in their entirety. For artists like him who actually put thought into track listings and the album experience, it's sort of important to sell it that way. And good for him for explaining his point of view without being negative towards iTunes or Apple. Classy guy.

  6. 6

    The problem with album-only downloads is that half of the songs on the albums are throwaways. Why should I have to pay full price for songs I'll never listen to?

  7. 7

    The Smiths are absolutely available on iTunes and have been for at least a year.

  8. 8

    I agree with them - I also hate iTunes and their prices. Plus listening to an entire album (a good one) is like hearing a story. Don't chop it up.

  9. 9

    I agree that it is their right to decide how their music is sold- most definitely.

    …but there is varied pricing. Popular artists cost more money. I really don't think iTunes will be the death of the music industry. I've purchased one or two songs from artists I would have never purchased a whole album from. I've also purchased an entire album because a single I got was just that good.

  10. 10

    Um, the last time I checked before Itunes and I went to Tower Records or Target the CD's and tapes were the same price(unless you bought an old cd or tape in the bargain section) and when you went to the retailer to buy it as a NEW release it was sold at an even cheaper price, no matter the artist. They even sold singles back in the day if you just wanted the hit song and not the entire album. Also, most retailers did not sale your local garage band's CD at all. In the not so distant past, CD's cost more that cassette tapes for the same album, but every artist had the same price tag. Born to run is probably in the bargain bin at Walmart right now for 5 bucks, but it is probably edited for content like Walmart has done for years without any artist complaining about the artistic Merit of their "Music". Music has always changed in how we listen to it, no matter how we get it , some people just still choose to listen to the vinyls I guess.

  11. 11

    Apple is the NEW Big Brother they want to control and own all your media…FIGHT THEM AT ALL COST….they are only a pretty interface..don't drink their Kool-Aid

  12. 12

    It's entirely price: Frank Zappa's family sells music online (not the entire catalog, but a lot) at about 3x the price iTunes charges. And they DON'T have to give Steve Jobs a cut.
    Rightfully, so, I say.

  13. 13

    I understand and agree with the album argument. However, music in general has moved away from this format. There still is a market that enjoy and will pay for a "album/CD" experience.

    As for the free market arguement, garage band vs an accomplish artist, I'm sure the revenue stream is still just as lucrative. It's just not the market setting the price, it's between the artist and Apple.

    If the hold outs feel their music will still be enjoyed by their fans and continue to make a living, good for them. The reality is that artist don't make any money from their music anymore. It's all about live performances. It's too bad but, that's what it's become.

  14. 14

    I see their point and I agree they have a right to decide where their music is sold and how it is sold.

    As a consumer & music lover, I don't agree with their thought process because when i go into Target, Walmart and anywhere else music is sold, I can buy a CD and they all cost the same. And if music is considered an art form, isn't the value of the music relative. Just because kid Rock thinks Born to Run is fabulous and someone else's music isn't…doesn't mean we all feel that way. Look at Hip Hop. My grandparents view of it and my view of it is very different, but that doesn't mean it is good or bad…just relative.

  15. 15

    Garth Brooks has always been a douche about his music, but I think the artist should have every right to determine how their music is distributed.

    That being said, they may be holding out until the deal is worth their while.

  16. 16

    I think they have valid points. I would buy Garth's whole CDs, so I wish Apple would give in to his demands and make that an option.

  17. 17

    Well, I am still buying physical albums weekly and I hate downloading. And I hate people who download music illegally. I just think that's poor. Seriously, there is like ebay, Amazon, Target, etc. which really have good deals, even for newer CD's, there's no need to download! If you don#t have a lot of money (like I do), buy a used CD from mazon or ebay or something.

  18. 18

    Well not putting their albums on iTunes only hurts them… I know I don't buy CDs anymore, I only buy off iTunes (and usually it's the whole album). Their decision only loses customers for themselves!

  19. 19

    It's their music so they have the right to decide how it's sold, but they're still GREEDY egomaniacs.

  20. 20

    It's a valid point and maybe for established musicians it's applicable but I know for my buying habits I don't purchase whole CDs based on liking one single. Typically if I hear 3 songs that I like then I'll commit to buying a whole album. But on the point of iTunes destroying the industry I'd say that's way off base and the only thing hurting the industry is itself and greed. I can't even list how many new bands I've discovered through iTunes whether it be a genius suggestion or the free download of the week. Or how many times I heard a song loved it and just went ahead and bought it straight from my iPhone. Some muscians just need to accept the change and make it work for them.

  21. 21

    Brooks' 6 cd box set is available for 5.00 @ WALMART online.

    Chadstermac is right. They're making specious arguments. The pricing system is basically the same as purchasing cd. full albums or singles. Individual artists have NEVER set prices. One could make a valid argument about the size of APPLE's cut per download. However, there's nothing new there either. Album-only in ludicrous. For every person who only buys albums there's one who only buys 45s. it's a lucrative market. Garth Brooks music has been available in 'single format' for cds & tapes why not downloads? As for kid rock, does he have individual dealings with EVERY outlet that sells his music? Suppliers give SUGGESTED retail pricing to outlets. WALMART buys in mass bulk so pays less per unit then a local mom & pop store so they are charge less.

  22. 22

    What point did they make exactly? The only thing they both just said was "We want to charge more money for our music" period. And the reason they don't want individual songs sold, only albums is because most songs on an album are crap, and people only want the couple good songs there are, and these guys would rather you had to buy all the shit just to get the 2 good ones.
    And, most important of all, who are they to decide who is good, and who is bad. Who is worth more than someone else. I personally can't stand Springsteen, and wouldn't you couldn't pay me to listen to one of his songs. Music is music, it's art, it's worth whatever the buyer is willing to pay for it, nothing more.

  23. 23

    I'm not understanding this. I download entire albums all the time if I know the album is good, but I don't want to be forced to download an entire album if I don't want to. The music industry HAS changed. Artists used to put a lot of thought into their music and lyrics. Just listen to any Eagles album. They're amazing. Now, half the songs are garbage and you're lucky to get one really good song off an album. The artists did it to themselves, in my opinion. And I have a Kid Rock song on my iPod that I downloaded from iTunes, so that's weird.

  24. 24

    Kid Rock should count himself lucky to get the same price as everyone else.

  25. 25

    I never thought about how iTunes works until reading what the artists had to say about it. And I absolutely agree with them 100%. Apple seems to be about one thing only, money. And they're doing a fine job of getting what they want. Who are they to put a price on an artists' song? But then again they kind of have to think about how much more money they'd make a lot of people buy their music digitally now.

  26. 26

    I don't see what the problem is. A CD roughly costs about $14-17 dollars which kinda comes to 99cents on average considering most CDs have about 12-14 songs. They don't have to pay for packaging or store costs. By the time songs hit itunes most of the production costs have been recouped.

  27. 27

    Good for them. Save the music. fuck apple

  28. timo says – reply to this


    who buys their music?

  29. 29

    The Smiths. Yes!