Traxan

Bullshit.

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/201...sic-downloads/

Apple is now scheduling an end date for paid iTunes music downloads, according to sources inside the company.

Apple is now experiencing meteoric growth on its streaming music platform, Apple Music. But that growth is directly impacting Apple’s old-line downloads store, for obvious reasons. And, ultimately hastening its demise.

Just last week, Apple executive Jimmy Iovine pointed to a shutdown when ‘people stop buying’. Now, sources inside the company are pointing to a firm date for a planned shutdown of the iTunes music download store. Earlier, these same sources pointed to an ‘early 2019’ shutdown, though internal roadmaps now include a March 31st, 2019 phase-out of the service.
The sources clarified that this would only be the announcement date. Effectively, that will set in motion the shutdown, with users given ample warning of the upcoming phase-out.

Additionally, the sources stressed that music downloads will always work on all Apple devices and the iTunes platform, across all versions. That includes music purchased on iTunes, or uploaded from any other source. So you’ll always be able to play MP3s, iTunes-purchased AACs, and even older, DRM-protected iTunes songs (many years ago, song downloads were ‘DRM protected,’ creating limitations on file-sharing and other uses).

Other variations, including ‘iTunes Plus’ downloads and video downloads, will always be playable.

You’ll also be able to manage your music download collection on iTunes without issue. Apple will only be ending its paid download offering.

Also, older iPods, including iPod shuffles and iPod video players, will all keep working and playing song downloads. That’s worth noting for people that prefer their older, disconnected devices for off-grid listening. Or, just something simpler for a jog, workout, or dog walk.

No, you can’t upgrade your iPod, but at least it won’t turn into a brick. And iTunes synching will always work (though we’re not sure it will be upgraded over time).

Mabuse

Such bullshit.

Quick example: Oingo Boingo

iTunes has every one of their albums.
Apple Music has none of their albums.

For the sake of comparison Amazon Prime also has none of their albums. Amazon Unlimited has just Dead Mans Party.

iTunes for the win.

Why So Blu?

Noonan

It was only a matter of time. Streaming services have killed pay per song/album services. I'm sure it's been a cost center for them for years already.

DJariya

I don't get it (if this story is true)

So Apple/iTunes is no longer letting folks purchase digital copies of music to keep for themselves? If you want to listen to say Taylor Swift's new album, you can only stream it off their subscription service?

This is going to kill a huge portion of individual album sales, especially since CDs are maybe a few years away from being extinct.

Why So Blu?

Something's weird with that story. I don't buy it.

Noonan

Why the questioning? Maintaining two completely separate models (and apps) for music is silly and was never going to last. This will allow them to dump royalty payments for catalogs which aren't part of Apple Music already; kill development/updates to the iTunes app; and make their offering easier for customers to understand.

james2025a

Well the fight against music piracy is only gonna get harder for them to fight if they pull shit like this. The music industry has been a greedy set of bastards for many years and I was actually very happy when piracy started hitting them where it hurt. Morons like Larrs Ulrik crying in front of committees and saying bullshit that its like stealing food from his children's mouths just makes me want to see them suffer even more.

I have a huge music collection, and with the state of shit music these days I cannot remember the last time I even saw an album I wanted for free, let alone buy. So let them do what they will and I hope the plan crashes and burns. They won't get a penny from me either way.

stvn1974

I wonder if you will still be allowed to burn discs with the itunes software?

Mike86

I’m not entirely sure I understand why they’re doing this. I mean even if sales are down it’s not like physical media that’s taking up retail space. I guess they’ve got the servers to maintain but they’re a technology company and one of the wealthiest companies in existence. You’d think even if they aren’t selling a bunch that it still amounts to some profit for them. I don’t see how they’d be taking a loss keeping it going. I’ve actually started using iTunes more as I don’t buy a lot of physical albums anymore (or really music in general).

Adam Tyner

Updated the subject since this is still a rumor for now.

PhantomStranger

Thus begins the end of personal music ownership. The labels want all music customers trapped in an endless streaming cycle, collecting a monthly fee in perpetuity.

This is going to have major ramifications on the business of music and the future of the industry. If iTunes has abandoned purchased downloads, this is a huge inflection point.

Inhumans99

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Apple? Who am I kidding, I was never an iTunes power user who spent much in the store. It is still a dick move to try and force folks to use Apple Music.

I assume that they are only shutting down the music path and you can still buy films/tv content?

As Mabuse notes it sounds like their iTunes store digital catalog is a lot more robust than the catalog available for streaming through Apple Music.

bunkaroo

I only stick with iPhones over Samsung because I like BUYING music direct from iTunes. My 7 is getting flaky, so looks like Samsung is indeed in my future since I won't have any future need for iTunes.

Jason

Oh, you'll be able to purchase music. You'll just have to fork over $30-40 for a vinyl record. And you'll still need a streaming service if you want to listen anywhere but at home.

I'm old enough that I've a) got a pretty large CD collection including complete catalogs of several favorite artists and b) there are enough catalog CDs in the pipeline for me to track down more albums and artists I've missed than I could ever listen to in ten lifetimes.

Draven

Eh, I just bought an album on iTunes the other day and I haven't done that in easily a year. I already listen to 99% of my music from Spotify. I don't need to own a copy of "Sister Christian" to listen to it whenever I want. This reads like Netflix dropping the DVD rental for streaming.

I do hope this doesn't affect the video side. I buy stuff there weekly.

OldBoy

This blows.

Mikael79

$30-40? Are you shopping at a Pamida back in 1996? Records are about half that these days.

rjh_54

It was only a matter of time. I can't remember the last time I bought anything on iTunes. I just can't justify spending $10 - $15 on a bunch of digital files when I could just as easily buy a physical version for the same price (or even cheaper in a lot of cases). Maybe a single here and there, but even then, I haven't bought one in maybe 4 or 5 years, before everyone became hell bent on streaming.

Although I'm subscribed to Spotify Premium for convenience, I also have around 1,000 CDs and I'm pretty content with what I've got for now. I won't miss iTunes, but it sucks for those who do still use it.

Josh-da-man

The prices vary a lot.

A standard LP can be had for about $18-$25, but some artists charge more for their stuff, or you get special editions, premium covers, 180g vinyl, single albums spread over two records, colored vinyl, and it's not unusual for a lot of things to only be available in the $30-40 range.

PhantomStranger

Yeah, vinyl has shot up in price as the labels cater to the wealthy niche still buying them. The days of cheap vinyl haven't been seen in a few years.

brayzie

Do artists get paid less with streams as opposed to downloads?
I thought it's like physical albums>digital downloads>streams.

I'm late to the party with streaming services. I have enough monthly bills and subscription services, I don't need one more.
I've been just buying digital songs. I guess it's cheaper for me in the long run.
But like I said, 1) I feel like the artists are getting screwed even more these days. Before the artists would get screwed on albums sales, but they made a shit load of money off of concerts and touring. But since no one's buying physical media really, labels aren't getting money from CD sales, so they sign artists to 360 deals where they make money off of virtually everything the artist does, including touring.

And 2) it's too easy for the service or label to make a song unavailable for whatever reason. I have some CDs that aren't available on iTunes or Amazon. I have purchased songs that ended up no longer being in my cloud because the label took them off the service for some reason.

majorjoe23

A decade or so back I talked to artists who said they were getting 79 cents (with cuts of that going to each member, management and their label) for a 99 cent sale on itunes.

A thousand streams on Spotify gets you anywhere from $3.80 to $7.50.

brayzie

What's messed up is that Tidal was supposed to be the best for artists when it came to streaming, but everyone goes with the Spotify and Apple. Plus it seemed like some media outlets were going out of their way to make Tidal look bad.

from Forbes:

So Camila Cabello made $595,334 off of her audio vid of "Havana" after it got 992,224,119 views.

Alan Smithee

I've spent untold thousands of dollars on CDs since 1985, though admittedly very little in recent years.

I WAS going to say that I've spent exactly $0.00 on "digital" music in that amount of time, but then I remember I actually did buy an audiobook for $10 last year about accounting that I felt would be a good idea to listen to on an 8-hour drive on the way to a job interview. It was also available on CD but I couldn't readily grab it anywhere before I started the trip. The audiobook wasn't too interesting and I likely won't listen to it much again if at all- oddly they put audiobooks in a separate section from music; to me it's all audio regardless of what's on it. If I had the CD, I'd keep it shelved with all the other CDs.