iTunes LP is a failure, but Apple never really cared about it anyway
By John Brownlee (8:07 am, Mar. 10, 2010)
Over six months after it was first unveiled, iTunes LP is a total bust. Apple launched its interactive album format with a library of six iTunes LPs: since, only 23 more have been added to iTunes.
What the heck happened? According to Paul Bonanos writing over at GigaOm, it all comes down to two things: the iTunes LP is incredibly expensive to produce, and Apple really never wanted to do it in the first place.
Bonanos says that sources close to Apple that iTunes LP was a concession made by Cupertino to the major record labels in exchange for allowing DRM-free songs, a gesture that Apple would promote albums in the face of massive evidence that consumers preferred digital singles. They even subsidized the initial half dozen albums as a good will gesture, paying third-party contractors up to $60,000 a pop.
Despite that, however, Apple was really never invested in iTunes LP, and consumers just don’t care about it. Bonanos says his sources claim that the financial impact of iTunes LP has basically been non-existent.
Personally, I always loved the idea of iTunes LP: the move to digital music has been wonderful, but it has completely robbed me of the experience of buying a new album, reading the liner notes (these tend to be a lot more informative if you’re a jazz fan) and looking at the album art. iTunes LP tried to simulate that… but no one really cared, apparently. Even Apple.
[via 9to5Mac]
Posted by John Brownlee in News, iTunes | Comment on this article
If you enjoyed this article:
Subscribe via RSS or email, or follow us on Facebook and Twitter
I just look up information about bands on Wikipedia.
Justin Harter, on March 10th, 2010 at 8:36 am
It’s one of those things you look at for 2 minutes and never use again.
Kev Robinson, on March 10th, 2010 at 8:39 am
no one reads the inside leaflets of cds for more than 5 minutes before they get bored of it.
Ben, on March 10th, 2010 at 8:43 am
This is the problem with our twitter-based culture. Everything is a bite and nothing is a meal. There are still and handful of bands that create albums that are worth having as a collection (Tool always comes to mind for that), but they are a rarity. There is a way to recreate the magic of the album, but kids need to see the value of the experience of engrossing themselves in music and not just listening to random playlists while they surf the net. I admit that I don’t have the time to spend with new albums that I used to, but I’m not a kid anymore.
Brad, on March 10th, 2010 at 8:51 am
“It all comes down to two things: the iTunes LP is incredibly expensive to produce, and Apple really never wanted to do it in the first place.”
It’s not Apple’s job to make these things. It’s the job of the record companies. After all, it’s their content. So if they can’t make them for a price and quality that makes people want to buy them, then it really doesn’t matter whether Apple cared about it or not. Why is Apple expected to babysit the labels and teach them how to sell their music?
Joseph, on March 10th, 2010 at 9:54 am
Brad speaks the truth. People (at least the young uns) don’t want albums any more, they want bite-sized chunks of soundbite material that the latest fad is spewing out. Oh, and the ringtone version. Popular music doesn’t want albums.
Imagine Tubular Bells being released today – “WTF? Two twenty minute tracks? What a rip-off, etc.” Their attention span isn’t long enough for either a whole album or the sleeve notes that accompany it. Sad, really.
Knightlie, on March 10th, 2010 at 10:07 am
…or Thick as a Brick (One 43 minute track) or A Passion Play (One 44 minute track)
Tony, on March 10th, 2010 at 10:27 am
I personally like the idea of iTunes LP. It has the potential to offer a much richer experience than CD inserts. I blame the record companies for not actually producing more iTunes LPs. Take out the “greatest hits” compilations and the selection is downright pathetic.
Will, on March 10th, 2010 at 11:01 am
There is no reason such a thing would need to cost $60k or even $20k to produce. Properly conceived, it should cost no more than a few ($2-3 thousand contracted out.)
Frankly if I were a band I would do it for every album and would provide the base framework of cover matter even with single trackpurchases. The more tracks you buy the more cover matter you get (or pay $0.99 and get the complete cover matter no matter how many tracks you buy. Of course, buy the album and get a deal.
This should essentially be a give-away.
DESuserIGN, on March 10th, 2010 at 11:07 am
I’m not a young un. I’m 49 years old and I don’t have a twitter account. I NEVER saw the reason to buy crap songs. There are lots of albums I refused to buy because most of the songs weren’t worth 2 cents then or now.
It is only now that I can buy the songs I want, and ONLY the songs I want, that I am buying these songs.
As for the garbage about albums being holy, that is also pure crap. The ONLY reason artists want you to buy the whole album is money. The “collection” of songs on any album are just songs that happen to be on the same album and have absolutely nothing to do with each other besides who wrote them and when. For the fan, that means nothing.
If you want to say I’m not a fan because I don’t want to buy crap songs, then I’m not a fan. And I’m happy not being a fan. They don’t want my money for individual songs? Fine, make us buy albums only and see how far that gets them. In my wallet, that will be no where. For those you who bought the whole album and don’t honestly like all the songs, I call you suckers.
Again, I’m 49. Maybe I was just 25 to 30 years ahead of my time.
OlsonBW, on March 10th, 2010 at 11:49 am
OlsonBW: “The “collection†of songs on any album are just songs that happen to be on the same album and have absolutely nothing to do with each other besides who wrote them and when.”
That might be true for a lot of music, especially pop music. But in so many cases that is not true. Many artists releases albums that are meant to be listened to from start to end. Go back to the 60s and 70s and there are a lot of it.
Michael, on March 10th, 2010 at 1:00 pm
I remember Jeff Waynes War of the worlds, When I got it the best way was as the full LP, because you got a beautiful book of art and lots of information, that I perused while listening. This was one of the first albums I actually bought with my own money. The problem was I had to take it to a mates place to dub to cassette so I could play it at home, we had no LP player.
Then a couple of years ago, I cam across Amarok on Linux – it just automatically looked up stuff on the somg that was playing and let you read it at your leasure. The only drawback was it had ot be on your PC. Then iTunes LP came out, and I thought cool, finally the same experiance might be mobile and I’ll get it on my iPhone. – umm, nope. Again only on the PC, and I’m not paying the extra coin Apple asked for just for a pretty PC only liner note. It would have gone better if the LP option cost no mre than the full album download.
Lucily, it is actually easy to create you own, with a bit of effort – so now many of my Metallica Bootletged live recordings have their own custom LP on my machine – with photos and notes on the concerts they were from. It only took a few hours to put together. The longest part was getting the ID number for the tracks I wanted to use. A little tricker for tracks not purchased from iTunes.
John, on March 10th, 2010 at 2:54 pm
Other posters are correct in that additional content can be as cheap or expensive as you care and effort can best production look.
More importantly, I am fairly certain Apple introduced the LP format with the iPad in mind. I can see people using an iPad to casually listen to music and enjoy the additional content.
George, on March 10th, 2010 at 11:22 pm
I love the format, and of those I have purchased I’m most impressed with Peter Gabriel’s latest album. Although given his early uptake of multi media it’s not surprising that he has embraced the concept. I hope that artists will continue to use the format, even if it’s sporadic.
Adrian Price, on March 11th, 2010 at 3:05 am
They should have included a lossless audio, or DTS/Dolby surround mixed versions of the music along with an AAC version that doesn’t take up as much space on your 2gb ipod shuffle or whatever. That would be worth paying a premium for.
Who cares about the special features, it’s all about the music.
Thomas, on March 11th, 2010 at 11:45 am