Well, That Was Quick - Bored Already, Not Going To Keep Apple Music

[boltjames]

So after the rush of the first few days of having a huge catalog of music at my fingertips and asking Siri to "play songs by Olivia Newton John" just for the fun of it, that novelty has worn off and it turns out that if there was any older music that I just had to hear I already own it. And where I am lacking in back catalog, like The Eagles "Desperado" LP, turns out it's not available for streaming. Between ripped CD's and iTunes purchases since 1999, there isn't much of a wayback machine for me here.

And as far as the discovery of new music goes, the newly improved Radio stations will suffice- perhaps not Beats 1, which I can never connect to consistently anyway, but the rest and they're free. I wanted to love Apple Radio but in the end it's nothing more than what I've got already plus an old library, and I'm not going to spend $180 a year so I can listen to an obscure Hootie & The Blowfish LP when the moment strikes and my daughter can listen to the new $10 Taylor Swift album and suck up $120 in data charges while doing so.

Apple Watch and Apple Music. Not very impressed in the post-Jobs era.

BJ

 

[gsmornot]

The free radio stations are not where you discover the music. That is just the tab basic stations that will go with the free tier. The discovery is in the combination of liking music, listening to the full length of the song (For You) and using the New tab. You have to scroll through the many sections to find everything within New but once you do the interface morphs into a service more suited to what you like to listen to. The early view is a default based on current trend.

Its not for everyone but I enjoy both my watch and the music service.

 

[boltjames]

The free radio stations are not where you discover the music. That is just the tab basic stations that will go with the free tier. The discovery is in the combination of liking music, listening to the full length of the song (For You) and using the New tab. You have to scroll through the many sections to find everything within New but once you do the interface morphs into a service more suited to what you like to listen to. The early view is a default based on current trend.

Its not for everyone but I enjoy both my watch and the music service.

I get how song affinity works and, trust me, iTunes knows enough about my tastes from the 2,000+ songs I've purchased there over the years and listened to on multiple iOS devices than a week with some red bubbles in the Music app.

What I am saying is that the service is good, not great, but the dealbreaker is that its ultimately too expensive and eats too much data. Those tradeoffs dramatically offset the upsides. $180 for the Family Plan and $120 in data overages x4 members is $660 and there's no way we spend that much on iTunes, there simply aren't 600 songs or 60 albums worth buying each year.

I'll take my personally curated iTunes Library and Playlists, thank you, and I'll continue to use iTunes Radio for the occasional backyard BBQ or dinner party. I'll buy my music a-la-carte as I've done since 2002 and that'll be that. It's sad to see Apple try to monetize something of so little value and treat its customers like fools. We're too smart for this. That's what's so disappointing. We're used to overpaying for quality; this is substandard.

BJ

 

[motulist]

Sounds like you really haven't explored AM at all. There are a zillion different ways to discover great new music. My favorite is the 3 playlist sections on the "new" page. Have you looked through those?

 

[Supermallet]

Apple is trying to monetize something with so little value? You mean 30+ million songs? If there were no market for streaming, Apple wouldn't have gotten into it. It's an absolute beast of a project getting all these labels signed. Apple didn't do it just for fun.

Now, you may think the radio aspect doesn't have much value, and I agree with that. If it were $9.99 a month just for radio, I wouldn't even have tried the free trial. But it's $9.99 for all you can listen streaming of a massive amount of music. No, not everything is on there, but that's why they're allowing you to integrate your existing library into it.

If it's not for you, it's not for you. But there's plenty of value in streaming music services. The question is, is the value there specifically for Apple Music? That answer will change depending on who you ask.

 

[Bromeo]

I'd suggest giving it a bit more time. You have three months, after all, and I doubt Apple Music will be standing still. Keep your options open.

I'm a longtime listener of local FM public radio, XM Satellite Radio (Sirius XM now), and have enjoyed paid accounts on Slacker and Pandora. They all have pros and cons, in addition to my own library. I love classical music, jazz, meaningful rock/pop/folk/new age/opera, and much more. I know my own music collection like the back of my hand. Satellite radio (and before, cable DMX, Music Choice) all gave me an opportunity to enjoy commercial-free music of many different moods and genres. Countless albums in my own collection are the result of hearing a track on one of these streaming services.

At one time I had 5 XM radios on multi-year discounted plans (plus aviation XM weather)! I guess I'm lazy. I'd rather tune in, learn something new from a knowledgeable program host, and hear something familiar, or maybe something new... but in any case, I expect quality programming and quality sound. Too bad Sirius XM has gone for quantity over quality and is but a shell of its once great self. I kept it for Symphony Hall and their fantastic hosts. The Loft was great, too. I guess Sirius XM had to do what they had to do to survive, and heck, satellite still works where there is no cell coverage out in the middle of nowhere.

What I find promising about Apple Music is the merging of several facets:
1. Integrating my own collection
2. Ability to play complete classical music performances, not just random tracks from generic compilations
3. High quality sound (256 AAC sounds fantastic to my ears)
4. Offline caching for road trips
5. A live radio station, hopefully to be expanded into additional sub-genres/moods in the future

I used to pay $14/mo for just one XM Radio... less with a discount. Apple Music is offering a potentially more compelling value for less. Time will tell.

 

[kmj2318]

It's sad to see Apple try to monetize something of so little value and treat its customers like fools. We're too smart for this. That's what's so disappointing. We're used to overpaying for quality; this is substandard.

BJ

I don't understand what you mean here. I get how already having built up a library makes Apple Music sort of a waste, but you're assuming everyone else is in your situation. For many others the service is a tremendous value.

 

[Rogifan]

So basically you're not interested in discovering new music or prefer to pay for what you want vs renting it. That's your choice but that doesn't make Apple Music a bad product.

 

[Arran]

So basically you're not interested in discovering new music ...

But are you really discovering it if it's being pushed to you?

 

[johngordon]

I get how song affinity works and, trust me, iTunes knows enough about my tastes from the 2,000+ songs I've purchased there over the years and listened to on multiple iOS devices than a week with some red bubbles in the Music app.

What I am saying is that the service is good, not great, but the dealbreaker is that its ultimately too expensive and eats too much data. Those tradeoffs dramatically offset the upsides. $180 for the Family Plan and $120 in data overages x4 members is $660 and there's no way we spend that much on iTunes, there simply aren't 600 songs or 60 albums worth buying each year.

I'll take my personally curated iTunes Library and Playlists, thank you, and I'll continue to use iTunes Radio for the occasional backyard BBQ or dinner party. I'll buy my music a-la-carte as I've done since 2002 and that'll be that. It's sad to see Apple try to monetize something of so little value and treat its customers like fools. We're too smart for this. That's what's so disappointing. We're used to overpaying for quality; this is substandard.

BJ

I really don't understand this notion that music has little or no value. Its almost depressing to be honest.

If I can buy a new CD for $10, or I can pay $10 a month to listen to practically anything, then the later is an absolute bargain and no brainer.

You don't even have to listen to much music for it to be a good deal - its the equivalent of one new CD a month, which is hardly anything.

Any suggestion that Apple (or any streaming service) is trying to rip people off, or treat people as fools, or monetise something with little or no value is just absurd and could hardly be further from the truth.

By the sounds of it you are happy listening to your existing library of largely older music, and not so interested in hearing much new stuff. Which is fine, but it certainly doesn't make anything you say about Apple Music / Beats 1 remotely true.

 

[johngordon]

But are you really discovering it if it's being pushed to you?

Yes. Its music, not The Lost Kingdom of Atlantis or The Holy Grail.

 

[zhenya]

Too expensive?? LOL.

There is no helping if you really aren't interested in discovering new music. That doesn't mean Apple Music is a bad product, it means you aren't really interested in doing the work required to discover new stuff. As stated, the radio stations aren't going to be good at discovery. This is why Pandora despite being a decent system for years, is actually so terrible at introducing you to new stuff you want to listen to.

 

[mpfuchs]

Apple Watch and Apple Music. Not very impressed in the post-Jobs era.

BJ

People need to get away from the mindset, that everything Apple comes out with is a "must have", no matter if you like it or not, you need to have it.

Once that pressure is off, you just enjoy what you like, and ignore what you don't.

 

[boltjames]

Sounds like you really haven't explored AM at all. There are a zillion different ways to discover great new music. My favorite is the 3 playlist sections on the "new" page. Have you looked through those?

Yes, and they're fun, but I think I can achieve the same exposure to new music via iTunes Radio Stations and SiriusXM.

BJ

 

[boltjames]

Apple is trying to monetize something with so little value? You mean 30+ million songs? If there were no market for streaming, Apple wouldn't have gotten into it. It's an absolute beast of a project getting all these labels signed. Apple didn't do it just for fun.

Now, you may think the radio aspect doesn't have much value, and I agree with that. If it were $9.99 a month just for radio, I wouldn't even have tried the free trial. But it's $9.99 for all you can listen streaming of a massive amount of music. No, not everything is on there, but that's why they're allowing you to integrate your existing library into it.

If it's not for you, it's not for you. But there's plenty of value in streaming music services. The question is, is the value there specifically for Apple Music? That answer will change depending on who you ask.

I should have clarified:

I'm a 47 year old father and have a 20,000 song music collection from ripped CD's and purchased iTunes tracks. I believe that the current state of American and Eurpoean music is awful, it's all teeny girl Ariana Grande and faux hipster folk and where I used to discover a few new Alternative and Rock bands each year a decade ago today it's a vast wasteland.

I can see how a 20 year old with a small music library can discover Van Halen or Oasis and be blown away for a month on the 100s of back catalog songs and look forward to the new Taylor Swift LP. That just doesn't apply to me. Nor my kids, for that matter. I've got them covered.

BJ

 

[boltjames]

I'd suggest giving it a bit more time. You have three months, after all, and I doubt Apple Music will be standing still. Keep your options open.

I'm a longtime listener of local FM public radio, XM Satellite Radio (Sirius XM now), and have enjoyed paid accounts on Slacker and Pandora. They all have pros and cons, in addition to my own library. I love classical music, jazz, meaningful rock/pop/folk/new age/opera, and much more. I know my own music collection like the back of my hand. Satellite radio (and before, cable DMX, Music Choice) all gave me an opportunity to enjoy commercial-free music of many different moods and genres. Countless albums in my own collection are the result of hearing a track on one of these streaming services.

At one time I had 5 XM radios on multi-year discounted plans (plus aviation XM weather)! I guess I'm lazy. I'd rather tune in, learn something new from a knowledgeable program host, and hear something familiar, or maybe something new... but in any case, I expect quality programming and quality sound. Too bad Sirius XM has gone for quantity over quality and is but a shell of its once great self. I kept it for Symphony Hall and their fantastic hosts. The Loft was great, too. I guess Sirius XM had to do what they had to do to survive, and heck, satellite still works where there is no cell coverage out in the middle of nowhere.

I used to pay $14/mo for just one XM Radio... less with a discount. Apple Music is offering a potentially more compelling value for less. Time will tell.

Love this, and you're right that if I could simply replace Sirius XM with Apple Music it would be a worthy tradeoff.

But XM is just too easy, Bluetooth is just too inconvenient, and streaming costs too much money, especially with my kids and their $10 ATT overages here and there.

BJ

 

[boltjames]

I don't understand what you mean here. I get how already having built up a library makes Apple Music sort of a waste, but you're assuming everyone else is in your situation. For many others the service is a tremendous value.

Again, apologies. Should have clarified that mine is a perspective of an early-adopter 1997 music ripper and iTunes purchaser who finds that I already have all the old music I want and finds today's new music lacking.

I can discover new music through free iTunes Radio and XM's Alt Nation or Hits 1 or whatever's trending on YouTube.

BJ

 

[boltjames]

I really don't understand this notion that music has little or no value. Its almost depressing to be honest.

If I can buy a new CD for $10, or I can pay $10 a month to listen to practically anything, then the later is an absolute bargain and no brainer.

You don't even have to listen to much music for it to be a good deal - its the equivalent of one new CD a month, which is hardly anything.

Any suggestion that Apple (or any streaming service) is trying to rip people off, or treat people as fools, or monetise something with little or no value is just absurd and could hardly be further from the truth.

By the sounds of it you are happy listening to your existing library of largely older music, and not so interested in hearing much new stuff. Which is fine, but it certainly doesn't make anything you say about Apple Music / Beats 1 remotely true.

There are use cases where Apple Music would be terrific, it just doesn't apply to me because I have an extensive music Library already (as I suspect most of us do).

If, for example, there was something called Apple Movies that offered every movie ever made for $10 a month I'd be thrilled because I don't have a movie library at all, it would be of great value.

But Apple Music doesn't fill enough holes for me (if I wanted Santana I'd have bought it years ago) and leaves some holes (no Beatles, major Eagles LP's not available). And the big thing here is the data- I listen to music on the commute in the car (2 hours a day) and on the plane (5 hours a month) and LTE is spotty, and after only 5 days of listening (that's about 10 hours total) I got a notice from ATT that I was already at 3 GB and heading towards the 5 GB maximum which is unacceptable.

Streaming is a great service for a teen's bedroom, a backyard party, a dorm, anywhere that there's Wi-Fi. But on the go it's just something else to pay for and worry about. I have 5 family members on AT&T dataplans and we run overages to our 3 GB plans now, can't imagine how it would add up with Apple Music being relied on instead of a resident library.

BJ

 

[motulist]

I should have clarified:

I'm a 47 year old father and have a 20,000 song music collection from ripped CD's and purchased iTunes tracks. I believe that the current state of American and Eurpoean music is awful, it's all teeny girl Ariana Grande and faux hipster folk and where I used to discover a few new Alternative and Rock bands each year a decade ago today it's a vast wasteland.

BJ

Again, if you think that there aren't any new alternative or rock bands there then it's pretty clear that you haven't really explored the music that's presented there at all.

And in fact it's pretty clear that you haven't really done any effective looking for music at all in the past decade if you haven't come across any good new alternative or rock bands in the past decade. Maybe you just aren't using the right adjectives names for the styles of music that you like when you search for new music?

 

[boltjames]

Too expensive?? LOL.

There is no helping if you really aren't interested in discovering new music. That doesn't mean Apple Music is a bad product, it means you aren't really interested in doing the work required to discover new stuff. As stated, the radio stations aren't going to be good at discovery. This is why Pandora despite being a decent system for years, is actually so terrible at introducing you to new stuff you want to listen to.

Two things:

1. It's too expensive if you're a father with 5 family members and data overages from AM's high quality streams. I'm looking at $660 a year which to me is ridiculous.

2. The onus is on the record companies to get their new bands out there and broken, not on the audience. They should pay us to steam new artists material if this is the new-norm. And, of course, we know it's not. Plenty of ways to get exposed to new bands on social media.

Think of it this way: If there were no attempt by computer companies to destroy free FM radio and replace it with paid Streaming radio would you be worse off? Turn the hands back to 2005 and you hear a song you like on the radio or on the internet, you buy it for $0.99. Have a good month of discovery? 20 songs, $20. Have a bad few months? $0. Apple Music and other streaming services have you paying for bad music in bad months and take away the ability to own the good ones permanently. Sounds like Cable TV. Sounds like HBO. Sounds like AMC which is a paid premium channel with commercials. No thanks.

BJ

 

[boltjames]

Again, if you think that there aren't any new alternative or rock bands there then it's pretty clear that you haven't really explored the music that's presented there at all.

And in fact it's pretty clear that you haven't really done any effective looking for music at all in the past decade if you haven't come across any good new alternative or rock bands in the past decade. Maybe you just aren't using the right adjectives names for the styles of music that you like when you search for new music?

Here, help me:

The bands I discovered back in the day that blew me away when I first heard them and made me a lifelong fan over, say, the last 20 years are:

Oasis, Radiohead, Foo Fighters, Coldplay, Death Cab, Spoon, Interpol

Not sure how they got on my radar, but the year that they did I was hooked. Some got better with age, some got awful, but those first years were awesome. Tell me the one band I missed out on that would have been equally mind-blowing that launched in the last year or two.

BJ

 

[motulist]

Here, help me:

The bands I discovered back in the day that blew me away when I first heard them and made me a lifelong fan over, say, the last 20 years are:

Oasis, Radiohead, Foo Fighters, Coldplay, Death Cab, Spoon, Interpol

Not sure how they got on my radar, but the year that they did I was hooked. Some got better with age, some got awful, but those first years were awesome. Tell me the one band I missed out on that would have been equally mind-blowing that launched in the last year or two.

BJ

Go to the page of any album or song you like, then look at the "you may also like" section.

EDIT: as for me, my current new favorite is Radio Moscow, but they're a little different than the styles of bands you listed.

 

[Arran]

...Sounds like Cable TV...

I've been thinking the very same thing myself. This is simply Apple's long-term play to lock people into renting music and paying monthly fees until they die.

My other concern is that it takes away the ability for consumers to vote with their wallet. If I like a band, I buy the CD and they get rewarded. If I don't like their sound, I keep my money and they go look for other careers. Natural selection at work.

Under the bundled, rented, all-you-can-eat model, there's less incentive for quality. Just like cable TV: Bundled crap (with the odd nugget in there if you can find it)

 

[turbineseaplane]

I've already found that I'm in a similar boat as the OP.

For me and my desires, the free radio offerings will work wonderfully for discovering new music. I just personally have no need for a monthly bill for music streaming. Not a knock on Apple Music so much as I'm probably just not in the demographic the service targets.

 

[turbineseaplane]

This is simply Apple's long-term play to lock people into renting music and paying monthly fees until they die.

This is exceptionally true and *not* what I want.

So much of the excitement is "all the music in the world - add it to your library - play it anywhere and anytime (with data usage that is...or download it, more data)...

....but if you EVER stop paying the monthly fee?

It's all gone.

Not for me at all.