August 17, 2004

iTunes spells disaster

"Disaster" may be too strong a term here, but iTunes, the Apple Music Store, and the conversion of music from the album format to the digital one all point towards change for the music industry, and not necessarily change for the better.

Metamanda discusses her objections on her blog (metamanda>>weblog: itunes and crappy metadata), siting the simplification of the "artists" producing music as the main threat. The idea here is fairly straightforward when it comes to jazz or classical music. iTunes simplifies a song to "artist," "title," "album," and sometimes "composer." Even the category of "genre" yields some very sticky situations, but that's another entry entirely. She references an article off harlem.org (Jazz in 2500? iTunes versus Preservation), which laments that iTunes' metadata format puts too much emphasis on the headliner artist and often reduces an accompanying band to the notes, or less.

Meta goes on to relate this issue to classical music, where the composer is emphasized over the artist, yet he or she is relegated to the "composer" tag, which doesn't allow for easy comparison/browsing in iTunes.

The only other place to take this discussion is to "popular" music in general. I use pop music in the most generic of terms here and I have no wish to restart this discussion. I'm just going to post my reply to meta's post here:

This is actually a problem for "pop music" as well. In the era of the CD, when people actually went to a "store" and bought their music, not only did you get your compact disc, but you got a little booklet along with the compact disc. It had all kinds of great information, like who produced the songs, who wrote the songs, who was playing what instrument. If there was a guest guitarist or vocalist, they're mentioned. In iTunes, those people are reduced to either a tag in the title (so-and-so w/ so-and-so), they're stuck in the notes (this is rare), or they're left off all together.

I guess it stems from the simplification that is required of organization to such a broad degree. How else is ONE program going to deal with all types of music? It's the serious downside of technology. It's why I hate it when I have to design a "smart" form for people to fill out online. It's turning us into lemmings, I tell you! It's destroying our individuality!

Well, that's taking it a step too far, but you get the idea.

Posted by kenji at August 17, 2004 02:45 PM

Justin at August 17, 2004 04:44 PM

I am only responding to this:
"not only did you get your compact disc, but you got a little booklet along with the compact disc. It had all kinds of great information, like who produced the songs, who wrote the songs, who was playing what instrument. If there was a guest guitarist or vocalist, they're mentioned. "

The people who paid attention to that information on CD booklets are the same people who look that information up on the internet. iTunes doesn't really need to be responsible for that sort of information, just enough for you to find and locate the songs you want to buy and hear. Its a jukebox. Information like that is easy to discover for the interested without gumming up a program whose simplicity is one of its selling points.

An easy adaptation: online music stores could make PDF copies of liner notes available with downloads... easy.

end

kenji at August 18, 2004 08:49 AM

Good point. You can already download album covers, liner notes would also be a good idea. They couldn't possibly be that large, file-wise.

end