Macnoviz
Jul 20, 04:23 PM
Sort of proves the point i was trying to make, at some point mose users wil rather get a beter IO subsystem than more processing power.
Actually, that was my point, but now that you mention it, reversed hyperthreading would solve some problems.
In the long run (really long run, I'm talking quantumcomputers here) however, you are right, and innovation in computing will mostly come from software and how you tell the computer what to do. The nec-plus-ultra would be thinking of a result and getting it (or saying it to your computer) like a photoshop user going, well I would like the sun being more dominant in that picture, the power lines removed, and make those persons look younger. Boom. It happens.
Actually, that was my point, but now that you mention it, reversed hyperthreading would solve some problems.
In the long run (really long run, I'm talking quantumcomputers here) however, you are right, and innovation in computing will mostly come from software and how you tell the computer what to do. The nec-plus-ultra would be thinking of a result and getting it (or saying it to your computer) like a photoshop user going, well I would like the sun being more dominant in that picture, the power lines removed, and make those persons look younger. Boom. It happens.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 01:02 AM
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
Obama is far from perfect. But all of the known GOP contenders (Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc etc) are completely unacceptable.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground
At this stage I doubt we have any boots on the ground. Communication with the opposition leadership is still patchy but they have made it clear they do not want foreign soldiers in-country. It will be best if the situation can be resolved without further foreign military intervention.
Obama is far from perfect. But all of the known GOP contenders (Huckabee, Palin, Bachmann, Romney, Paul etc etc) are completely unacceptable.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground
At this stage I doubt we have any boots on the ground. Communication with the opposition leadership is still patchy but they have made it clear they do not want foreign soldiers in-country. It will be best if the situation can be resolved without further foreign military intervention.
cmaier
Apr 20, 11:58 AM
According to the analysis, it is in the suit, as part of the trade dress claims.
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
aswitcher
Aug 27, 05:17 AM
What would be competitive:
SNIP
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
I agree, it would be really good if Apple did what they did with the Mac Pro, and made sure the next updates used the best appropriate tech available.
Alternatively, they should release a grunty half sized Mac Pro for those who need more power and customisation, but dont need a full on work station.
SNIP
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
I agree, it would be really good if Apple did what they did with the Mac Pro, and made sure the next updates used the best appropriate tech available.
Alternatively, they should release a grunty half sized Mac Pro for those who need more power and customisation, but dont need a full on work station.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 11, 07:51 AM
I'm sure the idiot fanboys will buy it no matter what, but people like myself (who actually make a living and want reliable, efficient software) are ready to leave.
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
Then that just begs the question, "why haven't these people left already?" FCP has been fairly stagnant for years. There are plenty of other alternatives, so doesn't that kinda make them fanboyish too for sticking it out when up to this point Apple has given zero hints about when or how it will take FCP to the next level?
I'm not in the video editing biz, but if the pro s/w I use in my profession hobbled my efficiency and workflow the way you are carping about FCP, and there were viable alternatives, I would abandon it quicker than pigeon can snatch a bread crumb. Just sayin'.
11thIndian
Apr 11, 11:24 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Motion has a funny reputation. I find it quite powerful and very intuitive now that I've been using it almost exclusively for over a year. I know a lot of AE users find it very hard to make the mental leap to the different methodology, and I totally understand that as it took me several months of regular work to really adjust my headspace to the new way of thinking.
How the different parts of the Studio might be merged or changed is one of the more interesting questions for me. You could overload FCP if you tried to cram all the other apps together, but there's no question there's room for tighter integration.
It would be very surprising to see the different programs sold separately thought the appStore. The programs themselves aren't too massive [and may have been streamlined more] but the extra content for loops would make it a HEAFTY download for anyone!
This evening can't come soon enough, glad to have all the speculation over with and concentrate on what it actually is [and isn't].
If anyone comes up with a good liveblog or ustream of the presentation, remember to post it here. So far, the best coverage I can find it twitter feeds for people like Larry Jordan or Philip Hodgetts who will be in attendance.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
Motion has a funny reputation. I find it quite powerful and very intuitive now that I've been using it almost exclusively for over a year. I know a lot of AE users find it very hard to make the mental leap to the different methodology, and I totally understand that as it took me several months of regular work to really adjust my headspace to the new way of thinking.
How the different parts of the Studio might be merged or changed is one of the more interesting questions for me. You could overload FCP if you tried to cram all the other apps together, but there's no question there's room for tighter integration.
It would be very surprising to see the different programs sold separately thought the appStore. The programs themselves aren't too massive [and may have been streamlined more] but the extra content for loops would make it a HEAFTY download for anyone!
This evening can't come soon enough, glad to have all the speculation over with and concentrate on what it actually is [and isn't].
If anyone comes up with a good liveblog or ustream of the presentation, remember to post it here. So far, the best coverage I can find it twitter feeds for people like Larry Jordan or Philip Hodgetts who will be in attendance.
simontarr
Sep 15, 07:46 AM
I think all this quad and oct core stuff is fantastic (it would be even more fantastic if I have the money to get such gear...)
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
But at the moment it's the HDD that slows everything down. Your RAM may be able to send 4GB/s of data to the processor to deal with, but the HD can't write the said executed data at even a 10th of the speed.
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
outlawarth
Apr 11, 01:23 PM
Analysts can just shove it. Complete BS all over the place. So.. according to them, we're going to have OSX Lion, iOS5, iPhone5, new iPods AND iPad 3... ALL IN THE FALL?! Complete bull. Oh, and throw in macbook pro updates for the later part of the fall, as usual. Just think about that for a second.
Now, let me remember, when was the last time they were wrong.. oh wait, that's right, iPad 2. Last I remember, it was, you won't see it till May/June at the earliest. WRONG. And after analysts vs. bloggers report, it seems bloggers are more right than analysts.
Anyways, after the 1st paragraph I wrote, I have no doubt in my mind that this is impossible. Last time Apple tried something like this, if I recall, it was Mobile Me, iPhone 3G + iOS2. It was a mess. Jobs himself said it was a mistake (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10006873-93.html) they'll never make again. So, when thinking about everything that is rumored by analysts to be coming out this fall, yeah, don't think so.:rolleyes:
Edit 2: ipad 2 entered production 1 month b4 apple announcing, so no freak'n 3 months as I've heard around rumor sites.
+1... Thank you.
Now, let me remember, when was the last time they were wrong.. oh wait, that's right, iPad 2. Last I remember, it was, you won't see it till May/June at the earliest. WRONG. And after analysts vs. bloggers report, it seems bloggers are more right than analysts.
Anyways, after the 1st paragraph I wrote, I have no doubt in my mind that this is impossible. Last time Apple tried something like this, if I recall, it was Mobile Me, iPhone 3G + iOS2. It was a mess. Jobs himself said it was a mistake (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10006873-93.html) they'll never make again. So, when thinking about everything that is rumored by analysts to be coming out this fall, yeah, don't think so.:rolleyes:
Edit 2: ipad 2 entered production 1 month b4 apple announcing, so no freak'n 3 months as I've heard around rumor sites.
+1... Thank you.
NAG
Mar 31, 03:24 PM
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
If early access to the code is so unimportant then why the big fuss over cutting corners with Honeycomb to get it on the Xoom? Why not delay the Xoom or put Gingerbread on it and update it later?
Pretending that getting a jump on the market by weeks isn't enough to make or break you in the Android market isn't going to work. Having early access only doesn't matter if the features in the update are irrelevant (which they are for the feature phone makers who pretty much ignore any software updates anyway) or they're the life blood of the device (usually the flagship device of the month).
If early access to the code is so unimportant then why the big fuss over cutting corners with Honeycomb to get it on the Xoom? Why not delay the Xoom or put Gingerbread on it and update it later?
Pretending that getting a jump on the market by weeks isn't enough to make or break you in the Android market isn't going to work. Having early access only doesn't matter if the features in the update are irrelevant (which they are for the feature phone makers who pretty much ignore any software updates anyway) or they're the life blood of the device (usually the flagship device of the month).
TripHop
Jun 18, 06:30 AM
He said they gave up and that corporate is just going to send out whatever allocation next week not based on any PIN numbers since most stores give-up trying to get them. :rolleyes:
Astro7x
Apr 6, 11:34 AM
This is Bowl *****!!! Come on man....I see these claims with absolutely NO, ZERO proof to back it up...Links? Pics? Video???? IF anything, MORE people have joined the FCP camp...because more people than EVER are buying Macs! Even though Adobe and Avid are cross platform, the affordability of FCP is a real bonus. Everyone I know that uses FCP and has been using FCP has ZERO interest in flipping. Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases! Today's speed of the new Macs....MBP, iMacs, Mac Pros...makes the transition from AVC, XDCam, DVCPro, etc to Pro-Res, is actually a very speedy process. Even Canon stepped up last spring with a plug in to increase transition speed almost a 1,000% (used to take a minute or two to transform...now done in 10 seconds or less!!!). Once in Pro Res, editing is an absolute breeze...a cake walk, easy as pie:) Especially if you have a recent generation Mac from the last couple of years.
Seconding this. And also would like to add... What businesses out there can just switch operating systems on a whim because they latest and greatest came out for another platform? Sure if you are Joe Schmo freelancing out of your house you can do it, but any actual business with existing equipment doesn't just switch like that. I just can't picture anybody going "Damn Apple won't support the Mercury Engine, I'M SWITCHING BACK TO WINDOWS!!!"
Seconding this. And also would like to add... What businesses out there can just switch operating systems on a whim because they latest and greatest came out for another platform? Sure if you are Joe Schmo freelancing out of your house you can do it, but any actual business with existing equipment doesn't just switch like that. I just can't picture anybody going "Damn Apple won't support the Mercury Engine, I'M SWITCHING BACK TO WINDOWS!!!"
CaptMurdock
Mar 18, 12:21 AM
I expect better from both of you.
Boy, are you in for a disappointment. :rolleyes:
Boy, are you in for a disappointment. :rolleyes:
dextertangocci
Jul 27, 10:21 AM
Can I swop the Merom with the Yonah in my MB?
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:20 PM
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
JackSYi
Aug 17, 01:18 AM
CompUSA just got the Mac Pros in and we downloaded Quake 4 and ran it at the highest settings on the 30" ACD. Runs beautifully.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:20 AM
I'm getting tired of Apple Mac's being INTEL's BIATCH!
Integrated graphics on a laptop costing THAT MUCH? PLEASE!
Steve Jobs should threaten to switch to AMD/ATI solutions even if just for leverage with Intel to get discreet graphics chips in these machines.
If this is true, this is a pathetic technology compromise in my opinion.
I would say the decision not to use discrete graphics is apples in order to save room inside the machine and make it small. If you want discrete graphics you can buy a macbook pro...? You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false. You are paying for the small, lightweight, portable laptop with the air, obviously not what's inside of it, save for maybe the SSD.
Integrated graphics on a laptop costing THAT MUCH? PLEASE!
Steve Jobs should threaten to switch to AMD/ATI solutions even if just for leverage with Intel to get discreet graphics chips in these machines.
If this is true, this is a pathetic technology compromise in my opinion.
I would say the decision not to use discrete graphics is apples in order to save room inside the machine and make it small. If you want discrete graphics you can buy a macbook pro...? You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false. You are paying for the small, lightweight, portable laptop with the air, obviously not what's inside of it, save for maybe the SSD.
Tones2
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
You failed to read the blog. Wanna try again?
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
What, that ONE GUY thinks Apple has a solid case? Yeah, I got that part. :rolleyes:
The point being that almost EVERY smart phone even before the iPhone has a black, rectangular shape with square application icons on the Home Screen and a button or three at the bottom. Some closer than others to the iPhone and to EACH OTHER. Jeez...
wizard
Apr 10, 04:29 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
Couldn't agree more, disgraceful to be honest. This part of Apple I cannot abide.
Are you sure you understand what is happening here? Apple is presenting at the FCP Users Group Supermeet, no one is getting booted from the NAB show!
Now step back for a minute and THINK what are the members of this group interested in? Come on you can spit it out. If the users group management didn't respond to Apples request they would like have a rank and file revolt on their hands. Why be cause it is the FCP users group. At times people can be very dense.
Interesting news, but the bit about booting competitors is downright disgusting.
Couldn't agree more, disgraceful to be honest. This part of Apple I cannot abide.
Are you sure you understand what is happening here? Apple is presenting at the FCP Users Group Supermeet, no one is getting booted from the NAB show!
Now step back for a minute and THINK what are the members of this group interested in? Come on you can spit it out. If the users group management didn't respond to Apples request they would like have a rank and file revolt on their hands. Why be cause it is the FCP users group. At times people can be very dense.
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 11:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
shelterpaw
Jul 20, 11:02 AM
All these rumors are making it so hard to decide when to get a new computer... my desktop and laptop are both about five years old. Though I don't have an urgent need to get a new ones, something new would surely be nice and useful. You essentially answered your own question. Get it when you need it, if you don't need it, then don't bother. If you're upgrading your apps in the next year or so, then it may make sense, but if you're not, then stay where you are. New is always nice until 6 months later when it's not so new and something nicer comes along.
Personally, I wouldn't hold out for some super ultra machine becuase the super ultramachine x2 will be around the corner. . If it fits my needs, then it's the choice I'll make.
Personally, I wouldn't hold out for some super ultra machine becuase the super ultramachine x2 will be around the corner. . If it fits my needs, then it's the choice I'll make.
THX1139
Aug 21, 02:09 AM
I stopped by the Apple store tonight to play with a Macpro. I'm getting ready to buy and thought I'd get some hands on experience to see how it performed with Finalcut Pro. I was especially interested in how it handles playback of uncompressed footage.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
The store had a 2.6 hooked up to a 30"ACD. Everything on the machine was stock. I launched FCP and it appeared with a project already loaded (about 5 seconds). The project was a simple 20-30 second 720x480 NTSC clip of hockey game footage. I selected the clip and copied it to a new layer and threw a blend mode on it AND changed the speed to 85%. Next I copied and made another layer and changed the speed and offset it and changed the transparency to 80%. 3 layers total with the top two manipulated. I hit the render and it finished in about 30 seconds. :)
I know, not very scientific, but I just wanted to get a feel for how fast the Macpro would render manipulated footage. Anyhow, next I changed the output in project settings to "uncompressed" and hit render again. Again, it took less than a minute to render and the CPU usage in console was maxing out at only 42% per core.
Once the render completed, I hit the play button to see how the stock Macpro would handle playback of the uncompressed footage. It played for about 4 seconds then threw an error saying that frames were being dropped during playback. Not good. I was hoping that the Macpro would be able to play uncompressed footage from the timeline without 3rd party acceleration or setting up a raid. The error message suggested turning off RT effects (of which I did, but still had dropped frames) or get a faster drive. There was a couple other things the error suggested, but I can't remember at the moment. I wonder if having the ATI card would have made a difference? Not sure if FCP uses the GPU for playback, but I would think that should make a difference. Ram would probably help too. Anyone know what might be going on? Am I expecting too much out of this machine?
Sorry for sort of getting off topic. I thought this might be an appropriate area to post this; I wasn't feeling up to starting a new thread.
AndrewR23
Apr 11, 11:23 AM
I hope not. I want the 5 now :)
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
whooleytoo
Apr 27, 09:08 AM
Does anyone have any photoshop skills? If so, do you want to do up some mock 'iPhone location maps'?
E.g. Charlie Sheen's, F1 driver's (lots of little circles around the world), Bin Laden's/Gadaffi's (hiding under a rock somewhere) etc.. etc..
:p
E.g. Charlie Sheen's, F1 driver's (lots of little circles around the world), Bin Laden's/Gadaffi's (hiding under a rock somewhere) etc.. etc..
:p
