Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Music Classical

learn.applemusic.apple

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 473 posts

Re: Apple Music Classical

#251

Post by pwinnski »

n0tahacker wrote: post #227
mbo wrote: post #173

> There’s no separate subscription for Apple Music Classical. It’s included at no extra cost with all Apple Music subscriptions except the Apple Music Voice Plan. Bit of a missed opportunity here to provide a cheaper subscription just for Classical. Apple could have captured Spotify users who would be willing to pay a small premium for a nicer classical UX, but would be unwilling to take out an additional full-priced…

I am a student with not a lot of money and I really love classical music. I don't have to pay for Spotify due to Spotify family. Also, I really don't like the cliché that classical music is mostly for the well-earning élite. Classical music is just great music. Totally agree with you. Like the idea of a seperate app; when I am streaming my favorite music on Spotify, it's sometimes weird to listen to some piece of con…

If your family had Apple Music Family rather than Spotify Family, you would have this option for free.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#252

Post by vjulian »

leviathant wrote: post #168
lwhi wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a band camp for classical music is required?

My wife composes choral music and "new music". (what many here would consider classical) and has been using Bandcamp since 2009 with pretty good success. But even that gets tricky, as she is not the performer for any of the recordings. It's a strange world though, when so many people focus on centuries-old music by dead German men, that's going to be harder to market. My first glance at Apple Classical a few weeks ag…

Is Bandcamp oriented towards performers?

I think I see what you mean in relation to what audiences Apple is presumably trying to cater to, though I have no market knowledge as to how “classical“ music audiences truly segment. Apple Classical becomes similar to Apple Music a way to (re-) discover both old catalog and new releases. Listening to Toscanini this morning, the performance and music sounds as fresh in 2022 as it always did.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#253

Post by vjulian »

Have TV and cinema solved the cataloging issue or at least the categorization issue? If so, why can’t music adapt it and serve all genres? We can easily analogize to studios, seasons, episodes, years, directors, actors and so forth.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#254

Post by jdgoesmarching »

Y-bar wrote: post #150
russelldjimmy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a different thread on HN about the same topic, some commenters mentioned that the information architecture and navigation required for classical music is different enough from other music to warrant its own app. I would be surprised if Apple made a decision to cut corners on work and ship a product faster (because from their other products, they seem to be a company that believes in taking their time and delayin…

I have a lot of rap music which has the same problems today and would be solved by the metadata management in the Classical Music app. I dearly hope Apple will bring back some of the management from that app into the regular app, or allow non-classical music into the new app.

I have a strong feeling that they acquired Primephonic to eventually replace the primary Apple Music architecture. To your point, there’s a lot of cool functionality you can create with different performances of songs in all genres that could be a huge competitive advantage, but Apple Music currently struggles with simple metadata management.

No shade to the classical music enjoyers, I am one of them, but that is nowhere near a large enough market for the largest company in the world to acquire a niche app for the sole purpose of catering to them. It only makes sense to me if they’re after a tech stack that can be folded into their main service, and Apple almost always companies for their tech rather than their product (including Beats for Beats Music).

Rolling it out as a classical music app first is a pretty clever way to test new features and architecture at limited scale. I would 100% look to that app to see the potential future of Apple Music.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#255

Post by pwinnski »

masklinn wrote: post #31
augustl wrote: post #10

Maybe we'll finally get a music app where classical music isn't categorized by Album/Artist :) Classical doesn't really fit that well into a schema, since you have composers, performers, and then under performers there's soloist, or multiple soloists, which orchestra, which conductor, and so on. And it would also be nice to have things like "show most popular recordings of Beethoven's 5th".

> Classical doesn't really fit that well into a schema, since you have composers, performers, and then under performers there's soloist, or multiple soloists, which orchestra, which conductor, and so on. That sounds like a schema to me. Hell, even popular music can have such complexities, it’s just that they’re usually ignored e.g. if you want to correctly tag a cover featuring a rapper, that’s basically a performer…

I mentioned some of these numbers in another comment already, but for example: Search for "Don Giovanni" in the new app, and there are 1,182 "Works" that match. That's a lot of covers! The "Editor's Choice" is 79 tracks, while the five popular works listed under that one are 63, 64, 70, 38, and 59 tracks, all for the same composition.

It is true that there are complexities in pop music, especially in the modern age of "featuring" artists, but:

1. There are complexities and complexities, and classical music involves the latter.

2. If anything, much pop music seems designed to hide things like composers and session musicians as often as not. The fear seems to be that if people realized how few pop artists write their own music, they'd think less of them. I'm not sure I agree, but the point is that improved metadata is not what everybody involved in pop is looking for. Since the metadata would need be supplied by the labels, I don't think the uptake would be as high as one might hope.

The best example of non-classical music that might rise to a similar level of complexity and care is touring bands like Phish or the Grateful Dead, if all of their live recordings were available officially.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#256

Post by pwinnski »

treerunner wrote: post #102
dewey wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's crazy Apple considered it better to write a completely new app rather than improve their existing product. That's why they didn't, they bought a service and rebranded it. https://www.apple.com/hk/en/newsroom/2021/08/apple-acquires-...

That’s even more crazy. Patching one app into another for improved UX and categorization is bonkers. Also, my kid wanted to use Apple Music classical first thing this morning (he’s a big classical music nut), you literally have to be logged in to regular Apple Music before Classical will allow you to play anything. Weird.

You have to be logged into Apple Music before you can play Apple Music, regardless of whether you're using the Music app, the Classical app, or the web app. I'm not sure what's weird about that?

Oh, are you saying you can't log in using the Classical app, but have to use the other one? That would be weird.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#257

Post by perceptronas »

>Which devices is Apple Music Classical available on?

>Apple Music Classical was built exclusively for mobile and is available on iOS with Android coming soon.

I wish they made an app specifically for MacBook as well

Re: Apple Music Classical

#258

Post by pwinnski »

eDameXxX wrote: post #9

Actually, I think it's a good thing they've built a separate app for that. We used to think that one app that rules all of them is a good idea. Not always. Classical music has a lot of nuances (some of which are listed on the announcement page) and from UI/UX perspective it would be quite difficult to mixed all these details in the standard Apple Music app. I'm now wondering what Spotify thinks about this matter. Do…

Spotify has been busy shoehorning their "podcasts" (on-demand audio shows) into every nook and cranny of the app people use to listen to music. If they notice or think of classical music, one can only imagine how they'll try to "highlight" it.

Re: Apple Music Classical

#259

Post by MavisBacon »

UncleMeat wrote: post #205
MavisBacon wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally would love to see some AI model imitate Thelonious Monk compositions and solos. The result would probably be hysterical

You probably will be able to get imitation in the not too distant future. But a world where we just listen to imitations of 50s and 60s derivatives of bebop is a sad one. The most loved musicians are ones who are pushing things forward and don't just imitate Trane endlessly or whatever. AI would need to be able to do something like create The Bad Plus in 1995. That's an even bigger mountain to climb.

What about imitating Coltrane’s Classic Quartet? That would be INSANE

Re: Apple Music Classical

#260

Post by pwinnski »

imwithstoopid wrote: post #206
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #25

This looks ok, but I can't be the only person suffering Content Fatigue. Between access to infinite music, infinite movies and TV, infinite gaming, and infinite news - and that's just leisure - I'm not sure how much time I have left for a finite life.

well good news...you can actually listen to pretty much "all" of symphonic music! yeah there is new stuff, but when we speak of "classical music", we're really talking about long-dead people Dvorak isn't going to be composing any new works, you can actually listen to everything Dvorak ever created and then you're "done"

There are 1,182 recordings of Mozart's "Don Giovanni" alone, each running close to three hours. If you listen for 16 hours every day, you can cover this one in under a year, on to work number two! :D
Post reply on HN