Garth Brooks music goes digital, but not on iTunes

For a long time, Brooks has declined to put his music online, as he insisted albums be released in their entirety. It’s not clear if that’s how he’ll release his music moving forward, but all digital sales will be handled through his official website, not iTunes. There will be a window when his entire collection will be released at a “stupid” price.

Come on Garth, put it on iTunes and be done with this stupid shit.



  • DougFisher

    Why isn’t Star Wars on iTunes yet?

    • lucascott

      Which version. The proper original one or the “WTF?” remakes

    • imthedude

      Cause they’d rather people download pirate copies, of course.

  • lucascott

    The beauty of copyright is that the artist has the legal right to distribute their creation however they like. Even if it seems insane. Heck JK Rowling did basically the same thing.

    And I never took you as a Garth Brooks fan. I would have thought more ZZ Top. Ya know, cause of the beard

    • imthedude

      I think Jim’s commenting on him killing his own sales by insisting people buy his complete album. I’m sure each album weaves a story ala The Wall, and that’s why we need the complete album, not because he only has a few good songs that would sell separately.

      • lucascott

        Garth Brooks has a good song.

        oh yeah wasn’t there that achy breaky heart song. that was pretty decent. The roller rink liked to play it a lot

      • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

        Haha. I assume you’re being sarcastic, in which case you’re right: Garth’s albums are pretty terrible. There’s definitely some good songs in there, but the album as a whole is not an “experience.”

        I’m not saying he’s bad, but he’s not fit to carry George Strait’s or even Keith Whitley’s boots. And Keith Whitley didn’t live long enough to put out much.

        (Yes, I used to love country music. Mostly over it now.)

  • imthedude

    I bought the new Garth Brooks tape today!

  • exapple

    Who’s Garth Brooks?

  • Sigivald

    Why would anyone want to buy someone’s music only from “their own site”, rather than at least a dedicated storefront (be it iTunes, Amazon, or Bandcamp)?

    His decision is baffling, not because “not iTunes”, but “all on his site, nowhere else”.

  • GG

    There are albums on iTunes that don’t allow per-track purchasing. The “NOW That’s What I Call Music” compilations spring to mind. If you’re on a major or large indie, you simply request it. So that’s not the reason unless Garth is out of touch, which is probably more likely.

    • lucascott

      true. But the point of those ‘albums’ is that they are a compilation If you just want to buy a song or two you can almost always find them on the original album

      • GG

        When Apple makes an option available to labels, it’s always available. They stay out of the reasoning. And Garth is almost certainly still affiliated with a large label—but maybe not?

        • lucascott

          Actually he’s likely not with a label. They like to make every penny they can and would never sign off on restricting sales.

          Or if he is, they were stupid and never got digital rights under their control

  • Dave Aiello

    I wonder who advises Garth Brooks and what they told him in order for his digital music to be offered in this manner?

    Is it possible that he has never bought anyone else’s music for his own listening pleasure, or that he is completely insulated from the typical digital experience of regular folks like us?

  • Merckel

    Garth Brooks…yawn

  • James Hughes

    Take that Apple!

    “Singer/songwriter Garth Brooks will release his first album of all-new material in more than a decade under a new agreement with Sony Music, it was announced today by Brooks and Sony Music Entertainment CEO Doug Morris at a press conference in Nashville.”

    Apple, once again is doomed. Sony has a country singer all signed up for that there digital music. Uh oh.