Nate SwannerFormer Reporter, TNW
TNW's former West Coast writer in the PNW (Portland, Oregon). Nate loves amplifying developers, and codes in Swift when he's not writing. If TNW's former West Coast writer in the PNW (Portland, Oregon). Nate loves amplifying developers, and codes in Swift when he's not writing. If you need to get in touch, Twitter is your best bet.
At a recent BBC event, Zane Lowe questioned whether or not Apple Music really needs Beats 1.
I’m here to tell you it does. Unequivocally.
Asked by his former boss at the BBC is Apple Music needed Beats1, Lowe had the following to say:
“I’m not sure it does. We’re working this out, time will tell. We’ve been going three months, I don’t have the answers. I hope that there’s a place for it. This is in progress, and over time we’ll find out exactly why [it’s needed].”
Zane Lowe is crazy if he doesn’t think Beats 1 is necessary to Apple Music. The overarching aim of Beats 1 is to curate cool new music, whether it be new talent or fresh music from established artists.
There’s nobody better at that than Lowe, and other hosts on Beats1 are also fantastic at curating new or unheralded music.
It’s that curation that drives Apple Music. Rather than rely on algorithms to feed you new tracks, Apple Music has a team of humans (real people!) curating playlists for listeners.
I’m undeniably positive about Beats 1 anyway, and I respect that Lowe doesn’t seem to get its place in the larger ecosystem of Apple Music — but I’d argue Beats 1 is the soul of Apple Music.
Beats 1 offers a direct link to Apple Music, too. If I find a track I like, I can add it to My Music. I’ve done that more often listening to Beats 1 than when I find a track via Apple Music.
Lowe might not be sure of Beats 1 place in Apple Music, but I am. Beats 1 is not only wanted, it’s critical.
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.