Yellow Tools Announcements [Archive]

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by Joanne Babunovic:
Bruce and others,

I know we\'ve talked to this in other threads, but can somebody again explain to me what we mean by open formats? If Yellow Tools only runs on its own proprietary engine, but the engine is bundled with the tools, why do we care that it does not run on NI, Giga etc.? Becuase this has happened before, Joanne. The engine in this case is not bundled with \"tools.\" It\'s a crippled sample player, not a sampler.

There are forces at work which would like to crush full-featured samplers right out of the marketplace. DO NOT SUPPORT THEM if you want to see full-featured tools and innovation win the day. Support only real samplers and real libraries that run on real samplers, and you will keep these wolves at bay. Otherwise, in five years, you won\'t be able to buy a real sampler unless you\'re an NDA developer for one of the \"engine makers.\"

Real samplers have the following archtectural features:

1) Full and unfettered waveform import/export/editing access.
2) Full and unfettered ability to combine ANY content in ANY way the end user sees fit.
3) NO features which are closed off to the end user (i.e., only available via NDA).

If you are buying products that do not fit this description, you are contributing to the demise of sampling. DO NOT SUPPORT PRODUCTS WHICH FAIL TO MEET THESE CRITERIA.

Jan

12-28-2003, 09:23 AM

…also, if you own YT products such as Culture, I think it is good to let your voice be heard, so that the YT developers are aware of the consequences of their decision; if I am not mistaken they also have their own forum at their site.

Joanne Babunovic

12-28-2003, 09:28 AM

Real samplers have the following archtectural features:

1) Full and unfettered waveform import/export/editing access.
2) Full and unfettered ability to combine ANY content in ANY way the end user sees fit.
3) NO features which are closed off to the end user (i.e., only available via NDA).

Appreciate the explanation Bruce. so we are saying that if a developer ports their library to Kontakt, Giga, EXS etc., there is no way they could stop access to functions 1-3 above.

Best judgement says I should stop drilling at this, but,I understand the need to edit the waveform, or the ability to adjust Release, Decay, Attack, Velocity etc. What I don\'t follow however is why import/export is so important, or any other capability beyond basic editing.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by Joanne Babunovic:
--snip--so we are saying that if a developer ports their library to Kontakt, Giga, EXS etc., there is no way they could stop access to functions 1-3 above. With EXS no. With Giga, no. With Kontakt, yes. NI caved to the demands of certain distributors, and they\'ve locked end users out of waveform editing. The monolithic \"Kompakt\" libraries cannot be waveform edited, even in Kontakt.
--snip--I understand the need to edit the waveform, or the ability to adjust Release, Decay, Attack, Velocity etc. But, I don\'t follow why import/export is so important, or any other capability beyond basic editing. Understand that NO sampler, Giga included, offers waveform editing. Sampler engines only offer what\'s called nondestructive or realtime editing. By its nature, the type and quality of DSP which can run in realtime while a sampler is also functioning and streaming data must be quality limited in the extreme. The only efficient way an end user can use high-quality DSP to change the underlying waveforms in a sampler is to have the ability to batch export the waveforms in a manner which keeps their logical structure, with a matching \"replace\" function which will allow the re-integration of those waveforms back into the sampler\'s programmed structure.

Distributors will claim that end users don\'t use this functionality (full import/export with limitless destructive editing), so why should we complain about them taking it away. I\'ve gone over the reasons a hundred times, this will make 101.

Blocking of this functionality:

1) blocks batch waveform editing, which is the most powerful and sophisticated way to make large scale changes to the sound of a particular instrument.

2) divides the sampler in to \"hands on\" and \"hands off\" functions, depending upon who is using it. The basic problem with this is that the end user pays for ALL of this, yet the end user is the one who is blocked.

3) discourages development companies like NI, Giga, et. al., from focusing on innovation and improvement in sampling tools. End user suggestions and feedback have driven EVERY ADVANCE we\'ve seen in these tools. Now, those who currently control the sampleware market want that power taken OUT of end users\' hands, and concentrated into theirs.

It\'s a matter of what you want to support. I want to support the sampleware vendors who support open, platform-transparent, editable libraries. I am encouraging those who believe this path leads to the best marketplace to follow suit. If you have a choice where to spend your money, spend it on someone who supports open, editable platforms, and you will see that sector grow. Pretty simple.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Jan:
…also, if you own YT products such as Culture, I think it is good to let your voice be heard, so that the YT developers are aware of the consequences of their decision; if I am not mistaken they also have their own forum at their site. This is very true. They are YOUR vendor, not the other way around. Every penny they make comes from the pockets of buyers. Make them play by your rules.

Will Loconto

12-28-2003, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by Joanne Babunovic:
What I don\'t follow however is why import/export is so important, or any other capability beyond basic editing. If, by chance, a company like Yellow Tools goes out of business, there would be no further updates to their products. Without the ability to export the samples, you couldn\'t use them once the program didn\'t run on your system anymore (maybe due to a new version of Windows or Mac OS). If they weren\'t locked, you could at least import them into the latest sampler you are using.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 10:39 AM

It\'s very important to understand what this move by Yellow Tools represents.

The one man/one license concept is what has allowed end users the freedom to operate several machines filled with sampleware, in order to get their work done...yet not violate the license. The understanding has always been that the license covers USE. By licensing, you get to use the sampleware in your work however you wish, on as many machines or in as many locations as you wish...as long as it\'s YOU using it, and not someone else.

Now, Yellow Tools is imposing the one-license/one-installation, software model upon sampleware. Under this model, you cannot use the sampleware on more than one machine at once.

DO NOT SUPPORT THIS.

Since the very first peep of this \"integrated\" sampler/sampleware concept, I have been warning you guys that this is where it is headed. Now, perhaps you can see where our tolerance of this activity, based upon the red herring of piracy, has led us.

You have the choice. Yellow Tools, and all sampleware vendors, can only operate on your money. Stop the flow of money to people who are imposing these restrictions, and the people who do NOT impose them will profit and flourish--while the carpetbaggers will starve, and have to move on to find another market to infect and ruin. Don\'t let them have ours. You have 100% of the power in this situation. Use it.

Jake Johnson

12-28-2003, 10:42 AM

Hi, Joanne.

My thoughts:

Importing and exporting are important. They just give you much more control over the sound. One might want to:

Export a wav file so you can edit it in a wav editor (and then import it back into Giga, etc.) If you can\'t do this, you are at the mercy of any late night mistakes made by even excellent programmers under a deadline.

Import the entire program into a softsampler if it has features, such as a particularly well-done filter or verb, that you like.

Import samples of your own to layer with the existing samples.

Import samples to combine with the existing samples. Sometimes you love a forte layer in an instrument, but it\'s missing a pp layer that you want to add from another sample set. Open architecture lets you create what you need.

Use the samples with new programs and updates as they arise. If Giga had been closed, we couldn\'t use its samples to take advantage of the features in Kontakt.

Move the samples around. A pp note sampled a little too late on a chromatically sampled piano, for example, so the hammer strike isn\'t recorded, can reduce the value of the library greatly if you need that note. If the architecture is open, it\'s easy to experiment by cutting the sample and stretching those on the other side to cover it. With closed architecture, you\'re stuck with the bad sample.

And closed architecture just doesn\'t make sense. Why impose limits? When the instrument maker, such as Post, also makes an open version, and the closed version is just a convenient VSTI, the format isn\'t really a limitation--you can buy the full Giga version if you need the control. But creating only closed versions that prevent users from editng the sample sets fully just imposes unnecessary limitations.

yellow tools

12-28-2003, 10:51 AM

Dear users,
I think it is time to join the discussion on our authorization key.
First of all:
We do not have any problems with critics - as long as we all keep the respect in the discussion.
Something like \"yellow fools\" is not the way we should discuss anything together.

If you do not like a copy-protection sure you can mention that, but isn\'t it always the same discussion:
We all know that it is always the legal user who is constricted by a copy-protection.
We all know that no copy-protection is 100% safe.
But we also know that you always want to have better and more realistic sound libraries. The development of such products is nothing of just a few weeks. Culture was developed over a period of 1.5 years. Believe me it is more than just taking a microphone and recording some instruments.
We always want to improve our products and make the more and more user friendly.
The decision to the authorization key has many reasons, so don\'t you think the question should first be something like:
Why did you decide to choose a USB dongle?

When we announced the challenge/response copy-protection for Culture some users said: Please not challenge/response.
No we decided to switch to a USB dongle and once again some users have a problem with it. Any company could choose any kind of copy-protection and it would always be the same...
But: There is no need to start the basic discussion about copy-protection again. Fact is, that no new yellow tools product will be released without copy-protection - as nearly all companies do, so it is nothing new to any user.
Culture is used by many professional users like Hans Zimmer, David Newman, George Duke, Marc Mancina, John Powell, Harry Gregson-Williams, etc, who have multi licenses and our goal is to make the use of our MVIs as flexible as possible for our users. With the key you can take your Culture authorization with you where ever you go. Many recording studios have several workstations, just connect the key and the MVI is running. The key can be used in a network with a multiple client license, you do not have to request for a new code with every new computer or after changing some components of your system, etc.

Finally everything is very simple:
If you don\'t want to use a product that is cope-protected in general or \"even\" with a USB key than don\'t use it - but ask yourself: How do you want to make music then...
Should not more the quality of a product influence your decision to buy it than the kind of copy-protection?
Digidesign, Emagic and Steinberg already use a USB dongle, now also yellow tools, so where is the problem.

Best regards

Christian Hellinger

robin123

12-28-2003, 12:10 PM

i was thinking about getting the culture, but now with the dongle thing, i\'ll never even think about purchasing it....it\'s simple stupidity to use the dongle protection when you know it\'s going to be broken as soon as it comes out and the registered users will suffers but pirates will have some good time....sometimes i think that as a protest to the dongle protection people should use the cracked version of that software without paying for it.....i\'ll never buy your dongle protected software - i see some paradox :-)

Alan Russell

12-28-2003, 12:19 PM

Hi Christian,

I too am anxiously awaiting Candy. I would infer that the time your sound developers have spent keeping us all in suspense is nearing and hopefully this will yield a superb product.

As far as a dongle goes, I\'ve got plenty of USB ports on my self-built machine and would gladly rent it to Yellow Tools..

Wishing you the best in 2004.

Alan Russell

KingIdiot

12-28-2003, 01:19 PM

Well there goes my isoraxx. Its already stuffed.

-Sarcasm on--

Maybe I\'ll have to buy about 8 USB hubs, and have them set up for a dongle patch bay. I mean, its only money right?

I look forward to the day of \"trial by crash\" picking and removing dongles from that setup, jsut leading to:

When I want to use Cubase, Waves, and Culture, I musremove Dongles 4, 8, 17, and 22.

When I want to Use Acid, Candy and Wavelab, I must remove 3, 5, and 13, but 17 and 44 must be installed, and only after Reboot.

--sarcasm off--

I\'d like to shoot the people who went against the \"change/response\" setup. Its by far the least instrusive (to my pocketbook) setup, and the least likely to cause confiction based crashes.

How much more will a multi-lisence cost? (This kills me if its much more. This is the reason we should support Giga, now we have to pay extra $$$ for each computer we want to run a freaking library on. Atleast with Giga its only the software to run it, and we can pick and choose which librareis and how many times)

If yuore choir library is fantastic, I\'ll still think about purchasing it, but for products I\'m on the fence for (like Culture and Candy), they\'ve gone way down the list under the header \"when I win the lottery\"

esteso

12-28-2003, 01:31 PM

Hi all

Seems like there\'s two seperate issues here. yes? Dongle protection can be implemented with full functionality still in place. We will, and are choosing our poison in terms of copyright protection right now, and Christian is right. It does not matter which one developers implement, not everyone will be happy. Let\'s take this as a given. You choose the lesser of two evils according to your own preferences. So I think we can dispense with this part of the discussion.

Christians\' post, as much as I enjoyed him personally responding really obfuscates the main point. Namely, the limiting of full access to the samples in order to do whatever you choose to them. I would like to thank Bruce for pointing this out and pounding on it because this is probably the central issue going on in the sample world right now. If something is not done we will all lose. And so the world of possibility gets smaller.

Who said? Hey, who\'s the artist here? Just so.

What happens when, a company goes out of business or decides to not support your format or your preffered OS? Eventually your old computer is dogfood and will not do what you need it to do. There are any number of ways that your sample libraries will become obsolete and there will be nothing that you can do to protect your investment. Sample developers are protecting themselves.

Again, as Bruce said, it\'s pretty simple. It\'s a small market. Do not support them and they will have to change the way they do business.

all the best

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 01:57 PM

Originally posted by yellow tools:
The decision to the authorization key has many reasons, so don\'t you think the question should first be something like:
Why did you decide to use a USB dongle?

The key can be used in a network with a multiple client license, you do not have to request for a new code with every new computer or after changing some components of your system, etc.

Finally everything is very simple:
If you don\'t want to use a product that is cope-protected in general or \"even\" with a USB key than don\'t use it - but ask yourself: How do you want to make music then...

Should not more the quality of a product influence your decision to buy it than the kind of copy-protection?
Digidesign, Emagic and Steinberg already use a USB dongle, now also yellow tools, so where is the problem?

Best regards

Christian Hellinger First of all, the fact that APPLICATIONS are protected by dongles/install-count licenses has nothing whatsoever with the SAMPLEWARE business.

Sampleware has NEVER been restricted to a number of licenses based on machine count. It is always restricted by USER count. One user, one license.

What you are doing is changing the way licensing is approached.

The problem we have with copy protected sampleware is simple--it\'s DATA, not technology. As such, it should be transparent, to work with any brand of technology the end-user chooses. What you are doing is elevating data to the level of an application.

That dog won\'t hunt. I think you see very clearly here that people will not stand for this. Your list of NFR users is not particularly impressive to me. I could care less what Hans Zimmer uses. I only care what SAMPLE VENDORS think they\'re doing telling the end user how we will accept the way business is done.

The joke\'s on you. Let\'s see how you crash and burn. We have infinitely more time and energy and resources to start a grassroots effort to end this intrusion into OUR marketplace.

People, all you have to do is hold onto your dollars. Do not buy a single product from Yellow Tools until they\'ve learned a lesson.

Christian is right. This is very simple. But not in the way he thinks. He is YOUR vendor. You have 100% of the say in how he serves you. Never, ever, forget this. I promise you, if you refuse to purchase Yellow Tools products under these conditions, they will release them as sample libraries for REAL samplers.

It\'s simple, all right. Boycott Yellow Tools, and this will go away as quickly as it came.

Simon Ravn

12-28-2003, 02:09 PM

I am not gonna buy anything from Yellow Tools either. I already have an USB dongle for Cubase which is more than enough.

Joanne Babunovic

12-28-2003, 02:23 PM

Bruce, thanks for the explanation of what we mean by open software. I\'m sure it won\'t be the last time you\'ll need to repeat images/icons/smile.gif

Hi Esteso,

Glad somebody finally said it. Although it helps in building crowd revolt mentality, we did manage to interweave two completely unrelated issues.

Jake,
Thank you for taking the time to explain the value of import functionality. What you described makes sense, and until your post, I was still struggling with the concept. Like others, and even despite the basic level in which I work with these libraries, I\'ve yet to have a sample that did not need adjustments from what came out of the box. I can only imagine the changes and tweaks that literally become manadatory for those with more advanced mixes and projects.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 02:40 PM

The issues, unfortunately, are quite intertwined.

The USB dongle creates a host of problems...not the least of which is: What if the machines you\'re using are standing alone, NOT networked?

I hope that everyone who sat on the fence with a \"wait and see\" attitude about Content Copy Protection is now painfully aware of what we enabled as a market. That first step led to this...Yellow Tools was emboldened by others\' success at getting you to swallow.

How many more \"tools\" will you swallow before you wake up?

Now we have a choice. I urge everyone to get OFF the fence, and boycott these products. You CAN do without them. The world won\'t end. But Yellow Tools\' assumption that you\'ll bend over will CERTAINLY end if you starve them of your cash. Now is the time to draw a line, and to refuse to cross it.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 03:48 PM

\"No one will dare maintain that it is better to do injustice than to bear it.\" - Aristotle

I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who would place the burden of piracy on the backs of those who pay the bills.

You can accept this if you choose. For my part, I maintain that the time has come to draw a line, and to teach our vendors that there are limits to the degree which we will accept the responsibility for their piracy problems.

A boycott of Yellow Tools products will be the best possible way to demonstrate this. Yellow Tools can pick the time at which they choose to make money again. It\'s not harsh. They can give up this stupid, harmful, policy any time they choose, and I\'m sure people will be happy to support them once again. Until that time, there are lots of ways to make music without supporting a vendor whose policies run so retrograde to the spirit of creation.

Simon Ravn

12-28-2003, 04:01 PM

I am totally with Bruce. This has gone too far now. I can see the usefulness of creating custom synths like Atmosphere and such - I can live with that, although it\'d still be preferable to have the ability to convert Atmosphere\'s programs to anything else you want. And the protection is a simple challenge/response one. I can tolerate that quite possibly because Atmosphere isn\'t the cornerstone of my production tools. I use it quite often, but rarely as the foundation. I can only try to imagine if all the orchestral libraries I have each were using their own custom sample engine and their own protection scheme. I am getting dizy just by imagining this... Also, VSTi\'s need a VST host. I don\'t like that. I am an advocate for GigaStudio. 64 MIDI channels in one easy-to-follow application, yes please. No need to run other programs (VSTi hosts) to use your samples. Quicksearch function to locate you patches, standard Windows GUI, yes please!

For my part, Yellow Tools can dig their own grave now and deservedly so. I hope it\'ll serve as a valuable lesson for other developers at least...

Hudson

12-28-2003, 05:20 PM

As someone else mentioned, there\'s a major difference between having your sequencer dongled and a sample library dongled. To suggest otherwise is so ridiculously shortsighted that I had to do a double take when Christian said \"what\'s the big deal?\".

A sequencer is the heart of a composer\'s system, and we only need one to run several machines. The number of sample libraries on a computer can go through the roof. To even consider a usb dongle for each of those libraries is so...well, I\'ll get bleeped if I type it so just use your imagination.

Let\'s just say this ranks #4 on my Top 10 Not-So-Brilliant Ideas List between the Bird Powered Blimp and Edible Condoms.
-Hudson

T Parks

12-28-2003, 05:30 PM

The problem is that these so-called protection methods simply don\'t work. Dangling dongles are pretty much ineffective in the fight against piracy, a fact born out by the fact that companies who use them like Steinberg have their prized DAW\'s cracked pretty much as they\'re released.

The companies are closing doors and the financial cost is passed to the consumer on these wasteful security systems.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 05:43 PM

Lee, great that you should mention the precedent of hardware in this context, because that is exactly my argument against this. Software synthesis/sampling broke the mold and relegated such antiquated concepts to the scrap heap where they belong.

Absolutely NOTHING exciting happened in hardware for years. As the Japanese companies eliminated programming tools in favor of card slots, the only way to get a great synth was to pay dearly for it...when it could even be found among the nickel-and-diming slot-slut machines.

Software synthesis absolutely skyrocketed in creativity, precisely because the TOOLS were the important thing that caught our collective imaginations. Now, the money changers have invaded the temple again, with the same tired old \"this gives everyone low cost alternatives\" song and dance.

Bulls**t.

Now Yellow Tools is trying to resurrect HARDWARE CONSTRAINTS in a software world, reducing our increased functionality to something that\'s just as crippled as the old card-slot synths.

YOU CALL THIS PROGRESS????

There are no reasonable excuses for Yellow Tools\' unprecedented attempt to turn the clock back ten years. They should be boycotted until they come to their senses.

Jamie Haggerty

12-28-2003, 06:19 PM

I\'m curious as to why Yellow Tools is being singled out with such venom. Shouldn\'t your boycott includes Spectrasonics, East-West, and Garriton as well?
Except for the dongle what is it about Yellow Tools that is driving the boycott their way?
I agree that the paying consumer is the one that has to deal with the copy protection cr*p while the pirates still enjoy their free lunch but to pounce on one developer is a little odd.
What about Digidesign and Pro Tools? The Digi hardware has got to be the most expensive dongle out there.
J

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 06:36 PM

This is different. I don\'t use any of those products you name, by the way. But this is a radical alteration of the one-man/one-license concept, instead substituting the one-license/one-installation concept.

In my opinion, we need to draw a line and make an example out of Yellow Tools for everyone to see and note.

I suggest people take the opportunity to spend their money on those who develop samples for open platforms. Those developers are just as talented, have products every bit as good, and are putting users first.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 06:38 PM

Lee, your attempts to discredit me have no effect. Ad hominem doesn\'t counter my postion. You are right. You should avoid wasting your time.

Tamino

12-28-2003, 06:57 PM

Copying isn\'t theft.

\"To constitute theft, every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position.\"

Source: Webster\'s Revised Unabridged Dictionary

Tamino

12-28-2003, 07:07 PM

Might I also add that in the vast majority of cases, those copying the software do not even have the money to pay for the product in the first place.

I doubt there\'s a single person reading this that can say they haven\'t copied or downloaded copyright software or music without paying for it.

Even so, make way for the blatant hypocrites which I\'m sure will step out of the shadows as a result of my posts.

David Abraham

12-28-2003, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by yellow tools:

When we announced the challenge/response copy-protection for Culture some users said: Please not challenge/response.
No we decided to switch to a USB dongle and once again some users have a problem with it. Any company could choose any kind of copy-protection and it would always be the same...Christian Hellinger ...USB Dongle is a bad idea I think, so is having your own engine IMO, I don\'t want to have to worry about too many plugin engines (with associated integration issues) at this stage in the game. Kontakt/derivatives and UVI is about all I can handle at the moment.

...nice idea with the MIDI loops though, I\'d like to see more of this.

Ben H

12-28-2003, 07:46 PM

It\'s not the dongle that bugs me, even though I\'d prefer challenge response, watermarked samples or something else.

It\'s the fact that I don\'t have access to the samples I PAYED FOR. I cannot modify, manipulate or mangle the sounds THE WAY I WANT TO.

It doesn\'t matter if it is a good/revolutionary product. I don\'t care if it took x years to develop. I wouldn\'t buy a ferrari if the vendor told me I couldn\'t drive it over 30 kmph!!!

When I originally asked about their sample format and whether another open format would be available their response was that THEIR ENGINE was superior. I asked them what about someone who wants to EDIT the sounds that THEY PAYED FOR to use on a hard or soft sampler and they tried to tell me that there was NO NEED.

Honestly, I WAS thoroughly interested in Candy but this sort of ARROGANCE has turned me off.

I too will boycott YT products

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 07:53 PM

Re: Candy

Lucky you...there\'s a product by a developer who cares about your end-user right to choose your sampler as you see fit!!

Check out the Vienna sax product. It\'s open-platform, editable, and as good a sax library as I\'d imagine anyone could make. The demos are spectacular.

Support open-platform developers!! It\'s your party. Don\'t let vendors tell you what the rules are concerning YOUR money and investment.

Ben H

12-28-2003, 08:09 PM

Got the BG sax set, the VSL saxophones 1 is on the way.

Candy was going to round of my collection with the diff saxes (not selmer IV) and jazz mouthpieces, oh well.

Now I can spend the money I had put aside on something else. images/icons/wink.gif

Ben H

kbaccki

12-28-2003, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Simon wrote:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />This has gone too far now. I can see the usefulness of creating custom synths like Atmosphere and such - I can live with that, although it\'d still be preferable to have the ability to convert Atmosphere\'s programs to anything else you want.This really isn\'t some radical new concept. It\'s simply an extension of the security of the hardware that we\'ve all used for years and years. What about all those cards, sound banks and memory sticks we bought for the M1, M3R, JV series, Kurzweil sound blocks, Emu ROM, and the piles and piles of ROM based instruments that came with their own sound sets?

Lee Blaske <hr /></blockquote>Huh? How many illegal sample sets do you think are floating around out there of almost the entire Korg, Roland, and Yamaha lines in Ensoniq, Roland, and Akai format? Gee, considering that until recently alot of that stuff was recycled anyway, you could probably piece together the last 10 years of keyboard history with a few .fi FTP sites...

Ray Lindsley

12-28-2003, 08:19 PM

I have to agree that the use of a dongle to copy protect samples is a little ridiculous. I have a dongle for Cubase, but that is an application- and I only need one sequencer on my system. If I had to plug ina dongle for every sample set i have, it would be a nightmare. I have 8 USB ports, but I refuse to give any up for somebody\'s bad business decision. I can see the need for copyright protection, but use a little common sense.

Ben H

12-28-2003, 08:20 PM

Grrrrrrrr

Again with the double post.

Ben H

J. Whaley

12-28-2003, 08:58 PM

A few months ago I was like Joanne and didn\'t completely understand what Bruce was talking about, but as I\'ve watched this debate roll on I\'m in 100 % agreement with Bruce.

Users have a RIGHT to the samples they buy. Whether it be made to work with giga, kontakt, or any proprietary format. We pay for those samples. True, sample developers ALSO have a right to NOT have those samples stolen, but MOST honest users pay for their samples. Those who don\'t pay now won\'t pay later. Those who pay now will stop buying as many because it\'s a pain in the butt. It\'s as though sample companies say \"we have to be inconvinienced so these folks need to be too\".

Well I have news for you - we ARE! All of us EXCEPT the theives. I HATE pirates, but we all know they are there, and we all know some. I hate having conversations with people I know and work with when they tell me they\'re using such and such software and I say \"really when did you get that\". \" Oh I got it off Kazza\". And I\'m thinking \"You\'re getting paid that much for your work and you\'re stealing your sounds?\" My friends hate me because I make such a stink about it. But i can\'t monitor their every move.

And it doesn\'t matter WHO makes the software, it gets copied. I not long after I had started using Stylus a producer I was working for was bragging about how good the tracks were sounding. I said \"it\'s this new product called Stylus\". The guy mixing for him perked up and said \"oh i just downloaded that\". WHAT! I went nuts on the guy. Why is it I paid hard earned money for Stylus and went through all the hell of getting registered and this guy didn\'t have to? Why is it that I got stuck in the atlanta airport and wanted to edit some samples on my laptop but couldn\'t because I didn\'t have my LOGIC DONGLES with me? I\'ve been a 100% honest Logic user since 1995 and I\'M the one who is suffering, yet people call me who have downloaded something illegal and want to know how you do this or that. I tell them they buy the manual!

It DOES NOT MATTER how hard your copy protection, it will be broken. Those who want to steal will steal. Those who don\'t won\'t. And more importantly, those of us who are honest also get misused in the process.

So Yellow Tools says they want to make it hardware hu? Well we as users then should have the RIGHT to treat it as hardware. But not just Culture, also any of the closed platform software samples. If the liscens is no longer 1user/liscense, but is now 1 liscense for machine, then when we don\'t want to use that software anymore, we should have the right to sell it. That\'s right, we can\'t demo it, we can\'t edit it if we don\'t like the way a filter works, or if a sample starts late, or any other number of problems, so what can we do? Well be dang well better be able to SELL IT.

Spectrasonics is the ONLY, and I mean ONLEEEEEEY sample I have ever used where it worked for me and performed like I want out of the box. Eric Persing is a brilliant programmer who can create products that work the way musicans think. But he\'s the only one I\'ve ever found. No matter what the product I always want to tweak on something. And now that Kontakt is out, I like it so much better then giga that I want to convert all my giga patches to kontakt. Well I CAN - but not Yellow tools. Reality is technology changes, but samples don\'t. I just bought QL Brass really cheap in the EMU format. Why? Not because the programming is brilliant, but because it was cheap and the actual samples are pretty decent. I can pull it into Kontakt and work with it. So it just makes sense to do that.

If companies like Yellow Tools think they can create products that are exactly like we want/need them to be out of the box, then go for it. I doubt they will. Eric persing is the only one I give much grace to because his products work so well. Plus I have them installed on 3 machines, my 2 workstations and my laptop - all of which I AM THE SOLE USER OF. As far as I can tell with GPO thus far I\'ve not been limited to any of the editing I\'d like to do. I\'ve not got any of East Wests recent stuff though so I can\'t say on that. But I do know that a Dongle is WAY over the edge.

For Christian to say that people didn\'t want challenge response, he probably didn\'t tell them the alternative would be a dongle! Who ever would be stupid enough to want a dongle?

IF WE HAVE to have a dongle, the least they could do is create an ilock type dongle protection that could hold multiple authorizations. OR, do what Antares has done with a challenge response OR ilock authorization.

I have one word: Errrrrrrrrrr.

Now on to the future of sampling - users on this forum are plenty capable of pulling together to create our own libraries. Some of us have recording facilities, some of us are good editors, and programmers. And we CAN make a statement. Sure, it\'s a ton of work to create an awesome orchestra library like EWQL has done, but for all the coolness of yellow tools culture, I can easily get some of my percussion buddies in my studio and do a freakin awesome sample library. i\'ve done it. And I\'ve not spent a penny on it. Maybe we need more of us to start group projects - much like the development of Linux and other open platform OSes, Samples NEED to remain open.

That\'s my 2¢ and a bunch of other air!
J-

Lazul

12-28-2003, 10:28 PM

You can count me out buying any dongle protected soundware. It\'s ridiculous. If everyone follows this trend then we will have over a dozen dongles to accomodate. Sequencers are different Yellow Tools! Not many people run more than one at the same time as there is really no need.

J. Whaley

12-28-2003, 10:33 PM

Bruce, Do you think this trend would have been changed any for the positive if Giga 3.0 had been released a year ago when the hype was still high? Maybe people started looking elsewhere and decided vsti\'s were the way to go?

David Abraham

12-28-2003, 10:51 PM

...appetite for VSTi style integration has been there all along, it\'s a market Nemesys wasn\'t interested in. I see that as a separate issue from copy protection

J. Whaley

12-28-2003, 10:53 PM

Okay, I don\'t want everyone to think I\'m anti-developer. I\'m a business man too and I DO see their side of the story. And I know about right now all the developers are sitting back saying \"well what\'s the solution\". So maybe those of us who are so clearly opposed to the problems (piracy AND copy protection) should help solve the problem.

Here\'s a couple:

1) One argument is small companies like Yellow Tools can\'t afford to litigate and track down illegal users. So how about we help get a larger organization formed that would do the deed. I\'m 100% against Unions, but something of the sort for litigation purposes could proove helpful in a situation like this. The sole purpose of the group would be to do spot tracking on recordings to verify that the tools used are 100% legit.

It sounds extreme at first, but I remember a day when I could take a master to duplication and didn\'t have to sign a waiver that I own all the copyrights. Now I either have to proove I own them, or prove I have been cleared to duplicate them before my duplicators will press the CDs. Something similar with producers would raise awareness, and discourage illegal use.

Let\'s say for example: XYZ album is released. It\'s registered with ASCAP, BMI, and whoever else. ASCAP, BMI and Whoever get ready to pay their bills - well they need to track to see if the people who are getting their royalties have been honest. If they haven\'t, then they can hold their royalty checks. As soon as a few names have been busted and made examples of - including price of software PLUS legal fees - something that COULD be paid off eventually though, not like this mother of a 9 year old slapped with Multi-millions - as soon as those examples get made, producers will start calling the hand on their people doing the work to insure they have legal copies.

Executive producers from record labels should be held responsible to insure that the people working for them are using legal copies of software.

2) One method could be to require in the EULA that any recording have the sample products listed in the credits. If Sample companies can match questionable users through their records. If they don\'t appear as a legit user then the companies could track it further. Though really annoying, the companies could issue copyright liscense #s with each collection of samples. Those numbers should have to be available upon investigation for the producers to prove, if they need, legal ownership.

I KNOW it would be a pain in the butt, but I also know how many people I preach to all the time about this issue. I know I can\'t force their hand. I have refused to work with them, I have burned bridges, but I can only do that so much. it\'s not MY job to loose my reputation because the software companies can\'t track their pirated software. There was actually one group of producers I was co-sharing space with for 9 months and I ended up leaving because I refused to work in the studio production house if they wouldn\'t buy thier software. They wouldn\'t buy it. So i left.

In the end I think we would see legitimate users a tad inconvenienced but over all unscathed, while non-legit users getting their hand called and those who are on the fence becoming a bit more honest because they get scared into it.

I posted about this very issue a bout 2 weeks ago and posted an address from Senate Majority leader Bill Frist. SOME congressmen are starting to work on this issue, we MUST get involved with politics to let people know of our problems. This is the ONLY way we can bring large scale awareness to the problem.

It\'s one thing to boycott a company like Yellow Tools, it\'s another thing entirely to admit we\'re all being hurt and see how we can all pull together - users and developers alike.

I LIKE developers. big and small, we all need them. Even companies that do things as crazy as dongles (emagic included). But it doesn\'t mean we have to get angry about it - let\'s work together.

SO - to clarify my position if anyone\'s in question - I\'m NOT buying dongle libraries, but I WILL help work to find a solution images/icons/smile.gif

J-

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 11:02 PM

Personally, I think the timing is just right. I have spent the last year with a totally stable setup, not wanting for a single thing. Tremendous work has come out on the Giga platform, some slated for release literally at any time now. I think a few people got nervous and jumped ship, but not too many. Most people I know who were using Giga two years ago are still using it and making money with it right now. It\'s pretty much win-win as far as I can see. If anything, I think the generally ratty atmosphere and VSTi mania has made Giga 3 even more anticipated. I\'m really interested to see what kind of information comes out in the next few weeks, and anticipating some stimulating discussions.

Ben H

12-28-2003, 11:12 PM

Did someone count the number of potential lost customers from this thread?

Lets do the maths.

11 people have stated that they will UNEQUIVICOLY not purchase another YT product

Another 5 or so have seriously reconsidered

So say that\'s 20 potential libraries not sold assuming all would probably not purchase and some would purchase 2 different libraries

Not even allowing for people who didn\'t bother to post.

YT have lost a grand total of 20 * 399 euro (average cost per library) $7980 OUCH

I hope they RECONSIDER

thesoundsmith

12-28-2003, 11:20 PM

I just want to add, in case YT is reading this thread, that I have been waiting anxiously for Candy, hoping it would provide some useful contemporary saxes.

Now I don\'t care, I will NOT EVER purchase dongle-based products.

Should not more the quality of a product influence your decision to buy it than the kind of copy-protection?
Digidesign, Emagic and Steinberg already use a USB dongle, now also yellow tools, so where is the problem he quality of a product is linked to the kind of copy protection. It is more than the quality of the samples, or the GUI, or the editing capablilties. It is all of these things and more. I have enough problems with the direction of mass exodus from Giga and other sample players to closed-format proprietary engines which lock the user out of creative alteration of the sample set (do you developers TRULY believe that your way is the ONLY way to edit a sample set? Every lib I own has undergone at least minor alterations, so it sits in my orchestra smoothly, without spending hours at mix time repeating the same EQ, compression, etc. moves.)

Make a product that sounds great and lets me work MY way, and I will buy it. Who\'s the artrist here...

Dasher

robin123

12-28-2003, 11:20 PM

what protection will the dongle serve if somebody will resample every sound out of culture and put it out in some other lib format images/icons/rolleyes.gif good luck....you are only going to give some hard time to your registered users....

Ben H

12-28-2003, 11:21 PM

At least SOME GOOD can come from all of this.

Those that are in the sample conversion utility business will have another format to add. And that means more $$$ for them. images/icons/grin.gif

Ben H

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 11:24 PM

Piracy is a red herring. Period. Know what? I remember when people copied each other\'s friggin\' 8-tracks. I remember big parties where people brought albums to be copied onto daisy-chained cassette decks. This has been going on FOREVER. It\'s no better, no worse, no different. So what if it\'s all digital now? It\'s meaningless. It\'s a red herring. It has never changed. It is not changing right now. All of the protected libraries you can name are available for download, for free, where any numbnuts idiot can find them. This piss-colored donglefest won\'t change it.

Nope. Just another inconvenience you get the privelege of enduring because YOU paid money.

Here\'s my solution. There are clearly two camps of sampleware developers in our market. One camp supports open platform sampleware, and does a really amazing job of it. Dan Dean, Scarbee, Michiel Post, Worra, VSL, Kip McGinnis, Frankie, Bela D, GOS, SISS...the list goes on and on, (and I apologize for perhaps leaving out some really nice and talented names--my brain is jelly after a full day of editing).

EastWest and Yellow Tools even have some open platform products (Hint: It\'s how they made the money they\'re now using to inconvenience you).

SUPPORT THOSE OPEN PLATFORM PRODUCTS EXCLUSIVELY.

Want a solution? THAT IS THE SOLUTION. Support open platform sampleware, PERIOD, and the problem gets solved.

Does it cure piracy? Nope. Nothing does. What people need to realize is that curing piracy is not the answer. The answer is keeping developers profitable. And if you want copy protection-free sampleware, the answer is to keep the vendors who supply it profitable--at the expense of those who don\'t.

That way, the money gets spent on the vendors who are playing the game according to the rules you want respected. That leads to positive results.

There\'s no other solution. There\'s no question it will work. The only question is if we\'re tired enough of this BS to do what it takes to end it. All you have to do is spend your money only on open-platform sampleware. The problem will automagically solve itself.

Ben H

12-28-2003, 11:28 PM

Fingers are crossed that GS 3 is open right??? images/icons/rolleyes.gif

Ben H

Bruce A. Richardson

12-28-2003, 11:37 PM

Well, you\'ll know exactly who to blame if it isn\'t, won\'t you? Lots of people know exactly where those bones are buried. I, too, hold out hope that Tascam didn\'t cave.

However, if worse comes to worse, and they did, you\'ll still have a choice of supporting those developers who keep their libraries open. And they\'ll have the choice of keeping them open.

So, the solution will still work. If everyone on this board would support only open-platform sampleware, this copy protection problem would disappear in months. And the people who respect your end-user concerns would profit handsomely. Win-win.

Jan

12-29-2003, 05:27 AM

One aspect has been overlooked, and that is that the current owners of Culture (who bought a product protected with a challenge-response system) now have a dongle protection shoved down their throats. Without accepting the dongle protection they can no longer enjoy any updates of the product they bought a license for, and that bothers me.
It is an attitude that does not show much respect and concern for the customers.

T Parks

12-29-2003, 06:02 AM

Originally posted by Jan:
One aspect has been overlooked, and that is that the current owners of Culture (who bought a product protected with a challenge-response system) now have a dongle protection shoved down their throats. Without accepting the dongle protection they can no longer enjoy any updates of the product they bought a license for, and that bothers me.
It is an attitude that does not show much respect and concern for the customers. Agreed. Its certainly a sobering thought that any company who gets jittery could also follow suit in a similar matter with future updates.

I understand the arguement here. But I am interested to see what will happen with any products that are closed off in a similar fashion BUT are simply too must-have for most to resist. If a product is really first class then its a safe bet people will buy it even if the rules state they have to use up all their usb ports on dongles and stand on their heads in their underwear to operate it. Well, maybe not quite so extreme.....

lumpyhed

12-29-2003, 06:42 AM

What i find most shocking here is that production studios & people whom actually make money out of their recordings actually pirate software. Its just disgraceful!

Its one thing to have some impoverished student grabbing all the apps he/she can find and figuring it all out, but another for those who bite the hand that feeds them. Even i whom doesn\'t earn an especially large salary can save up the cash to buy the first edition VSL yet these scrotes could not care less. Its these folk whom damage the industry. It is they whom should pay for every single application & library they use!

Disgraceful... images/icons/frown.gif

Hardy Heern

12-29-2003, 07:30 AM

I may have missed someone making this point after having read through this thread...if so, my apologies.

As far as I know SampleTank was the first with combined sample engine player? Dongles are bad enough (I just picked up my first USB one with Cubase SX) and I don\'t really mind it on a sequencer too much. What worries me is this:-

If every sample library you buy has its own engine what is the effect of this on the CPU and RAM of your PC and how do they share the resources? For example, could you have one ‘engine’ manufacturer making his engine hog the resources to improve its response at the expense of others? I don\'t know enough about this particular technology but it seems sensible to me that it must be better (more resource efficient) to have a single sample engine running with your sequencer and have everything running on that: like Giga Studio or Kontakt.

What is going to become of the small sample developers? Say someone wanted to bring out just some helpful samples like, for example, the generous Tobias of Gtown (Writing this caused me to go to his site to remind myself of his name and, in so doing, has caused me to Paypal the guy even though I haven’t actually used any of the samples yet…..but that’s another story….you know, the one about waiting for GS3!)

There is one growing chink of light though. The UK’s ‘Computer Music’ magazine is supporting new, young, talented programme writers! It is almost like a new subculture and they are turning out, for example, the likes of the Traktion and Musys sequencers etc. The FX series…Teleport, Freeze are examples from this new breed. Aren’t they, or is it someone else, producing a Giga sample player? So the open standard will survive….brilliant!! There is something about this freedom that brightens my free spirit. The protective, closed shop of the established companies will present these guys with an opportunity.

They have an advantage over the established companies in that the latter have spent years bolting on code onto an original core until they can do it no longer. This results in huge inefficient code whereas these new programmers have a clean sheet. I hope that they will give the ‘MacDonalds’ of the sequencer and sampler world a battle. I did actually upgrade to Cubase SX2 but I very seriously considered one of the above…they are amazingly powerful and ingenious sequencers for around $50!!

Before I splash out on another audio card I am actually trying out the Russian ‘KX Project’ ASIO drivers for my SBLive (Don’t laugh…it works very well so far!…A sound card for $10!!!) What is extraordinary is that these, VERY, talented programmers (Russian in this case, are they just \'hungrier\' than the bloated Westerners?) turn out amazing stuff seemingly by themselves. (The gifted, and passionate amateur will always give the jaded professional a run for their money). I mean the software even has a good looking interface! Don’t forget the ‘no resource hog’, decent enough (for hobbyists), hardware reverb that the SBLive contains too!! Probably better than my old Alesis Microverb!

Perhaps the established, larger companies will die on the vine, when these new entrepreneurs get going (remember Wordperfect?) Someone will produce a new, free sampler and new samplists will appear to fill the gap. I hope they just don’t get bought out like Nemysys did. Maybe that’s modern day commercial reality? I always trot out my Microsoft Office example of the piracy myth. No one can challenge it or the greed it represents. That is that Microsoft charge MUCH more for their ‘office’ suite than their competitors, even though the latter don’t share Microsoft\'s advantageous scale of production . Think about it!

The whole thing’s pretty depressing. The shop windows for software (the magazine reviews) have a, let’s say, ‘cosy’ relationships with the mainstream software producers. They publish reviews in exchange for advertising….That’s not an ideal breeding ground for the entrepreneurs. I am pleased with Computer Music’s slightly anarchic approach!

I bought GPO immediately after I heard the demos and didn’t consider the implications of the separate engines as it seemed such a great value package. Thinking about it now I suspect that I might start running into limitations when I get further along the line. I haven’t sorted it yet but I believe that I will be able to run it on the full Kontakt, which I now have, thus avoiding the need to have two engines running at once. I’m not quite sure how to go about it yet but that’s for another forum.

This ‘everyone with his own engine’ is a can of worms and I’m sure Bruce is totally right to continue his fight for free programmes. Sadly his predictions are turning out to be true. Don’t knock Bruce on this; he deserves our support. I also totally agree about the piracy red herring, they’ll all be cracked shortly after the first package is opened. They admit it themselves. So why are they worried about ‘piracy’?

There is obviously something else on the agenda that no one has spotted yet. I have seen some of the Steinberg ‘engined’ stuff pirated and I’m sure that all the others will be easy fodder for clever hackers and we all know that some of the best programmers are hackers, are they not? I don’t think that pirates are what they are worried about. I suspect it is the fear of one musician lending his software to his mate. Logically, that would be the only point of the route they are pursuing.

The little guys will eventually save the day!!

Frank

PS Let’s not argue whether it’s God or Evolution!, but humanity is peppered with bastards! Some of these bastards want political power at any cost; some want financial wealth at any cost; some want both!! I know it’s only music but, rest assured, that the driving force behind some of the guys running, even these, businesses will not rest until they are the only ones left and then they can feel secure and charge anything they like.

The answer is FREE enterprise. Power to REAL free enterprise….if it truly exists! I really am torn between who are the worst sometimes; the pirates or the businessmen!!

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 08:21 AM

As far as I know SampleTank was the first with combined sample engine player? probably the first ROMpler but it also had/has built in effects...pretty forward thinking.

For example, could you have one ‘engine’ manufacturer making his engine hog the resources to improve its response at the expense of others?
most engine developers do their best to do the opposite, to be as efficient as possible the evidence shows up in the host CPU meter.

a single sample engine running with your sequencer and have everything running on that: like Giga Studio or Kontakt.
not all engines are created equal...for example still no mono-legato type triggering in Kontakt or Giga. This is something Spectrasonics/UVI brought to the table with their custom engine.

What is going to become of the small sample developers?
if they do a good job they won\'t be small anymore.

Aren’t they, or is it someone else, producing a Giga sample player? So the open standard will survive….brilliant!!
\"a giga sample player\" doesn\'t say much, doesn\'t VSampler have giga sample compatibility? if so why isn\'t everyone using it. Currently It takes hard work and time to produce a reliable professional Giga compatible instrument (as well as significant legal resources given the uncertainty around the streaming patents). So we have to allow companies doing this to develop a business model so that it can continue. If they make questionable business decisions (and to me a USB dongle for soundware is one of these) they\'ll learn, or others will learn.

They have an advantage over the established companies in that the latter have spent years bolting on code onto an original core until they can do it no longer. This results in huge inefficient code whereas these new programmers have a clean sheet.
or conversely, they have a disadvantage versus the establish companies because the latter have spent years optimizing their code, resolving bugs and understand what it takes to make an engine run in a bug reduced, customer oriented efficient way.

What is extraordinary is that these, VERY, talented programmers (Russian in this case, are they just \'hungrier\' than the bloated Westerners?)
who are the bloated westerners?

(The gifted, and passionate amateur will always give the jaded professional a run for their money).
are there any gifted passionate professionals?

Perhaps the established, larger companies will die on the vine, when these new entrepreneurs
I don\'t consider any of the current companies \"established and large\" we are still in the \"can all this really be possible?\" season of soft synthesis and soft sampler playback.

The whole thing’s pretty depressing.
what? depressed already? This was the greatest year ever for Keyboardists, MIDI and aspiring orchestrators.

This ‘everyone with his own engine’ is a can of wormsI prefer fewer engines, and right now I believe Kontakt covers the most ground and has the best potential. Things could change after NAMM.

I suspect it is the fear of one musician lending his software to his mate. Logically, that would be the only point of the route they are pursuing. a legitimate fear. I know of an indie artist that travels with a 100+GB removable hard drive expecting all the producers she works with to just copy all their libraries/loops on it.

I really am torn between who are the worst sometimes; the pirates or the businessmen!!
?? a pirate by definition is using unauthorized software. It\'s possible for a businessman to be legit you know...

-david abraham

Thomas_J

12-29-2003, 09:10 AM

I don\'t like running many plugins at the same time in my sequencer. No matter how well it seems to work I always feel like everything is going to crash on me, and if ONE plugin crashes, it usually takes the sequencer down with it. I\'ve had it happen so many times. What\'s even worse is that when you have plugins that take up like 200-500mb of ram or more and then crashes the whole thing, your OS doesn\'t flush the ram but instead it believes the ram isn\'t in use and starts addressing it, resulting in a sudden reboot.

Sometimes the sequencer will crash due to plugin overload and you realize you didn\'t save yet.. so you try clicking the \"save button\", which still works, hiding beneath the \"[plugin] has attempted an illegal instruction and will be closed...\".... Boom, it corrupts your sequence.. exits and reboots.
Great fun. All could have been avoided if I didn\'t have to run a zillion of plugins just because people think it\'s cool to make a new GUI for each friggin\' library they make.

The more applications you start loading up in your sequencer, the bigger the chance of a crash. It\'s always been like this.

Remember MS-DOS? it always felt rock-solid. It never crashed no matter what you threw at it.

Then came Windows 95 (skipping 3.11) and while the windows were nice and all it still felt like you were sitting on top of a matchstick skyscraper. Windows 98 improved things ever so slightly, while ME dragged everything down in the dirt again. With Windows XP things seem to operate MUCH smoother, but now we\'re facing a new problem: people writing custom engines to protect their sample material and by doing so, presenting users with buggy, unoptimized and untested software. A dongle is bound to make your system at least 1% less stable. Some soundcards dislike USB ports, as do some mainboards, gfx-cards, even applications. Windows will detect a new device every time you start up the computer, Windows will attempt to install it and windows WILL crash.
Call me the doomsday prophet, but this isn\'t something I\'m making up. The more applications you have running (and each plugin counts as an application) on your computer, the more problems you get.

I will not support dongleware. Keep all samples open to the user.

Thomas

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 10:48 AM

Each person needs to do his part to reduce piracy. It\'s good Karma, and smart business. A culture of respect is built one step at a time.

But sampleware is data, and data should be as platform independant as possible. I am gratified that many of you who thought I was nuts six months ago are reconsidering what I have been saying. What is happening now is weakening the market, and weakening the best technology--AND the most respectful vendors.

The best way to help is to simply purchase sampleware for SAMPLERS. There\'s nothing you can\'t get, with as high a quality as the proprietary/locked wares. If you consistently do this, and avoid purchasing the sample-app hybrids whenever possible, you WILL force your vendors to respect your wishes. You will reward those that respect you and encourage more open platform products.

I think if you want Yellow Tools to halt its unprecedented attack on the licensing model we prefer, then you have to refuse to support the licensing model they propose. If you grumble with your mouth, and attach the dongle with your hand, you don\'t accomplish anything except bringing MORE of the same on yourself.

Remember, ALWAYS, that YOU HOLD THE POWER. These are your vendors. Too often, people give away their power. You are the artist. You are the producer. These vendors are service providers to YOUR business interests. It is not the other way around. You have no obligation to accept this. Do not allow anyone to make you feel powerless, because absolutely NONE of your vendors\' cash comes from anywhere but YOU--the musician. You make the rules. Allow no disresepect of your interests. They\'ve got nothing you can\'t get somewhere else or do without. So never hand over your power to dictate how data will be handled on your computer.

kitekrazy

12-29-2003, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by dalamein:

From a DAW builder perspective, I can see many possible inconsistencies, and open room for incompatibility with this dongle approach.

I have tested many pro audio configs, and have come across performance/incompatibility issues with USB configs and Soundcards. This makes it really challenging if the client has thier mind set on a spesific card that they want. I then try to build a system that will incorporate the clients need, yet it has to be compatible with the rest of the system. I therefore agree with Thomas that these instances and closed platform, does open room for incompatibilies. This means that the user is forced to use a USB dongle to make the program run and work.

However the Pro Audio Interface market is not so forgiving, and certain companies soundcards (straight out of the manufacturers mouth), do have problems while running USB, and they suggest not using it with their cards. Then we also have to consider the Chipsets, and Motherboard configurations, when running such a closed platform.

Dave I\'ve read stories from Cubase users whose systems quit because of dongle failure. Some people disable USB ports on their systems to reduce IRQ conflicts.
I\'d hate to take a chance on anything that uses USB dongles in a studio. You could lose a day\'s work of pay that way.

Ned Bouhalassa

12-29-2003, 12:17 PM

Another total thumbs-up for Bruce\'s point of view.

Perhaps I will only buy sample-sets for my EXS24 for now on... I\'ll get Kontakt as well, for my GPO (the Kompakt version is too limited IMV).

Bruce, you\'ve made a VSL Percussion set buyer out of me with your praise of the content! Best part? I\'ll be able to mold them like crazy using the EXS\'s built-in audio/sample editor. images/icons/tongue.gif

Tarkio Road

12-29-2003, 12:32 PM

Add me to the \"never buy\" column. I\'m sorry that Yellow Tools decided to take the lead on this. This was a very misguided decision. The bad blood will extend far beyond this forum, and word of mouth is very powerful.

I completely agree with Bruce on every point. I will put up with a dongle on an application like Cubase SX if I have to. But go to the Steinberg forums and read about the nightmare users have had trying to upgrade their dongles for SX 2. Many have become so frustrated they have downloaded cracked versions of SX just so they can actually use the software they bought legally. Because of this increased business from legal users, pirates are flourishing.

Adding dongles to samples is a major slap in the face to users. Using a proprietary player is just as bad. I use Halion which is not challenge/responce OR dongle protected. And I use many libraries from companies that seem to be doing quite well without silly copy protection schemes, including all the SAM libraries, GOS, DIVA, several giga pianos, KH solo Strings, and soon, a VSL library or two. And I can load all of these and any other Giga, Halion, Emu, Akai labrary into ONE sampler and edit programs at will.

There are plenty of posts above describing the benefits of open sample format program editing. Proprietary all-in-one sample player libraries force you to be satisfied with bugs and limitations until the sample player developer decides to do anything about it. You\'re just simply stuck.

I would really like to buy EWQLSO Gold, but it only comes packaged with the Kompakt player. Kompakt player still doesn\'t work with OS-X, even though it\'s been promised for months. And there are posts from users who can\'t make the disk-streaming work with Logic. The response from the sample developer is one we will have to get used to if we keep supporting proprietary players: \"We\'ll bring these technical issues up with NI when they return from holiday. Happy New Year!\"

As for copyright/piracy issues, the successful library developers know that there will always be some shrinkage, just like in retail. But their business model allows for this. The real profits come from legitimate users who NEED to use legal, licensed samples. Every contract I sign has a clause that clearly states that I shall defend, pay and indemnify and hold my clients harmless from and against all claims arising from my use of non-licensed materials. Anyone copying and using samples illegally is doing so only to impress their parents or girlfriends. These users will never represent any real income to sample developers.

Since I have DAWS in 2 different locations (used only by me) I would never buy samples that would require me to haul around a bag full of dongles (\"where\'s my piano dongle? there it is...no, that\'s my bass guitar dongle, or is it my, no, it\'s my drum dongle.\")

I am with Bruce on this and will continue to express my opinion every chance I get.

SWL

12-29-2003, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:
I don\'t like running many plugins at the same time in my sequencer. No matter how well it seems to work I always feel like everything is going to crash on me, and if ONE plugin crashes, it usually takes the sequencer down with it. I\'ve had it happen so many times.

Thomas Maybe you need to consider using a Mac ;-)

Sorry, but i can\'t get Logic on OSX to crash .. EVER! No matter how many plugins, how many samples, etc. Many of these symptoms are based around the instability of the OS.

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 12:55 PM

thanks, I guess this means I\'ll be the only one using the new Spectrasonics virtual instruments...who\'da ever thought spectrum would become my exclusive sound designer? images/icons/smile.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by JonP:
Sure, a washboard and a pair of spoons will be enough to start off a groove, but I\'m thinking of libraries like EWQLSO which offer up a whole soundworld that I simply can\'t obtain elsewhere unless I have a year free, a concert hall, a top engineer, a symphony orchestra and a team of decent programmers to pull it all off.

I\'m not trying to be difficult, its just that some products do offer features that I don\'t think can be found elsewhere. To access them, you have to subscribe to the dictates of the companies. Do you? I\'m having tremendous success with VSL.

Fact is, if people had held out for EWQLSO until they relented and released it on Giga platform, we wouldn\'t be having this discussion. About one month of no sales would have done it...and it\'s not like anyone would have gone out of business because they held out a month, you know? The fact that people just laid down and handed over their money emboldened smaller players like Yellow Tools to try the same thing. And now, much worse.

Every manufacturer and distributor of samples is going to try and create an atmosphere of \"must have right now.\" Probably 90% of sample purchases are driven by a sense of urgency--of somehow imagining that this or that library will be \"the one\" that changes everything for a person.

But is that true? Can anyone in here really say that one single library suddenly made them more profitable than they were the month before they purchased it? That somehow, a single library put them into a completely different financial league?

I really, really doubt it. Careers don\'t work that way. They\'re remarkably steady-state. Chances are much more likely that you\'re making money on whatever you were making money on six months ago, and new library purchases work their way into the \"sound\" quite gradually.

I\'m not suggesting people stop buying. Far from it. I am suggesting that people make a deliberate choice to end this chokehold on technology that some are attempting to force upon our industry.

None of this content copy protection is moving anything forward. All the protected libraries are being pirated right alongside the rest.

So, what you have, in essence, is a parasitic money-drain for the authoring and maintenance of this protection technology which is making your machines less stable, and your technology providers less creative--as they now have to vet every feature against the ever more restrictive and ineffective protection schemes.

That is time, effort, and creativity flowing right down the crapper. That effort, until about a year ago, was being spent on technology you could hear. Now, it\'s just spent. And spent.

The most important thing is to recognize that this has NEVER been about piracy. It is, and always has been about CONTROLLING MARKET SHARE. It is about eliminating choice, and putting the brakes on technology, so it can be pimped out in bite-size, tightly controlled portions. The sooner you stop believing the red herrings floated about to make you sympathetic, and start opening your eyes to the truth--and spending your money on people who shoot straight with you--the sooner this practice will end.

You can only end it one way. Feed the developers who support open platforms, and starve those that don\'t. When these guys get hungry enough, they\'ll show up for your money with the products you want. Until then, if you give them your money for restrictive technology you DON\'T WANT, you are contributing to the problem, not the solution.

You said it yourself. You want the samples. Not the proprietary apps and headaches. Well, don\'t buy them. There are always alternatives that are just as good.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 01:06 PM

Lee, everybody here is smart and perfectly capable of judging my writing on its merits without needing you to interpret for them.

Why does it panic you so, that people might just hold the same sentiments as me? That this new, more restrictive practice with Yellow Tools may be pointing out a very basic fallacy?

You certainly tell me often enough that the sky isn\'t falling, that whatever happens, the market will provide.

So what makes you think the market won\'t provide if musicians stop supporting copy protected sampleware? Won\'t forward thinking individuals realize there\'s money on the table, and step up to collect it?

PeterRoos

12-29-2003, 01:09 PM

Content should be separate from the software to view or play it.

Imagine websites that require you to first download THEIR browser before you can view their texts... Suddenly you are surrendered to the programming qualities of their software developers, while you only wanted to read the texts on the site...

Viewers and players can be buggy, content not. Content is judged in terms of usability, appropriateness, etc., but not in terms of stability and how sexy it looks.

Content usability can be enhanced by software usability, but it should not be dependent on software usability.

I want to be able to purchase licenses for musical and audio CONTENT and not for a multitude of playback applications. I also want to be able to access the content as I like, for my own use, within fair restrictions of a user license.

I have no problems with registering my content purchase directly with the producers and to open a direct line of communication with them. I think
the (option of having) personal contact with people like Gary, Dan and Ernest is the best way of building trust and mutual respect.

Dongles are devices meant for pirates, not for legit users. They create a paradoxical end-effect: legit users seeking to bypass them by using cracks.

We need to remain able to access the content at the level of the individual Wave (or Aiff) files, because you pay for the right to use the sound material. Using the sound material should not be restricted to sound card playback only, using a custom playback application.

My GigaStudio setup is rock-solid, so I would like to remain able to purchase content for that format (or other, similar, stable and \"open\" applications).

I would consider EWQLSO if it was released in Gst format, but not in its current closed format and I really hope I\'m not the only one.

Hardly 2 cts... images/icons/wink.gif

Sovereign

12-29-2003, 01:23 PM

I\'m with stupid. Hats off to Bruce for stating the obvious (again!).

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by PeterRoos:
Content should be separate from the software to view or play it.

Imagine websites that require you to first download THEIR browser before you can view their texts...
healthy analogy, and as agressive as they are, Microsoft made the browser ubiquitous and a seamless part of the users OS experience. \"Embrace and extend\" was one of the strategies.

If Nemesys would have been a little more flexible in allowing for plugin integration options perhaps there wouldn\'t have been the need for so many alternatives some with hidden \"gotcha\'s\"

Restriction of user flexibility is not new, at one time there was a disturbing Giga-exclusive trend by some sample library developers, and I\'m glad this eventually fell apart.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 01:34 PM

David, you have it a little backwards. No one wanted to restrict their sampleware to GigaStudio. It was just the only sampler capable of realizing their vision.

PeterRoos

12-29-2003, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by PeterRoos:
Content should be separate from the software to view or play it.

Imagine websites that require you to first download THEIR browser before you can view their texts...
healthy analogy, and as agressive as they are, Microsoft made the browser ubiquitous and a seamless part of the users OS experience. \"Embrace and extend\" was one of the strategies.

...
<hr /></blockquote>ok... images/icons/rolleyes.gif
But please play with the thought of umpteen websites pushing their browser onto your computer. I agree that MS also knows how to enbrace content and content types, but I was looking for an analogy to underline wrapping up content in software.

Cheerio,

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
David, you have it a little backwards. No one wanted to restrict their sampleware to GigaStudio. It was just the only sampler capable of realizing their vision. there were ads touting \"Giga exclusive\" I remember because it irritated me, and when I sent private correspondence, the response amounted to \"we want to protect giga\", I won\'t mention specific vendors, because it\'s no longer an issue.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Bruce wrote:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />So what makes you think the market won\'t provide if musicians stop supporting copy protected sampleware? Won\'t forward thinking individuals realize there\'s money on the table, and step up to collect it?
Money or chump change?

In your utopia, users (and unfortunately an army of pirates) hold all the cards, and the content producers hold none. It would not be fun to be a content producer in your world.

In my world, the playing field would be more level. I\'d expect the content producers to give me as much flexibility as possible, but I\'d thoroughly understand their need to not scatter the investment they\'ve made to the wind.

Lee Blaske <hr /></blockquote>You should try thinking.

First, there\'s one world, one universe.

Second, with all the money being spent on protection, every scrap of protected content is there for the taking just like the unprotected.

So who\'s the fool? The person who fritters away his creativity, standing there with his finger in the dike (or dyke, about as productive either way...), or the person who applies all of his creativity to products, and keeps pumping out titles?

Is it totally lost on you that until a year ago, lots of very significant profits were made in a sampleware world with no CCP, and that nothing whatsoever has changed about piracy WITH CCP?

Anyway, go on and have your fun, pal. You amuse me. You\'re like my own angry little personal fireman, always there with your little fire hose in case I say something that makes too much sense. Ooooh, scary talk. Must negate. You really are funny. BOO!! Did you jump? Hahahahaha....

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by PeterRoos:

But please play with the thought of umpteen websites pushing their browser onto your computer. I agree that MS also knows how to enbrace content and content types, but I was looking for an analogy to underline wrapping up content in software.

Cheerio, yes and I agreed with you, however the reason why it WORKED with the browser is because a specific vendor found the best way to meet the content delivery and presentation needs for a majority of the users.

Once that happens with soundware content delivery something similar may happen. I\'d argue that at the moment Native Instruments has the lead here. A soundware developer can use their technology and choose not to restrict access to underlying audio content.

I take the time to mention this, because aside from the awful USB Dongle decision by YellowTools other dimensions of soundware delivery alternatives are also being challenged in this thread.

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:

Personally, I\'m impressed by the *extension* of flexibility that many of the new bundled products are bringing. They\'re cross-platform, and versions are available for use within a wide variety of daw platforms. Many can also be used as stand-alone products. This is making my life easier.

Lee Blaske for me the biggest benefit of the technologies is the increased potential for lateral innovation, one engine provider isn\'t going to have all the smarts vision or energy to make all competitors irrelevant...at least not yet.

This past year was a technology learning curve year, so what we got was not much more than just prepackaged sample libraries. Hopefully in years ahead this binding can lead to more innovation as it relates to marrying programming with content. Still need more arps, syncable LFO\'s etc.

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:

That\'s true, but we\'re also getting to a point where there\'s more in each one of these virtual contraptions than one person can explore.
would agree from the sound recording perspective, still think there\'s room for improvement in workflow/integration with instruments. but we\'re almost there, then I just need one more order-of-magnitude improvement in CPU power. Dual Opterons could do it.

Tarkio Road

12-29-2003, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Personally, I\'m impressed by the *extension* of flexibility that many of the new bundled products are bringing. They\'re cross-platform, and versions are available for use within a wide variety of daw platforms.Lee, this is not true. EWQLSO Silver/Gold (Kompakt player) does not work with OS-X (I know, the next 2 weeks, the next 2 weeks). So I would not be able to use them with my DAW.

I have read posts here from at least one user who has had Platinum sitting on a shelf for months waiting for the promised OS-X version. And when he gets the OS-X update that just came out for Platinum only, it will be OS-X version 1.0 with NI\'s first attempt at OS-X disk streaming.

I\'m not blaming EW. I would have bought Gold the day it was announced if it was in Giga or Halion format. I have been using Giga format libraries in OS-X Halion for over a year. It\'s this kind of \"what ya gonna do about it?\" approach to technology updates that I don\'t look forward to.

But the dongle-protected sample library scheme is simply obscene. To embrace it now, with even one company, opens the door for all developers. Then you will have no choice other than having dozens of dongles, with all the upgrade/conflict issues that come with them, or shutting it all down. And what happens if you lose or break the dongle? From what I\'ve read, Steinberg has never clearly stated that you could get a replacement dongle, and they have never corrected statements from users assuming they would have to buy the software again.

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
From what I\'ve read, Steinberg has never clearly stated that you could get a replacement dongle, and they have never corrected statements from users assuming they would have to buy the software again. I was loving Cubase SX for a while there but the dongle confusion has kept me off of it. Halion technology is great but the Wizoo aquisition/joint venture makes me concerned that the best interests of independent soundware developers might be subject to interference from wizoo business concerns.

SWL

12-29-2003, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

So who\'s the fool? The person who fritters away his creativity, standing there with his finger in the dike (or dyke, about as productive either way...), or the person who applies all of his creativity to products, and keeps pumping out titles?

ROTFL !!!!!!!!!!

jack meginniss

12-29-2003, 04:50 PM

Bruce wrote:

Now, Yellow Tools is imposing the one-license/one-installation, software model upon sampleware. Under this model, you cannot use the sampleware on more than one machine at once.

DO NOT SUPPORT THIS.
Bruce, I agree with you totally regarding your position on the one licence/one-installation concept. If I had to buy a new app and/or library licence for every installation on every one of my machines, I wouldn\'t ever be able to afford any of the other great libraries or apps that are available.

Questions: When I purchased two addional \"seats\" of Gigastudio 160 (from Nemesys) to be used by no one other than myself, did I really need to buy these seats to use Giga legally on two additional computers?

I was under the assumption that Nemesys (and now Tascam) required that one licence be restricted to one installation.
Thanks,
Jack

Hardy Heern

12-29-2003, 04:52 PM

David A F said \" Lots of things\"

David, you made some great points. Without the limitations of the forum we could take this further.

Respect,

Frank

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
I was loving Cubase SX for a while there but the dongle confusion has kept me off of it. Halion technology is great but the Wizoo aquisition/joint venture makes me concerned that the best interests of independent soundware developers might be subject to interference from wizoo business concerns. I agree with this. But don\'t you find the current trend, say EastWest\'s interest in NI, or in Yamaha, ditto for Zero-G; YellowTools with UVI, etc., etc., to be more of the same?

The reason I like the idea of content produced for actual samplers is that it takes all this creativity and aims it back at a reasonable number of hosts. The people making the full-featured samplers get rewarded for doing so. The sampleware development gets input. The sampling tools are distributed to the entire user-base, so that the collective smarts of the entire market get funneled back into the tools.

When you start having these back-room deals, where sampleware vendors are essentially keeping the authoring technology of their various vendors OFF the shelf, how are those engines going to mature and grow at the rate of say a Giga or a Kontakt, which must have a programming interface well-tested and designed to serve the full market?

David, you especially know me well enough to know that I am opinionated and strong in my participation--but that I have only the forward propulsion of quality technology in mind. I do not believe the fragmentation of the sampler market is the way for this to be achieved. In fact, already the evidence of this is showing. NI has done nothing but scramble and flounder to meet the expectations of its new \"partners,\" and look how the output of new synthesis titles has suffered compared to its earlier productivity. They\'re some of the most brilliant innovators around, yet they\'re spending all of their time crippling their technology into derivative subsets.

Is that really the way our industry will grow? We\'re in the very infancy of its development, barely past the point of emulating hardware technologies--not even approaching the potential of new ideas. Yet, what is the energy going into? Incredibly retro-minded REDUCTION of function. Locks. Barriers.

The Yellow Tools dongle is just a symptom of a larger sickness. The greatest leap in technology we\'ve experienced in twenty years is now being made cheap and disposable, before it has even had the opportunity to mature.

I don\'t know, man. I don\'t think I\'m a flawed thinker in this regard. I am pretty sure we\'re at a fork in the road, and that some short-sighted interests are pushing very hard for the industry to take the wrong path.

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
But don\'t you find the current trend, say EastWest\'s interest in NI, or in Yamaha, ditto for Zero-G; YellowTools with UVI, etc., etc., to be more of the same?

What I see with NI \"so far\" is the ability for all soundware companies to have unfettered access to the technology, there\'s a pretty disturbing post from Garritan on the the cubase.net forum regarding his efforts to get GOS running on Halion. NI has also provided a roadmap for the most playback options.

Yamaha and Zero-G...I\'ll buck the trend here and insist that this technology is years away from being truly relevant and by then there will be ample competitors. But sure, the dev tools should be available to users.

Yellowtools, I just watched their video and while their MVI (it\'s not UVI based) looks interesting. It has turned them into a software company, it\'s not easy being a software company. I\'d prefer they either partner with UVI if they want the ultimate customizable engine, or NI if they want to do more of a packaged library concept, this relieves them of the software dev testing and support biz, and lets users run their libs either standalone, or in the context of a full blown Kontakt instance in the sequencer.

The reason I like the idea of content produced for actual samplers is that it takes all this creativity and aims it back at a reasonable number of hosts. The people making the full-featured samplers get rewarded for doing so. The sampleware development gets input. The sampling tools are distributed to the entire user-base, so that the collective smarts of the entire market get funneled back into the tools.
agreed if it\'s only about samples, but what about programming innovations that gifted developers may want to provide? there\'s no cross sampler standard for this.

When you start having these back-room deals, where sampleware vendors are essentially keeping the authoring technology of their various vendors OFF the shelf...

I agree with you on this one

David, you especially know me well enough to know that I am opinionated and strong in my participation--but that I have only the forward propulsion of quality technology in mind.

absolutely, and I respect this.

I do not believe the fragmentation of the sampler market is the way for this to be achieved. In fact, already the evidence of this is showing. NI has done nothing but scramble and flounder to meet the expectations of its new \"partners,\" and look how the output of new synthesis titles has suffered compared to its earlier productivity. They\'re some of the most brilliant innovators around, yet they\'re spending all of their time crippling their technology into derivative subsets.

this is one is debateable I think, depending on what a user wants. In the case for a example of a user wanting a plugin version of EWQLSO, all the time wasted is still less than the amount of time it would take to have a version based on Giga technology (because a plugin version does not exist) and may never, depending on Tascam\'s verdict on plugin options.

Is that really the way our industry will grow? We\'re in the very infancy of its development, barely past the point of emulating hardware technologies--not even approaching the potential of new ideas. Yet, what is the energy going into? Incredibly retro-minded REDUCTION of function. Locks. Barriers.

some of this attributable to lack of engine flexibility. The layering approach I prefer is not available in Giga, or Kontakt, neither of them has mono-legato, Giga was slow with the effects/programming integration, Kontakt doesn\'t have the patch change functionality. Until a particular engine \"gets it\" one of the only alternative is competing engines IMO. Still sonically I think we blew away typical hardware this year, this should set us up well for better usability next year..me hopes.

The Yellow Tools dongle is just a symptom of a larger sickness. The greatest leap in technology we\'ve experienced in twenty years is now being made cheap and disposable, before it has even had the opportunity to mature.

I think the YellowTools dongle only really shows inadequate research on their part, from lack of experience. They should have leveraged the experience of NI or UVI. Especially NI which has been experimenting with all kinds of ccp approaches from CDROM,to large mystery files and now challenge/response etc.

I don\'t know, man. I don\'t think I\'m a flawed thinker in this regard. I am pretty sure we\'re at a fork in the road, and that some short-sighted interests are pushing very hard for the industry to take the wrong path. definitely not a flawed thinker, however everyone has different objectives for the technology, I would just like to see as many of the bases covered as reasonably possible....and no one vendor seems to have been able or willing to meet the demand.

David Abraham

12-29-2003, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by Hardy Heern:
David A F said \" Lots of things\"

David, you made some great points. Without the limitations of the forum we could take this further.

Respect,

Frank many thanks Frank

dalamein

12-29-2003, 11:11 PM

I am in support of Bruce\'s viewpoint of this issue.

From a DAW builder perspective, I can see many possible inconsistencies, and open room for incompatibility with this dongle approach.

Although this dongle will work with a DAW system, I tend to be very strict as far as eliminating all possible incompatibilities with regards to a smooth/clean running system.

I have tested many pro audio configs, and have come across performance/incompatibility issues with USB configs and Soundcards. This makes it really challenging if the client has thier mind set on a spesific card that they want. I then try to build a system that will incorporate the clients need, yet it has to be compatible with the rest of the system. I therefore agree with Thomas that these instances and closed platform, does open room for incompatibilies. This means that the user is forced to use a USB dongle to make the program run and work.

I am not saying a system will not work with USB running, in fact after a system has run smoothly, I will then test it with many USB ports running. However the Pro Audio Interface market is not so forgiving, and certain companies soundcards (straight out of the manufacturers mouth), do have problems while running USB, and they suggest not using it with their cards. If the client does not have USB in thier priority list, I always shut it off before shipping. Then we also have to consider the Chipsets, and Motherboard configurations, when running such a closed platform. This problem lies in that this engine is exclusive to yellow tools, and if I need support on config issues, I am not so sure they could help me with the techicality details on Chipsets, USB, Motherboards etc.

On the other hand this could work for me as I could build systems exclusively to run Culture and other Yellow tools products, where the user could have a standalone DAW only to run A Yellow tools product, yet this is not my intention at this time, and rather wish to consentrate on systems that prove to work, and where I feel comfortable with using my knowledge in building a trouble free environment.

I also want to promote creativity, and supply the tools to create endless imagination, therefore I also only support open platforms, and will try to sell such open platforms, however if a client really wants this product, I will not hesitate to satisfy their wants, and will build a system to accomodate thier need, although I will try to give them other options that might work better for them in the long run.

Dave

JonP

12-29-2003, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
They\'ve got nothing you can\'t get somewhere else or do without. I support your arguement now as I did when I first read it back when, but is this statement actually true?.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-29-2003, 11:19 PM

Originally posted by JonP:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
They\'ve got nothing you can\'t get somewhere else or do without. I support your arguement now as I did when I first read it back when, but is this statement actually true?. <hr /></blockquote>Of course it is. Music can be made with anything, and alternatives exist everywhere to these products. There is no product so \"valuable\" that we should lay down and just accept whatever a vendor thinks he can get away with. YOU are the boss. It is not the other way around. Your money makes the whole industry tick. If you don\'t want these methods used, don\'t support those who use them.

JonP

12-29-2003, 11:31 PM

Sure, a washboard and a pair of spoons will be enough to start off a groove, but I\'m thinking of libraries like EWQLSO which offer up a whole soundworld that I simply can\'t obtain elsewhere unless I have a year free, a concert hall, a top engineer, a symphony orchestra and a team of decent programmers to pull it all off.

I\'m not trying to be difficult, its just that some products do offer features that I don\'t think can be found elsewhere. To access them, you have to subscribe to the dictates of the companies.

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:

But if EWQLSO had been released in Giga format it would work in GS, and in full-blown plug-in samplers like Halion and Kontakt.
Until recently it was pretty much well asserted that the Giga support in Kontakt and Halion was a non-starter...agreed? EWQLSO development predates general confidence that robust Giga support would appear in Halion and/or Kontakt in a reasonable time frame.

Also I don\'t own EWQLSO, but are there features therein that are not yet supported in giga files?....(besides ccp images/icons/smile.gif )

And releasing libraries in an open format creates and promotes healthy competition and faster technology updates.


Yes, if all they consist only of raw samples. For example the Scarbee libraries are ideal for this. What about custom programming options?

And what is an \"open\" format? I\'m not entirely sure that Tascam is happy that other sampler vendors are working to seemlessly import Giga files. So I\'m not sure there\'s really an open format. There is however a multi-format strategy and that\'s a business decision.

What if every developer decided to use a Kontakt player with their libraries? I would have to have about 13 NI licenses, all needing care and maintenance every time I upgrade.


I\'m not excited about the prospect of managing many licenses either, NOR am I necessarily advocating CCP. My concern is that plugin integration is available for the best sounding content. Tascam does not currenly support this, so the alternatives have to be evaluated.

I don\'t want the issue of CCP and USB Dongles to be lumped with plugin integration. Two separate issues.

Plus, I would have paid for 13 NI licenses. Add dongles to the mix and I would need to hire an assistant to keep track of all the red tape and update incompatibilities. regarding paying for 13 NI licenses I don\'t see the issue here. If you pay a fair price for the content, you pay for whatever the content provider has to do to make their business model work. There\'s a ton of stuff sitting among the layers of your OS that you\'ve \"paid\" for even if you aren\'t using it.

USB Dongle...yeah bad idea, don\'t think for a minute that I support this, just trying to keep the issues SEPARATE.

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
This is exactly the point, and the issue to which everyone should object. Money is being diverted away from supporting leading edge technologies, and piffled away on crippleware.

I think Kontakt is leading edge, and I think what was delivered this year is pretty impressive. I\'m not that concerned about what money a particular vendor may spend on securing their content, I am concerned about how the ccp decision effects me, that definitely sucks, but I think how they spend their money is their business...especially when for the most part the content is rocking the house.

In my ideal world all the available content would sit happily in Kontakt, without separate authorization...yet Kontakt doesn\'t even do everything I want it to do. Of course others want it to be Giga, others EXS, Halion etc....until one of these samplers dares to cover all the bases, custom solutions will be in demand.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 02:35 PM

I certainly count Kontakt as a leading edge application. And, it is an open platform when developers choose to develop for it, and not for Kompakt. So, I encourage people to support developers who create open-platform Kontakt libraries as well.

jack meginniss

12-30-2003, 02:37 PM

Thanks for the response Lee. I was aware of the price of an additional licence. I was just hoping that it really meant licence-per-user as opposed to licence-per-installation so that I would not have to buy any more licences, with the exception of GS3, if I decide to install GS on more machines.
Jack

Nick Phoenix

12-30-2003, 02:48 PM

I believe that the Yellow Tools decision was purely monetary. There is alot less money in the sample business for the developers than you might think. I am guessing that despite the excellence of their products, they are facing extinction. Pirated Culture is floating all around LA and the drum, bass and saxaphone genres have become incredibly competitive. I think they should consider challenge response.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
regarding paying for 13 NI licenses I don\'t see the issue here.I think it\'s rather ludicrous, myself. Why pay 13 times for the same code you\'ve already licensed once? It\'s wasteful and unneccessary, and a product of vendors who place their interests above those of their clients. If people stop putting their money into these products, and make it clear that they expect their vendors to provide sampleware in open platform formats, the practice will stop.

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 02:49 PM

David Abraham Fenton said:

\"Until recently it was pretty much well asserted that the Giga support in Kontakt and Halion was a non-starter...agreed?\"

David - I\'m not sure what you meant by this. But I have been importing Giga libraries into Halion (in OS-X) for over a year. The latest version imports Giga files perfectly (MW, KS, etc.) and streams very efficiently. Kontakt and Halion have much higher polyphony and much more advanced program editing features than Giga. So I don\'t see how either are non-starters.

\"EWQLSO development predates general confidence that robust Giga support would appear in Halion and/or Kontakt in a reasonable time frame.\"

Again, Halion has had robust Giga support with Windows, OS-9, OS-X for over a year. Actually, it is EWQLSO Silver/Gold that will not work with OS-X at all yet. If EWQLSO were in Giga format, it would be working well on all platforms now. And if released in Halion or Kontakt EWQLSO Silver/Gold/Platinum would be working well now, and in 24-bit.

\"Also I don\'t own EWQLSO, but are there features therein that are not yet supported in giga files?....(besides ccp images/icons/smile.gif )\"

Absolutely. Technology has moved ahead since GigaStudio\'s last release. That is why Scarbee produced his bass samples in Halion format. This is also why Post Music, Bela D, all Project SAM Brass, and other formerly Giga-only library producers are releasing Halion-native versions of their libraries. There is just so much more you can do in Halion and Kontakt than you can in Giga. Scarbee has said many times that he could not have programmed all the powerful features of his new libraries in any other sampler but Halion.

If you like the sound of EWQLSO, you should have the option of buying it as a standalone library to be used in a full-featured sampler. You shouldn\'t have to buy a crippled player just to get access to the sounds. images/icons/smile.gif

Nick Phoenix

12-30-2003, 02:54 PM

Nick Phoenix

12-30-2003, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
David Abraham Fenton said:

If you like the sound of EWQLSO, you should have the option of buying it as a standalone library to be used in a full-featured sampler. You shouldn\'t have to buy a crippled player just to get access to the sounds. images/icons/smile.gif YOU DO! It now works in Kontakt and you can do everything but export the waves. You can even alter sample start times and edit the loops. This is really a non-issue for EWQLSO.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 03:00 PM

And we have VSL, Scarbee, Dan Dean, GOS, and several libraries of your own to say that people are making money on open-platform libraries as well.

The answer is always more titles. No different than writing music. If you want to make more sales, you put out titles. You build a catalog so that someone is always buying something.

Marsdy

12-30-2003, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
I believe that the Yellow Tools decision was purely monetary. There is alot less money in the sample business for the developers than you might think. I am guessing that despite the excellence of their products, they are facing extinction. Pirated Culture is floating all around LA and the drum, bass and saxaphone genres have become incredibly competitive. I think they should consider challenge response. This thread certainley isn\'t helping them stay in business images/icons/frown.gif

Marsdy

12-30-2003, 03:15 PM

double post

Marsdy

12-30-2003, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
And we have VSL, Scarbee, Dan Dean, GOS, and several libraries of your own to say that people are making money on open-platform libraries as well.

The answer is always more titles. No different than writing music. If you want to make more sales, you put out titles. You build a catalog so that someone is always buying something. How do you do that if your first big product is pirated to the extent that you make no money and go out of business?

Alexcremers

12-30-2003, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

The answer is always more titles. No different than writing music. If you want to make more sales, you put out titles. You build a catalog so that someone is always buying something. Yes, indeed, or just one of those titles is a lucky number while all the others you wrote are deadborn. Either way, the more the merrier.

------------
Alex Cremers

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 03:33 PM

Lee: In fact, I do not like copy protection of any kind, and if you were privy to my private communications with both Nemesys and Waves you would know that I lobby very heavily for them to avoid using it...for exactly the same reason I lobby everyone to avoid using it. IT DOESN\'T HAVE ANY EFFECT, except to divert money away from creating!!!

Both Waves and Giga are out there for the downloading. CP didn\'t work. Never does. Never ever. When someone invents the pick-free lock, let\'s be sure to put them right to work on perpetual motion and inventing girls who still like to give head after they\'re married.

Ouch that hurts

12-30-2003, 03:46 PM

Fortunately, as new plug-in formats evolve and the old ones need updating, there\'s an opportunity for these companies to regain control of the situation. Unlike pure content, these products do not remain cracked forever.Yeah, there\'s usually a couple of days\' grace between the release of a new update and the crack appearing on Kazaa!

Lee, the problem with your argument is that you have consistently avoided addressing one fundamental issue (although its been thrown at you several times). That is that copy protection doesn\'t actually DO what it is supposed to do.

Years ago when I first started building DAWS, I got hold of illegal copies of every program, sample set etc I wanted, as simple as a few phone calls. It was the only way I could see of making sense of the software maze and working out what I should really spend my money on.

I now work professionally and everything on my system is legit. But that\'s not because of copy protection, its (a) because I\'ve worked out what software I really want to run, narrowed it down to what I can afford, and I WANT to support the vendors of it, and (b) because I can\'t be entertaining the hassle and risk of putting things out there with uncleared samples. But I know people still doing the non-professional thing who have every program and sample under the sun on their systems. Cubase dongle? I don\'t use Cubase but I know many people who do, and I rarely see a dongle except in professional studios (and many of them even install the crack, despite having bought the program, to save themselves the grief). Personally I have given my money to Cakewalk for a copy of Sonar that I can just get on and use.

I tend to think Bruce and Nick are on the case - making money from sampling is difficult so sample developers are trying to corner the player side of things as well, either directly or through agreements with NI etc. This is a fair enough business decision on their part, but we need to consider what is actually best for us as end-users, and not be diverted by misleading assumptions that copy protection is actually about eliminating piracy.

I\'m with Bruce. There are too many unknowns in a DAW already, without having the use of your samples dependent on dongles, authorisation codes etc (and thus ALWAYS dependent on the company staying in business). My DAW is mine, I\'ve sweated blood to tame it and make it do what I want, and I\'d rather have its content in a flexible open format that I can do what I like with, thanks very much.

Competition is a wonderful thing. I\'ll be buying VSL.

Ouch that hurts

12-30-2003, 03:49 PM

Both Waves and Giga are out there for the downloading. CP didn\'t work. Never does. Never ever. When someone invents the pick-free lock, let\'s be sure to put them right to work on perpetual motion and inventing girls who still like to give head after they\'re married.LOL! Now there\'s ONE product I\'ll take sight unseen. Where can I place an advance order?

Not Dudley Simpson

12-30-2003, 03:50 PM

Good grief, Bruce. You really ARE a good ol\' boy after all. There\'s me thinking you were like the rest of us limp-wristed dilitantes, but, by god, you were actually Joe Don Baker all along!

Yeehaw!!!

and a little bit scary.... images/icons/frown.gif images/icons/tongue.gif
Heath

Lazul

12-30-2003, 03:57 PM

All CP issues aside I personally hate the idea of each sound developer having their own proprietary \"rompler\". For one thing you have to master several different gui\'s and workflows. I\'d rather become a poweruser at one and not have it dictated by content. For example, I do not like Kontakt at all, and especially its crippled little brother Kompakt. For the way I work Halion is so much better. Kontakt\'s gui is just whacky as well as it\'s workflow. My biggest qualm is its patch management. In Halion you can load up one program yet you can assign more than one midi channel to that single program. In Kontakt/Kompakt you have to load the same program on each midi channel. Not only that but it seems to load the samples each time. Halion does not load identical shared samples.

Let\'s take a big piano for example. In this one particular song I want to set up 3 midi channels, each with different pan and volume. In Halion this is easy. Just load the piano and assign those channels to it and volume/pan is discreet for each. With Kompakt you would have to load the piano 3 times. Including samples! So if your piano is 1.5 gigs that would be 4.5 gigs trying to load. Aint going to happen here.

Also a complaint is that I cant seem to access network volumes though Kontakt browser. They just dont show up [they do in Halion]. Maybe I am doing something wrong. This rules Kompakt out since I keep my content spread out over 2 different computers.

I am not trying to bash Kontakt at all but I am only trying to illustrate that the developer is telling me how I should work. There\'s no way I can buy any East West products that use that Kompakt engine. The rompler just gets in my way too much. That\'s too bad because I think they sound really great. images/icons/frown.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Marsdy:
How do you do that if your first big product is pirated to the extent that you make no money and go out of business? That would be the result of a very VERY bad business plan. Look at Doug Rogers\' business. Do you think he would have partnered with Nick and produced EWQLSO without the Butta-Booty loops and all those other products providing the basis with which to take on a project of such significant scale? If you go into any licensing business thinking that every product will hit, you\'re just a dead man walking.

I have some experience here...you\'re talking to a guy who lost $50k on a single album once!! If that had been my sole source of income, I\'d be living in a cardboard box right now.

Marsdy

12-30-2003, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Marsdy:
How do you do that if your first big product is pirated to the extent that you make no money and go out of business? That would be the result of a very VERY bad business plan. Look at Doug Rogers\' business. Do you think he would have partnered with Nick and produced EWQLSO without the Butta-Booty loops and all those other products providing the basis with which to take on a project of such significant scale? If you go into any licensing business thinking that every product will hit, you\'re just a dead man walking.

I have some experience here...you\'re talking to a guy who lost $50k on a single album once!! If that had been my sole source of income, I\'d be living in a cardboard box right now. <hr /></blockquote>But everyone has to start somewhere and maybe the market for Butta Butty loops is saturated!

Yellow Tools aren\'t taking anything away from you, they are giving you the opportunity to use best of breed percussion samples. I can pretty much guarantee you are not using better conga, bongo or countless other percussion multisamples.

But you seem happy for them to go out of business becasue you don\'t happen to agree with the way they choose to run their business. OK so you can\'t edit the samples, it doesn\'t matter, Culture it is what it is and it\'s a bloody great product that puts a big smile on your face because they did it so well and it\'s an absolute blast to play.

I\'d really like to see them making more libraries even with a stupid dongle. I admit, I groaned at the prospect of yet another dongle but if it works, fine, I\'ll get over it.

Bruce, you are not using any YT, Spectrasonics, or any product based on the Kompakt engine presumably. You don\'t know what you\'re missing!!! images/icons/wink.gif

vash

12-30-2003, 04:56 PM

This isn\'t a black or white issue in my opinion. But my question is for a company desperate as YT to resort to this method, what real alternatives are there?

I think Culture is an amazing product personally. I am thrilled to see they are adding new content of which would probably have saved me the purchase of $200-300 worth of other sample libraries to acquire. I think a lot of people seem to be airing out all sorts of their own personal grievances against YT, using new engines to run their samples, etc. Which really isn\'t related to the issue at hand per se. I have great respect for Bruce\'s opinions and agree with them most of the time. However, to me all I see is a bandwagoning of opinions here that could prove detrimental to YT in all sorts of various matters not relating to the new announcement. I personally had no idea YT could be on the brink of disaster as I love Culture and would love to see it do well in the marketplace.

I think the main issue here at hand is to find a way to stop piracy so that these situations don\'t keep damaging both us end users and developers that make these awesome products.

That\'s my two cents.

tomhartman

12-30-2003, 04:57 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joanne Babunovic:
[qb]

It\'s a matter of what you want to support. I want to support the sampleware vendors who support open, platform-transparent, editable libraries. I am encouraging those who believe this path leads to the best marketplace to follow suit. If you have a choice where to spend your money, spend it on someone who supports open, editable platforms, and you will see that sector grow. Pretty simple. Bruce, does this mean you will not use QLSO, or any of the UVI engine variants out there like Stylus or Atmosphere?

It would seem like we\'d be limiting our own abilities by boycotting what seems to be a pervassive change in how samples are delivered. Personally, I don\'t like it either. I don\'t like Kontakt or any of it\'s little brothers a bit, preferring GIGA and Mach5...but perhaps that\'s because I\'m on a Mac and Kontakt has been buggier than hell on the Mac for me. But if I want the sound of QLSO, I have to accept it in the format it\'s sold in.

You are right to say that it looks suspiciously like pure samplers will be in short supply if this situation begins to proliferate. I\'m not sure what the answer is, but my gut is, my music comes first, and if the sounds I need to make it are only available in one medium, that\'s the one I\'ll have to use.

Others?

Rich Pell

12-30-2003, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Ouch that hurts:
Yeah, there\'s usually a couple of days\' grace between the release of a new update and the crack appearing on Kazaa!

Lee, the problem with your argument is that you have consistently avoided addressing one fundamental issue (although its been thrown at you several times). That is that copy protection doesn\'t actually DO what it is supposed to do.

Definately, everything seems \"crackable\". I`d imagine for hackers, the more CP~the greater the challenge~ the harder they`ll work at cracking it.
On the other hand (and I`m surprised no one has mentioned this..). The new challenge/response system can definately reduce/thwart casual Friend>Friend trading/copying. E.G Since u can only really get 2 licences for any Lib. wrapped up in the new NI Romplers and Spectasonic stuff,you would have to sacrifice one of your licenses in order to share ,which no paying customer in there right mind would do.
I think this sort of inconvience will reduce piracy on a product somewhat. I`d guess at about 20%. I`d bet QLSO isnt pirated nearly as much as VSL for that very reason. So ,if I`m right, then the the new C/P can work for the developer..I`d love to see some hard stats. on this type of thing..Rich P.S Happy New Year everyone!!! images/icons/smile.gif images/icons/smile.gif images/icons/smile.gif

J. Whaley

12-30-2003, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I certainly count Kontakt as a leading edge application. And, it is an open platform when developers choose to develop for it, and not for Kompakt. So, I encourage people to support developers who create open-platform Kontakt libraries as well. Bruce you said earlier that Gary Garritan had sold out - but I\'m confused as to how. His Kontakt player (Kontakt not kompakt) does offer copy protection for the PLAYER - but not the samples. I loaded several samples into Kontakt (full blown) from GPO last night and was able to edit until my heart was content. I checked out all of Tom Hopkins\' programming, and had direct access to ALL of the individual sample .wav files. How is this not open?

I\'ve not got EWQLSO so I can\'t say on that.

Clearly Yellow tools and thier Dongle (which is what this is about anyway) would not be so flexible - but I guess if Gary can get Copy Protection - even just so much as a deterent - and make SOME more sales maybe, but not be limiting us as the user I\'m not sure it\'s a bad idea. Thus far i\'ve found GPO to be as flexible as one can want. It offers a player for the novice and full fledged editing for the geek!

J-

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
David Abraham Fenton said:

If you like the sound of EWQLSO, you should have the option of buying it as a standalone library to be used in a full-featured sampler. You shouldn\'t have to buy a crippled player just to get access to the sounds. images/icons/smile.gif YOU DO! It now works in Kontakt and you can do everything but export the waves. You can even alter sample start times and edit the loops. This is really a non-issue for EWQLSO. <hr /></blockquote>Nick - I use Halion. So tell me how I can do everything except export waves.

Here\'s a compromise for you to consider. Release EWQLSO Gold in Giga or Halion format, with no sample player. Use a challenge/response copy protection scheme (no dongle) just like NI does. I will be your first customer.

How would this expose you to piracy anymore than forcing me to buy samplers I don\'t need?

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I think it\'s rather ludicrous, myself. Why pay 13 times for the same code you\'ve already licensed once? It\'s wasteful and unneccessary, and a product of vendors who place their interests above those of their clients. how much would GPO cost without the player? and if I\'m not mistaken the plugin version of the the PMI Piano actually cost less than the plain sample version.

I purchased Kompakt for the included library, but load all the sounds in Kontakt. If I end up purchasing Silver, I\'ll do the same. Funny how GPO and Silver have this \"added cost\" of the NI runtime, yet represent arguably some of the best value in the history of sampleware.

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by J. Whaley:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I certainly count Kontakt as a leading edge application. And, it is an open platform when developers choose to develop for it, and not for Kompakt. So, I encourage people to support developers who create open-platform Kontakt libraries as well. Bruce you said earlier that Gary Garritan had sold out - but I\'m confused as to how. His Kontakt player (Kontakt not kompakt) does offer copy protection for the PLAYER - but not the samples. I loaded several samples into Kontakt (full blown) from GPO last night and was able to edit until my heart was content. I checked out all of Tom Hopkins\' programming, and had direct access to ALL of the individual sample .wav files. How is this not open?<hr /></blockquote>J-It is not open unless you spend a few more hundred dollars on a sampler you may not want or need. Believe it or not, not every sample composer uses or has Kontakt. And they don\'t want to be forced into buying it just to edit the samples they bought. Put yourself in my shoes (stinky as they are). What if I responded to you that GPO is completely open as long as you purchase Halion?

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:

So I don\'t see how either are non-starters.

please note the tense I used, WAS a non starter. There have been issues with compressed giga files, dimensions...even rumours of litigation. I followed the whole thing because I was planning to invest in Halion.

Again, Halion has had robust Giga support with Windows, OS-9, OS-X for over a year.


a year is a long time?, when did EWQLSO development begin? And of course it\'s still not quite there in Kontakt. Halion is a great product, but do they really want it to work well with SONAR? Logic? maybe maybe not. risky bet.

And if released in Halion or Kontakt EWQLSO Silver/Gold/Platinum would be working well now, and in 24-bit.

Yes and of course yes it IS working well in Kontakt now. Your issue is getting it working in Halion. I have no problem with that. But did you not read Garritan\'s post on the Halion forum a few months ago? what was that all about!?!?!? very alarming to say the least.

Absolutely. Technology has moved ahead since GigaStudio\'s last release. That is why Scarbee produced his bass samples in Halion format.


Ok I\'m a huge scarbee fan now, so with his upcoming Keyboard FX, I would love to have this integrated into an instrument, a rhodes instrument with the tremolo, etc right there..even pre-programmed patches if you will. Is this possible with any open format sampler? the answer is no. Something like this would require a plugin or custom app. Not that Scarbee is even considering this.

So when you assail the validity of the plugin format, and suggest boycotts. This in my opinion is standing in the way of advancements.

There are samplers, sampleware and sample synthesizers. I\'d like to see the advancement of sample synthesizers be given a chance.

If you like the sound of EWQLSO, you should have the option of buying it as a standalone library to be used in a full-featured sampler. You shouldn\'t have to buy a crippled player just to get access to the sounds. images/icons/smile.gif I don\'t think you understand, EWQLSO can run in the full blown Kontakt.

additionally, for those new to software instruments in general...having EWQLSO, or GPO or whatever delivered as an integrated product removes a significant sales barrier IMO. Instruments are easier to market. The customer only has to buy one thing. For those of us who are experienced, yeah, buy the plugin, but don\'t use it, load it in Kontakt.

For those who prefer Halion...I feel your pain..yes.

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
Release EWQLSO Gold in Giga or Halion format, with no sample player. Use a challenge/response copy protection scheme (no dongle) just like NI does. I will be your first customer.

how can challenge/response be added to sample data?, it would require some kind of application, or sampler runtime environment. In the case of Halion, to date this only seems to be available to Wizoo developers.

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
What if I responded to you that GPO is completely open as long as you purchase Halion? [/QB]then possibly Halion programmers needs to solve the Kontakt file format riddle? just like Giga had to solve the AKAI file riddle and Kontakt and Halion had to solve the giga file riddle.

And now there will likely be pressure for sample developers to support Giga3 file format....what fun lies ahead.

Nick Phoenix

12-30-2003, 06:16 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
With Kompakt you would have to load the piano 3 times. Including samples! So if your piano is 1.5 gigs that would be 4.5 gigs trying to load. Aint going to happen here.

images/icons/frown.gif That\'s not true. Kontakt does not load the samples again. You must have missed something.

Nick Phoenix

12-30-2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by tomhartman:
[

You are right to say that it looks suspiciously like pure samplers will be in short supply if this situation begins to proliferate. I\'m not sure what the answer is, but my gut is, my music comes first, and if the sounds I need to make it are only available in one medium, that\'s the one I\'ll have to use.

Others? [/QB]Herein lies part of the problem for Bruce. Self contained libraries do not bode well for Giga 3, because you can\'t import them. If all sample developers go to a self contained program, then Giga 3 will fail.

Lazul

12-30-2003, 06:23 PM

hmmm I wonder what I am doing wrong then. I loaded a piano once and then again and the samples loaded both times. Nick, coould you verify or not that Kontakt/Konpakt cant access network drives?

thanks

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
I don\'t think you understand, EWQLSO can run in the full blown Kontakt.

additionally, for those new to software instruments in general...having EWQLSO, or GPO or whatever delivered as an integrated product removes a significant sales barrier IMO. Instruments are easier to market. The customer only has to buy one thing. For those of us who are experienced, yeah, buy the plugin, but don\'t use it, load it in Kontakt.

For those who prefer Halion...I feel your pain..yes. David - How can you say the customer only has to buy one thing, but also say you can run EWQLSO in the full blown version of Kontakt? Doesn\'t that mean for full functionality you really have to buy two things?

Also, what pain do you feel for Halion users? I respect your choice of samplers, why be nasty?

Lazul

12-30-2003, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
I don\'t think you understand, EWQLSO can run in the full blown Kontakt.

additionally, for those new to software instruments in general...having EWQLSO, or GPO or whatever delivered as an integrated product removes a significant sales barrier IMO. Instruments are easier to market. The customer only has to buy one thing. For those of us who are experienced, yeah, buy the plugin, but don\'t use it, load it in Kontakt.

For those who prefer Halion...I feel your pain..yes. David - How can you say the customer only has to buy one thing, but also say you can run EWQLSO in the full blown version of Kontakt? Doesn\'t that mean for full functionality you really have to buy two things?

Also, what pain do you feel for Halion users? I respect your choice of samplers, why be nasty? <hr /></blockquote>I dont think he was trying to be nasty. Just being sympathetic for us since we are getting screwed in the whole deal considering Halion is the superior sampler. images/icons/wink.gif

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
What if I responded to you that GPO is completely open as long as you purchase Halion? then possibly Halion programmers needs to solve the Kontakt file format riddle? just like Giga had to solve the AKAI file riddle and Kontakt and Halion had to solve the giga file riddle.

And now there will likely be pressure for sample developers to support Giga3 file format....what fun lies ahead. [/QB]<hr /></blockquote>So David, you believe we would all be better off in a Kontakt-only world, with no other sampler formats supported? Are you willing to argue your point to this extreme? If not, what are you saying?

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
David - How can you say the customer only has to buy one thing, but also say you can run EWQLSO in the full blown version of Kontakt? Doesn\'t that mean for full functionality you really have to buy two things?


I\'ll try again, for those NEW to software instruments, one package is an easier sell. They don\'t have to buy two products, unless they want additional power. The specs on the EWQLSO should describe to them everything they can do with that product, provided they have a suitable sequencer

Also, what pain do you feel for Halion users? I respect your choice of samplers, why be nasty? I was making a sincere statement here. I actually prefer the Halion GUI, I identify with the fact that if you are commited to Halion, not having particular libraries support it can be frustrating.

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 06:48 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
So David, you believe we would all be better off in a Kontakt-only world, with no other sampler formats supported? Are you willing to argue your point to this extreme? If not, what are you saying? that\'s a big leap Tarkio, I think you\'re getting a bit defensive.

I\'m saying that

1) If NI is successfully getting library developers to support their format

2) If certain library developers elect not to create a Halion version

3) If Halion product management wants to help Halion customers use these libraries that are available in NI format

Then Halion developers need to provide a solution for Halion to open NI format samples.

And this is not a new scenario.

To be clear I like it when sample library developers create multi-format CDROMS when possible.

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
Just being sympathetic for us since we are getting screwed in the whole deal considering Halion is the superior sampler. images/icons/wink.gif in a lot of ways Halion IS superior, but it has not been positioned as well as NI has positioned Kontakt

Lazul

12-30-2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Lazul:
Just being sympathetic for us since we are getting screwed in the whole deal considering Halion is the superior sampler. images/icons/wink.gif in a lot of ways Halion IS superior, but it has not been positioned as well as NI has positioned Kontakt <hr /></blockquote>yeah, Steinberg have idiots as marketers.

dougrogers

12-30-2003, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Look at Doug Rogers\' business. Do you think he would have partnered with Nick and produced EWQLSO without the Butta-Booty loops and all those other products providing the basis with which to take on a project of such significant scale? If you go into any licensing business thinking that every product will hit, you\'re just a dead man walking.Well I\'ve got a shocking statistic for you Bruce. Michiel Post is here on this forum and he will verify that our copy-protected plug-in version of his Bosendorfer 290 Piano sold \"35 times\" the amount of all other \"open\" formats combined last month, and the feedback we get from customers is \"excellent\". The reason? Most users love the fact that the library sits inside their work environment, no matter what format that is. Whenever there\'s a problem reported with any of the samples, Michiel posts an update. We have also done this twice with EWQLSO and will continue doing so until the majority of users are happy.

You also miss an important issue for developers. When we bundle the software and sounds together we \"know\" what the product will sound like - in all other cases where the product is imported into another foreign format, the product suffers due to the interpretation of that particular format. It\'s safe to say a library with complex programming will \"never\" sound the same in any foreign format currently. It\'s interesting to note that the \"Giga\" format is now used this way more than ever. So this is just as important \"artistically\" to developers as CP - which btw \"does\" reduce the problem even if it doesn\'t eliminate it - our sales figures speak for themselves.

There has been much talk in this thread about these products being \"locked\". That is a gross exaggeration. You can import all of our libraries into Kontakt (the format they were programmed in, so it is identical) and edit to your hearts content and create as many programs as you want. On top of the programming flexibility offered in Kontakt, if you \"really\" need to get a sample, any of them, you can render them. Sure, it\'s not as convenient as accessing them from a folder, but we\'ve tried that method for 15 years and it didn\'t work commercially. We\'re not in the business of offering charitable samples to play with. We offer a complete product that hopefully our customers find useful to their creativity.

All of the developers I know in this business are hard-working and dedicated to their craft. When years of work is stolen in an hour it amounts to rape for them! You\'ve never made a sample library to know what this feels like.

So, instead of starting a boycott to run small developers out of town like Yellow Tools (what a hollow victory that would be!), why don\'t we all put our heads together and devise a CP method that allows the access and flexibility users want, but still offers us the ability to limit casual copying of our products, \"and\" offers the faithful reproduction of our work. That would be a much more productive discussion than the witch-hunt that\'s going on here. I believe this would be a win-win for your objective and ours.

Happy New Year!

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST

Lazul

12-30-2003, 07:20 PM

good points Doug. But you got to admit slapping a dongle on their content is rather excessive. You dont see the absurdity of that? As a musician how many libraries would you use and how many dongles would you like to manage? 10? 15?

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 07:40 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
To be clear I like it when sample library developers create multi-format CDROMS when possible. Thanks David. Good that we agree. images/icons/smile.gif

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
good points Doug. But you got to admit slapping a dongle on their content is rather excessive. You dont see the absurdity of that? As a musician how many libraries would you use and how many dongles would you like to manage? 10? 15? Doug - Do you see dongles in EWQLSO\'s future?

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Culture is a wonderful product, meticulously sampled and assembled, with a very intuitive, quick to learn interface that\'s exquisitely designed for the task at hand. As I\'ve mentioned earlier, the Yellowtools folks are also a pleasure to deal with.
I picked this up from the video, the product looks hot. If they convert (back) to a reasonable challenge/response system...I\'m in there. Unfortunately I\'m allergic to dongles.

Ouch that hurts

12-30-2003, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Yeah, there\'s usually a couple of days\' grace between the release of a new update and the crack appearing on Kazaa!
PT HD has been out for some time, and its plug-in CP has not been cracked.

CP can be quite bulletproof, but it needs some hardware integration.<hr /></blockquote>Oh certainly - hardware-based CP is a whole different story. Its both more useful, since it stands a chance of actually working, and less problematic to the user since the hardware can be hardwired to work that way and the CP isn\'t dependent on all sorts of software variables.

I use Soundscape Mixtreme soundcards, with some quite expensive plugins that run on their native DSP. They have the best copy protection in the business. All the plugins are available free on their website, but they will only work with a code that unlocks them for your SPECIFIC card. So you pay your money and Soundscape give you the code.

But unlike native code, once you\'ve got it you\'ve got it. There\'s no buggering about with needing another code after you reformat your hard drive or whatever. You can move the card around from PC to PC and the code will always work on that card, etc.

I am perfectly happy with this method of CP since it is totally unobtrusive and unproblematic. And I have never, EVER seen a Soundscape plugin cracked. To do so, somebody would have to disassemble their Soundscape DAW or Mixtreme card and learn the proprietary code that Soundscape use to program their DSPs.

Problem is, sample vendors are still working in the \"pure software\" paradigm, and when it comes to pure software, there\'s nothing that\'s uncrackable, and its very hard to find a method of CP that is reliable, robust and unobtrusive.

OTOH, the content producers on this list have asserted that CCP *is* helping their bottom lines. They\'re the ones who are in a position to know.Well, they\'re trying to justify it so they would say that, wouldn\'t they? I would be interested to know how they can possibly measure such a thing with any degree of accuracy. For example, EWQLSO has only ever been available in a CP\'d version. So you can\'t compare sales figures for it with those of a free-format version. If EWQL are doing well now, who\'s to say they wouldn\'t be doing just as well or better without the CP? And if they\'re doing badly, who\'s to say that\'s not BECAUSE of the CP? etc. etc.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Competition is a wonderful thing. I\'ll be buying VSL.
I wouldn\'t count on VSL being CP free forever. If you recall, VSL initially was going to wait for GS 3.0 (which initially *was* going to have CCP) before they released their library. As it happened, they couldn\'t wait that long, and it was brought out for GS 2.5.x.

VSL\'s next release supposedly will come on a large HD. Obviously, that would be a large chunk of data for pirates to distribute over the internet, but it would make things quite easy for person to person cloning. The VSL folks are quite industrious. I wouldn\'t be surprised if they are working on some type of CP. In fact, I recently read where their MIR product might need some dedicated DSP to work. A dedicated PCI card would give them the opportunity to implement hardware based CP a la PT. This is obviously just speculation on my part. At the same time, I\'m sure VSL is monitoring the situation closely, and is not about to let the pirates run away with the store.

Lee Blaske <hr /></blockquote>I\'m sure they\'re also monitoring threads like these and are aware of how much bad feeling CP causes. At the same time, they sell a very expensive, high-end product to professional composers. Those composers have to have legal cleared samples to work. Although I know its an old justification, and not a very good one, this is one instance where you can say that the home user who pirates VSL samples for making his own private ditties with really wouldn\'t buy the samples anyway. (Although of course the recent release of the cheaper sample sets are a different story, catering to a less high-end market).

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
I picked this up from the video, the product looks hot. I they convert (back) to a reasonable challenge/response system...I\'m in there. Unfortunately I\'m allergic to dongles. David - this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship! images/icons/smile.gif

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 08:21 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
David - this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship! images/icons/smile.gif could be images/icons/cool.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 08:41 PM

First, I never suggested driving Yellow Tools out of business. Buy their open-platform sampleware--boycott their dongle-ware. You\'ll make a statement, and you won\'t cost them a thing. Send them e-mail, and tell them you\'d love to buy their samples in a sampler format (if indeed you wish to do so).

Cracked/downloaded piracy is MOOT, folks. MOOT. The evidence is clear. Protected and non-protected content are equally available for download. Simple algebra--that factor cancels itself out. That means that only peer-to-peer trading can account for differences in sales figures--IF these figures are even accurately reflecting that single condition (and not also affected by say, differences in distribution, host compatibility, genre-market potential, etc.)

So, if eliminating peer-to-peer trading is the financial nut, what was tried short of a total lockdown? Was a registration system tried? Nope. Was an installer which built the file in realtime (with customer info imbedded) tried? Nope. Tell me, I\'m anxious to know this...what methods short of waveform lockout were tried?

(insert defening silence here)

Right....NOTHING. The progression went from \"Here are the files on a silver platter for the taking,\" to \"total lockdown.\"

So how do we know that those less radical steps, which may well have reduced peer-to-peer trading significantly, wouldn\'t have worked? How do we know if the potential for positive identification wouldn\'t have scared potential traders into keeping their samples out of friends\' systems? Where are the figures? We don\'t know. They weren\'t tried...even though they would have been far less negatively impactful to the technology and technology providers. Look at how NI has had to struggle to make this protection system work (not work). What creative purposes might have been tackled in that time spent doing security detail?

Look at how misguided and perverse these so-called solutions have become. How many libraries do you guys license on average? Do you relish the thought of dongles sticking out of your machine\'s every square inch, like bluntly colorful porcupine quills?

IS THIS THE PROMISE OF SOFTWARE????

Folks, learn to ferret out and smell boondoggles.

Meanwhile, support sample developers who are taking risks to provide you with open-platform sampleware. They exist, they\'re doing a great job, and by supporting them you make a statement. If you have a choice, and there\'s an open-platform alternative, you can speak volumes and help someone who\'s trusting you.

J. Whaley

12-30-2003, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by J. Whaley:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I certainly count Kontakt as a leading edge application. And, it is an open platform when developers choose to develop for it, and not for Kompakt. So, I encourage people to support developers who create open-platform Kontakt libraries as well. Bruce you said earlier that Gary Garritan had sold out - but I\'m confused as to how. His Kontakt player (Kontakt not kompakt) does offer copy protection for the PLAYER - but not the samples. I loaded several samples into Kontakt (full blown) from GPO last night and was able to edit until my heart was content. I checked out all of Tom Hopkins\' programming, and had direct access to ALL of the individual sample .wav files. How is this not open?<hr /></blockquote>J-It is not open unless you spend a few more hundred dollars on a sampler you may not want or need. Believe it or not, not every sample composer uses or has Kontakt. And they don\'t want to be forced into buying it just to edit the samples they bought. Put yourself in my shoes (stinky as they are). What if I responded to you that GPO is completely open as long as you purchase Halion? <hr /></blockquote>How is this any different then the entire past of Samples? It\'s not. Let\'s look at this picture:

I use to buy a sampler - no sounds came with it.

Then I had to buy samples. If I was LUCKY they made the sounds I wanted in the format of the sampler I bought.

Sample library was around $150-$200 - Sampler - $1500+.

Then let\'s say I want something that\'s available for Kurzeil only - I have to not only buy the sounds, but also a new sampler. errr. Now how is that handy?

Now let\'s look at the issues today:

I buy a sampler, I get a few sounds.

I buy a sample library - if it\'s made for Akai, Giga, or EXS, there\'s a good chance I can open it in my new sampler that only cost me $400 instead of $1500.

Now let\'s say I want the sounds, but I don\'t have a sampler - I SHOULD have to buy a sampler, but these nice folks have decided to INLCUDE a FREE sample PLAYER. This is no different at all then the sample player in the Roland 5080. It\'s just a player. But it\'s free.

Now let\'s say I want to edit my sounds - I can, simply load them into Kontakt.

you argue you don\'t want to use kontakt - well maybe you need to let the good folks who are working on Halion know you want to be able to IMPORT Kontakt files. Why? Because you can.

I can open ANY of the .wav files, and have direct access to ANY of the .nki files on my computer. Once it\'s installed it\'s installed.

I think your argument is weak.

Here\'s the bottom line: If companies can make more sales but not prevent users from accessibility (ie I can still load into kontakt and edit) then I don\'t think there\'s anything wrong with what they\'ve done.

If a company chooses to make a Software Instrument, then that\'s their business. I may or may not be as interested in their product. They have chosen a different business then samples. It\'s hard for me to want to not get Eric Persing\'s stuff because it\'s so fantastic.

But if a company wants me to give them a USB slot to play their samples in a player that just plays samples and I can\'t get around it.... uh no. Not for me. But that\'s just me. I think it\'s goofy. But that\'s me. Maybe some people want to collect dongles - that\'s their right. It\'s just not what I want to do.

I just want to have fun images/icons/smile.gif

J-

Ben H

12-30-2003, 09:24 PM

Amidst angry calls to boycott and drive Yellowtools out of business, the above needs to be kept clearly in mind. Culture is a wonderful product, meticulously sampled and assembled, with a very intuitive, quick to learn interface that\'s exquisitely designed for the task at hand.I am not disgreeing with that.

As I\'ve mentioned earlier, the Yellowtools folks are also a pleasure to deal with.That\'s nice.

Now, if there are people here who have joined the anti-Yellowtools lynch mob It\'s not anti-YT just anti-closed-samples. I WAS thoroughly interested in YT Candy, it looks like a GREAT product but because of the lack of access to the samples I find I have no use for the SW

YT is going to ship to current owners, at no charge, the new dongle, the new version 1.5 of the software, and... 290 Mb of new sounds plus 700 MIDI grooves that interface with the YT instruments. Obviously, it\'s going to cost them a fair amount to send this stuff out (especially the dongle), so they must feel compelled to take the chance and do it.That\'s nice.

QLSO can be exported to Kontakt so it is more open.

YT MVIs can be exported to... They CAN\'T.

Even if they don\'t like the translation they SHOULD offer an option to have the sample content rendered. Like I stated earlier If I am PURCHASING a sample library then I should be able to use the samples the way I WANT TO and not have it DICTATED to me the way THEY THINK I want to use them... short of being a pirate.

Send them e-mail, and tell them you\'d love to buy their samples in a sampler format (if indeed you wish to do so).Tried that didn\'t work. They had the ARROGANCE to tell me that they preffered their engine and that I shouldn\'t want to have access to the samples anyway. Guess what??? I DO want access to the samples, and hence my decision NOT TO BUY YT.

Ben H

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Ben H:
Guess what??? I DO want access to the samples, and hence my decision NOT TO BUY YT.

Ben H what about rendering the sample? There are some great add-on hits in Stylus that I wanted to use in Kontakt, I just rendered them one by one and created a Kontakt patch using these samples.

Ben H

12-30-2003, 09:48 PM

How about rendering the samples? I wouldn\'t want to sample and then reconstruct the 9 GB of sample material into new instruments.

Ben H

David Abraham

12-30-2003, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by Ben H:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />How about rendering the samples? I wouldn\'t want to sample and then reconstruct the 9 GB of sample material into new instruments.
Ben H <hr /></blockquote>neither would I, I was theorizing that you wanted to be able to make tweaks as they became necessary, not that you would want to make massive changes like that from the get go.

Ben H

12-30-2003, 10:03 PM

Yeah, most of my usage for sample libraries is live with an Akai z4 sampler and a Yamaha wx5 wind controller so offline editing is not an option for my realtime gigs images/icons/wink.gif

Ben H

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 10:03 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
[QB] <blockquote>quote:<hr />Was a registration system tried? Nope. Was an installer which built the file in realtime (with customer info imbedded) tried?SISS\'s installer requires an authorization code. I don\'t think it\'s much of an obstacle, though. I don\'t know if it identifies the files, linking them to a specific user.

Even if it did, you\'d need some heavy handed law enforcement to enter a home or business to examine the computer and files of a suspected pirate. That sort of thing isn\'t happening on a regular basis.

[QB]<hr /></blockquote>You miss my point.

On the most basic level, we\'ve seen no numbers, no proof, no elimination of other variables...nothing to prove the premise that more money IS being made due to CCP. Word of mouth is hardly sufficient. Especially when you start breaking down the situation into understandable chunks instead of looking at it like some monolithic entity. So, to repeat:

The protected libraries are every bit as cracked and available for download as any other product. So this is self-canceling and moot. Protected and nonprotected samples are equally available via illegal download. We all concede this.

That being the case, only peer-to-peer trading represents the \"controllable\" loss...people who share. Even this subdivides into a variable...you can\'t really assume the alleged receiver won\'t just turn around and download if his pal WON\'T share.

Now, say you build an installer which by its design MUST imprint your identification information into the realtime-constructed files. No usable data files exist on the discs themselves, only installer code that can build these files.

You could challenge/response the installer so that it must shake hands over the internet (or phone) before it will build the actual data. In that fashion, you could force a person\'s genuine identity to be registered and catalogued before the installer will spit out a file.

This means a person can\'t just hand the disc to a friend and let him copy a \"ready to go\" file from it. It would mean an immediate bust. No one is going to risk that. The only way a peer could share the library would be to copy the file from his hard drive. But the knows, becuase he has gone throught this process and it has been made known to him, that HIS IDENTIFICATION exists on that file. That creates a negative incentive...where none has EVER existed before.

Would some people would risk it? Perhaps. But I think most would fear being tied to the shared file, and it would give them pause. I\'d certainly be loathe to risk it, since someone who\'s already asked me to \"share\" probably has no issues with \"re-sharing.\"

It WOULD, therefore, achieve some reduction in peer-to-peer sharing. And that is the type of sharing we\'re talking about...money that IS on the table. Right?

So, it\'s not about policing. It is about introducing risk to the equation for the party who is inclined to share. It is about working REASONABLY with the balance of protection and user rights, not jumping wholesale off the cliff and throwing up the barbed wire...with all the included inconveniences and dampers to higher functionality.

As I said earlier, we went from a state of data files simply burned onto disks to total lockdown. Could the less intrusive, installer-based routine have met the financial goals? We don\'t know, because we didn\'t have anyone willing to consider REASONABLE, stepwise progress.

Surely you can concede this point, because it is very plausible.

I find it supremely ironic that I can enter a discussion like this and simply state my case, and people come out of the woodwork to try and negate the things I say...yet, without actually addressing the arguments I make. All sorts of peripheral and half-pertinent means are used to try and convince folks that I have no point here.

Well, I trust that the people of this forum are smart enough to see when tactics of distraction are used to attempt a dilution of my message.

It\'s reasonable. I\'m suggesting people support open-platform sample libraries when they have an opportunity to do so, and by doing so, supporting the developers who have extended them the most trust and faith.

I\'m suggesting to the sample development community that the truth is in the middle and not at the extreme. I wish people wouldn\'t use lockdown copy protection. Likewise, I wish people wouldn\'t just put their data on CDs with no installer for the stealing. It creates the situation we face.

That message cannot be diluted by any argument.

If a person desires to see more open-platform libraries, he should support those products. Doing this is the most effective possible way to encourage the result of more openness and less restriction. Reward those who you wish others to emulate. If people who are not providing open-platform libraries begin to lose money as a result, then perhaps they should reexamine the effectiveness of their decisions.

Tarkio Road

12-30-2003, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
this is one is debateable I think, depending on what a user wants. In the case for a example of a user wanting a plugin version of EWQLSO, all the time wasted is still less than the amount of time it would take to have a version based on Giga technology (because a plugin version does not exist) and may never, depending on Tascam\'s verdict on plugin options.But if EWQLSO had been released in Giga format it would work in GS, and in full-blown plug-in samplers like Halion and Kontakt. And releasing libraries in an open format creates and promotes healthy competition and faster technology updates. For example, Halion imports Giga libraries much better than Kompakt right now. The next update to Kompakt will most likely close that gap. Kompakt has time-stretch tools, etc. No doubt these features will be added to Halion. Halion disk-streams perfectly in OS-X, Kompakt is a bit behind in this area, but will be pushed to fix any problems due to the competition.

What if every developer decided to use a Kontakt player with their libraries? I would have to have about 13 NI licenses, all needing care and maintenance every time I upgrade. Plus, I would have paid for 13 NI licenses. Add dongles to the mix and I would need to hire an assistant to keep track of all the red tape and update incompatibilities.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-30-2003, 11:53 PM

This is exactly the point, and the issue to which everyone should object. Money is being diverted away from supporting leading edge technologies, and piffled away on crippleware.

There has to be a realization among consumers in our industry that EVERY DOLLAR COUNTS. If you put your dollars into open, leading-edge platforms, they will flourish. If you put your money into security-intensive (and now retro, hardware-locked) crippleware, THAT will flourish.

Vote with your dollars!! There are plenty of open-platform designers doing an amazing job and producing amazing tools. Support them!!

robgb

12-30-2003, 11:58 PM

My question is, where are all the Open Source freeware developers in the samples arena? I can get office suites and SQL databases and just about everything else under the sun for free thanks to places like Source Forge, but have yet to see any open source orchestral libraries.... LOL. images/icons/smile.gif

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 06:00 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
[QUOTE]... our copy-protected plug-in version of his Bosendorfer 290 Piano sold \"35 times\" the amount of all other \"open\" formats combined last month, and the feedback we get from customers is \"excellent\". The reason? Most users love the fact that the library sits inside their work environment, no matter what format that is. so, again it seems to me that the reason for the increase in sales is more of a function of the plugin delivery format, than necessarily the ccp...though it could be a function of both.

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 06:07 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

Now, say you build an installer which by its design MUST imprint your identification information into the realtime-constructed files. No usable data files exist on the discs themselves, only installer code that can build these files.
trying to follow this. Wouldn\'t the end result be completely open wave files on the hard drive. Which can then be freely shared. Or are you suggesting a watermark on each wav file?

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 06:51 AM

That\'s exactly what I am saying. You don\'t lock it down, but you don\'t just put the data on the disc for the taking. You dirty it up with the user info as you print the data from the installer, and you be very bold about it.

Some people would be deterred. Even in the case of cracks, some user info would get on the internet.

Create enough deterrent through identifcation means, and see what financial result comes from that. It might be equivalent.

I think you\'re also right about delivery, too.

JonP

12-31-2003, 06:58 AM

I like the idea, but what about false identities?. The world is awash with them these days, slipping through every safety net.

Ray Lindsley

12-31-2003, 07:05 AM

Nobody is trying to drive YT out of business, but they\'re making bad business decisions, and if they go out of business, THAT will be the reason. I have been an economist and investment analyst for 20 years, and I\'ve seen this kind of arrogance damage otherwise good companies that produce excellent products. Management fails to understand that there are almost always viable alternatives to their products, and the marketplace votes with their dollars for the one that best meets their needs. They smuggly cling to what amounts to a \"it\'s my way, or the highway\" mentality, and people take them up on it.

It reminds me of when US companies first tried to do business overseas- instead of adopting their way of doing business to the local culture, they arrogantly expected the local culture to adapt to their way of doing business. Guess what? It didn\'t work. The survivors quickly learned their lesson and adapted their business model accordingly.

YT may put out a great product, but it\'s too closed and the dongle CP is out of the question for me, and apparently many other potential customers.

What I think Bruce is trying to say, and I agree with, is that we have the power to vote with our dollars, and influence the sample industry business model. Hopefully, the developers are astute enough business people to adjust their strategy to satisfy the demands of the marketplace. If they are too slow or arrogant to change, then they deserve to go out of business, and they\'re better off working for someone else.

jkerr

12-31-2003, 07:28 AM

As much as I want to say that *trading/sharing* can be stopped, the shear fact is that a dongle will be cracked. As Bruce says, \"We concded this.\" However, my next point is this: as long as the format is in a digital format, it will be copied.

People will burn an image of the cd (.iso, .bin, .nrg, .etc) regardless of whether it is an installer or \"drag and drop to the desktop.\"

I have thought long and hard about this and as far as I can tell, I have no complete answer to the problem. I think hardware based is a start (like having a protools rig to run protools - but then the pirates are just the protools users....it keeps away unwanted traffic though). VSL might have a hardware lock on the harddrive that prohibits transferring samples. This seems like the best way to make it work.

I honestly have a solution, but am unsure of how to even get a working prototype.....if anyone has the knowhow to start a prototype, pm me or email me because I have a solution. The overhead might be too great though. But, I think it would save money for all developers - not just for sample libraries.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by jkerr:

People will burn an image of the cd (.iso, .bin, .nrg, .etc) regardless of whether it is an installer or \"drag and drop to the desktop.\" That\'s not the point I am making though. IF you have that installer force a connection to the manufacturer, either via telephone or internet, and you watermark user ID on every WAV file it spits out, you create DETERRANT. People will be less thrilled about copying the resulting DATA to someone else (the installer wouldn\'t do any good--it would bust the source immediately). People who \"share\" know one thing...that the people they share WITH will share. Put ID on those data files, and you give a person pause when it comes to having HIS user info out there replicating itself. It doesn\'t have to be a lock. Breaking into a house with an alarm system doesn\'t mean you\'ll get caught. It just means you\'ll think twice, and maybe pick a softer target.

But what everybody REALLY missed, my good pal David Abraham Fenton NAILED. None other than Doug Rogers himself just told you that Content Copy Protection makes NO DIFFERENCE IN HIS SALES.

Read and reflect:

Well I\'ve got a shocking statistic for you Bruce. Michiel Post is here on this forum and he will verify that our copy-protected plug-in version of his Bosendorfer 290 Piano sold \"35 times\" the amount of all other \"open\" formats combined last month, and the feedback we get from customers is \"excellent\". The reason? Most users love the fact that the library sits inside their work environment, no matter what format that is. Whenever there\'s a problem reported with any of the samples, Michiel posts an update. We have also done this twice with EWQLSO and will continue doing so until the majority of users are happy. There you have it. Let\'s break it down.

1) That Bosendorfer has been out in Giga and other open-platform formats for a year at least.

2) That Bosendorfer can be downloaded from despicable pirate sites, and purchased for chump change on despicable pirate CDs.

3) Yet, with Doug\'s distribution and a plugin-format, Michiel enjoyed a huge sales blitz.

WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU????

It ain\'t the copy protection...it\'s MARKET SHARE. Piracy is a red herring.

OK, you want solutions??? I\'ll give you a solution.

Since it is clear that even a well-pirated library will enjoy a significant peak in sales when provided in a plugin format, and because that can clearly be traced to an increased sales potential because more people own DAW software than samplers...WHY NOT RELEASE BOTH AND MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY???!!???!!!???!!!???

There is no need to ruin real samplers, and to neuter their features by CCP, when it is clear that this does not hurt the sales of the plugins.

That is a compromise position, and a damn fine one. Let people who use samplers have sampleware which doesn\'t cripple their ability to edit as they please, and let DAW users who don\'t want to own samplers have plugins, and everybody wins. No one has to lose. No one has to endure stupid dongle-fests, or stupid registration-fests.

Does someone want to challenge this logic? I have been saying it over and over again, that it\'s other factors besides piracy that make a difference. Now Doug has put the proof on the table. Open-Platform libraries did not hurt Michiel Post\'s plugin sales one bit. It follows that Eric Persing could easily continue providing sample libraries as well as his plugins. Yellow Tools Culture could easily be a sample library just as well as it is a plugin. This leads to MORE, not less, sales.

And it coincides perfectly with the logic of all licensing-based business. License to everyone, everywhere, at any price they\'ll pay, and you will make more money than someone who doesn\'t. Put more titles in more hands in more different ways than anyone else, and you will make more money than someone who produces a masterpiece and guards it under lock and key.

CREATE. Don\'t play policeman. It just hurts your sales.

People, support these open-platform providers!!!

dougrogers

12-31-2003, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
Doug - Do you see dongles in EWQLSO\'s future? No - before we added CP we asked the forum members here which method they preferred, and challenge/response was regarded as the least intrusive. The system is still being fine-tuned as we run into new situations, but we\'ll keep working at it until there is a good balance between our need to protect our investment and the customers ease of use. Obviously that\'s a difficult marriage, but we will continue to try and achieve this.

However, no one has responded to the other issue I raised which is equally important to us developers - knowing what happens to our products when they are imported into foreign formats. To us, that\'s like artists releasing their multitracks for consumers to \"play\" with. Some will achieve a good result and others will make the track sound awful. We have been dealing with this for many years, and presenting a software/sounds product overcomes this problem, and eliminates the need to make a dozen formats of the same library. This, plus less piracy, has enabled us to reduce prices, which directly benefits \"most\" customers. This format also allows us to customize the interface for a particular product - we already have an example of this in the works - Voices of the Apocalypse - which will include the word building utility. This is not usually possible with other companies software, as they are just not interested in the development costs involved. We are more interested in this kind of product that enables our customers to get to work and create some music \"out of the box\", than providing folders full of raw samples.

Maybe the industry is dividing into the instrument makers and the sample providers. I\'m sure EW will continue to distribute both types of product in the future.

Now it\'s time to prepare for the party!!

- Doug

dougrogers

12-31-2003, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Since it is clear that even a well-pirated library will enjoy a significant peak in sales when provided in a plugin format, and because that can clearly be traced to an increased sales potential because more people own DAW software than samplers...WHY NOT RELEASE BOTH AND MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY???!!???!!!???!!!???Because it costs many times more than what it costs to produce a universal format, such as a plug-in (which also includes a standalone version btw), than individual formats, of which there are too many now, and the sales don\'t warrant the expense and time involved.

- Doug

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 09:09 AM

I think I\'d like to hear from Mr. Post on that, as well as Mr. Scarbee. We are through with you for now.

dougrogers

12-31-2003, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I think I\'d like to hear from Mr. Post on that, as well as Mr. Scarbee. We are through with you for now. That\'s a pretty dismissive statement Bruce!

Happy New Year!

- Doug

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:

Maybe the industry is dividing into the instrument makers and the sample providers. I\'m sure EW will continue to distribute both types of product in the future.

- Doug that\'s how it looks, I\'ll continue to invest in both, great instruments and libraries

T.Artimisi

12-31-2003, 09:27 AM

Hey amazing programmers and brilliant minds of music (I\'m serious). I was hipped to this site by J.Whaley and have been reading this thread for the past few days truly amazed (honestly) at the talent on this board.

In regards to copy protection, I have a friend that is a sales rep for a pharmacetical company. They have a pretty neat system for logging into their server that involves a \"password card\" that is basically just a cheesy calculator-like screen that updates itself every five minutes with a new set of numbers that becomes her password for that five minutes. Every time she logs in, she uses a different card-given password. Would that work for a sample library?

jkerr

12-31-2003, 09:29 AM

I think that the only successful CP technique I have seen is used in gaming. It only really works in the online-multiplayer parts of the game (which is usually what it is purchased for). This is the online key verfication. A keygen will not produce a key that works on their servers because it is not an active number they have released. Electronic Arts has an excellent technique for multiplayer - even though the user can crack it and play the single player version on their home computer.

I feel that if there were someway to tie in even an online activation serial number to a server that keeps a mysql database (or something equivalent) of authorized codes. At the end of the production day for EastWest, they would update their server with a list of printed serials. The downfall would be that the connection would have to be active when using these plugins, or else it will still be cracked. I really don\'t think this is a problem - when loading up your plugin, it takes another few seconds to authorize your license. Simple as that. I would love to be involved in the developement since this is my idea.

Microsoft had a failed attempt with Windows XP. The failed attempt lies in the fact that they sold serial numbers that were good for 50 licenses or even unlimited licenses (as in their internal copy). I was very dissappointed to see the ability for this to be stolen. I was at first timid about the whole authorization process. After purchasing XP PRO some years ago, I realized it was really easy and painless. For the common user, this technique does work. But as we know, the pirates are pirates for a reason. They will find a way like they did with XP. I think Microsoft resolved this problem in future releases, but I am not sure.

With this being said, this brings up another argument. Many people don\'t like their workstation computer tied into the internet. However, from a financial standpoint, it has to be done to perform many common tasks. Put up a firewall, and don\'t download junk in your emails and you really are fine.

All in all, this still doesn\'t solve the problem completely. IT could probably still be cracked since it is just 1\'s and 0\'s in the code.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I think I\'d like to hear from Mr. Post on that, as well as Mr. Scarbee. We are through with you for now. That\'s a pretty dismissive statement Bruce!

Happy New Year!

- Doug <hr /></blockquote>Oh, sorry. I tend to get dismissive when people claim they can\'t make money on what they\'ve made darn good money on for years.

And anyway, you\'ve provided the necessary information for the discussion to move on. We just need to hear from some developers who do multiple formats, to find out if you\'re telling the truth about whether it\'s profitable to make those collections.

Remember, people here understand that YOU are the vendor and THEY are the client. We are going to find out what the most favorable market condition is in this group, then we are going to make some recommendations. I\'m tired of this discussion existing in marketese and obfuscation. We are going to get the facts once and for all.

So, not dismissive. Just needing to move the discussion forward and move away from soundbytes and marketing opportunities.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by jkerr:
I think that the only successful CP technique I have seen is used in gaming. It only really works in the online-multiplayer parts of the game (which is usually what it is purchased for). This is the online key verfication. What about people who use these libraries onstage? You\'re leaving out the most critical aspect--mission critical performance. If a game goes belly up in-session, some nerd might have to get a life. If a sample library goes belly up mid-session, an artist loses time or even a job.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 09:47 AM

To recap:

Yellow Tools announces it is abandoning the one-user/one-license model for sampleware, and instead imposing a one-installation/one-license model.

Bruce Richardson suggests boycotting this type of license and supporting open-platform licenses instead.

Many end users agree to boycott this product.

Some end-users express concern that desirable titles will be unavailable in non-plugin formats.

Bruce Richardson reminds all end users that they are the Client, the sampleware vendors are their VENDORS, and that in a client/vendor relationship, 100% of the power rests with the client.

Discussion ensues.

Lee Blaske and Doug Rogers (who has a financial interst in the outcome) object to this meanness.

Doug Rogers, (who we all assume makes a very good living taking 40-60 points on every library that comes through his doors) has the gall to tell us that he\'s made no money on unprotected sampleware. Perhaps he made his fortune marrying rich old ladies then? (Note to self: Investigate rumor that Doug Rogers is Anna Nicole Smith. Note to Doug: Bruce can never be underestimated.)

DOUG ROGERS PROVIDES SALES DATA INDICATING CCP MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN SALES FIGURES!!!

Realizing he has harmed his case, Doug backtracks and raises peripheral issues like author control over the \"sound\" of a library, and fuzzy statement about the expense of producing multiformat libraries vs. sales potential.

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 09:50 AM

Originally posted by T.Artimisi:
Every time she logs in, she uses a different card-given password. Would that work for a sample library? [/QB]This would likely increase the rate of musician suicide

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 09:52 AM

Now, to address the sound issues:

Who\'s the artist here? This is a vendor/artist relationship. People who program and produce libraries ARE generally very good artists, with great talent.

However, and I think they themselves would be the first to admit this, an end-user can add greatly to the quality of just about any released library with his own editing and experience. Look at the KI strings updates to GOS as a perfect example of artistic synergy in open-platform libraries. Are we going to start claiming that GOS hasn\'t benefitted, or that somehow the open platform nature of release has harmed the users or author of this acknowledged hit library?

As to the effort vs. profitability vs. sound losses of multiplatform titles, user after user after user has praised Halion\'s perfect conversions.

If the issue is making money, which is the issue continually pounded into our heads in these discussions, I fail to see how more versions of the same product, satisfying more people, does not make more money.

I\'d like to hear from some people who produce multiformat libraries.

T.Artimisi

12-31-2003, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by T.Artimisi:
Every time she logs in, she uses a different card-given password. Would that work for a sample library? This would likely increase of the rate of musician suicide [/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Welllllllll... that would create some more work for somebody! images/icons/smile.gif

jkerr

12-31-2003, 09:56 AM

Good point Bruce about using the samples onstage......didn\'t even think about that.......guess i will just keep reading and not typing graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

And I thought I had written a profound statement. Maybe not....but, in the light of things, I do want GIGA support in the same fashion it exists.

Just for the sake of Doug\'s PMI 290 Plugin comment, I decided to see what I could find available in the places we cannot mention on this board........low and behold the only available versions were the GIGA and Halion versions. I guess he is correct about the VST CP. However, I didn\'t look too hard to be 100% correct though.

*****I do not endorse piracy...I was just substantiating Doug\'s point by \"looking.\" I don\'t want people to jump my case now because I said I looked. images/icons/frown.gif *****

jkerr

12-31-2003, 10:04 AM

So now I feel guilty for saying that I looked. I don\'t want people to have that impression on me. In all honesty, most everyone here knows where to look but most choose NOT to download/puchase - WHICH IS THE CORRECT THING TO DO.....

I just wanted to make that clear.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 10:08 AM

No harm in looking. Those folks are the enemy, and knowing the enemy--and the fact that these things exist--is the key to raising understanding and having true dialog.

T.Artimisi

12-31-2003, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by David Abraham Fenton:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by T.Artimisi:
Every time she logs in, she uses a different card-given password. Would that work for a sample library? This would likely increase of the rate of musician suicide [/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Yeah... I was just thinking about it and if you have a bunch of different companies\' libraries, you\'d have to load a sound, go their site, blah blah blah. That would, like, suck.

dougrogers

12-31-2003, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
DOUG ROGERS PROVIDES SALES DATA INDICATING CCP MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN SALES FIGURES!!!I did NOT say this, in fact I have said the complete opposite time and time again!

Btw, we\'re not the only company that believes this - look around - most software companies and a growing number of soundware companies include some form of CP. If you\'re going to boycott all of these software and soundware companies you\'re not going have much to work with.

Also, I\'ll put money on it you use other CP\'d software. Have you waged the same campaign against these companies, including Giga - which is CP\'d?

Wouldn\'t you consider this hypocritical?

- Doug

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by T.Artimisi:
... I was just thinking about it and if you have a bunch of different companies\' libraries, you\'d have to load a sound, go their site, blah blah blah. That would, like, suck. I have two products that I bought full price, that I never use because they challenge me for the CDROM every two weeks...a challenge every day would be dangerous to my health images/icons/shocked.gif

yellow tools

12-31-2003, 10:42 AM

Dear forum members,
looking at all the posts over the last days it seems to me many things admixed in here.

You can be sure that all we do - and all other sound library developers - is trying to develop best possible products for YOU.
The idea behind a yellow tools product is not just a one-time purchase for our customers.
ALL updates until today are free. Version 1.5 is also free, so the current users get the authorization key, 270MB! additional sounds and the Culture Groove Package FOR FREE! Also this Groove Package will get extended by-and-by and all Culture users will partake in this.
I don’t think there are many other companies out there who offer that much.
Yellow tools customers buy not just a product but also a big “care and support” package, so don\'t tell me we wouldn\'t take care on our users.

Why do you think the USB dongle is something we want to constrict the user? Also the license agreement did not change compared to the former challenge/response versions.
Sure this dongle is also a copy-protection, but it is also to guarantee best possible products and support for our customers. This dongle is nothing new in our business and it offers many advantages for you as legal users – btw you do not need one dongle for each yellow tools product, you can save all your authorizations on one key.
As developer it is also our duty to “protect” our customers, and if I recognize, that best possible products and support for our legal users are only possible with this USB dongle, than I have to do it.
So the dongle is not only to protect us against illegal copies, it is also to protect YOU.
You purchase Culture and invest your money in our company so we can go on with the development of such complex products.
I have to take care of my customers so I have to find a way to award the legal user for his purchase and to make sure the illegal user does not have the same possibilities and only with the key you get exclusive access to the user area with free updates, download and freebies.

Our goal is to improve sound libraries continually. If best results are only possible with the development of a custom engine, then we do it. Believe me it is much easier to create sampling cd-roms only than also to develop a customized software for the instruments. But since best results are only possible choosing that way, then we do it.
If you want to edit and customize Culture’s instruments, then do it. I’m not sure if all of you already played with Culture...
Culture supports all interfaces for MAC and WIN, you can edit all Multi and Layer programs, create new instruments, save all settings and also share them with other Culture users completely platform independent.
You are right, there is no possibility to export the sounds into any sampler, but that’s why it is a Virtual Instrument and not a sampling library.
All this has nothing to do with arrogance. We at yellow tools are always open-minded towards critics, suggestions and anything else that makes our products better, because we create these products for you, but as developer I expect the same behavior from the user, too.

Once again, if best quality, playability and authenticity of the included instruments is only possible with a VI, then we do it, but isn’t a good product always in your interest, too? Do you really want to make a dongle/USB port more important than the quality of a product and the possibilities it offers – although nobody made his own experiences with Culture 1.5 yet?

I wish all of you a Happy New Year and keep well and fit – that’s what is most important.
Best regards

Christian Hellinger

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
DOUG ROGERS PROVIDES SALES DATA INDICATING CCP MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN SALES FIGURES!!!I did NOT say this, in fact I have said the complete opposite time and time again!

Btw, we\'re not the only company that believes this - look around - most software companies and a growing number of soundware companies include some form of CP. If you\'re going to boycott all of these software and soundware companies you\'re not going have much to work with.

Also, I\'ll put money on it you use other CP\'d software. Have you waged the same campaign against these companies, including Giga - which is CP\'d?

Wouldn\'t you consider this hypocritical?

- Doug <hr /></blockquote>Regarding the latter, I addressed it early on. I constantly lobby these companies to drop the copy protection devices they use on their APPLICATIONS. What you are doing is using the very flimsy excuse of bundling an application to copy protect DATA and to close it off from multiple formats.

And of course you didn\'t SAY that your copy protection made no sales difference. You clumsily provided data that proved it. Despite the fact that:

a) Michiel Post\'s Bosendorfer exists in sampler formats

and

b) Michiel Post\'s Bosendorfer is available for download anywhere a musician who wants to find it CAN find it

c) You still sold an admitted huge number of Bosendorfer plugins.

So, by breaking that situation down (don\'t you hate it when I do that), we see two things:

a) Open-Platform availability does NOT hurt your sales

b) CCP is not responsible for the sales you got on the plugin.

In fact, it may have hurt you.

I daresay that the total number of users of DAW applications, vs. the total number of users of SAMPLERS is greater than a 53-1 ratio.

So, I\'d say that the penetration of the open format sampler market was a higher ratio than the penetration of the full DAW market.

Perhaps it was because people are turned off by copy protection. But whatever the reason, by number of desktops, you should be doing BETTER than 53-1.

Thanks for the numbers. It\'s the first real evidence that\'s been provided that I am right. How ironic that it\'s you who provided it.

dougrogers

12-31-2003, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
To recap:

Realizing he has harmed his case, Doug backtracks and raises peripheral issues like author control over the \"sound\" of a library, and fuzzy statement about the expense of producing multiformat libraries vs. sales potential. Three days ago you dismissed Prof. Keith Johnson\'s 30 years experience in the classical recording field in one insulting sentence. Today, you are trying to belittle me by dismissing my 15 years experience developing and marketing these products - and yet you have no experience whatsoever. Have you ever made or distributed a sample library? I bet not! So stop trying to claim this thread as your own, when you didn\'t start it, and open your ears to the various discussion points that are being raised, which are not fuzzy, they are based on reality!

Anyway, I\'ve got a party to organize - happy new year to all of you forum members!

2004 is sure going to be interesting!

- Doug

Ray Lindsley

12-31-2003, 12:07 PM

Give me a break and stop insulting our intelligence, Christian. Not only are you trying to justify the dongle, but you\'re trying to tell us it\'s for our own good. My mother tried that when I was about to get a whooping. It didn\'t work then, it\'s not going to work now.
No sale.

Jake Johnson

12-31-2003, 12:32 PM

Doug:

I\'ll leave the dongle issue aside, but I agree with Bruce that it would be good to release the same sample content in both the closed form and in Open Platform libraries for Giga, Halion, Kontakt, et. al.

I understand the attraction of closed platform instruments. It\'s great to be able to open our sequencers and have our default instrument sitting there ready to play. But I need more control over very, very basic editing.

I think what you may be missing is the experience of everyday users. Bruce isn\'t angry--I don\'t think--just because of large theoretical issues. It\'s more because of the SEVERE limitations of the closed sample sets. I don\'t own a lot sample sets, but many of those I own have been made more to my liking by more minute editing of the samples than closed platform instruments seem to allow--I mean things like:

1. Being able to move samples over a hair, when I like the sound of Bb interpolated to C better than the programmer\'s choice of D stretched to C.

2. Being able to extend the decay, verb, et al of just one note, instead of an entire region.

3. Being able to actually see a map of the regions, so I tell at a glance what notes will be affected when I make an edit. (A HUGE problem with the closed system instruments that I\'ve seen--if you can\'t see where the samples are mapped, you have to make you own map using trial and error, and then consult it every time you edit.)

4. Many closed systems (like the Edirol Orchestral) don\'t even let you edit at the level of the region --you can only change settings for the entire instrument, which means that applying a lp filter, say, to the violin takes off the edge to the higher notes, but muddies the lower range. (I hate to attack the Edirol program--it was groundbreaking, and I love its interface, but the absence of control over regions is one of its problems. Still, it was the first attempt, and I hope Roland did better than break even on what must have been a huge project.)

5. Being able to replace single samples. I think most people who use piano libraries have sometimes taken a sample they liked from another library--that nice woody B2 from one library--and used it to replace that was a little muddy in another.

These abilities are so important because sample libraries, like all software, are non-returnable. If we don\'t like a sample in a Giga library, we can often find a way to fix it. If we have one Eb3 that has a little too much verb in a closed system, we\'re stuck. (And there are no demos that can accurately represent each sampled note at each velocity, so we have to buy blindly.)

So, I, for one, hesitate to buy any closed platform sample set--not because of any desire to harm a company, but because I\'m afraid that my tastes and preferences will differ from those of the programmers, and I won\'t know that until it\'s too late.

Maybe there\'s another, technical issue that\'s a problem here: Does the VSTI format absolutely forbid editing at the sample layer? The ideal instrument, for me, would be one that opens as a VSTI, but lets me under the hood.

Respectfully hoping that someone finds a way to make VSTI code stronger. (And hoping it\'s not intentionally written to lock out basic editing.)

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by Jake Johnson:

Maybe there\'s another, technical issue that\'s a problem here: Does the VSTI format absolutely forbid editing at the sample layer? The ideal instrument, for me, would be one that opens as a VSTI, but lets me under the hood

Respectfully hoping that someone finds a way to make VSTI code stronger. (And hoping it\'s not intentionally written to lock out basic editing.) from an editing perspective there\'s no reason why VSTi code has to be any weaker than that of a standalone sampler. In the case of Kontakt its\' available both standalone and in VSTi format with identical (and powerful) editing functionality

this is the reason I decided to participate in this thread...fire away all you want at CCP, but leave my beloved plugin technology alone images/icons/smile.gif images/icons/cool.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 01:30 PM

That doesn\'t impeach the idea. Not everyone edits for realism or correction. Sometimes people mix waveforms to create a result that cannot be created by ANY manufacturer because they\'re not at liberty to mix each others\' content. A user who has licensed both has the liberty to do as he wishes, and to customize to the point of a unique, one-of-a-kind instrument.

For instance...even though the Art Vista Malmsjo has no release samples, MY version of it does. And you know what? It doesn\'t sound like two libraries at all. You\'d never know that the attacks are Malmsjo and the releases are Steinway. It just sounds complete.

I\'ve exported all waveforms in a library and used high-quality EQ to completely change its character.

All of these are valid. Just because a library comes out with excellent programming does not mean there\'s nothing else interesting to do with the content.

This used to be a given. It\'s not quality issues that changed it, but these protection issues.

So, if people will strive to support open-platform sampleware, and as much as possible avoid the closed-platform titles, we\'ll change the way business is done...and if the vendors are smart, they\'ll survive it without so much as a hiccup.

Nick Phoenix

12-31-2003, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by Jake Johnson:
Doug:

I\'ll leave the dongle issue aside, but I agree with Bruce that it would be good to release the same sample content in both the closed form and in Open Platform libraries for Giga, Halion, Kontakt, et. al.

I understand the attraction of closed platform instruments. It\'s great to be able to open our sequencers and have our default instrument sitting there ready to play. But I need more control over very, very basic editing.

I think what you may be missing is the experience of everyday users. Bruce isn\'t angry--I don\'t think--just because of large theoretical issues. It\'s more because of the SEVERE limitations of the closed sample sets. I don\'t own a lot sample sets, but many of those I own have been made more to my liking by more minute editing of the samples than closed platform instruments seem to allow--I mean things like:

1. Being able to move samples over a hair, when I like the sound of Bb interpolated to C better than the programmer\'s choice of D stretched to C.

2. Being able to extend the decay, verb, et al of just one note, instead of an entire region.

3. Being able to actually see a map of the regions, so I tell at a glance what notes will be affected when I make an edit. (A HUGE problem with the closed system instruments that I\'ve seen--if you can\'t see where the samples are mapped, you have to make you own map using trial and error, and then consult it every time you edit.)

4. Many closed systems (like the Edirol Orchestral) don\'t even let you edit at the level of the region --you can only change settings for the entire instrument, which means that applying a lp filter, say, to the violin takes off the edge to the higher notes, but muddies the lower range. (I hate to attack the Edirol program--it was groundbreaking, and I love its interface, but the absence of control over regions is one of its problems. Still, it was the first attempt, and I hope Roland did better than break even on what must have been a huge project.)

5. Being able to replace single samples. I think most people who use piano libraries have sometimes taken a sample they liked from another library--that nice woody B2 from one library--and used it to replace that was a little muddy in another.

These abilities are so important because sample libraries, like all software, are non-returnable. If we don\'t like a sample in a Giga library, we can often find a way to fix it. If we have one Eb3 that has a little too much verb in a closed system, we\'re stuck. (And there are no demos that can accurately represent each sampled note at each velocity, so we have to buy blindly.)

So, I, for one, hesitate to buy any closed platform sample set--not because of any desire to harm a company, but because I\'m afraid that my tastes and preferences will differ from those of the programmers, and I won\'t know that until it\'s too late.

Maybe there\'s another, technical issue that\'s a problem here: Does the VSTI format absolutely forbid editing at the sample layer? The ideal instrument, for me, would be one that opens as a VSTI, but lets me under the hood.

Respectfully hoping that someone finds a way to make VSTI code stronger. (And hoping it\'s not intentionally written to lock out basic editing.) This is a prime example of the misinformation which seems to be spreading. In the East West example these things are all possible in Kompakt or Kontakt. The only restriction is the exporting of waves and surgical edits in the middle of a sample. 99% of users just want to make music and because we offer the KOMPAKT or KONTAKT platform and we offer frequent updates based on user comments, there is no issue. A dongle is a different story, though.

Hudson

12-31-2003, 01:31 PM

On the contrary...as developers make these large libraries with umpteen velocity levels you\'re introducing umpteen more places for them to miss errors, clicks, pops, cross fade problems, etc., in the samples. I don\'t care how high end or meticulous the developers are, these problems still come about.

Granted, I wouldn\'t be switching out samples from other libraries, but not being able to fix these errors myself and having to wait for an update that may or may not come out is bad any way you look at it.

I had a problem with one of the GOS Detache update samples. There was a loud click in one of the crossfades, and King was too burnt out to fix it. Guess what, I fixed it myself. It took a few tries, but I did it. So please tell me how you can do that with these closed libraries?

And that\'s just one example. I can\'t tell you how many piano samples I\'ve heard with glitches in them, and samples with obvious clicks in the mix. Attacks that were too fast, or releases too long.

If I\'m gonna be shelling out the kind of money these devlopers are asking for, I better damn well be able to tweak it to my tastes and fix the slip ups rather than waiting for them to fix them, if they fix them at all.
-Hudson

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:

I really doubt that many people will be doing anything like that with the large, high end products hitting the market today. Instruments are sampled at umpteen velocity levels, pedal up and pedal down with cross fading plus release samples (and often multiple perspectives). Putting that \"nice woody B2 from one library\" into these carefully crafted new libraries would be like jamming one piston from a \'52 Chevy into your new 2004 BMW\'s engine.

Granted, from time to time, poorly crafted products might slip through. It would probably be best to avoid those completely, though.

Lee Blaske [/QUOTE]

J. Whaley

12-31-2003, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by yellow tools:

Once again, if best quality, playability and authenticity of the included instruments is only possible with a VI, then we do it, but isn’t a good product always in your interest, too? Do you really want to make a dongle/USB port more important than the quality of a product and the possibilities it offers – although nobody made his own experiences with Culture 1.5 yet?

Christian Hellinger In a word - YES.

Sorry, I just don\'t have enough USB ports to justify a percussion collection. I don\'t even have enough USB ports floating around to justify the ability to use an entire companies product line (if as you say all your products authorize to the same key)

if the WHOLE sample developer world put their butts together and farted out one single dongle (I\'m sure it would be a long dongle- but I digress) and that dongle could hold every authorization it ever needed to hold - and there was NO WAY i could get my work done without using it... I MIGHT decide to stay a musician and give way to the pressure. But come on, how in the WORLD can you think a user would want to use your percussion samples so bad that they\'d take a USB port? Not a big deal? Well if computers shipped with 100 USB ports maybe it\'s not a big deal - but that\'s not going to happen. I have 3 USB ports, and they\'re all full. And i\'m not getting a USB hub just for a percussion library.

I still contend that there needs to be legal action against the Executive producer level of recordings. Both the Producers and Executive producers should be held accountable for who is using what on their productions. When a few Exacutive producers get made example of, those guys will force the musicians they hire to be honest.

The other petty pirates will always pirate, so there\'s no need to try to stop that.

J-

Looper

12-31-2003, 01:46 PM

Whew, this topic is heating up faster than a P4 with a broken fan so I thought I\'d post the verbal equivalent of thermal paste.

I just wanted to say to Yellow Tools that their decision to use a dongle hasn\'t changed my opinion of Culture, I\'ve wanted to buy it for some time now and I still do (maybe next time Doug has a big sale).

The only problem with dongles as I see it is there can be too many of them.

I hope there\'ll be a day in the future when everything including applications, sample data, song data, and user configurations can all be saved in a device the size of a USB key or credit card (500GB capacity would be good start). Ideally the device could be plugged into any computer and would contain that particular user\'s personal studio setup without having to copy anything onto the host computer. Applications and sample data could be downloaded from the vendor\'s website and encoded to work only on that \'device\' for which they were purchased. The user could have total mobility and freedom to work in any studio or live situation and the vendor would be protected from unauthorized copying.

I guess it will be a good number of years before we see \'studio-on-a-card\' since \'studio-in-a-box\' hasn\'t even fulfilled yet. It\'s just an idea.

Just one more note to vendors and end users...we\'re on the same side and we need each other! (ok that was 2)

Happy New Year to all.

Brian Shaw

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 01:54 PM

Brian, your idea still assumes that one person uses one computer at any one time. In fact, all sampleware licensing has traditionally been one person is licensed to use the sampleware in his practice on as many machines as he sees fit--so long as he is the artistic entity.

So, in your scenario, I leave my studio and go to play a gig--and my assistant cannot continue working because I have taken the content with me.

Everyone keeps thinking copy protection is the answer. It\'s not. It\'s inconsequential. Doug proved it with his own numbers right in this very thread. What was key in the sales figures was not the copy protection at all, but the delivery medium and wider market of DAW desktops vs. SAMPLER desktops. With the figures to back it up, it makes perfect sense, and fills in that key missing element in this debate that we\'ve been begging someone to provide since we first started discussing it over a year ago.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
The only restriction is the exporting of waves and surgical edits in the middle of a sample.Hardly. Any DSP operation which runs nondestructively within a samplers parameters must necessarily be very grainy and CPU-preserving.

In an open-platform library, one could export all samples in a library, run a Waves Linear Multiband to warm them up dependent on their innate components (yet in relationship to the entire instrument as a whole) in batch, then replace the waves into a new instrument. Substitute any DSP function here--this is how people can make super-powerful, radical changes to the overall sound of a library without dragging down CPU power or deferring it to later in the production.

What if someone wants to radically change the character of a sampled piano he\'s using in realtime on live or studio gigs, and wants to PLAY that character--not wait until it\'s on the track to change it.

There are hundreds of ways that waveform editing is critical to the WHOLE of sampling musicianship. I understand it\'s in your best interest to minimize these issues, and that there are a lot of newbies in sampling that don\'t understand what it is they\'re giving up. But that doesn\'t make it right for YOU to spread misinformation or deflect attention from the fact that you think it\'s in your best interest to reduce sampler functionality at the user\'s expense.

According to Doug\'s numbers, you\'d be making more money on EWQLSO right now if it were available in both Giga and plugin formats. So why not use Doug\'s own data that suggests as much to your advantage, and release on both platforms?

Jake Johnson

12-31-2003, 02:12 PM

Quote: \"This is a prime example of the misinformation which seems to be spreading. In the East West example these things are all possible in Kompakt or Kontakt. The only restriction is the exporting of waves and surgical edits in the middle of a sample. 99% of users just want to make music and because we offer the KOMPAKT or KONTAKT platform and we offer frequent updates based on user comments, there is no issue. A dongle is a different story, though. \"

Nick:

You may have misunderstood me. I wasn\'t speaking of East-West or Kompakt or Kontakt--I was speaking of the closed systems that don\'t let you edit or move (or sometimes even see a map of) the samples.

And please don\'t misunderstand me--I love using VSTI\'s. I just want to be able reach the samples.

And Culture sounds and looks great. Judging from its screenshots, Yellow Tools lets you see the map, and make quite a few adjustments. But I worry that a trend in isolating us from the samples is a bad trend if the libraries aren\'t made available in other formats.

I can see the business problem, though, if one develops for all the platforms and create a VSTI--costs rise for development and support, while the market is split. A VSTI (as opposed to a softsampler host)that let us edit the samples would be my choice.

But hell, we\'re seeing tremendous progress in sound quality (as in Culture) and what we can do. We\'re living in a transitional stage, where each sudden leap in development raises new questions and worries about what\'s lost and gained. A great time to be making music. I just hope we don\'t lose the ability to work on the samples. (It\'s true, the more samples and layers, the more room for small errors, and often there\'s just the matter of personal preference--I may just want a less verb on Eb3 than the creator did.)

(And has anyone noticed, to change the subject, what\'s happened to the noun \"reverb\"? It was commony called \"verb\" when I was in my twenties, but now everyone uses the full form, \"reverb.\" Have we become more staid?)

Nick Phoenix

12-31-2003, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

Everyone keeps thinking copy protection is the answer. It\'s not. It\'s inconsequential. Doug proved it with his own numbers right in this very thread. What was key in the sales figures was not the copy protection at all, but the delivery medium and wider market of DAW desktops vs. SAMPLER desktops. Bruce,
I then explained the reason for the higher sales having to do with all of these things AND the end of the commonplace LA library sharing scenario. You simply chose to ignore this. I know this is what\'s happening, I see and hear about it all the time. These guys aren\'t hackers, they just can\'t resist a good deal when it is handed to them on a silver platter (a bootlegged one). It\'s a little bit of a different story to download a massive library that has been cracked and may give you trouble. It\'s the same reason that sample libraries are bootlegged more than primary applications. People need them to work. So a guy making a living at music will often not want pirated stuff when there is a chance of hassles or really problematic downloads. Using a good old pirated sample library is hassle-free. Just the way you like it. I have made this argument before. Each time you skip over it. Please explain why it is that 9 out of 10 composers I know have some bootlegged sample library in their collection, but all use registered copies of Logic, Cubase or DP. I\'ll tell you why. They need those applications to work, they want updates and they feel that their main application is worthy of a few dollars. Sample libraries are considered freeware, and are easily pirated. You could spend a fortune on sample libraries, so if they are easily stolen, then the temptation is too great. By contrast, these new self contained instruments are powerful, a better value, work on any computer with any plug-ins, offer updates and are not as easily pirated and might give you big hassles, even if you managed to find a cracked version. The perceived value of all of this is very high and it will only get better as the kinks are worked out.

Lazul

12-31-2003, 02:25 PM

Reverb is short for reverberation which is a now. So is verb for that matter. images/icons/smile.gif

Eric G

12-31-2003, 02:25 PM

Doug Rogers:

Well I\'ve got a shocking statistic for you Bruce. Michiel Post is here on this forum and he will verify that our copy-protected plug-in version of his Bosendorfer 290 Piano sold \"35 times\" the amount of all other \"open\" formats combined last month, and the feedback we get from customers is \"excellent\". I\'m one such user who bought the Bos 290 plug-in. It really is marvelous.

I may be in the minority, but for what it\'s worth, I\'m really wishing I\'d bought the Giga version now. The plug-in panacea lost its shine when I realized that I couldn\'t tweak two bothersome FFF samples right in the mid-range unless I also purchase Kontakt. I\'m also getting clicks & pops under very heavy load, which I\'m sure could be ironed out if I tweaked the system a little, but both of those would be non-issues had I gone with the Giga version.

Personalities and argumentation aside, Bruce is right about waveform editing, at least in my real-world example.

--Eric

Lazul

12-31-2003, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

Everyone keeps thinking copy protection is the answer. It\'s not. It\'s inconsequential. Doug proved it with his own numbers right in this very thread. What was key in the sales figures was not the copy protection at all, but the delivery medium and wider market of DAW desktops vs. SAMPLER desktops. Bruce,
I then explained the reason for the higher sales having to do with all of these things AND the end of the commonplace LA library sharing scenario. You simply chose to ignore this. I know this is what\'s happening, I see and hear about it all the time. These guys aren\'t hackers, they just can\'t resist a good deal when it is handed to them on a silver platter (a bootlegged one). It\'s a little bit of a different story to download a massive library that has been cracked and may give you trouble. It\'s the same reason that sample libraries are bootlegged more than primary applications. People need them to work. So a guy making a living at music will often not want pirated stuff when there is a chance of hassles or really problematic downloads. Using a good old pirated sample library is hassle-free. Just the way you like it. I have made this argument before. Each time you skip over it. Please explain why it is that 9 out of 10 composers I know have some bootlegged sample library in their collection, but all use registered copies of Logic, Cubase or DP. I\'ll tell you why. They need those applications to work, they want updates and they feel that their main application is worthy of a few dollars. Sample libraries are considered freeware, and are easily pirated. You could spend a fortune on sample libraries, so if they are easily stolen, then the temptation is too great. By contrast, these new self contained instruments are powerful, a better value, work on any computer with any plug-ins, offer updates and are not as easily pirated and might give you big hassles, even if you managed to find a cracked version. The perceived value of all of this is very high and it will only get better as the kinks are worked out. <hr /></blockquote>While it might lessen the LA file sharing I think but that would be nominal. Most of them would just go to another source which is readily available and download times are really nothing with broadband these days. Also, it is questionable that these collectors would have bought it anyway. Maybe they take it just because it was there and not that they really needed it.

Also, I hope you realize that these NI flavor sample instruments, including yours, are not kracked at all. They apparently have working key generators that spit out a legit code you can use to officially authorize the vsti.

I see your increase in sales as not the result of CP but more packaging and marketing. There\'s a huge market for the crowd that traditionally used canned things like a Triton. These people can\'t be bothered with a sampler and want to play sounds out of the box so to speak. These is the demographic where all your increased sales are coming from IMO. The CP might account for one or 2. images/icons/smile.gif

T.Artimisi

12-31-2003, 02:37 PM

I think J.Whaley might be onto something. Let\'s say Eric Persing finds out that a recording has a pirated version of Stylus on it. What kind of effect would it have if all of a sudden record labels are getting phone calls from lawyers requesting the masters? If record companies start having to pay penalties because some bonehead wants to use some illegal software, then I\'m sure some heads will start rolling. The producer will no doubt be warned which will in turn, if this person is smart, make him/her start asking musicians being hired if they own all of their samples/software.

This could be a beautiful thing. images/icons/grin.gif

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Jake Johnson:

(And has anyone noticed, to change the subject, what\'s happened to the noun \"reverb\"? It was commony called \"verb\" when I was in my twenties, but now everyone uses the full form, \"reverb.\" Have we become more staid?) for a while there \"verb\" was out, dry was in...now it\'s making a come-back...so we are going \"retro\" hence \"REverb\"

I\'m serious! images/icons/smile.gif

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
There\'s a huge market for the crowd that traditionally used canned things like a Triton. These people can\'t be bothered with a sampler and want to play sounds out of the box so to speak. images/icons/smile.gif yup that\'s me, looks like us instrument-dependent sneeches have thrown the sampler market into chaos....apologies! images/icons/smile.gif images/icons/smile.gif

Lazul

12-31-2003, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by Sharmy:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />By contrast, these new self contained instruments are powerful, a better value, work on any computer with any plug-ins, offer updates and are not as easily pirated and might give you big hassles, even if you managed to find a cracked version. The perceived value of all of this is very high and it will only get better as the kinks are worked out.
What would add some value is that only registerd users could get the updates. Creating another hassle for pros who use pirated copies might entice that pro to just buy it.

That being said, I find CP a pain in the arse and will leave this thread unless it gets close to Furst\'s numbers. <hr /></blockquote>Are you saying the updates are not kracked?

Lazul

12-31-2003, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by T.Artimisi:
I think J.Whaley might be onto something. Let\'s say Eric Persing finds out that a recording has a pirated version of Stylus on it. What kind of effect would it have if all of a sudden record labels are getting phone calls from lawyers requesting the masters? If record companies start having to pay penalties because some bonehead wants to use some illegal software, then I\'m sure some heads will start rolling. The producer will no doubt be warned which will in turn, if this person is smart, make him/her start asking musicians being hired if they own all of their samples/software.

This could be a beautiful thing. images/icons/grin.gif No this would just cause cd\'s to go up from $18 to like $25.

David Abraham

12-31-2003, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

In an open-platform library, one could export all samples in a library, run a Waves Linear Multiband to warm them up dependent on their innate components (yet in relationship to the entire instrument as a whole) in batch, then replace the waves into a new instrument. Substitute any DSP function here--this is how people can make super-powerful, radical changes to the overall sound of a library without dragging down CPU power or deferring it to later in the production.
perhaps this could be a good feature request for plugin instrument engine. A batch interface that could let the user run arbitrary (DX or VST) DSP across of range of selected wave files in the file monolith.

If this is made available generically in Kompakt, then all Kompakt derived instruments could have the option of adding this feature.

T.Artimisi

12-31-2003, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by T.Artimisi:
I think J.Whaley might be onto something. Let\'s say Eric Persing finds out that a recording has a pirated version of Stylus on it. What kind of effect would it have if all of a sudden record labels are getting phone calls from lawyers requesting the masters? If record companies start having to pay penalties because some bonehead wants to use some illegal software, then I\'m sure some heads will start rolling. The producer will no doubt be warned which will in turn, if this person is smart, make him/her start asking musicians being hired if they own all of their samples/software.

This could be a beautiful thing. images/icons/grin.gif No this would just cause cd\'s to go up from $18 to like $25. <hr /></blockquote>You\'re probably right.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
These guys aren\'t hackers, they just can\'t resist a good deal when it is handed to them on a silver platter (a bootlegged one). It\'s a little bit of a different story to download a massive library that has been cracked and may give you trouble. It\'s the same reason that sample libraries are bootlegged more than primary applications. People need them to work. So a guy making a living at music will often not want pirated stuff when there is a chance of hassles or really problematic downloads. Using a good old pirated sample library is hassle-free. Just the way you like it. Look, you know I am against piracy of samples. I have turned friends into enemies over it, and you can be guaranteed that no sample library has ever left my studio in someone else\'s hands. EVER.

But what I am saying is, why the total lockout when other methods may reduce piracy. What about the watermark scenario I mentioned? Not watermarking as in YOU policing the airwaves...of course that\'s ludicrous. I\'m talking about encrypting the samples as provided on the discs from the vendor, so that the only way that, say, a GIG file can be made is by running the installer.

Now, granted, that puts a GIG file on someone\'s hard drive. Of course, that can be copied. But if the installer must be activated by the vendor before it will install, and if the activation code is one which contains the user\'s information, AND if that information is watermarked on each and every sample as the GIG file is built...THAT becomes a different scenario.

I\'m not suggesting you hand over libraries on a silver platter. I\'m suggesting 180 degrees opposite--that developers STOP handing over GIG files burned to discs, and start using installers that watermark ID information onto the GIG files.

Of course a user can choose to copy that to a friend. But there\'s some deterrent. You make it darn well clear that ID info is being placed all over these things. Watermark technology is subtle enough that it is all but impossible to remove, and certainly quite impossible to remove from some thousand-plus individual files. When a person knows that he\'s \"sharing\" his copy which contains his user info, and that he can\'t trust his pals not to share it further...well, that would give me pause. Wouldn\'t it give you some serious pause?

And because no GIG file would exist without having been installed by SOMEONE from the factory disc, and because that file would contain someone\'s user info, you could take that to court and really screw up somebody\'s day. Further deterrent.

I am totally with you on piracy reduction. I would love to see piracy reduced, because it has done nothing except make the world a more difficult place for all of us.

I just don\'t agree that the plugin situation is better. Honestly, do you? Man, I really like using GigaStudio, because it is solid, you can abuse it to death in realtime, and it just keeps on pumping out money.

What I am saying makes sense, man. People would definitely think twice about sharing if the installation process for a sample library did the things I\'m describing. And I vetted this idea with Garth and some of the other guys--it is doable, and probably less expensive to pull off than what you\'re doing now.

If you could get that kind of protection, keep your plugin revenue where it is, and get additional open-platform revenue, wouldn\'t that be win-win?

I can\'t be more serious. I was wanting to potentially make cash on this idea by partnering with someone and producing it. I\'m putting it out here to contribute. Garth already did some technology that writes multiple formats from a single data file. This could accommodate a single installer that would write and watermark ALL supported formats from one installer.

If you even reduced piracy on open-formats by half, and doubled potential sales, you would be making a LOT more money, Nick. It\'s a good idea.

T.Artimisi

12-31-2003, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
T. Artimisi wrote:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I think J.Whaley might be onto something. Let\'s say Eric Persing finds out that a recording has a pirated version of Stylus on it.How in the world would he know it\'s pirated? These days, there is extensive collaboration on many if not most recordings. It would be hard to know that a legitimate user wasn\'t involved. Furthermore, it would be enormously costly to research and litigate such a thing. Lawyers aren\'t cheap, and big time record producers have better lawyers than lowly sample producers. In the end, even if they were successful, the content developer would probably be viewed as a villain by many. Either that, or the accused would trot out a legitimate license holder, and counter-sue. There\'s really no way to win at that game.

Lee Blaske <hr /></blockquote>Yeah... Lazul already got me.

Izenagi

12-31-2003, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by J. Whaley:
if the WHOLE sample developer world put their butts together and farted out one single dongle Extremely well said. I too agree with Bruce, though for the record, some of his ideas as posted by others before (like web handshakes, installers that create embedded/encrypted datafiles tied to the buyer) were not responded to by him at the time. Either way the installers would be modified by crackers who also supply a keygen. The key for developers is to release libraries so large they cannot be fully \"shared\" online.

It may be that because of the fear of broadband, and the results to date, that for the next cycle the trend will be to \"custom\" engines. Marketed to us as a feature -- see Yellowtools and Toontrack. DFH Superior VSTi is a good example; I estimate 8-10 GB for the installer archive (35 GB uncompressed). Due to the trends it seems I will have to go with it to obtain the sounds I really must have, if they are in fact that good. I will choose more exhaustively redundant variety of sounds over better production quality, and in fact, I would expect to render and rebuild any VSTi components I absolutely had into GS so that I could use them on the platform I believe in most.

With regard to GS3, I look forward to the sample-switching features and I hope they can be applied to libraries created for GS2. Library encryption is a necessary evil, and to a certain extent the GS2 generation means a golden age come to an end. VSL will be the last great work of that era. For some this raises the question of how the performance base established now, with the libraries that exist, can carry into the future of \"trusted\" computing.

- a crotchety old historian (who may keep using Win98 for the next thirty years)

spectrum

12-31-2003, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Any DSP operation which runs nondestructively within a samplers parameters must necessarily be very grainy and CPU-preserving. [/QB]Wow That\'s a pretty broad generalization!

:-)

That assertion is easy to disprove.

spectrum

JonP

12-31-2003, 11:01 PM

I\'d have thought this crusade needs to extend its field of influence far outside of the Northern Sounds forum to be in any way succesful. Not just to YT, but to all the manufacturers who refuse to budge.

I still see the problem being that the average musician who uses the technology couldn\'t give a damn about the situation (dongles excluded!), as long as what they use does what it says it will do. The plug-in format is just way too convenient and popular now and I\'d bet too many will see it as a jump backwards rather than see the true situation that has developed. And without enough support, a crusade will end in failure.

Bruce, a brief synopsis of your main points should be made and circulated around the numerous forums. Just as here, it may be that many will side with your way of thinking ater a bit of heated debating.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
To recap:

Realizing he has harmed his case, Doug backtracks and raises peripheral issues like author control over the \"sound\" of a library, and fuzzy statement about the expense of producing multiformat libraries vs. sales potential. Three days ago you dismissed Prof. Keith Johnson\'s 30 years experience in the classical recording field in one insulting sentence. Today, you are trying to belittle me by dismissing my 15 years experience developing and marketing these products - and yet you have no experience whatsoever. Have you ever made or distributed a sample library? I bet not! So stop trying to claim this thread as your own, when you didn\'t start it, and open your ears to the various discussion points that are being raised, which are not fuzzy, they are based on reality!

- Doug <hr /></blockquote>Well, you don\'t seem to be able to refute a single claim I\'ve made by doing anything except saying it ain\'t so. Yet you provided data that supports my claim.

And where did I dismiss Keith Johnson in a single sentance. In that thread, I actually supported the fact that different tools exist to provide different benefits. I explained that recording studio design IS a science, and that there are manipulations of space which produce results. I\'ll bet if Keith and I were having a conversation instead of you using his writing as a club to reinforce your positions and financial interests, that it would be a lot more interesting and revealing.

Now, if you\'d like to stop hiding behind \"my experience,\" and discrediting what I say by ad hominem (don\'t listen to him, he doesn\'t know what he\'s saying), I think we could have a discussion. But so far, I don\'t see you participating. You just want to convince people they shouldn\'t pay attention to me.

People are smarter than that.

Nick Phoenix

12-31-2003, 11:30 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
To recap:

Realizing he has harmed his case, Doug backtracks and raises peripheral issues like author control over the \"sound\" of a library, and fuzzy statement about the expense of producing multiformat libraries vs. sales potential. Three days ago you dismissed Prof. Keith Johnson\'s 30 years experience in the classical recording field in one insulting sentence. Today, you are trying to belittle me by dismissing my 15 years experience developing and marketing these products - and yet you have no experience whatsoever. Have you ever made or distributed a sample library? I bet not! So stop trying to claim this thread as your own, when you didn\'t start it, and open your ears to the various discussion points that are being raised, which are not fuzzy, they are based on reality!

- Doug <hr /></blockquote>Well, you don\'t seem to be able to refute a single claim I\'ve made by doing anything except saying it ain\'t so. Yet you provided data that supports my claim.

And where did I dismiss Keith Johnson in a single sentance. In that thread, I actually supported the fact that different tools exist to provide different benefits. I explained that recording studio design IS a science, and that there are manipulations of space which produce results. I\'ll bet if Keith and I were having a conversation instead of you using his writing as a club to reinforce your positions and financial interests, that it would be a lot more interesting and revealing.

Now, if you\'d like to stop hiding behind \"my experience,\" and discrediting what I say by ad hominem (don\'t listen to him, he doesn\'t know what he\'s saying), I think we could have a discussion. But so far, I don\'t see you participating. You just want to convince people they shouldn\'t pay attention to me.

People are smarter than that. <hr /></blockquote>Bruce, you have really crossed the line. We didn\'t guide Keith in any way. Anyway, all of the new CP protected plugins are enjoying very good sales. The Bosendorfer plug-in is very popular because it sounds best in this format, can be used in any situation and by any level or type of user, and can be used with all plug-ins. People are buying it and not sharing with their buddies. That\'s the reason for the high sales.The long run will prove or disprove the copy protection debate. Ask Eric Persing about his sales after CP. images/icons/wink.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by yellow tools:
ALL updates until today are free. Version 1.5 is also free, so the current users get the authorization key, 270MB! additional sounds and the Culture Groove Package FOR FREE!

-snip-

I don’t think there are many other companies out there who offer that much.VSL and Post Musical Instruments have offered massive updates on Open Platform sampleware. GOS has offered massive updates on Open Platform Sampleware.

Why do you think the USB dongle is something we want to constrict the user? Because it changes the agreement. Where sampleware has traditionally been licensed to one user/one license--and that user has had the freedom for the SAME PRICE to use sampleware on as many different machines and sampling platforms as he wishes--the USB dongle represents a massive downgrade in the portability, usefulness, and longevity of the product. It turns what was once treated as DATA into something being treated as an APPLICATION in terms of licensing. It is a very broad assault on the traditional licensing model.

btw you do not need one dongle for each yellow tools product, you can save all your authorizations on one key.
As developer it is also our duty to “protect” our customers, and if I recognize, that best possible products and support for our legal users are only possible with this USB dongle, than I have to do it.
So the dongle is not only to protect us against illegal copies, it is also to protect YOU. But this actually makes the dongle even MORE restrictive. What if a person is in a situation where he has licensed your products and needs to spread the processing load out over several computers. You say you have offered a multi-user license, but that depends upon networking. Some computers are not networked. Say a busy composer has work proceeding in his studio, and he has a live gig to play that night and wants to use Yellow Tools samples on the gig. He takes out the dongle, and his assistants can no longer work at the studio--even though that individual has rightly licensed the content.

You cannot represent it as equal functionality. It is RADICALLY reduced flexibility when compared with open platform sampleware which can be loaded into multiple instances of the same platform, converted to other platforms, edited on the waveform level, and used as the customer sees fit.

You are right, there is no possibility to export the sounds into any sampler, but that’s why it is a Virtual Instrument and not a sampling library.
All this has nothing to do with arrogance. We at yellow tools are always open-minded towards critics But is it really a Virtual Instrument? What is it about the percussion samples mapping in this instrument which cannot be effectively achieved in a sampler...when the VI itself is nothing but a reduced functionality sampler in its own right?

Once again, if best quality, playability and authenticity of the included instruments is only possible with a VI, then we do it, but isn’t a good product always in your interest, too? Do you really want to make a dongle/USB port more important than the quality of a product and the possibilities it offers – although nobody made his own experiences with Culture 1.5 yet? Christian, I think you are being sincere.

But what about playability of percussion samples or authenticity of them is enhanced in a plugin sample player vs. a full sampler?

Of course good products are in the best interest of users. But fair licensing agreements are also in the best interest of users. Your USB dongle plan fails on any scale. For a single user, it represents a radical reduction in flexibility and convenience. For a user of multiple libraries, even if he reduces his licenses to a single dongle, it represents tying his license to hardware rather than to his person. This is a fundamental alteration of everything we have had in sample licensing since its very inception.

And finally, it is YOU who has made the dongle issue come about, not the end user.

Doug Rogers has posted some true data that suggests your sales of Virtual Instruments would not be harmed by also releasing the same sample content in Open Platform libraries for Giga, Halion, Kontakt, et. al.

I would be satisfied to see a committment to release the samples in all of those platforms, in waveform accessible, open formats. By doing so, as Doug has demonstrated, you not only enjoy the sales benefit of reaching the larger DAW audience, you satisfy those customers who are looking for the flexibility and custom programming that only a full-featured sampler provides.

I hope that is very plain language, and very concise points. You could be a shining example of customer service by providing ALL formats.

No one is suggesting that we put you out of business. We are suggesting that people support your open platform products, and do not support your closed platform products. When you see monetary losses on those, perhaps you will change your policy. Or you could realize that the dongle idea is not going to win friends, and opt for an open platform policy, thus saving the entire user base a lot of grief.

One thing is certain. A vendor is a vendor. A client is a client. That relationship cannot be altered, as much as people are persuaded to feel powerless in the situation. Users have the power to change any policy they disagree with by voting with their dollars. Supporting open platform sampleware sends a very clear message.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-31-2003, 11:42 PM

Bruce, you have really crossed the line. We didn\'t guide Keith in any way. Anyway, all of the new CP protected plugins are enjoying very good sales. The Bosendorfer plug-in is very popular because it sounds best in this format, can be used in any situation and by any level or type of user, and can be used with all plug-ins. People are buying it and not sharing with their buddies. That\'s the reason for the high sales.The long run will prove or disprove the copy protection debate. Ask Eric Persing about his sales after CP. Yes, I am such a bad person.

Problem is, I didn\'t say you GUIDED Keith. I said that you use his writing support your point of view. To be more precise, you copy it into discussions on the board to dismiss techniques that are considered to have equal merit. I don\'t deny Keith Johnson is talented. Do you think he\'s the only person with valid opinions, or that he\'s the only person who has ever produced good sounding work?

We\'ve asked Eric. Eric says he gets more sales of his plugins than he got of his sample libraries. BUT again, where\'s the apples to apples comparison? YOU gave us that. And the evidence you presented fills in the blank that Eric couldn\'t provide. You cannot account for increased sales by tying them to CCP, when by the evidence presented it has almost everything to do with the presentation format, and almost nothing to do with the protection. If a person wanted to get his hands on that Bosie, he could download a crack of Giga or Kontakt, download the illegal copy of the Bosie, and go right to town. If users are such evil little downloaders, why doesn\'t that happen?

Because it ain\'t about piracy. It\'s about presentation, penetration, and the difference in DAW desktops vs. sampler desktops.

EDIT: Sorry Nick. I thought I was responding to Doug. I have already gotten to the snippy point with him...didn\'t mean to come back at you with quite the same vigor, but the basic points are intended.

Tarkio Road

12-31-2003, 11:45 PM

Originally posted by yellow tools:
I have to take care of my customers so I have to find a way to award the legal user for his purchase and to make sure the illegal user does not have the same possibilities and only with the key you get exclusive access to the user area with free updates, download and freebies.This seems to defy logic. How do you make sure the illegal user does not have the same possibilities as legal users. By definition, illegal users are already illegally using your product. So they must have a cracked version, ergo, they have the same usage as us legal users who have to deal with your stupid dongle. So actually, illegal users will find your product much more pleasurable to use than those who pay for it. images/icons/confused.gif

And what does sticking a dongle on a sample library (no, it is not a normal practice in your industry) have to do with free upgrades and freebies. Would you like us to list the very successful non-CCP libraries that provide free upgrades and freebies. I think you have heard of most of them.

Anyone remember Circuit City\'s DIV-X DVD format attempt. They spend many millions trying to change the home DVD movie rental paradigm. It was completely closed. You could only BUY (not rent) DVD movies at a Circuit City store. You had to buy a specific DIV-X player that HAD to be connected to a phone line with your credit card number stored at \"headquarters.\" The player would charge your card every time you played the movie. Circuit City had the support of several major film distributors and major DVD player manufacturers.

Customers said, \"screw you CC!\"

DIV-X was dead in a year. CC was out millions of dollars, and those users who championed DIV-X (with posts that sound a bit familiar around here lately) were stuck with crippled DVD players that eventually couldn\'t phone home.

Bad ideas are just simply bad ideas.

Hudson

12-31-2003, 11:55 PM

You can rationalize all you want to, Christian...but bottomline, a USB dongle for a sample library is way over the top, overly intrusive, and an absurd path for any sample devleoper to take. You clearly haven\'t \"gotten it\" after reading all these posts, so let me try one last time...USB dongle = *No Sale*. Period. The last thing I need are 20 usb dongles hanging out of my computer from various developers. It adds a whole new dimension to the word \"moronic\".
-Hudson

Originally posted by yellow tools:

Why do you think the USB dongle is something we want to constrict the user?
Sure this dongle is also a copy-protection, but it is also to guarantee best possible products and support for our customers. This dongle is nothing new in our business and it offers many advantages for you as legal users – btw you do not need one dongle for each yellow tools product, you can save all your authorizations on one key.
Best regards

Christian Hellinger

Bruce A. Richardson

01-01-2004, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by spectrum:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Any DSP operation which runs nondestructively within a samplers parameters must necessarily be very grainy and CPU-preserving. Wow That\'s a pretty broad generalization!

:-)

That assertion is easy to disprove.

spectrum [/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Agreed to an extent...I was hasty. Volume, pan, simple echoes, even some resampling to an extent. How about a phase-coherent EQ or Multiband, though?

And let me be pretty specific, because I don\'t think you\'re going to end up disagreeing with me.

Take the Art Vista Malmsjo. That is a piano I really like to use in certain settings, because it has a lively, high-motion sound and loads of sustain. It is VERY dark, though. I have done a great deal of editing on that piano to make it suit my needs. I have used nice EQ in batch to put it into a brigher color overall. I\'ve done a lot of spot EQ-ing in the lower registers. I\'ve grafted another piano\'s release samples onto it, and EQ\'ed those to match. All of this was done in batch with processors that would never run in realtime, nor would it make a bit of sense to run this kind of processing in realtime. In an example like that, being locked out of waveform editing, and automated export/replace at that, is a serious loss of functionality.

Another example: SISS Pizzicato basses. I think Jennifer\'s team tried to go very easy on the noise reduction, but I dont\' like the result--I hear the room go in and out as the threshold on the NR opens and closes. To me, that actually makes the sound smaller than if you just go ahead and lose that range altogether. So, I exported those in batch and did a much broader noise reduction stroke. They lose some air, but to me, the image is more consistent, and I can deal with it in the track at that point, since it\'s not going in and out any more.

That\'s another edit which made a patch far more useful to me, which would be just plain silly to run in realtime every time.

Look, I have been hearing and hearing and hearing how people are making more money on plugins. Which cannot be contested. But Doug\'s 35-1 ratio of plugin sales, on a library which IS available as a straight-ahead sampler library as well (and is very available for download via the pirate channel) spoke HUGE volumes to me. That\'s a piece of information no one has ever provided to us, and frankly it still has me a little chapped. It is quite clear that a vendor CAN provide a library in both open and closed formats, and still make his money, SO WHAT GIVES???

There are a lot of people who have the same desires I have, to use samples in samplers, rather than have each darn library become its own VSTi. It makes more sense in my setting. It makes more sense in a lot of settings. If Doug is seeing those kinds of numbers on a VSTi which is also a sample library, then the whole copy protection issue cannot be argued any longer. The sales are there. It\'s DAW market share vs. Sampler market share accounting for those numbers--NOT COPY PROTECTION.

I think it makes a lot of sense to support the sampler market. I wish everyone would consider those numbers Doug provided. Their meaning cannot be more clear. We\'ve never seen a definitive case like this--we\'ve only seen apples and oranges. Now we see apples and apples, and what we\'re being told about copy protection and sales is being proved false by those numbers.

esteso

01-01-2004, 01:37 AM

I just went over to YT to read the blurb on CCP. What I didn\'t realize, even though I\'ve been paying close attention to this thread, is that your USB key must be attached to the computer that you access the internet with in order for you to be authorized. I use an old 8600 to connect with the net and I\'d like to keep it that way. I really don\'t want the internet or anything else on my workstation. So that let\'s me out right off the bat. Even if I wanted to purchase it, I can\'t, unless I want to jump through a bunch of hoops to change my setup. I don\'t, thank you very much.

Too bad really, the software looks interesting.

And on another note, it can be easily argued that dongles are actually an inducement to piracy. At some point it becomes easier and less stressful to run the crack. Dongles may well be that point, and it\'s already been proven that they\'re not that hard to crack. (Waves, Logic)

Need I say I\'m not condoning piracy, merely pointing out the obvious. Don\'t we all know a person or two who bought the software but are running the cracked version? Why are they doing this? (rhetorical)

The developers have a problem and they want to make it your problem, in fact they have already made it your problem and it\'s going to get worse unless you do something about it.

Look what we\'re putting up with already.

-You can\'t try the software
-You can\'t sell the software
-You can\'t move the software w/o new auth
-You can\'t upgrade your CPU w/o new auth
-You can\'t re-install after a crash
-You\'re asked for install disk all the time
-Vendors registration system simply doesn\'t work
-You need to wait for an auth. email
-You can\'t use the software on 2 machines
-You run out of USB hubs
-Your platform is no longer supported

Well that\'s all I can think of right now but I bet there\'s a few more. I am not saying that we put up with every one of these inconveniences on every piece of software but these devices are all in common usage and effect lots of us every day.

What about the guy who couldn\'t get his software to operate \'cause he changed the clock on his laptop to reflect the new time zone he was now in!

This is ridiculous and we\'re letting it happen.

Some developers are better than others for sure, but one way or the other they are holding all the cards. I get a queasy feeling every time I\'m forced to get another authorization, for whatever reason, for software I have already bought and paid for. They\'re usually really good about it but it irks me that I should have to ask permission to use my own property.

spectrum

01-01-2004, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I think it makes a lot of sense to support the sampler market. I wish everyone would consider those numbers Doug provided. Their meaning cannot be more clear. We\'ve never seen a definitive case like this--we\'ve only seen apples and oranges. Now we see apples and apples, and what we\'re being told about copy protection and sales is being proved false by those numbers. [/QB]But I think you\'re conveniently ignoring that he also said that it isn\'t cost effective to do both. Supporting the vast multitude of ever changing sampler platforms is very difficult, and has killed the business for many developers in the history of the soundware business.

It\'s important to remember that selling sounds has always been a very difficult business. There isn\'t only one way to do it, and you\'ll see many more experiments in various types of ways of people trying to make it work.

One thing that I\'ve found is that the market usually speaks pretty loud and clear about what it wants and what it\'s willing to put up with. (This thread is a pretty good example...;-)

spectrum

Bruce A. Richardson

01-01-2004, 08:34 AM

Originally posted by spectrum:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I think it makes a lot of sense to support the sampler market. I wish everyone would consider those numbers Doug provided. Their meaning cannot be more clear. We\'ve never seen a definitive case like this--we\'ve only seen apples and oranges. Now we see apples and apples, and what we\'re being told about copy protection and sales is being proved false by those numbers. But I think you\'re conveniently ignoring that he also said that it isn\'t cost effective to do both. Supporting the vast multitude of ever changing sampler platforms is very difficult, and has killed the business for many developers in the history of the soundware business.

It\'s important to remember that selling sounds has always been a very difficult business. There isn\'t only one way to do it, and you\'ll see many more experiments in various types of ways of people trying to make it work.

One thing that I\'ve found is that the market usually speaks pretty loud and clear about what it wants and what it\'s willing to put up with. (This thread is a pretty good example...;-)

spectrum [/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Well, Eric, I AM ignoring it, because I don\'t believe it. It\'s pretty hard to reconcile against the fact that his business has 15 years of success selling open-platform libraries.

Everybody who has knowledge of the industry\'s condition at present knows that starving content off of sampling platforms will doom them. And you are absolutely right--the market \"bore\" it, and here we are.

Does a producer like Doug Rogers, like yourself, have any responsibility to the technology which brought us here, and kept the business flowing?

Are we really going to say that it\'s cool to doom the purity of a tool, with a history and a purpose, because it\'s not convenient any more to support it?

It would be a tragedy if any of the samplers died. Kontakt is very cool. Look at NI--they\'re hanging on by a thread. GigaStudio leveled the playing field for thousands of musicians, and Tascam will pull the plug on it in an instant if Giga 3 tanks.

Does that serve ANYTHING that is good or decent?

If someone is telling me a plugin is increasing sample sales by a multiplier of 35, and those sales BEFORE plugins were sufficient to at least keep him in business, then you know what?? I have an expectation that DECENCY comes into the picture somewhere in that equation. I expect that person to give something back, and is it really too much to ask for a producer to program up Giga, Kontakt, and EXS versions of a library?

Right now, Garth has a technology sitting fairly idle, which takes common sampler data and builds libraries in various formats upon installation. That\'s not a translator. A developer can do discrete mappings for a variety of formats, then the program assembles that with the common waveform components and spits out native data for the various samplers.

THAT technology could be protected by user-tagged watermarks, and that deterrent WOULD keep people who have something to lose from trading files. \"Loaning\" the installer would be deterred because nobody\'s going to hand off a disc that will set off a personalized \"pirate alert\" the moment someone else sticks it in his computer.

It seems to me that if people are enjoying plugin sales on the order of 35/1 over libraries, that this is a very profitable market. But \"35\" is also not nearly as high a penetration into the total DAW desktop as \"1\" is into the total sampler desktop. That means there are some faithful customers out there who DO want sample libraries in sampler formats.

And this technology of Garth\'s is a way to reduce the disc runs necessary to support those people and technologies, to provide deterrent in the form of identification, and to do something which contributes to the common good.

I will happily split the cost of hiring Garth to produce that technology with any developers who wish to pursue it. I am dead serious. I\'ll bet some others here will help, too. If we could raise the money, we give Garth some work, we put a tool out there which gives you a chance to profit while supporting more technology, and everybody wins. Guys, if you\'d be willing to pledge some support, let\'s hear from you.

If we let samplers die, that sucks, Eric. And by not actively doing anything about it, we are participating...you, me, everyone.

PatS

01-01-2004, 09:23 AM

THAT technology could be protected by user-tagged watermarks, and that deterrent WOULD keep people who have something to lose from trading files. \"Loaning\" the installer would be deterred because nobody\'s going to hand off a disc that will set off a personalized \"pirate alert\" the moment someone else sticks it in his computer.Bruce:

What prevents the user from burning the extracted files to a CD and casually handing them off to his buddy? How would the watermarked files \"set off a personalized \'pirate alert\',\" if the files are in open format and the mechanism for contacting the manufacturer (i.e., the installer) is out of the picture? Tracking watermarked sounds presupposes that the sounds have entered the public arena, which is not guaranteed. Are you proposing that the watermarking itself includes information that triggers a pirate alert?

Mind you, I prefer the open-format model, even if I\'m among the so-called 99% who presently wouldn\'t take advantage of it. Who knows what I\'ll do with my time once the kids start ignoring me; I might very well join the 1% club and tweak raw samples to my heart\'s content. But it may be too late for me if developers have already embraced the closed-format model.

BTW, someone suggested \"rendering the sounds\" as a solution to working with non-exportable wave files. What does that mean? Sampling the samples?

Happy New Year! Keep up the good fight.

Pat

Michiel Post

01-01-2004, 09:52 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
a) Michiel Post\'s Bosendorfer exists in sampler formats
and
b) Michiel Post\'s Bosendorfer is available for download anywhere a musician who wants to find it CAN find it

c) You still sold an admitted huge number of Bosendorfer plugins.

So, by breaking that situation down (don\'t you hate it when I do that), we see two things:
a) Open-Platform availability does NOT hurt your sales
b) CCP is not responsible for the sales you got on the plugin.

In fact, it may have hurt you.

I daresay that the total number of users of DAW applications, vs. the total number of users of SAMPLERS is greater than a 53-1 ratio.

So, I\'d say that the penetration of the open format sampler market was a higher ratio than the penetration of the full DAW market.

Perhaps it was because people are turned off by copy protection. But whatever the reason, by number of desktops, you should be doing BETTER than 53-1.

Thanks for the numbers. It\'s the first real evidence that\'s been provided that I am right. How ironic that it\'s you who provided it. Hi Bruce, happy New Year!
I\'m out for a New-Years party two days and I miss this 17 pages topic!...

The numbers Doug gives you are correct, but...they tell me a very different story.
I have worked very hard for half a year to create the Giga version of the PMI Bösendorfer 290. When I started selling this library it was a success. We sold 6000 Typo: should be 600 !!! of them during the last year. I started offering other open-platform versions (HALion, Kontakt and EXS) during the last 6 months. I also sold several 100\'s of these. In general the sales is high during the first months after a release and gradually decreases to stay on a very low level. In my case the Bosendorfer sales during the last months were so low we could not sustain our business activities. We made some money on the open-platform libraries, but not much, believe me. The non-giga open platform specific version cost us a lot of time and money to create as they are far from normal imports. The non-giga formats never made money. I regard them as an extra service for people who don’t hae giga and can’t make a proper import themselves. I also think the ratio of copied versus sold libraries is far worse for HALion/EXS than for giga.
Now you must remember my little Piracy topic last year, where we found that for every library sold about 10 illegal copies were in use? It turned out much worse than that. Since the library was available for EXS/HALion and EXS we found there must be between 20 to 40 illegal copies for each copy we sell.
Under normal circumstances we wouldn\'t have survived this situation; you calculate how many users may be buying your library and base your company strategy on such numbers. When all of a sudden your potential market is getting 30 to 40 times smaller because everybody knows where to download your library for free, you\'ll be out of business in no time. I talk a lot to other developers and I know what I\'m talking about. Sales of platform-specific libraries are going down like Saddam’s statues are going down in Iraq. Massive!
The open-platform libraries were very time-consuming, very expensive (in the light of possible sales), and are a pain for distribution. You now need to stock 4 different version of one piano. We made them available on DVD’s (but some people don’t have DVD players so we created CD’s too). That makes 8 different versions of one piano. A lot of work, a larger risk for distributors etc. In general these non-giga sampler specific versions were a disaster, both financially and because of the trouble producing them that only resulted in more pirated copies and less sales.

Now back to your equation:
a) Michiel Post\'s Bosendorfer exists in sampler formats
and
b) Michiel Post\'s Bosendorfer is available for download anywhere a musician who wants to find it CAN find it
c) You still sold an admitted huge number of Bosendorfer plugins.

Some remarks here; the plug-in is a very convenient way to purchase the sound that I created. Most of my customers have very basic questions like: What do I need to in order to play your wonderful sound? Do I need a computer or can I use my Clavinova and home stereo? What is the difference between the plug-in and the other versions? Which sampler format is best? Which sampler program is the easiest to set up for a technophobe piano lover? Etc.etc. 100’s of emails every month.
Very few customers are the tweakers that will open the WAV files and want to filter out an unwanted freq. or add some fav. impulse. We both know that you and I are such persons.

Back to your conclusions:
So, by breaking that situation down (don\'t you hate it when I do that), we see two things:
a) Open-Platform availability does NOT hurt your sales
b) CCP is not responsible for the sales you got on the plugin.

Your logic in the above equation misses some points.
I said it before: Open-platform availability is not profitable enough to let me stay in business. Piracy is preventing a healthy operation in these formats.
CCP is NOT responsible for the increased sales? How is that?

Since we started selling the Plug-In we found that the market was as big as we expected after all. We found that people who need that library (in that specific easy format) are willing to PAY to get it. And this makes this plug-in so special. You can borrow/copy/download/iso-burn a copy of the other platform versions but you have to pay to get the plug-in to work. Simple.

I have to leave now, but I’ll be back later!

Lazul

01-01-2004, 10:08 AM

Hi Mr Post,

What about the fact that there are open formats of the b290 plugin concurrently? If piracy is so rampant what keeps these pirates from just getting the giga version and not the plugin version? What does the plugin version have that the others don\'t? Also soundonline is carryin your plugin now. You have wider distribution and visibilty which would increase sales alone as well. Also with a packaged plugin physical stores like Guitar Center will carry it as well. I really think you cannot not say that the 35:1 ration is largely due to CP.

Steelhed

01-01-2004, 10:14 AM

Hey Guys I haven\'t been here in months, I had to comment on this growing trend of Misinformed Developers... LAZUL is right, and the only ones who are going to not buy YellowTools products are those who would rightfully pay for it... What these Companies don\'t understand is, Hackers will always figure out a Dongle Key.. So the only ones to be using their product will be people who use these hacks.. You think they\'re gonna pay for it?? I don\'t think so.. In the future we will look back on this era, and use companies like YellowTools as an example of someone creating their own sales drop..LoL.. I\'m all for protection, I payed for everything I have, But I damn sure not going to want a dongle key collection to pull out and put in.. It\'s kinda like how I feel about the Music industry, They choose who\'s gonna be the next star, The people don\'t decide, Then when the Music industry hits a slump, they blame it on P2P clients, That\'s what they get for not opening up the Music Industry, and letting real talented people in, I don\'t have an ounce of pity for them.... In conclusion, We are in an ERA where copyright protection is bass ackwards, Make it a pain in the *** , and prospective customers will shy away from it, Hackers are willing to deal with the pain in the *** to get around Copyright protection.. Good Luck TO THose Idiots! I hope they lose ton\'s of sales and sell out to a more competent company

Bruce A. Richardson

01-01-2004, 10:34 AM

Hi Michiel,

You sold 6000 copies of the Giga version of the Bosie?

That\'s 1.2 million dollars gross return, over one year, on six months\' work!!!!!!!!!!!

Your numbers are not helping the argument, if you want us to believe that people are not profitable on open-source libraries.

I\'m sorry, man. You are talking to musicians. I do licensing/royalty sales, and I would surely be tickled if I could even guarantee I would get a $120,000 return on six months\' work consistently.

I hope you misquoted your numbers.

From PatS:
What prevents the user from burning the extracted files to a CD and casually handing them off to his buddy? How would the watermarked files \"set off a personalized \'pirate alert\',\" if the files are in open format and the mechanism for contacting the manufacturer (i.e., the installer) is out of the picture? Tracking watermarked sounds presupposes that the sounds have entered the public arena, which is not guaranteed. Are you proposing that the watermarking itself includes information that triggers a pirate alert?What prevents a robber from shooting the deadbolt off your front door with a 12-gauge and robbing you anyway? Did you even read what I wrote? It\'s not the idea of total lockdown that provides deterrent in any societal construct. It is introducing the possibility of risk into an equation, significant enough to give pause.

I\'ll repeat it once again. I want the idea to be clearly expressed, because I think it has merit.

This idea isn\'t about total lockdown. I am not proposing that it is. I am proposing that sample developers for years just put data files on the disc, and basically said, \"Come and get it\" to the people who would share them.

I\'m proposing there\'s a median level of security, which costs no more (probably less) than the overhead of custom players/total lockdown, which would, on an installer level, \"dirty up\" the extracted data with user information as a watermark.

AT THAT POINT...

Sure, someone can just share THOSE files, and the shared files would be unprotected.

BUT...

You have now added a significant risk to the original buyer\'s continued well-being. Anyone whose Karmic-compass is sufficiently skewed to ASK this person to share the library isn\'t going to be very discrete about who HE shares it with. We know this. The original owner knows this. If there\'s NO user information imprinted into a sampler data file, there is NO RISK to people who share. No one could ever track where a shared file originated.

BUT...

If an installer based system DID place that info into the data in the form of a watermark, and it did so with much WARNING, every step of the way, THAT ORIGINAL OWNER IS GOING TO THINK TWICE BEFORE HE RISKS A MAJOR LAWSUIT.

Can that system be thwarted? Of course. Any system can be thwarted.

But enter all the conflicting arguments. Nick says these traders are not hackers when arguing one side of the coin. Michel is here telling me that a library that made $1.2 MILLION DOLLARS over a year didn\'t hit a satisfactory nut??????

JESUS.

Listen, I am tired of wasting my breath. I cannot believe that people can read these kinds of arguments, facts, and figures, and there is no sense of outrage over the fact that SAMPLING AS WE KNOW IT WILL CEASE TO EXIST in the current market. And it is people who are making piles of money, more than ANY of us make on our equivalent labor, who are trying to sell us this sob story?????

The fact that ANY library loses sales after six months to a year is not due to piracy. Sorry, that dog doesn\'t hunt. Britney Spears might as well wonder why nobody buys her first album in quantity. EVERY PRODUCT HAS SHELF LIFE.

Finally, if EVERY library becomes a plugin, your production situation as an end user becomes abyssmal. All these engines compete with each other to stream data. The work flow becomes a nightmare dealing with interface after interface after interface.

I rarely produce much \"pure synth\" music any more. Not because I don\'t love it--it\'s probably my most natural fit. It\'s because IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DEAL WITH WINDOW AFTER WINDOW, and UI AFTER UI, while trying to make music. It becomes a logistic nightmare to manage the sequencer.

By opening GigaStudio, there\'s 64 simultaneous slots there which are managed through ONE interface. It\'s like an oasis.

As far as Michiel\'s piracy numbers for the platforms he mentions, one must only do a little research to come to that conclusion. Jamey Scott took a ratio of heat, and was accused of jingoistic behavior when he noted where piracy was most rampant, but the numbers don\'t lie, and the demographics of the various user-bases are known. Sounds to me as if Michiel\'s Giga-library numbers are VERY PROFITABLE, and I suggest he drop the other formats and concentrate on that. Garth makes very good translation software, which can serve other samplers. Better to have that inconvenience and preserve open-platform formats, then to have them ALL die.

Folks, read through this information. You will find yourself coming to the same conclusions as me if you really study what is being said. There\'s plenty of money to be made here, and what is being sold to you as a matter of necessity just doesn\'t seem to be holding up when people give us numbers.

Bruce A. Richardson

01-01-2004, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by Michiel Post:
Back to your conclusions:
So, by breaking that situation down (don\'t you hate it when I do that), we see two things:
a) Open-Platform availability does NOT hurt your sales
b) CCP is not responsible for the sales you got on the plugin.

Your logic in the above equation misses some points.
I said it before: Open-platform availability is not profitable enough to let me stay in business. Piracy is preventing a healthy operation in these formats.
CCP is NOT responsible for the increased sales? How is that?

Since we started selling the Plug-In we found that the market was as big as we expected after all. We found that people who need that library (in that specific easy format) are willing to PAY to get it. And this makes this plug-in so special. You can borrow/copy/download/iso-burn a copy of the other platform versions but you have to pay to get the plug-in to work. Simple.
It\'s not that simple.

Your libraries for SAMPLERS have a far smaller market than your PLUGINS FOR DAW SOFTWARE. In one case, you\'re talking about a niche market within the total musician community. When you start plugging into the DAW market, you\'re reaching a significantly larger market.

In fact, a far larger market than the 35 to 1 ratio reflects. You were actually getting more PENETRATION in the sampler market. Which makes sense.

What does not make sense is attributing it to copy protection, or at least significantly to copy protection. There are other market variables at hand, not the least (as was mentioned by Lazul) the fact that you went from a self-distribution methodology to being distributed by EastWest. Since you sold 35 to 1, clearly you made bank--enough to pay Doug his 60 points and still come out laughing all the way to the bank.

So, since you\'ve clearly made a huge chunk of change (if we say you enjoyed at 10-1 net, just to account for Moloch\'s share, that\'s a cool 12 million. Nice nut), how about some charity work, on the order of helping keep GigaStudio and other open platforms alive for those musicians who sincerely love them?

Steelhed

01-01-2004, 10:58 AM

I also have a hard time swallowing the 30 to 40 to 1 ratio Michel was talking about, I\'d like to know who and how came up with those numbers, Just doesn\'t sound realistic, You would assume 9 outta 10 Sampler users were pirates, Pretty hard to believe really... BTW, Do you have any samples of your Library I can hear Michel, I\'m interested to check it out.... Actually, Come to think of it, I might have heard a sample of your Bosendorfer, But if you have a link to it, I\'d like to check it out....

Tarkio Road

01-01-2004, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Michiel Post:
[QUOTE]
Now you must remember my little Piracy topic last year, where we found that for every library sold about 10 illegal copies were in use? It turned out much worse than that. Since the library was available for EXS/HALion and EXS we found there must be between 20 to 40 illegal copies for each copy we sell.Now Michael, you know this is anecdotal. And the plural of anecdote is not \"data.\"

Please post the methodology of your research. \" What we found\" and \"there must be\" doesn\'t count. And how do you gather hard data on piracy of your specific product?

Did you perform phone surveys? What was the sample? What research company designed the questions? (\"Do you use Post Pianos? Now please disregard the fact that we have your phone number, but do you use Post Pianos illegally?\")

Did you share coffee with pirates in a few focus groups?

Did you perform Mall surveys? (\"Excuse me, happy holidays! Would you mind participating in a short survey to determine if you are violating major copyright laws?\")

If you really have hard data on the thousands of illegal users of your pianos, why not use some of your hefty profits on going after at least one of them? Or go after all of them. That would please you and almost every person in this forum.

Just don\'t try to pass off urban myths as data.

spectrum

01-01-2004, 12:08 PM

Something tells me that those 6000 Giga Pianos might be a typo.....that\'s an amazing number if true. For one thing, that would mean that most of you Giga users have already bought it, since that\'s probably at least half the installed base of Giga users!

I have a feeling Michiel may be coming back to clarify that one, since that would easily make him the most successful independant Giga developer of all time.

:-)

spectrum

Lazul

01-01-2004, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by spectrum:
Something tells me that those 6000 Giga Pianos might be a typo.....that\'s an amazing number if true. For one thing, that would mean that most of you Giga users have already bought it, since that\'s probably at least half the installed base of Giga users!

I have a feeling Michiel may be coming back to clarify that one, since that would easily make him the most successful independant Giga developer of all time.

:-)

spectrum Sure give him a way to back out! hehe I can beleive it. You forget though that people have been purchasing the giga version and importing them in to things like Halion and Kontakt.

Lazul

01-01-2004, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by spectrum:
Something tells me that those 6000 Giga Pianos might be a typo.....that\'s an amazing number if true. For one thing, that would mean that most of you Giga users have already bought it, since that\'s probably at least half the installed base of Giga users!

I have a feeling Michiel may be coming back to clarify that one, since that would easily make him the most successful independant Giga developer of all time.

:-)

spectrum Sure give him a way to back out! hehe I can beleive it. You forget though that people have been purchasing the giga version and importing them in to things like Halion and Kontakt. <hr /></blockquote>Let\'s it was 600 copies. That is still a respectable living. PMI was a one man operation I assume and basically sold sounds directly off his website. 600 copies would mean about 120k. This is just one of his libraries too.

And are you saying, if this 35:1 pirating ratio is true, that you would have sold 21,000 copies if it wasn\'t for pirating? lol That is just whack reasoning. images/icons/wink.gif

Jamie Haggerty

01-01-2004, 12:23 PM

This post has become ridiculous. This is nothing more then a mob mentality against the very people that are creating wonderful tools for musician. Why do you think there is something wrong in being in business and making a profit? Are you in the habit of scoring films for free? Why are you so keen on vilifying these developers and then scoffing at them when they try to explain it’s not as easy to do what you, who are NOT in the business of sample development, claim is so simple.
People like Eric, Michiel and Doug should know what they are talking about. They do this for a living.
I’m sorry but with so much evil and callousness in this world it’s very sad to see this. Discussion and creative suggestions are one thing but this gleeful, destructive “drive the small guys out of business, that will show them\" stuff is very counter productive.
If you don’t want the tools, don’t buy them but stop vilifying these people. It just makes no sense.
Have a great New Year.
J

spectrum

01-01-2004, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Does a producer like Doug Rogers, like yourself, have any responsibility to the technology which brought us here, and kept the business flowing?I can only speak for myself in that my main responsibility to my customers and to all the people involved with my company, is that we make wise decisions that ensure the long life of our own business. A lot of people depend on us. Being tied to any technology that doesn\'t work for what we want to do would certainly not be wise.

I cannot speak for every company, only my own. For the needs of the types of products we wanted to create, the old way of supporting lots of formats initially was successful, but eventually did not work well for us on many different levels.

Most importantly, we were stifled by the limitations of the platforms that are out there, so it made the most sense to begin creating a different kind of product that could do what we needed and also that we could innovate with and would be able to grow with the future. The response to this approach has been great, and we are really enjoying what we are doing these days.

I think sample libraries are a great thing. For those developers that can make it work for them, I\'d say \"more power to you!\" We just have to focus on doing what we are doing now with virtual instruments, since it makes so much more sense. I\'d rather do one thing well, than try and do everything at a mediocre level. That\'s my goal at least....

:-)

spectrum

Lazul

01-01-2004, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by spectrum:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Does a producer like Doug Rogers, like yourself, have any responsibility to the technology which brought us here, and kept the business flowing?I can only speak for myself in that my main responsibility to my customers and to all the people involved with my company, is that we make wise decisions that ensure the long life of our own business. A lot of people depend on us. Being tied to any technology that doesn\'t work for what we want to do would certainly not be wise.

I cannot speak for every company, only my own. For the needs of the types of products we wanted to create, the old way of supporting lots of formats initially was successful, but eventually did not work well for us on many different levels.

Most importantly, we were stifled by the limitations of the platforms that are out there, so it made the most sense to begin creating a different kind of product that could do what we needed and also that we could innovate with and would be able to grow with the future. The response to this approach has been great, and we are really enjoying what we are doing these days.

I think sample libraries are a great thing. For those developers that can make it work for them, I\'d say \"more power to you!\" We just have to focus on doing what we are doing now with virtual instruments, since it makes so much more sense. I\'d rather do one thing well, than try and do everything at a mediocre level. That\'s my goal at least....

:-)

spectrum <hr /></blockquote>True spectrum.

But you were a highly successful sample developer for many years. You yourself admitted in the radio interview that Distorted Reality was one of the most successful libs ever.

Besides, you custom sample engine is just a licensed sample technology from another company right? UVI was it? I really don\'t see anything it does that Halion or Kontakt can\'t do. It is just locked down thats all. In fact it is rather limited since it is not multi-timbral. Good sounding though. If you released Halion format I would buy them.

spectrum

01-01-2004, 12:36 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:Sure give him a way to back out! hehe I can beleive it. You forget though that people have been purchasing the giga version and importing them in to things like Halion and Kontakt. Not at all....I\'m simply amazed if he did those kinds of numbers on Giga format alone. That\'s very impressive if true!

:-)

spectrum

David Abraham

01-01-2004, 12:42 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
I have to slave all year around in my dayjob just to make 60k a year. I think I am going to change professions. Thanks for the inspirational testimonials guys. hehe a measly 60 g\'s eh? maybe we should have a salary poll images/icons/wink.gif

PatS

01-01-2004, 12:48 PM

I cannot believe that people can read these kinds of arguments, facts, and figures, and there is no sense of outrage over the fact that SAMPLING AS WE KNOW IT WILL CEASE TO EXIST in the current market.Well, I sure hope \"SAMPLING AS WE KNOW IT\" will cease to exist . . . after evolving into something much better!!! Of course, your caveat implies that the technology won\'t even have a chance to evolve if the closed-platform model takes hold in the market. That\'s what concerns me the most.

On the other hand, how do we know that the closed-format model will not eventually lead to something significantly better than what we have now?

Pat

spectrum

01-01-2004, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
But you were a highly successful sample developer for many years. You yourself admitted in the radio interview that Distorted Reality was one of the most successful libs ever.Yes....in 1996, I was very fortunate with that library. Sucess is often measured in different ways than money though. The sample library business was very different back then. It\'s always been small though, that\'s why it\'s really tricky to sustain when things dry up in different areas. So you always have to try new things. Luckily, we had the idea for our virtual instruments right at the best time to introduce them.

Besides, you custom sample engine is just a licensed sample technology from another company right? UVI was it? Nope....we co-developed that engine with the UVI team from the beginning.

I really don\'t see anything it does that Halion or Kontakt can\'t do. It is just locked down thats all. In fact it is rather limited since it is not multi-timbral. Good sounding though..Actually, there are numerous things in our instruments that could not be done in either the HALion or Kontakt engines...compromises would have to be made and that\'s not something we\'re willing to do anymore. David A.F. mentioned several of the key differences earlier in the thread, and there a number of other significant issues that would make it impossible or impractical to create an instrument like Atmosphere for multi-platform samplers.

Most importantly, you don\'t know what we have in the works either.....we\'ve only revealed the initial part of our grand designs!

(you\'ll get to see a little more of the big vision in a few days now....)

;-)

spectrum images/icons/wink.gif images/icons/wink.gif images/icons/wink.gif

Lazul

01-01-2004, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by Jamie Haggerty:
This post has become ridiculous. This is nothing more then a mob mentality against the very people that are creating wonderful tools for musician. Why do you think there is something wrong in being in business and making a profit? Are you in the habit of scoring films for free? Why are you so keen on vilifying these developers and then scoffing at them when they try to explain it’s not as easy to do what you, who are NOT in the business of sample development, claim is so simple.
People like Eric, Michiel and Doug should know what they are talking about. They do this for a living.
I’m sorry but with so much evil and callousness in this world it’s very sad to see this. Discussion and creative suggestions are one thing but this gleeful, destructive “drive the small guys out of business, that will show them\" stuff is very counter productive.
If you don’t want the tools, don’t buy them but stop vilifying these people. It just makes no sense.
Have a great New Year.
J Sorry if it seems like it is a witchhunt. I highly respect these developers and it is a great service they do. However there are many other issue outside the content itself we have a problem with. Any reasonable person would say that dongling the content is ridiculous. The other issue is this paradigm shift in formats. Where this is going is that each developer will have their own proprietary format. That means you will have to learn and master many different interfaces and keep them straight in your head while working. And of course there are things I might not liek about a particular format like I mentioned earlier with the Kontakt variety. To me it is way more efficient to learn just one.

Lazul

01-01-2004, 12:55 PM

cool spectrum! I look forward to seeing what you ahve up your sleeves. Good luck to you.

spectrum

01-01-2004, 12:59 PM

Thank you sir!

...and a very happy New Year to you!

spectrum images/icons/smile.gif

SWL

01-01-2004, 12:59 PM

It\'s funny how people refer to it as \'closed format\' --- sure, you dont have direct access to the raw WAV data .... BUT .... for instance, i have made my own custom loops with Stylus, i find it very easy to render a bar and mangle it till i get to how i want it. I have NEVER fealt like Stylus or Atmosphere has limited me in expression, there is always a work around, and takes as much time as it would to load the data into a WAV editor.

NOT TO MENTION ... i can easily slap plugins on top of the channel within the sequencer (something i cannot do in Gigastudio) .. then 2 mouse clicks .. render ... DONE!

OT: Eric, is the an anticipated sounds update to Stylus ? Atmosphere ? Just curious, hoping you throw us a bone and prove how great it is to have a all in one instrument ;-)

SWL

Lazul

01-01-2004, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by spectrum:
Thank you sir!

...and a very happy New Year to you!

spectrum images/icons/smile.gif Happy and Prosperous New Year to you as well. May you do so well so you can give us all free sound libraries! images/icons/smile.gif

Rich Pell

01-01-2004, 01:06 PM

Originally posted by Jamie Haggerty:
This post has become ridiculous. This is nothing more then a mob mentality against the very people that are creating wonderful tools for musician. Why do you think there is something wrong in being in business and making a profit? Are you in the habit of scoring films for free? Why are you so keen on vilifying these developers and then scoffing at them when they try to explain it’s not as easy to do what you, who are NOT in the business of sample development, claim is so simple.
People like Eric, Michiel and Doug should know what they are talking about. They do this for a living.
I’m sorry but with so much evil and callousness in this world it’s very sad to see this. Discussion and creative suggestions are one thing but this gleeful, destructive “drive the small guys out of business, that will show them\" stuff is very counter productive.
If you don’t want the tools, don’t buy them but stop vilifying these people. It just makes no sense.
Have a great New Year.
J Hear ,Hear,..I feel the same way. I just can`t believe the anger and attitude thats being thrown around here towards people that are creating GREAT tools that HELP u make your living! Even if, lets say the PMI bosey sold 6000 and made a million, who cares ? Dont you thing he deserves it? Dont u deserve it? What sample developers DONT deserve is for there stuff to be easily riped off,and thousands of sales to be lost. And if this new CP works even 10% (which i`m positive it does, since no one is running to change it back to open-platform)then give them the benefit of the doubt that there making the correct call that will insure that u get great products like PMI Bosey,Stylus,QLSO,Atmosphere,Trilogy,Culture,..etc etc. Its a huge financial gamble to put out this huge Libs. Its O.k to have an opinion but, Have more respect guys. Lets start the New Year right. And since we are musicians, we should be setting an example images/icons/smile.gif ...Rich

Tarkio Road

01-01-2004, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by Jamie Haggerty:
This post has become ridiculous. This is nothing more then a mob mentality against the very people that are creating wonderful tools for musician. Why do you think there is something wrong in being in business and making a profit? Are you in the habit of scoring films for free? Why are you so keen on vilifying these developers and then scoffing at them when they try to explain it’s not as easy to do what you, who are NOT in the business of sample development, claim is so simple.
People like Eric, Michiel and Doug should know what they are talking about. They do this for a living.
I’m sorry but with so much evil and callousness in this world it’s very sad to see this. Discussion and creative suggestions are one thing but this gleeful, destructive “drive the small guys out of business, that will show them\" stuff is very counter productive.
If you don’t want the tools, don’t buy them but stop vilifying these people. It just makes no sense.
Have a great New Year.
J As pros, Eric, Michiel and Doug come to this forum to hear what their customers want. Your \"drive them out of business\" quote above only adds to the provocative mob mentality that you say you perceive here. The only thing anyone is trying to \"show\" them is that dongled libraries will not be bought by many of us.

And who\'s asking for anything free? We are not pirates. We buy our samples. But we enjoy the right to buy only the products we want. And companies that are successful provide those products.

All that is \"actually\" being said in these posts is that many forum members will not buy a sample library that requires a dongle. Users have repeatedly urged others to support all companies, small and large, and all libraries that do not require a dongle. If a company ignores these clear messages, and releases a library with a dongle, and sales are low, how are we driving them out of business?

Isn\'t choice great! images/icons/smile.gif

Lazul

01-01-2004, 01:17 PM

Who\'s angry Rich? I am not. I just find it amusing about all these comments about rampant piracy and struggling to survive when the numbers the actual developers are giving us suggest otherwise.

thesoundsmith

01-01-2004, 01:22 PM

Pat S said:
On the other hand, how do we know that the closed-format model will not eventually lead to something significantly better than what we have now?
Bcause less options, conflicting dongles/copy protection schemes/access to the data we\'re paying for means significantly LESS value.

The sdetup in Giga: A bad loop can be corrected. Filters added to be consistently applied to any elements I choose (almost all of my libs have been appended to incorpoprate a filter at CC82- ANY time I need to make a sound less present, or change tiombre differently than the author thought was what I would want, I call up the filtered version and it\'s done, no uestion what controller, what phrasing. Bad loops? I can fix it. Mutiple instruments? No problem, and I don\'t have to worry about Atmosphere conflicting with Culture and the NI B4 and DX7... only one app running.

I don\'t like CP, but I underfstand the need. But intrusive systems, and system that give me less content (e.g. closed systems) do not help me create unique sounds - all I can hope for is to be first out of the box using that sound before it becomes cliche.

Imagine where we would be now if the only loop we could use were Digital Native Dancer - no diss at Eric...

Tools are for creation. Granted, I can always sample it myself (for now...) but there is a big difference between assembling an Ikea cabinet and building one from raw mahogany stock. And the Ikea will ALWAYS be cheaper than the custom cabinet. But we\'re expected to pay custom prices for a knock-off. Closed products are truly only worth half (or less) than accessible systems. (Just to be clear, I\'m not talking about CP, just access to the guts.)

Dasher

J. Whaley

01-01-2004, 01:30 PM

I think if Posts bosi really sold that well - frankly even if it only sold 600 - then Bruce\'s point is made.

Michiel I have a couple of your libraries and I greatly respect your work. And I try to be really fair in my assesment of what\'s fair for everyone. But reality is it\'s NOT a real comparison to say your piano sales dried up so you have to implement a CCP scheme. You were distributing by yourself. There\'s only so many people you can reach independantly. As soon as your libs were picked up by Sounds online, you had new distribution. And then with the pligin, the library was made available to non-sample freaks. And then stores could pick it up. This didn\'t add to more sales from CCP, but rather more sales because you hit a bigger market.

I support E. Persing in his VSTi - mostly because they are the most unique ones on the market and I truly believe there\'s NOT any sampler technology that would have allowed them to create the products they did. But their increase in sales is probably MORE due to the fact that now all 3 products are in stores across the world.
I\'ve NEVER once walked into a music store and seen a spectrasonics sample library. But now EVERY music store I walk into has all 3 VSTi\'s in stock - all the time. This WILL result in greater sales. But that\'s distribution/marketing, not Copy Protection.

I\'m very practical. If the PRODUCT itself is better outside of a sampler then the argument could be made that\'s the only way to produce it. But let\'s compare the arguments. One can\'t argue that sales are higher because of copy protection, when suddenly, at the same time you implement Copy protection, you ALSO blow your distribution wide open and appear on store shelves. Of course your sales are going to be higher. If I produce an artist that sold a few CD\'s last year, and the next album gets in best buy, they\'re going to have more sales too! It\'s that simple!

So it would be nice if everyone is a little more practical in their numbers!!

J-

(And BTW, if Post sold 6000 pianos in 6 months, he should have stopped getting sales, because pretty much everyone bought it that wanted to buy it in the sample market!)