WHAT??? No Copy Protection in GIGA 3.0? [Archive]

dougrogers

03-24-2003, 10:01 AM

Originally posted by peter269:
Nick, nothing is confirmed. The best thing to do is wait for some kind of announcement. Peter,

Unfortunately, I heard the same thing from a different, usually reliable source.

If this is true, our support for GS is over. We will instead release our products with NI\'s - copy protected - built-in audio engines only. This will save us a tremendous amount of work and investment, as we will no longer have to convert EWQLSO, and our other new libraries, into GS 3.0. Unfortunately for GS users, due to the encryption, it will not be easy to import these libraries into GS, and unlike the libraries you have become accustomized to using, that were optimized for GS, if GS 3.0 is able to import the VSTi\'s that are becoming the standard in GS 3.0 (doubtful), they will be severely compromised.

To be perfectly honest, TASCAM has strung us developers along since NAMM 2002 over this, when they announced to us at a TASCAM developers meeting, that strong CP would be available in 3.0 that was scheduled to ship in September 2002 - six months ago! We went and recorded our orchestra library, relying on this date, and since then, it has been impossible to get an estimated revised date out of them (I\'ve heard anywhere from September to next January for a release). Meanwhile, our orchestra was recorded and we had no 24bit GS to program it with. We then had to find an alternative, and thank goodness NI were responsive enough to supply what we needed - otherwise, a lot of investment would be sitting on the shelf.

In any case, it may be too late if this news is true. The only reason anyone was interested in GS in the first place was because the libraries were better. With EW, Best Service, Quantum Leap, Yellow Tools, Zero-G, many of our other smaller suppliers, and Spectrasonics support gone - there won\'t be many new libraries to support this format.

Bruce, we know your strong views on this topic. We also know you converse with the development team regularly, and putting 2 and 2 together, it would appear that you have won them over. All I can say to that is, it\'s a hollow victory if the format disappears, or at least joins the ranks of the many other unsupported formats.

Btw, for those that don\'t think CP works, ask Eric Persing, Eric will give you a different perspective based on real results.

A really sad day for TASCAM and GS users!

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

SCARBEE

03-24-2003, 12:19 PM

Copy-protection in 3.0 would probably keep Giga format alive for a loooong time since developers would support this aside with VSTi\'s.

If TASCAM don\'t do this I wouldn\'t be surprised to see NI or Steinberg using the idea instead - and then get that market!!

\"GigaStudio - A Safe Platform!!\" (sounds good to me) images/icons/wink.gif

Even if the CP was cracked after 2-3 weeks it still matters saleswise. Everybody in the biz confirms that. images/icons/grin.gif

But it only addresse one problem - protection.
I personally think that multible formats and user friendliness is more important.

Currently I like to sell my libraries with multible formats included - good for the user.
This is off course \"poor mans\" version - it is vey time consuming to do all the native conversions and due to the hard competition this solution has no future.

The clever thing about the Virtual Instruments is the fact that you can use them in all sequencers on Mac and PC. You only make ! single well programmed version. Support is easy too.

Only drawback could be that many VI will fight over the CPU power - but I can\'t say I know much about this yet.

When we had hardware samplers: Roland, Akai, Emu, Kurtzweil it was very easy to make conversions as the libraries were simple.
Now we make extremely advanced programming and conversions take several months to do proberly.

Nobody saw this comming...

regards

Munsie

03-24-2003, 12:34 PM

\"Certainly, no CP is going to be foolproof...\"

As someone who is considering jumping into the sample market I decided to search a popular (unnamed sharing tool) for samples and I was SHOCKED to see what showed up in the search results. (Full proof???) Still, these are users who are never going to purchase the instruments/samples anyway.

KingIdiot

03-24-2003, 12:49 PM

I think most developers aren\'t looking at copy protection to be fool proof, but to hinder the \"casual\" copier.

The people who dont know much about the internet and file sharing options (yes they are out there)

I\'d still like to see giga versions of libs, just because I want to have libs performing within one application, not multiple on one computer, tho with something like QLSO, its not so bad, since one can load the lib into Kontakt.

I\'d really hate to see everyone releasing Standalone or VST only versions of libs. I dont imagine all the different applications fighting for disk streaming will be very nice.

Looks like I\'ll be building some Kontakt Machines as well...

Marsdy

03-24-2003, 12:52 PM

Well it seems Lee was right along, the writing is on the wall for Giga if this is its attitude towards its development partners. You have to question Tascam\'s sanity if someone like Doug doesn\'t know whether Giga 3 will support CP. I\'m beginning to question my sanity for inversting so heavily in Giga systems.

Marsdy

03-24-2003, 12:56 PM

images/icons/smile.gif

I just noticed I got my star back images/icons/smile.gif images/icons/smile.gif

Who is the Star Fairy then????

peter269

03-24-2003, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by peter269:
Nick, nothing is confirmed. The best thing to do is wait for some kind of announcement. Peter,

Unfortunately, I heard the same thing from a different, usually reliable source.

If this is true, our support for GS is over. We will instead release our products with NI\'s - copy protected - built-in audio engines only. <hr /></blockquote>I understand. I\'m just trying to give Tascam the benefit of the doubt, hoping they\'ll make some kind of public statement vs. a silence that encourages speculation.

In regards to EW/QLSO-NI support, we\'ll have posted this week at Truespec our Predator series that allows for up to 256 MIDI channels and 8GB of RAM in one system along with a TCWorks Powercore for separate processing.

Beyond CP, RAM is a serious user issue. Major libraries, taking advantage of the computer\'s power, have simply gone beyond the 1GB to 1.5GB spec with GS. While improved polyphony will be a help with (something we heard at NAMM 2003), it\'s the RAM barrier that has to be broken.

There is also developer support, which is clearly sagging, largely out of the same silence you\'ve been getting. As you well know, Doug, N-I announced at Musik Messe that both Dan Dean and GOS will also be on the Kontakt format, either as a direct Kontakt library or plug-in. We hear that both DD and GOS will be available by Summer 2003. GOS has already announced a cross grade option from Giga to Kontakt. I\'ve done some early testing of GOS on Kontakt, and it\'s very impressive. Just running GOS as a plug-in inside Kontakt with Cubase SX is producing impressive results.

And! Cubase SX/Nuendo users get an extra bonus with System Link (which we\'ve tested and are successfully running right now).

It\'s pretty clear that the Tascam folks not only have technological challenges to compete with beginning second quarter, but serious relationship bridges to build, and in some cases to re-build.

I hate to see this. It\'s just so much better all around to return phone calls and maintain relationship, than it is to maintain a silence that is sadly working against what has been a truly innovative and revolutionary product.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-24-2003, 02:16 PM

I like the way everyone thinks I am such an insider. Haha. Haven\'t I told you all 1000 times that they don\'t tell me any more than they tell any of you?

I disagree. You all know that. I think it\'s a working system vs. Pandora\'s Box. Developers are making money. The platform is prospering. Why throw good money after bad?

Frankly, I am disappointed in the developers\' response here. You know, I argue up and down for fair licensing which protects developers\' interests over issues like resale. I\'m the first kid on the block to cry bloody murder when it smells like someone is trading or selling libraries. But I think copy protection is TOO MUCH to ask from your users.

And Doug, I am really not interested in plugins. I love Kontakt, but I don\'t see the kind of working efficiency there (and guys, I actually do appearances and clinics for NI on Kontakt, so I\'m no dummy about how it works) which makes it the right tool for my orchestral stuff. For that, I like the organization and \"big iron\" feel of GigaStudio. I love working with GigaStudio. It\'s right for me. I have worked with plugins. I don\'t like it as much. I just don\'t. It doesn\'t fit my production style, and it doesn\'t fit my software and capabilities nearly as well. So, see, I get disappointed when YOU talk this way. It makes me feel hopeless that you are truly a platform-neutral kind of guy. I have always trusted your company to take a dollar where a dollar is offered, and to support all the platforms you can profit from.

None of this is to say I don\'t LOVE Kontakt. Man, I was praising Kontakt on this forum before a SINGLE ONE of you had any clue what Kontakt even was. No one can out-Kontakt me, guys. But I don\'t see this as a gigantic competition. I see it as different tools for different purposes. Right now, you couldn\'t program VSL on Kontakt and make it work. It would choke, flip over, spew pea soup, and barf fireballs. But then again, I couldn\'t sync up the LFOs on my microtonal masterpiece on Giga either. Tools are good. Tools are neutral. Why don\'t we try to keep it that way, for everyone\'s benefit?

What I\'d like to see is real cooperation between users and developers on intellectual property respect and protection. I would like to see us all rise to the occasion so that instead of a copy protection \"Iraq\" situation, where we have developers and users hurting each other, we try to foster a basis of mutual respect towards the common goal.

And I would certainly like to see end users have a little more understanding of how conversations (exactly like the \"resale\" debate) affect relationships with developers. Don\'t you see how a developer could read threads like that, seeing that people care so little about their protection that they\'d sell off licenses without a second thought, and feel hopeless enough to think copy protection is the only way to solve the problem?

Despite all the sabre rattling, humble users, your sample vendors will continue to offer libraries for sale in formats people use. A buyer is a buyer. But we all have to help that along. It\'s easy to take for granted that this level of development will always be here. But it could evaporate in a minute. People won\'t continue to lay down massive amounts of money to create amazing libraries if there\'s no cash at the end of the rainbow. Who would?

If this decision is indeed true, then I laud it and heap great piles of praise on the fact that Tascam and Nemesys left it to DEVELOPERS to protect their work if they like, and not to force it upon users by including it in the platform. That is fair. If a developer wants to invest in copy protection, he should. BUT THE END USER, WHO FUNDS ALL OF THIS should not have to pay for Tascam to spend time developing copy protection.

Why should we? Why should the cost of GigaStudio 3.0 include ONE SINGLE BYTE of copy protection? Why should we pay for that? Especially, why should we pay talented sampler developers for that? I want to pay for Jim, Joe, Bert, and company to do what they do best--surprise us all with innovative work we can HEAR.

I guarantee you this: If Giga 3.0 is as innovative over 2.0 as 2.0 was over 1.0, then no one will have to worry about people developing for the platform. And I suspect it will be.

And if sample developers want to develop copy protection, they should. But it should not be allowed to encroach upon the sampler itself. That is simply too much.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-24-2003, 02:30 PM

Isn\'t it ironic how I take heat for being pro-developer one day, and anti-developer the very next?

I can hardly keep up.

RikTheRik

03-24-2003, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by SCARBEE:
Copy-protection in 3.0 would probably keep Giga format alive for a loooong time since developers would support this aside with VSTi\'s.

If TASCAM don\'t do this I wouldn\'t be surprised to see NI or Steinberg using the idea instead - and then get that market!!

\"GigaStudio - A Safe Platform!!\" (sounds good to me) images/icons/wink.gif

Even if the CP was cracked after 2-3 weeks it still matters saleswise. Everybody in the biz confirms that. images/icons/grin.gif

But it only addresse one problem - protection.
I personally think that multible formats and user friendliness is more important.
My biggest concern as user is stability if sample collection rely on bundled players. I have a very bad experience with Halion Strings which pretends to support DXi but crashes as hell (it is the most instable virtual instrument even in VST format). And technically it already gets very complex and lot of parameters are involved in large sample libraires (it takes time to setup software and hardware for having a stable system). And with slow software (especially with NI...) updates, users may have some hard time with their sample collections if there is any kind of bug. And I think most people who are using sample collections already have purchased a main sampler software and like Kontakt, they offer lot of creative filters.

In the future, I think a more serious solution would be for the sample to support DRM. And like windows media, you would get licenses (per host and backupable !) which grant you to use a library. But I hope that until there is nothing serious about it, developpers will not plugify all collections.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-24-2003, 06:35 PM

Lee, you are speculating wildly. There is no lull in development for GigaStudio. There is development everywhere. I know of at least four new GigaStudio libraries in development right now, that are all going to be great additions to the available media.

Anyone who is making multiplatform libraries at present is smart to develop Kontakt and EXS right now. It\'s good timing. Giga 3.0, if I am guessing correctly (and believe me when I say this is a guess), should be hitting an alpha testing state very soon, where developers would presumably get their first crack at the new spec. I think you are incorrect in assuming that someone would release a 2.0 library with 3.0 just around the corner--ESPECIALLY if they\'re waiting for some of the key features they\'ve requested. That would be a really bad business decision, essentially doubling their production cost for the same number of end users. Why do that, when you can develop for the other formats, get a little green coming in, then crank on your Giga version and get another nice cash bump...with only ONE production run.

You say you cannot imagine the rekindling of energy from early Giga. Hello. Tascam. Do you know how much more money Tascam has to promote this software than any other software company on the planet? Tascam is a force. Tascam is granite. Tascam can buy half the ad space in every magazine on the shelf for the next six months without so much as blinking an eye. I don\'t think you have to fear for Giga\'s survival.

SystemObserver

03-24-2003, 07:46 PM

To all the programmers: couldn\'t it be argued that a very small team of expert specialist programmers, who all know each other well and share the previous team experience, would ultimately render a better product than that of a gaggle of n00bs involved this late in the game? Which counts triple WRT copy protection...

PS Nick: any thoughts about the war?

lanesp

03-24-2003, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by SystemObserver:
To all the programmers: couldn\'t it be argued that a very small team of expert specialist programmers, who all know each other well and share the previous team experience, would ultimately render a better product than that of a gaggle of n00bs involved this late in the game? Which counts triple WRT copy protection...

PS Nick: any thoughts about the war? So, there are expert specialist programmers for this version of BetaStudio? I don\'t know how far along the programming is but would it be too late to get stability added as a feature?

Nick Phoenix

03-25-2003, 12:27 AM

I really didn\'t intend another argument about copy protection. I have done my research and concluded that it is worth it for the developer, even though I agree that copy protection is a pain in the . I have already heard of Vienna trading going on. It\'s pretty sad. We are going to make that kind of thing, very difficult. You know, I have supported Giga from the beginning and came out with one of the first libraries. I feel betrayed. Bruce, if you don\'t think that my upcoming libraries are a huge loss to Giga, then that\'s your opinion. But, it\'s not just me. Where the Vienna people expecting copy protection?

System Observer -My position on the war? I\'ll answer that with my new signature.

- Frodo Failed

imusic

03-25-2003, 01:27 AM

speaking of developer support, ...

I was in touch with Dave and Jim and so on, ... -nothing happend!!!

I made one phone call to Native-perfect support! The same with EMAGIC!

It looks like the Tascam people are so convinced, they do not have to watch the market and their supporters (or people they do want to program for GS).

sad andy

andyt

03-25-2003, 01:32 AM

I don\'t think I\'ve ever purchased software that had a copy protection system of the type being talked about here .. so I can\'t comment at all from a user perspective whether it would deter me from a buying a product or library with it.

Having said that though, I think Tascam must consider the needs of developers as much as those of the users. Without the libraries the product is useless (unless people produce their own samples) ... GigaStudio is only an \"enabling\" technology that DELIVERS the samples. Therefore surely its makes very poor sense to disenchant your main partners, the developers.

AND IT IS SELF-EVIDENT THAT ONE PARTICULAR GROUP OF PREMIER LEAGUE DEVELOPERS ARE VERY, VERY DISSAPPOINTED (TO PUT IT POLITLEY)AND THREATENING TO DESERT THE PLATFORM.

As an occasional observer of the Giga market, it seems to me that Giga\'s forte and niche market has been in mega sample libraries, most notably orchestral libraries. If one of the few key library developers in this area doesn\'t feel there isn\'t the capability to protect their ever increasing investment in library development, then I can\'t blame for moving to a platform that does.

... and no amount of applause for Giga\'s decision will change the fact that there will be one less quality library for the Giga platform. This simple fact is INDESPUTABLE. Giga will loose because the platform is less attractive, and the users will loose out becuase there will not be the choice AND we will not see the competition that might eventually drive down the prices of these expensive libraries.

I can\'t predict what will happen, but a few scenarios immediatly come to mind.
1) Giga survives, but with fewer development partners, hence less competition and library prices remaining high = result: existing giga users loose out.
2) Developers slowly start migrating to platforms that do offer facilities to CP, and increasingly as the other platforms catch-up in the capabilities = result: existing giga users loose out, left holding a dated system and set of libraries.

I think Leon or Lee suggested Giga develop CP capability and to leave it to library developer on whether to use it or not. Surely this is the answer that keeps both Tascam happy and the library developers who want CP happy.

As lee / Leon point out it is then for the developers to bear the risk of whether USING copy protection imropoves or erodes their bottom line.

None of my views are based on whether CP is user friendly or not, just on my perceptions of the business and market dynamics.

\"Frodo Failed \" ?!!??!?!?? I hope thats not a spoiler.

steve_t

03-25-2003, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by andyt:

\"Frodo Failed \" ?!!??!?!?? I hope thats not a spoiler. http://www.deathstarinc.com/images/Frodo_Has_Failed.jpg graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 06:18 AM

Well, if you\'re going to post a picture of a chimp on this thread, I have nothing left to say.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 07:33 AM

Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
I really didn\'t intend another argument about copy protection. I have done my research and concluded that it is worth it for the developer, even though I agree that copy protection is a pain in the . I have already heard of Vienna trading going on. It\'s pretty sad. We are going to make that kind of thing, very difficult. You know, I have supported Giga from the beginning and came out with one of the first libraries. I feel betrayed. Bruce, if you don\'t think that my upcoming libraries are a huge loss to Giga, then that\'s your opinion. But, it\'s not just me. Where the Vienna people expecting copy protection?
Herb has told me that copy protection is not an issue in Vienna\'s GigaStudio 3.0 plans. His intention is to pursue excellence with vigor, regardless. A great example. I hope all of the fine developers of quality sampleware will come to the same conclusion--that we users want to work with developers to ensure their (and our) continuing success.

If you have heard actual specifics of Vienna trading going on, I suggest you report what you have heard to Herb so he can take legal action. He would do the same for you, I am sure. He speaks respectfully of your efforts as well as those of all sample developers.

I hope you support GigaStudio 3.0, for everybody\'s sake including your own. To behave otherwise would be a slight to a lot of users who like working in the GigaStudio environment and who invested in you for years. I think you could have a double edged sword on your hands there. I\'m glad you acknowledge that copy protection would be a pain in the butt for users, because yes, it sure would be. You are talking about some serious tradeoffs when you go there. But ultimately, if you or anyone decides to stop supporting GigaStudio, I fail to see how that does anything except create a dandy vaccuum for someone else to come in and take that money off the table. That\'s the thing about vaccuums. You can create them, but by their nature, they don\'t last. They merely rearrange things.

Since everyone else can freely speculate, and seemingly the group accepts blind speculation as sensible argument, then hey, I can go there, too. It\'s a lot easier than fact!! No research required.

My speculation is this: What happens when exciting new features (that would benefit users dramatically--daily) start to become impossible if combined with copy protection? What is the sampler manufacturer\'s choice there? Deprive an end user of features and flexibility which would enhance his work and artistic experience? Or forget the innovation because it can\'t coexist with protection?

It doesn\'t take a whole lot of imagination to come up with a list of features that copy protection would make impossible to implement (or conversely, that would make copy protection moot even if it were included). There is a huge catch-22 there, simply enormous.

I dare say, Nick, that if GigaStudio 3.0 adds features that attract a great number of upgrades and which set new standards, that you would want to support that platform for your own business and artistic reasons.

I can understand how you might feel betrayed. Welcome to your users\' world. Take away the small handful that actually support copy protection knowing how it would restrict their uses and flexibility, and the additional handful that blindly support it without realizing that copy protection and advanced features don\'t mix too easily in an open format, and you come away with a remainder of users who feel betrayed that the fears and inconveniences of copy protection would be forced upon them by their sampler vendor.

So I\'d say we\'re all feeling pretty betrayed right now. The question is this: Are we going to behave as badly as Bush and company, or are we going to be artists and musicians and work for the common good? When have protectionism and free thinking ever coexisted successfully?

I heard someone mention DRM. That is already shaping up to be a total disaster for DAW manufacturers. Microsoft would like to take complete control of all low-latency audio streams, not to improve them, but to run every single one through DRM for hits. Unfortunately, that means NO application can directly access kernel-mode audio streams (within Windows programming guidelines, that is)...a side effect of this presumably good-hearted and benign \"protection.\" This is real, not just some fantasy I\'m imagining. The best and brightest developers, who are years ahead of actual production software (engaged purely in R & D), are bracing themselves for a transition which could very easily send a lot of DAW features we use every day into oblivion, unless some weakening and exception can be made to this blanket protection.

And why are we going to get hit with this? Because the most protectionist forces in the entertainment industry doesn\'t mind flirting with the same \"pain in the butt\" kinds of consequences. They think it\'s \"worth it\" even though they know it will effectively break every audio production tool currently on the market. Audio Units, anyone? Dig deeper. Apple has already laid its groundwork for this. And because we users of desktop music production software are not even a tiny fraction of one percent of their total revenue, will we see any quick relief of potential roadblocks? Nope, none at all. In fact, the only relief that some manufacturers have been able to propose is that the DAW industry return to the pre-native processing days, and become a separate hardware device which is simply controlled by the computer. So hey, Digi may have the last laugh, after all. In order to bypass a DRM system which has no deference to production needs, our expensive computers ultimately may be reduced to performing tasks a 386 could handle...telling other hardware what to do.

Who wins there? Hollywood gets to profit more than the millions they already make on each film, so we can have 50 times the number of mediocre Queen Latifah romps? My Big Fat Greek Custody Battle?

I urge everyone to do a little digging on these subjects, and to not just \"choose sides\" like a schoolyard gaggle. We are entering a time where the promise we\'ve sought for years is getting undermined by consequences of epic lawyer-battles...a fight in which we have no dog, but a lot to lose.

Sorry guys. I don\'t want to go through this topic again, either, because it makes me so sick and so emotional that I can barely function. I know just a little too much for my own good--the other edge of that \"insider\" sword.

So I hope that instead of considering this post some kind of missile hurled into the opposing camp, I would ask that everyone please just consider it an invitation to avoid easy, pat, arguments and to understand that in our very accelerated technical world, there are always more hidden consequences than apparent ones. Dig deep, ask hard questions, and be prepared to find that there are no easy answers any more.

dougrogers

03-25-2003, 08:17 AM

Originally posted by andyt:
I think Leon or Lee suggested Giga develop CP capability and to leave it to library developer on whether to use it or not. Surely this is the answer that keeps both Tascam happy and the library developers who want CP happy. This was EXACTLY what was promised in January 2002.

TASCAM apparently doesn\'t care that developers such as ourselves embarked on major \'expensive\' projects based on their promises.

I personally believe they subscribed to Bruce\'s opposition of CP because it involves less work for them; and they are obviously way behind schedule in their development of 3.0.

I do not agree with Bruce that there is still lots of library development going on for Giga. I\'m in touch almost daily with Giga library developers, in fact we represent most of them, and I can tell you for a fact they are shifting their attention to other platforms that enable them to protect their intellectual property (especially after this news). EWQLSO, Stormdrum, Stormbreakz, Percussive Adventures 2 (and the mini version), Hardcore Bass, Adrenaline, VOTA 3, and others still in development - all gone for GS!

If any of you people had actually seen a \'swap meet\' in action for sample libraries you would understand our anger at this apparent decision (which I hope, for their sake, is not true). It makes me physically sick when I think of all the hard work and investment that goes into some of these libraries that are then \'stolen\' in a few minutes. Legitimate purchasers of these products should be angry also, because this is the reason your libraries are more expensive than they would be if everyone paid. Pricing is directly tied to the market size for these products, which we know is much larger, but revenue is substantially decreased due to rampant piracy. CP allows us to \'reduce\' this - not eliminate it - just \'reduce\' it. If someone continues to break into your house, you have the right to put bars on your windows. That does not mean you will never have a break in again, but it\'s less likely! We have had CP in place for our UNITY libraries for two years, and I have yet to hear one complaint from a user about it - it\'s that transparent.

Let\'s just hope this is inaccurate information, as our plan up until yesterday was to continue to support Giga and our plug-in products.

We will NOT support GS in the future without the \'promised\' copy protection.

If anyone from TASCAM is monitoring this forum (the largest GS forum on the planet) - please take note!

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Russ

03-25-2003, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
We will NOT support GS in the future without the \'promised\' copy protection.Hmmm... reminds me of another company.

Ahh!

Creative Labs.

Create cards, get tons of people to buy them, then barely support them (if at all). EW publishes a lot of libraries in the GS format, people buy them, and then EW leaves the musicians (who have systems and even entire rooms dedicated to Gigastudio) in the dust and forgotten. Heck, even the attitude of the representatives are the same; screw the customers\' wishes -- why should the company care?

Am I disputing the CP issue? Not really, because the end user\'s opinion really doesn\'t matter. No matter what a pain it is to the end user, I don\'t think Tascam will drop the CP at all. I wouldn\'t doubt if we eventually see CP on every piece of software somewhat akin to the ridiculous XP Home Edition \'call in\' keycode. Cumbersome, annoying, sometimes faulty, and it was cracked within a week of the release, I believe.

As for the \'reliable source\' comment -- there\'s a first time for everything, or even a second. Let\'s hope for the sanity of some of the Gigastudio composers out there this is one of thse times.

Anyway, I\'ve got a Rondo to finish writing, maybe three hours of sleep to get, and then head off to work. Hope you find something for your stomach Bruce images/icons/wink.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 09:25 AM

OK, I am now starting to get amused.

Lee, you can\'t make a nonspeculative argument to save your life. You speak as if a single release of a sample library represents every interest of every user in every way. I have great respect for Nick\'s products, and for Dougs. My favorite library of Nick\'s is VOTA--I think it is his overall best work, and I suspect that his next one will reflect the amount of effort he has spent.

But a single product, or two, or even five, won\'t undermine a platform.

Doug, I\'m leaving you out of this for a minute, but don\'t get too bored and tune out.

Nick, this is not easy conversation, but I don\'t see how you express political views (which I happen to agree with) that the Bush administration behaves badly, then you don\'t flinch to represent (and see your products represented) in a \"my way, or the highway\" fashion.

In fact, couldn\'t we draw an analogy that pirates are terrorists working against your interests, and that copy protection represents war against them? And in fact that the \"pain in the butt\" acknowledged by you is the collateral damage to innocent and legitimate users, who suffer when such a blunt tool as copy protection is used?

Copy Protection ain\'t a \"smart bomb\" folks. It is the intentional creation of a state where a data product WILL break, unless a **single** condition out of the infinity of variables exists. Which musician will become \"collateral damage\" at 3 am, when his deadline is at 6? Necessary sacrifices?

Not only that, but because copy protection necessarily must close off MANY freedoms (think Ridge, Ashcroft, and \"homeland security\" here), many advanced and desirable features in SAMPLERS, not sample libraries, SAMPLERS (society?) must necessarily be sacrificed. To support the greater good?

To say that samplers are dead, and monolithic sample players are the single course for the future is to say that the sampler itself has no value, and that is NOT true. That is the equivalent of saying that Reaktor has no value because Native Instruments released Pro-53. In fact, that is hogwash. If it weren\'t for Reaktor, Pro-53 would not exist. In fact, none of that product line would exist (including Kontakt). Reaktor, by its nature, represents and serves a user-base that is looking to create the next new sound, not make convenient use of the current ones. That is a subtle, and perhaps peripheral argument, but something to think about.

Doug...so what follows? Do you begin refusing to \"represent\" developers that won\'t develop for YOUR platform of choice? It is certainly your right to do so, but here again, you created a business, supported your family, and essentially are the success you have become because samplers exist in this world, and musicians wish to exploit them. Samplers are a core technology. Sample players are a derivative technology based upon that core. To say there is no value in the sampler is to say there is no value in any of this. Hey, let\'s all just go home.

I will never let this kind of argument stand. Attack me, if you will. Reduce my user rating to negative 1000 stars. Expose every compromising detail of my life, I\'m sure many can be dug up. And still, I will never agree that protectionism, and especially the most ugly \"my way or the highway\" kinds of lines in the sand are in the best interest of CUSTOMERS--the people who make this whole business go.

I can only express disappointment at this position. It is truly unfortunate. I do agree that in principle, one can say that Tascam would indeed renege on a \"promise\" if their next product appeared with no internal copy protection. Or, you could just as easily say that upon fearless examination, Tascam came to the conclusion that the greater evil existed in hobbling the development of sampling as a core technology, rather than making an attempt to control an essentially terrorist activity by dropping a \"bunkerbuster,\" and damn the consequences.

Or you could just say that they\'re lazy, I guess. I think that is ridiculous, as is insinuating that Bruce Richardson, singlehandedly, convinced an international corporation to change its policy. Jesus, I\'m pretty much a dickless wonder when it comes to affecting anything. I\'m just a guy with an opinion.

I think that if this speculative adventure in banality is true, then bravo to Tascam for putting 100% of the responsibility for copy protection into the hands of those who desire it, instead of sacrificing the interests of those who don\'t. I think that is fair. And I think that the sabre rattling about supporting the platform is absolutely abhorrent, basically telling a large population of innocent end users to go to hell.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Bruce wrote:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Sorry guys. I don\'t want to go through this topic again, either, because it makes me so sick and so emotional that I can barely function.Hope you\'re speaking figuratively rather than literally. Don\'t start laying the foundation for a coronary down the road.

Lee Blaske <hr /></blockquote>Lee, I appreciate that. I hope my tone doesn\'t get confused with rancor against anyone here. These are stressful times, and this is a stressful subject. I will try not to let this make me croak off...in fact, I think I\'ll get some air.

Peace.

Bruce

dougrogers

03-25-2003, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Russ:
[QUOTE]EW publishes a lot of libraries in the GS format, people buy them, and then EW leaves the musicians (who have systems and even entire rooms dedicated to Gigastudio) in the dust and forgotten. Heck, even the attitude of the representatives are the same; screw the customers\' wishes -- why should the company care? Russ,

We have no intention of abandoning our customers that own existing GS products (or any that we represent for other developers in the future).

I am only talking about our future products, and we are making this decision based on this apparent decision by TASCAM - who lied to us all!

It\'s them you should be upset about. We are the victims of their decision.

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

peter269

03-25-2003, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by andyt:
[qb] This was EXACTLY what was promised in January 2002.

Doug keeps bringing us back to three words: communication, relationship, and trust. This is what developmental commitments are based on.

The issue isn\'t Giga 3.0.

The issue, as I understand it, is a lack of communication from Tascam/Nemesys which has diminished relationship and trust. Phone calls and e-mails often go unreturned, even after repeated recalls and re-sendings. And this has been going on for months. When I spoke to the guys at Tascam about this, all they\'ll say is that customers are really going to love the changes. Well, what\'s being forgotten is that developers are customers, too!

People investing cold cash in their platform, deserve better than a returned phone call and e-mail because such libraries become the jewel in the crown for both promotion and asserting the validity of the software.

I believe the key reason that Kontakt has advanced isn\'t because it\'s a cool sampler, it\'s because the people behind the product responded to developers and listened. The developers went to NI and told them what was needed. NI said, \"OK,\" and delivered, with dialogue, not in silence.

It\'s this attention to people issues that\'s been the real driving force behind Kontakt.

I\'m sure that Giga 3.0 will be a stunner.

But Bruce, it was YOU who posted the \"guess\" that they may be in alpha shortly.

First, if that\'s true, that announcement should be made directly and privately from Tascam/Nemesys to developers to let them know what the progress is, especially since the release date is MONTHS late.

Second, if they\'re only approach an Alpha by April 1, then that means several weeks of work before we get to beta, then beta release candidates.

Just between EW and VSL, millions of dollars of investment are on the table. Add in SISS, GOS, DD and Kirk Hunter, and you\'re in to six-figure production costs for most of these libraries.

These are very serious numbers! With that kind of investment money in their platform on the table, there is at least the need for the professional courtesy of a reply.

We\'re ALL busy. But a couple of times a month, calls can go out to Doug, Nick, Gary, Dan, Herb and others just to maintain relationship and communication.

But instead, it\'s silence.

And what happened? NI listened, and now, GOS and DD will be on Kontakt by summer\'s end. EW/QLSO has moved to Kontakt/Kompact and if GS 3.0 has no copy protection, then, Tascam/Nemesys has lost a major supporter.

There are two tools on the desktop: a phone and a calculator. Both support the other.

Kenn159

03-25-2003, 09:48 AM

Just a few questions.
Are there any examples of software[whether a sampler or sequencer etc] that went under because of a open platform or no copywrite protection?
I think most people like a platform that doesnt use a intrusive CP schemes that alter the workflow of a application.

Doug I have bought samples over the years from your company for my Akai s1000 which never had copy write protection ,why are you now refusing to support Giga But still support the s1000 Akai format?
Also a friend of mine told me about a pc users club in the area that got busted for trading software and were severly penalized having to pay fines , computers confiscated etc, just wondering why you didnt alert athorities about the sample swap meet that you witnessed.

Could one possible reason that Tascam abandoned the CP be because they concluded that all the time and resources that it would take to implement a CP would not be justifiable being that it would most likely be cracked in the short term.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:

For instance, I doubt that anyone who\'s running something like Spectrasonics\'s Atmosphere is aching for a GigaStudio version of it. The interfaces for some of these new products are highly tweaked for the specific content rather than being a one-size-fits-all solution like the current incarnation of GS.
I don\'t know about that. I think Eric is quite brilliant, and I can\'t imagine that given an interest in pursuing GigaStudio\'s full potential, he couldn\'t make an amazing product.

But Atmosphere is also a product which finds use in a more spare context than full orchestra simulation. Let\'s not forget the considerable disparity in track content, etc., per genre. If Atmosphere were, let\'s say, VSL, would the end use still reflect convenience? That is not quite so certain.

In fact, if you want to go invoking Eric Persing\'s name, his take on IP protection and samplers was that he really couldn\'t logically see a way to have the protection he wanted on the sampler technology--PRECISELY because Eric is a very mature musician. He understands very clearly that you cannot continue to make a sampler more flexible, push sampling into the expression of its next big leap, and simultaneously bolt down every aspect of the technology. One of those things will necessarily not fit into the equation. Something has to give. Eric chose to pursue a different course because of many reasons, but some time back he posted the comments I\'m paraphrasing here, and it is a very mature outlook.

There is no way to oversimplify all this. That\'s why the arguments are so strident and so deep. It is truly an impasse.

I think the characterization of a sampler as a \"one-size-fits-all\" solution--and to further portray this as negative, is a flawed perspective. If you reduce the functionality of a sampler to a specific design for specific core data, don\'t you in fact filter a user\'s response to that data, so that everyone sounds a little more alike? Of course, many of these products have great flexibility. But in lots of cases, the flexibility to creatively \"break\" the imagined use of the material is indeed compromised.

Hey, at one time, samplers were mainly used in studios to capture phrases and play them back offline onto analog tape. That\'s what people did with them. Who would have imagined that from such a humble beginning, we would see the detailed and microscopic modeling of acoustic instruments we now enjoy? Flexibility produced that. One-size-fits-all PRODUCED that. The sampler, being a core technology, will in fact continue to break its own barriers. Samplers are very legitimate. Monolithic designs for sample playback are very legitimate and desirable as well--but they are not the end of other legitimate technologies with their own paths to innovation.

There\'s enough innovative thought to go around!!

I am not speaking AGAINST any technology. I hope everyone understands I am speaking FOR the future of the sampler itself--for its unfettered technological advance.

Even though I sometimes lose my head, and I also argue rather, ahem, passionately...I want to make it clear that I wouldn\'t be here talking about this if I didn\'t respect all of you deeply. These are risky subjects, and they make people crazy, but what\'s the alternative to talking? Worse, I think. And as I have said on every occasion, and opined in every aspect, the sample developers do amazing work and take huge risks. The best thing any of us can do is support their licensing policies and solve this problem where it originates. Respect solves everything. Enough respect could change the whole world. Why not start here?

Hudson

03-25-2003, 10:01 AM

Bruce, you can blah blah blah all you want to (I wish I had that much free time on my hands), but there\'s one simple fact that keep smacking me in the face. Aside from the fact that Tascam is wicked late on releasing the product and they\'re not releasing a bit of info as to what kind of progress they\'re making or divulging any relevent product details to the developers, they promised the developers copy protection over a year ago and now the CP they promised has apparently been thrown out the window. That is a major screw over if ever I heard one on several different levels.
If Nick and Doug pull support for Giga, that\'s a huge blow to the platform. Would anyone blame them for pulling giga support on future libraries? I sure wouldn\'t. I think that would be absolutely lousy, but I couldn\'t blame them for it. I\'m one of those old fashioned types where if someone makes me a promise I expect them to honor it. In this case, Nick and Doug are looking at a major product feature being cut that could have severe implications on their profits based on that promise. Pull support? I\'d do the same. To suggest that Nick and Doug are the ones who are gonna be hurting the users is absurd. A promise was made, a promise was broken, and I lay any blame for the questionable future of the Giga platform at the feet of Tascam.
I don\'t wanna see intrusive CP anymore than the next guy because it is a real pain in the *** , and I honestly don\'t think it makes a big difference in the overall piracy rate. But that isn\'t what this issue is about to me. I just can\'t get past that whole broken promise thing. That\'s just shady.
-Hudson

dougrogers

03-25-2003, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I think that if this speculative adventure in banality is true, then bravo to Tascam for putting 100% of the responsibility for copy protection into the hands of those who desire it, instead of sacrificing the interests of those who don\'t. I think that is fair. And I think that the sabre rattling about supporting the platform is absolutely abhorrent, basically telling a large population of innocent end users to go to hell. You know, I have a great deal of respect for you, you are right on the money most of the time - but I believe you are wrong about this issue.

It has been \'proven\' time and time again that some form of CP is necessary to protect intellectual property (look what\'s happening to the record industry - ours is ten times worse!).

MOST of the major music software companies include CP of some sort, and I don\'t see any evidence that it is destroying their customers ability to work creatively.

How does a simple challenge/response registration impact your work? Give me a specific example (other than the standard multi-machine argument which is easily solved). I don\'t see any concern expressed here by Stylus, Atmosphere etc. users. EP has said time and time again on this forum CP dramatically increased his sales - and he has been fighting piracy with us for many years - and is now pleased with this solution.

If you were the victim of this theft I\'m sure you would feel different. Do you lock your car when you leave it? Do you leave your house open when you are not there? I could go on, but the reality is Bruce, that we have been fighting this war for 15 years, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to CP our sound data without the host application being involved - you know that - so please don\'t pretend otherwise.

Now, for the first time ever, we have an opportunity to protect our investment in these products. You should be pleased about this, because if our industry thrives as a result of this (it will, I guarantee it) it will result in better and better products being developed. Better and Better products usually involve more user control and expression, which translates into an enormous amount of recording options/editing/programming. The cost of EWQLSO, for example, is enormous, and has involved more than a year of work by dozens of artists. We are not going to put it out in some unprotected format while we have an alternative. The decision is based on that, and that alone.

It\'s a commercial decision, not an emotional one.

Btw, if you think this just involves EW and QL products - you are in for a shock!

Peace,

Doug Rogers
------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 01:15 PM

Hi Doug,

I hope you will agree to disagree. I will--strongly, and I think very legitimately. I won\'t agree for a moment that my position in this matter is wrong. We merely see it from two very different perspectives, and I honestly cannot say how I would choose to proceed in your shoes.

I can only be sure of how I would proceed in my shoes. In my shoes, the tradeoffs are too deep.

I\'m not talking about inconveniences, because that is VERY VERY different. I can live with inconvenience. Copy protection on an application is an inconvenience. Copy protection on a plugin is usually upgraded to a pain. Copy protection on sampleware is a different animal. It breaks functionality that I have been begging to get. It limits potential for all sorts of technology that solves problems. What\'s a clever analogy...thinking...thinking...OK. You might feel safer if there\'s a cop stationed in your house, but man it makes it hard to smoke a joint. OK, maybe I should forget analogies.

There are two sides to the story here, and mine is valid from my perspective and from the perspective of a great many end users\' best interest. I respect your position, but can never agree that the tradeoffs are something I want to accept, or that I believe benefits the state of the art in sampler design. We are just getting started. I don\'t want to see the doors slam shut on entire branches of potential growth for the technology of sampling itself. And when you roll copy protection into the picture on the app level, you\'ve just got to slam those doors and make the tradeoffs. There\'s no way around it. I can\'t support that, but I sure support you. I hope you do well, no matter what. It\'s the same way I can support and care about the lives of people in danger, and still absolutely not support our administration.

I am vast. I contain multitudes. Can\'t you tell by my photo? ----> graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

dougrogers

03-25-2003, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Hi Doug,

I hope you will agree to disagree.I thought you were going to take a walk!

Anyway, we will have to agree to disagree - but, I would still like one example from you of where challenge/response registration affects the way you work - just one!

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Bruce A. Richardson

03-25-2003, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
I thought you were going to take a walk!

Anyway, we will have to agree to disagree - but, I would still like one example from you of where challenge/response registration affects the way you work - just one!
Just got back. The temptation to just continue walking was great, but unfortunately, I have a deadline, so here I am.

The registration has no affect. That\'s not my point, and never has been. It\'s the restrictiveness imposed upon the file i/o and the sampler architecture in that regard.

Here\'s a concrete example. Nemesys wrote a really nice lossless compression routine, which many libraries use. I want that compression routine available to ME for two reasons:

1) I want to be able to compress libraries that shipped with raw PCM samples.

2) I want to be able to uncompress libraries that shipped with Nemesys-compressed samples.

I have been begging for that feature since GigaSampler, because it opens up my options to edit, re-think, modify, combine, and bastardize material that many people use into material that I exclusively use. That\'s what I adore about the sampler as a technology, that it\'s capable of going bizarro-deluxo. In batch.

Well, I can\'t do that at present, because the end user has no access to that coding/decoding routine. And this feature could never exist for the end user unjder a copy-protection system--because it would be the equivalent of a locked front door combined with a missing back door.

So that is one example of a technology (and of any derivative or interesting variations) that gets shot to hell the moment the application must also play policeman for sample vendors.

Discussing other features I see as impossible to combine with copy protection would involve reckless speculation on my part, so I\'ll have to leave it at the one you requested.

I am really now agreeing to disagree (I had no notions of altering your view, but I always hope you will reconsider). Deadlines await.

Best regards,
Bruce

Munsie

03-25-2003, 04:04 PM

Everything gets cracked, everything IS cracked. The harder it is to crack, the more the hackers will attempt to crack it. CP is a pointless subject. You\'ll never stop the small guys from downloading samples from the internet or going to their local store and making friends with the music dept and copying samples. This has 0 effect on your income because they never had the money to buy your library anyway.

What DOES make sense is trying to stop commercial composers from making money using non licensed libraries.

Asking them to insert the original CD in the drive once in a while (this either has to be a seperate stand alone app or built into the host application) is a step in the right direction until the routine gets hacked.

What alot of us fear is right in the middle of a creative process, be it a studio session, a jam session or a live performance, FINALLY you get that dreaded question to insert the cd and you have no idea where you put it. images/icons/smile.gif LOL

Having compressed samples and then writing digital watermarks based on serial codes into the samples at the time of installation is also a step in the right direction. This would require no CP that would intrude on the end user, ever.

In order to track all this cp stuff and actually FIND someone using unlicensed samples is probably going to cost you alot of money, say I\'m a pirate and I\'m using an illegal copy of XXX, I put out some music and I make oodles of money, XXX finds out and sues me, for what, the price of the library? What else can they sue for? XXX wasn\'t entitled to royalties anyway right??? Now I would assume if I was selling it or making it available to other users (and get caught) they sue me for everything I have, right?

(I also think part of the problem is certain libraries are costing more to make than the current customer base will support. There\'s only so many users out there that will actually PAY $1000.00 or $3000.00 for a library.)

It just seems like a lose/lose situation when you average it all up. Developers could make more money by better marketing and by producing more product.

Munsie

03-25-2003, 04:08 PM

http://www.deathstarinc.com/images/Frodo_Has_Failed.jpg

Looks like my buddy George is giving somebody here on the forum the finger! I\'ll leave it you guys to figure out who. images/icons/smile.gif

rediesisminore

03-25-2003, 04:27 PM

Doug, I think the moment is crucial and I\'m not sure that the essential is being clearly said.

I can\'t agree more with Bruce (funny, on another thread we couldn\'t agree less!!!).

I, for many, am a sampler user. A sampler user vs a sound module user, is to my eyes like a programmer vs a software user. When we first bought samplers we bought programmable, virtual, universal synths, ready to be filled up with any kind of sound. That\'s why I still have and use an EMU sampler.

I, for many, (ThomasJ where are you?) have NEVER used a sample library the way it was programmed by the producer. I re-program for every different composition or musical need. We need to bend programs and samples to OUR musical needs and taste.

I would NEVER buy an orchestral library which I should use the way it\'s sold. I have discovered during almost 20 years of computers and samplers programming too many tricks and personal ways to do music with these tools that I couldn\'t be more bored than being obliged to buy a BLACK BOX where everything is done the (always questionable) way another (maybe-questionable) musician thought on a given moment.

I had implemented my own version of realtime sustain pedal behaviour on the EW Ultimate Piano Collection on Emu sampler years before the implementation in other recent piano libraries. It was something which was maybe not even foreseen by you at East-West, but, thanks to the sampler possibilities, just a reality waiting to be discovered.

For a copy protection mechanism to be successful, Gigastudio would prevent user from doing low level sample and program editing. That would be the death of music.

I think, Bruce, things like these are examples of what you are expressing. I hope some more users come in on this.

Roberto

Sam

03-25-2003, 04:33 PM

Copy protection doesn\'t work. Name any copy protected program, then look for it on the p2p nets, russian/finnish/whatever websites, they are all available. Your customers don\'t purchase programs because they are copy protected and it\'s the only way they can get them, they purchase them because it\'s the right thing to do, or they never are / never will be your customers. Copy protection only hurts the legitemate customers.

All the protection schemes I have seen that are not evil are not effective. The more invasive schemes have no business on a DAW, as these machines will always be touchy, and in any case they have no efficacy against your non-customers. All copy protection does is ensure that the cracks run better than the legit software.

If you support your software / samples, your customers will stay in contact with you, and the crack users will be left behind. If you are hostile to prospective customers, they won\'t commit, especially when we expect to be using our legit products long after the vendor closes up shop.

And since Doug @ EW is adamant, I will use an EW product as an example. I use the Truan Boesendorfer every day. IMO Mr Truan is an excellent recording engineer, I love the sound of the sample but if I had to use it as shipped it would be collecting dust. A couple samples needed editing, but no sweat, I can do what I need to make it as great as possible. Also, the gig needs a good bit of editing before it\'s really playable, but I don\'t mind since it\'s great source material. If EW made such an articulation available, all their customers would contact them, and anyone that didn\'t probably doesn\'t actually use the product. So what has really happened here? A legit user gets years of usablility out of this fine product, since it is unhindered, while the vendor misses the opportunity for better support and bitches about not being able to cripple his products. For the record, I offered my articulation to EW and they never got back to me.

Good products and support make for good business. Copy protection paranoia, hopes, and fears will not turn a poor business model into a good one.

Best regards all,
-sam

rediesisminore

03-25-2003, 04:42 PM

Sam, funny thing we both made an example of an EW Piano library editing!

Look, Doug, you provide your customers sounds and a basic general programming... users wants to be able to play with them the way you didn\'t think of! And we are now afraid that CP interferes with this possibility.

Roberto

jose elith

03-25-2003, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by Sam:
Copy protection doesn\'t work. Name any copy protected program, then look for it on the p2p nets, russian/finnish/whatever websites, they are all available. Your customers don\'t purchase programs because they are copy protected and it\'s the only way they can get them, they purchase them because it\'s the right thing to do, or they never are / never will be your customers. Copy protection only hurts the legitemate customers.

All the protection schemes I have seen that are not evil are not effective. The more invasive schemes have no business on a DAW, as these machines will always be touchy, and in any case they have no efficacy against your non-customers. All copy protection does is ensure that the cracks run better than the legit software.

If you support your software / samples, your customers will stay in contact with you, and the crack users will be left behind. If you are hostile to prospective customers, they won\'t commit, especially when we expect to be using our legit products long after the vendor closes up shop.

And since Doug @ EW is adamant, I will use an EW product as an example. I use the Truan Boesendorfer every day. IMO Mr Truan is an excellent recording engineer, I love the sound of the sample but if I had to use it as shipped it would be collecting dust. A couple samples needed editing, but no sweat, I can do what I need to make it as great as possible. Also, the gig needs a good bit of editing before it\'s really playable, but I don\'t mind since it\'s great source material. If EW made such an articulation available, all their customers would contact them, and anyone that didn\'t probably doesn\'t actually use the product. So what has really happened here? A legit user gets years of usablility out of this fine product, since it is unhindered, while the vendor misses the opportunity for better support and bitches about not being able to cripple his products. For the record, I offered my articulation to EW and they never got back to me.

Good products and support make for good business. Copy protection paranoia, hopes, and fears will not turn a poor business model into a good one.

Best regards all,
-sam Maybe I\'m wrong but XS key for mac (emagic Logic Audio 5 series) is unviolable until now.. there are a lot of cracks for Pc but no for mac. All emagic plug ins are protected the same way..
I work every day with my Logic platinum 5 with out problems or crashes. Xs key is not difficult to use, just insert in the Usb port the program check if it\'s in his place and ready...
Maybe some companies must ask emagic how do they do in the mac side....

Elith images/icons/smile.gif

jens

03-25-2003, 11:46 PM

spectrum

03-26-2003, 01:41 AM

Interesting Jens....you say this does work legally?

I\'m curious as to how much prosecution have you been involved with for sample library piracy cases?

You sound like you know a lot about how the legal side of things works, and what is effective and what isn\'t in prosecution and some inside info on how the sample business can be grown without CP. What companies have benefitted from this watermarking system, and how did they actually prosecute the offenders?

Once an abuser is identified by a watermark, what do you usually do at that point? Please provide specific details as to who to contact, what the process is and how much the compensation will be, and how much time in might take for this process (are these legal services free?). I\'m sure there are a lot of developers here that would like to know what to do after an abuser has been identified with an unauthorized watermark.

After all, it\'s never been hard to find abusers....that\'s not the problem. It\'s what to do at that point. Watermarking is only a solution for identifying abusers, not a prevention or protection against the abuse itself.

if developers are to rely on this, it\'s pretty important that they are aware of how the next step works and what\'s involved and the ramifications of becoming the \"sample police\".

What\'s your experience been?

spectrum

Roman Beilharz

03-26-2003, 02:07 AM

Hi everybody,

this thread is especially intersting for me, since I recently wrote an article for german PC & Musik mag analysing the schemes that IMO have been leading to that ironic situation that we have nowadays:

1. \"Casual\" copying like \"OK, wait, ill just burn that for you just to check this out...\" will soon be overrun completely by P2P-trading (increasing bandwidth etc.). In short even technically low educated people will know how to get the latest stuff eventually freed from any kind of CP on the net. CP only gives you a couple of weeks before your stuff is out there: not more, not less.

TOO MUCH USERS DON\'T SEE A RELATION BETWEEN LEGAL USE AND INNOVATION THEY WANT

2. Most Pro\'s I know appreciate the existance of cracks somehow, because for comfortable and trouble-free use they put the original package in the shelf and run the crack. This can\'t be it.

ANY CP-SCHEME BESIDES WATERMARKING WILL DEGRADE THE USABILITY OF THE PRODUCT

Check back with Jens, in case you are interested. He is the man. This thing seems to be a good way to at least make some \"lazy\" users think about giving away stuff twice. - Keeping full freedom to access and edit the sounds he has paid for. But I admit, it will be damn\' hard to effectively punish an illegally distributing user who has given you ANY data for his registration and lives somewhere in russia...

Despite all that, I think your \"proof\" won\'t be there, Lee. CP will not give you nor anyone else any advantage, IMO. Many other points have already been covered.

Going all over many aspects of this topic again and again I came to the following main results, that are worth considering. I think it was great if we all were able work on changing the obviously bad dedication/communication between developer/manufacturer and user/customer, because:

1. Customers are willing to pay A LOT for perfectly usable products/quality of content, even more than they are able to afford and the awareness that quality-products are worth their price seems to GROW (many amateurs WILL buy expensive libraries as long as it amounts to be the holy grail for them). You will sure have been noticing some people have cars they can\'t afford - but they manage to buy them nonetheless...

2. To make the user PREFER buying your libraries/applications, you have to get the user INVOLVED emotionally. Most people LOVED to become a fan of your work. They will die for you if you OPEN your doors rather than closing them. They might even feel presented while having spent $2000, if you really show your concern about their ideas, critique etc.. Developers have to be openhearted, caring and PRESENT enough to users on a personal level to make them feel an important part of the game. Gary really teached me this lesson. He knows perfectly how to make people give their best contributing to his projects and still feel blissed by having been privileged to BUY his product(s) images/icons/wink.gif .

3. The reason why too many people don\'t care about illegal use of sounds and software is THEIR EMOTIONAL DISTANCE towards the creators. Any closed and restrictive information-policy causes an atmosphere of feeling unheard, ignored and betrayed in the end. Just as you feel betrayed by Tascam, Nick. Just as I feel betrayed by Mackie regarding their d8b-policy. Just as... etc. You know the stories. If Tascam decided to give us more information, the climate for GS was much more friendly these days. Have you ever seen complete bug- and wishlists of the big audio-app\'s on the net? Being informed about a bug/workaround in time makes the problem feel like a thing that will get solved by eager men/women sooner or later. A common issue making the user feel CAPABLE of handling it. A bug, that you are faced with every day that noone ever confirmed makes you at first feel INFERIOR. As soon as you realize it is not YOUR fault, you will get sore somehow. With every other secret weakness, you proceed into distance to the programmers/creators etc. Wecome! You entered the sector where you feel NO GUILT at all using a crack of \"all those arrogant, lightyears-away manufacturers\".

4. People are collecting apps and sounds rather than use them (\"If I add THIS and THAT, T H E N I will be able to create\"). This is a sword with two sides: on one hand this habit could bring developers good profit, on the other hand it seems to be the reason why their profit currently decreases. This overestimation of the TOOLS at hand has been created by the industry. Now this misunderstanding of the creative process (remember, what H. Matisse was able to do with just scissors, coloured paper and himself), strikes back hurting people like you, that surely have not caused any of this. I tried to convince my readers to sort out and delete any crack, that they have NEVER been using. This might at some places divide the count of the unlicensed apps by 3 images/icons/wink.gif . Then the rarely used ones etc. And I appealed to them to make a plan how they could manage to - one by one - license the products they NEED to use. And make a new start, to give all innovators a chance to be able to realize ideas that will make US ALL smile in adoration - before all of the innovative small companies have shut down.

To sum it up:
-CP doesn\'t work and will not be able to solve any developer\'s problems, since this will not change the mind of any user and will irritate all honest buyers. You probably even won\'t be able to cut the symptom - leave alone its sources. Protection is the opposite of freedom. If you want a free world, you have to show, that freedom is offering so many valuable possibilities to everyone, that it is the best thing to go for. You CAN NOT PROTECT nor FORCE freedom without destroying it by design (see Iraq).

-If developers decide to go for maximum openheartedness, you will make a lot of paying friends all over the world. Publish your concerns, open up your development as much as possible and care about your customers needs more than ever before. People love to learn from you, as long as you provide them with information such as what makes you go for things etc. They even will contribute to your projects, as everyone over here knows: I consider Northernsounds to be one of the brightest examples how this method works. It is just a relativel small club over here compared to what I have in mind.

-If users continue to ignore, that all innovative ideas need people being able to realize them, we all will be stuck, no doubt. Show them you are not Bill Gates. When they realize you are somehow just like them - crazy, dedicated, passionate - homo sapiens!! - they will start to see things differently. And maybe will start to estimate your goods more appropriately. And will love to BUY freely alterable samples.

Roman Beilharz

PC & Musik, Germany

jens

03-26-2003, 02:21 AM

Sapkiller

03-26-2003, 03:10 AM

Chadwick

03-26-2003, 03:48 AM

Roman makes a GREAT point.

It sucks that developers should have to do this after they\'ve already done the REAL work, but I totally agree with the idea of making the customer feel like he\'s buying in to a community - becoming a member of a kind of special club. Make the original sample library and his relationship to the developer very special to him personally.

spectrum

03-26-2003, 04:06 AM

Roman, you make an interesting case...but how do you know that CP is ineffective and is making no difference? Are you a developer that has tried it both ways....or are you just speculating?

I see a lot of times that people say that CP makes no difference, simply because cracks are available.......when all of the concrete data I see every day tells me it is making an very real and measurable improvement in a situation where nothing else was working.

spectrum

Scott Cairns

03-26-2003, 04:19 AM

It sucks that developers should have to do this after they\'ve already done the REAL work, but I totally agree with the idea of making the customer feel like he\'s buying in to a community - becoming a member of a kind of special club. Make the original sample library and his relationship to the developer very special to him personally. I couldn\'t agree more. (Hi Rick!) As a recent GOS and Spectrasonics customer I really feel that I have bought into a community. I spoke to Gary on the phone personally to order Garritan Strings and also had Eric personally answer some of my questions before I bought 4 of his products.

I have to tell you, a friend of mine came over and had a listen to my new \"toys\" (he\'s a DJ) and asked straight away if he could make a copy of them. I flatly told him no. He looked kind of hurt and surprised - but I just couldnt, with a clear conscience, do something like that.

There\'s one very simple reason for it too. By purchasing these libraries I felt I had entered into the sampling community. It might sound corny but its true.

Now, if I had dealt with some faceless corporation when I bought these libraries perhaps my perspective would\'ve been different. (Just being honest here!) No one seems to think twice about making a copy of Office or Windows.

Cheers, Scott.

sporter

03-26-2003, 07:16 AM

Interesting discussion. It all goes back to the fact that many people do not feel they are doing anything wrong by copying.

If it\'s any consolation to you developers, my pastor has mentioned in one of his sermons that illegally copying software is a sin. Sounds a little humerous I know, but I think the only way to overcome the problem is if people feel it is morally wrong to use illegal software.

I have a small but growing Giga library, and I\'ve been asked for copies by people who wouldn\'t dream of stealing anything...theyt just don\'t see copying my disk as stealing...

Good luck to you guys on this issue. I think it would benefit everybody...including us users...if everyone purchased the software as they were supposed to. I think software would be a lot less expensive, and there would be a lot more developers.

Roman Beilharz

03-26-2003, 09:04 AM

Huh, I didn\'t expect this is getting heated. I should have known better images/icons/wink.gif .

At first: I have been editing my first post here

Previous Page (\"http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=004545;p=4\")

while you guys have being responding, so I suggest
some of you might want to revise my post, Sorry!

Now, Lee:

Roman, do you even understand what we\'re talking about? Nobody is running these libraries off \"the original package.\" The products we\'re discussing must be loaded onto a hard drive and authorized. Once authorized, they are (at least in my experience) trouble free.Lee, I understand that this really touches you as a developer - much more than me being in the observing position of a journalist, user and a not existentially threatened co-developer. But please try not to be offending, I am no native speaker and might have not been able to really convey some things. I do my best over here to make my questionable points. I admit I was thinking of applications rather than sound-libraries, but it needs not much of phantasy how some guys would take their time to rid your work - VI, protected 3.0, whatever - of its authorization-routines, so that everyone was able to use your sounds without any CP. Does anyone over here truly think there will never be a freely installable Stylus someday? An encryption on the wave-pool basis would just increase the hackers work and will most probably cost performance. Easy cracks are there instantly, hard cracks are getting released later, impossible cracks (like Logic on the Mac) need quite some months at best. A simple challenge-response-routine just for the setup of your sounds seems no big help, since once on the HD the files were not protected anymore. The huge amount of samples filling DVD\'s? - It is a matter of time, that noone will hesitate to download such huge amounts of data as well. Think about the movies etc. This is just the beginning, I guess.

And if they don\'t do this, they deserve to be ripped off?No way. But they do nothing to break that vicious cycle IMO and should not be moaning, if noone cares about duplicating their work. Don\'t get me wrong: It IS a bad state. I HATE to see good ideas running down the river, because it is so hard to get paid for good ideas at the end as a developer. And I have seen quite some good projects quit at the sight of this this depressingly sad situation.
One reason why I revised my post was, because I saw I burdened the weight too much on the shoulders of you developers. The users are of course the people to blame in the first place. But this fact will not be of any help, IMO. If you want something to get better, get better.

I don\'t feel any emotional closeness to the store down the street, yet I don\'t steal from them. Are you saying that it\'s OK to steal from those you don\'t know? Lee, you are turning my words upside-down. OF COURSE NOT. But imagine you really had the talent to invisibly steal that cool instrument there, but the owner has ever been true to you and gave you invaluable advice: You won\'t steal it, ALTHOUGH you have bad habits and obviously the wrong gifts.

first of all, don\'t make a mockery of the tragedy and suffering going on this very minute by drawing a parallel between this and Iraq. That\'s simply disrespectful.
I never intended that. Maybe I choose the wrong words, what I meant was: If you force freedom, you destroy freedom. To me it is just that simple, though the consequences of this truth seem almost impossible to \"live\" these days.

Secondly, as Spectrum pointed out, you are not in a position to determine if CP is or isn\'t working for manufacturers. I am a journalist: it is my JOB to be speculating images/icons/wink.gif . Nothing is ever for sure, that\'s the only fact I know. It is OK if you think I am wrong, but as long as you don\'t know the name of my horse, you\'d better chill down. Yes: I am assuming. But up to now I thought we\'d share our thoughts over here, so - here they were.

Thirdly, don\'t assume that CP is irritating all users. The CP that Spectrasonics is using is very transparent to the user.Up to now to me ANY CP was a pain including Emagic\'s XS-key on quite some systems. You are right, the Spectrasonics-system is very good and easy to run. But didn\'t we talk about GS 3.0 and CP? To me there seems no such way of protecting your sounds for GS 3.0 without giving up freedom of use. CP versus innovation seems not a good way to go for me. Bruce has already covered this, I assume he has quite some good reasons he is not able to tell us, - because of this Tascam-top-secret thingee...

All the developers I know of seem to be good eggs. It seems you\'re suggesting that they need to meekly prostrate themselves and beg for every scrap of support.No. I understand that such qualified people like you don\'t like the idea of bowing in front of \"the crap\". But you didn\'t respect my words. If you care about your customers in a similar way you will be out of business in no time. You are exaggerating and this robs my words of their intended meaning. Did Gary ever beg for anything?? He simply was THERE. And he took great care. Charismatic. Everyone felt that. Everyone was GLAD to be a part of it. That is what I am talking about. No more, no less.

Personally, I think they deserve dignity, and the ability to carry on business without being robbed left and right. I believe they have every right in the world to experiment with ways of fighting back (especially since they seem to be going through a lot of trouble and expense to find CP schemes that are easy to use and work well)
Yes, I agree with you 100%. Do whatever you think is right. I am only SPECULATING, that this way you won\'t get where you want to.

regards

Roman Beilharz

Hans Adamson

03-26-2003, 09:16 AM

I personally respond to practically all orders coming in to Art Vista. Most of the time there is an exchange of 4-5 e-mails or more, including feedback etc. I feel I have a personal relationship with each customer. It was even more so, at the time when I had just started out in this business, and every customer and order was a \"new acquaintance\".

Still, as soon as our first product: \"Malmsjö Acoustic Grand\" was launched, I would find it on pirate websites. And I was wondering which one of those nice guys, that I had had the pleasure of dealing with, had deceived me. So, even if most guys are \"nice\", and like Scott, won\'t do it with a clear conscience, there are individuals who would. No matter how close the developer/user relationship is.

I believe the most damaging to developers, is when a friend gives a friend a copy. You may think that just doing it once, for someone special (maybe a brother, sister, partner) cannot be that bad... Still, making just one copy for a close friend, cuts the developer\'s income in half.

Hans Adamson
Art Vista Productions
http://www.artvista.net/ (\"http://www.artvista.net/\")

dougrogers

03-26-2003, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
All the developers I know of seem to be good eggs. It seems you\'re suggesting that they need to meekly prostrate themselves and beg for every scrap of support. Personally, I think they deserve dignity, and the ability to carry on business without being robbed left and right. I believe they have every right in the world to experiment with ways of fighting back (especially since they seem to be going through a lot of trouble and expense to find CP schemes that are easy to use and work well).Thanks Lee,

And what some of you forget, is we\'ve already conducted your experiment for fifteen years, and \"it does not work\".

Those of us in the industry, with real experience of this problem, have already seen increases in sales for products that have CP - that is a fact.

The analogy of ptp downloading is flawed for our products, which are usually several Gigabytes in size and growing. However, ptp downloading is gradually destroying the entertainment business, which will result in less choice in the future, unless a solution is soon found.

CloneCD will not work with keydiscs that have holes in them (such as Native Instrument\'s products).

Maybe hackers cracked the Spectasonics CP - but how long did it take to download the approx. 3 Gigs of data?

EP has the proof that CP has worked for his products, what proof do you non-developers have that it doesn\'t work? Just because you see cracked versions doesn\'t mean sales weren\'t increased because less sophisticated users couldn\'t by-pass the CP system.

Also, you forget another important anti-piracy tool that comes with CP - complete registration of users. If developers find anyone illegally using their sounds in a film, record or commercial, that isn\'t registered - they now have the proof they need to prosecute. The flip side for legitimate users, is they will have access to updates and upgrades the moment they are available, and tech support.

As developers, we have done a lot of research into this topic, we also solicited opinion from this forum many months ago, and we feel we have a solution that will work for us without interferring in the creative process.

Anyone concerned about this may be more concerned about their future ability to obtain these products for free, than any inability to work the same way they do now.

This is not a developer vs user issue - it\'s a matter of finding a solution that balances the developer\'s need to reduce piracy, with that of their users ability to work as they wish.

Our CP allows users to alter the programming of the library and save the result - so the argument that this is somehow restricted is simply false.

Also, aren\'t you all using copy protected software now in the form of GS? Is it impeding your ability to do what you want??

It\'s very interesting that TASCAM sees the need to CP GS but no longer feels it is appropriate for our products - despite lying to us developers 15 months ago that they were including it in the mysterious 3.0!

Btw, where is TASCAM - why aren\'t they involved in this discussion, since they apparently fueled this debate?

Take care,

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Munsie

03-26-2003, 09:56 AM

\"The analogy of ptp downloading is flawed for our products, which are usually several Gigabytes in size and growing.\"

\"CloneCD will not work with keydiscs that have holes in them (such as Native Instrument\'s products).\"

\"Maybe hackers cracked the Spectasonics CP - but how long did it take to download the approx. 3 Gigs of data?\"

wow, someone is due for a wakeup call.

Roman Beilharz

03-26-2003, 10:03 AM

The analogy of ptp downloading is flawed for our products, which are usually several Gigabytes in size and growing. I have heard that before, I can\'t remember where. Must be some months ago. Btw, has anybody already leaked Lord of the Rings III?

And be sure, I didn\'t want to sound ironic.

Roman

dougrogers

03-26-2003, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by Roman Beilharz:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />The analogy of ptp downloading is flawed for our products, which are usually several Gigabytes in size and growing. I have heard that before, I can\'t remember where. Must be some months ago. Btw, has anybody already leaked Lord of the Rings III?

And be sure, I didn\'t want to sound ironic.

Roman <hr /></blockquote>Yes, a highly compressed (distorted) version. Do you want to do this with 70 Gbs of EWQLSO?

Munsie

03-26-2003, 10:21 AM

\"After all, it\'s never been hard to find abusers....that\'s not the problem. It\'s what to do at that point. Watermarking is only a solution for identifying abusers, not a prevention or protection against the abuse itself. if developers are to rely on this, it\'s pretty important that they are aware of how the next step works and what\'s involved and the ramifications of becoming the \"sample police\".

I\'m confused. What exactly are your goals for adding cp then? I\'ve always assumed you guys were after the big fish, the commercial composer who uses unauthorized products?!

But now it just seems you guys are trying to stop the little fish from using your libraries. These guys aren\'t going to buy it anyway! You\'ll NEVER be able to stop the cracks, the downloads, and yes people are downloading multi-gig libraries right now. (They break them up and download several smaller packets.)

So if you\'re trying to say you\'ve turned a pirate into a buying customer I will never believe it. And if your\'re saying \"wow, we\'re having much better sales because of CP\" I will never believe that either. But if you were to say, \"wow, we\'re getting much better sales of Trilogy due to our full page ad in EM\" I would 100% believe that! images/icons/smile.gif

ngstime

03-26-2003, 10:44 AM

I just wanted to point where CP \"DIDN\'T WORK\":

Opcode Studio Vision Pro

this was a royal pain in the , I lost so much time and money!

it wasn\'t like opcode went under and I still had their products working like I paid for. thanks to the CP, I was burned, and the crackheads out there wasn\'t.

A side from wasting money on useless SVP, I had to go out and buy new software and sit down and learn it.

It would really stink if I bought a huge $$$ library and there wasn\'t anyone on the other end to respond to the challenge/response. No one can say this won\'t happen, as it already has.

All this to \"try\" to slow them down. If you can build it.... they can tear it down. In the end this only hurts the paying users.

....sad

Aaron Dirk

Roman Beilharz

03-26-2003, 10:50 AM

Yes, a highly compressed version. Do you want to do this with 70 Gbs of EWQLSO - if so, you\'re welcome to it!Not NOW, but I thought you were seeking a way how to protect your work tomorrow, too. You don\'t have to be a prophet to see, that in a few years it won\'t even be an uncomfortably size to download.

And I REALLY appreciate your work and would love to see, that things improve for you in a way you desire. No slime. Honest.

regards

Roman

dougrogers

03-26-2003, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by Roman Beilharz:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Yes, a highly compressed version. Do you want to do this with 70 Gbs of EWQLSO - if so, you\'re welcome to it!Not NOW, but I thought you were seeking a way how to protect your work tomorrow, too. You don\'t have to be a prophet to see, that in a few years it won\'t even be an uncomfortably size to download.

And I REALLY appreciate your work and would love to see, that things improve for you in a way you desire. No slime. Honest.

regards

Roman <hr /></blockquote>It\'s NOW we\'re concerned about. In a few years there will be other solutions to this ever evolving problem.

Thanks for the compliment.

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

KingIdiot

03-26-2003, 12:27 PM

Yuo\'ve got to remember that piraters dont care if it takes days to download stuff....

they got it for free. With \"always on\" connections, it doesn\'t matter so much to these guys. I remember, when I had dial up. I\'d set up getright to Dload Movie trailers and it could take more than a day with all the disconnects and dropouts.

Anyhow

Will it be possible to convert any of the Kontakt/Kompakt stuff you guys are releasing into Giga format?

I mean, if Giga\'s performance is worth it. I\'d like to see a Giga 3.0 version wether or not I have to do it myself.

This is where copy protection can be a pain IMO, I understand your need to copy protect your work, and it is valuable work. Still I dont believe that you should throw out the idea of doing Giga 3.0 libs because they \"lied\" to you. Many people would opt for a Giga version of QLSO if the performance is outstanding.

Wouldn\'t it be possible to do something like the copyprotection in VotA? I\'ve no problem with this, as its unintrusive IMO.

MartinL

03-26-2003, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
[Btw, where is TASCAM - why aren\'t they involved in this discussion, since they apparently fueled this debate?TASCAM, where are you????????? images/icons/confused.gif

spectrum

03-26-2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Munsie:

So if you\'re trying to say you\'ve turned a pirate into a buying customer I will never believe it. And if your\'re saying \"wow, we\'re having much better sales because of CP\" I will never believe that either. But if you were to say, \"wow, we\'re getting much better sales of Trilogy due to our full page ad in EM\" I would 100% believe that! images/icons/smile.gif Hi Munsie,

The music business is very small, and we have been doing this quite a while and know our users pretty well. (especially in the US)

The evidence is that we not only have much better sales, but that numerous people we know that were illegal users and casual copiers of our sample libraries are now legitimate registered users of our virtual instruments. Perhaps they all somehow felt simultaneously convicted to do the right thing, but I kind of think it probably has a lot more to do with having the CP hurdle in place. The difference in sales is well worth the effort for us. Far more so than trying to invest zillions in becoming the \"sample police\", which is quite a waste of time and resources (not to mention the negative energy involved!) I don\'t think most of you guys realize how expensive, complex and time consuming it is to prosecute abusers.....that\'s one of the biggest problems that we found. Finding them is super-easy, whether they are casual abusers or big time pirate rings.

BTW, we\'ve run similar promotion and ad campaign levels on our un-protected sample libraries for years too, so I think we are in a pretty good position to see the effectiveness in real terms. Also, the difference was clear even before our ads started running.

Just because it\'s easy to break into a simple door lock doesn\'t mean that having one isn\'t useful and wise.

We aren\'t naive about the situation.....CP obviously isn\'t a \"cure\" for the very complex problem of piracy, but it clearly does help......and every bit of help is most certainly welcome to developers at this point.

spectrum

Bruce A. Richardson

03-26-2003, 03:20 PM

Three points:

1) It is not an honest appraisal to compare copy protecting an applicaton to copy protecting content. To do the latter seriously undermines the core technology. Anyone who says otherwise is dealing in half-truths, hoping you\'re stupid enough to buy it. Literally.

2) Calling a software company \"liars\" because their initial feature set doesn\'t match their release set? Prepare to call every software company that ever existed \"liars.\" It happens. Thank God, in this case.

3) It will be sample developers who do end users a disservice, NOT Tascam, if support for that platform is withheld. Talk about a double standard. Sample houses have made EVERY DOLLAR they\'ve ever collected on unprotected content. Don\'t fail to note that point, humble users. GigaStudio is being SINGLED OUT, and held to a different standard. Foul ball.

I think some agendas are in need of a fresh coat of paint. They\'re becoming a bit transparent.

Now, all that said, whose fault is this?

END USERS. Period. See this mess? See these raw feelings? See these radical plans of action?

Well, skip over to a couple of threads now running and see how end users are saying, out loud, that they see no need to support their licensing agreements. That they think it\'s perfectly fair for them to license additional individuals, with the library\'s owner getting screwed in the deal.

We are reaping what has been sown.

Two excellent points were made earlier in the thread.

1) Every illegal copy started with a legal copy.

2) That copy you make for the \"good friend\" is the most dangerous copy of all.

Let\'s talk about that second point.

Ever hear the saying \"easy come easy go?\" Couldn\'t be more applicable here. You paid full price for the library. Maybe you feel a tug in your chest as you give that friend a copy. Of course, he won\'t spread it around, he says. He promises.

Hey, what\'s it to him, though? He paid nothing. He has no stake. I guarantee you, I\'ve seen these swapping things start up, too. It\'s exponential. That one copy you give to that \"trusted\" friend becomes five copies. If we\'re talking about VSL or EWQLSO, then we\'re talking $15,000 out of honest hard-working people\'s pockets. That ain\'t chump change, folks.

THIS is why we are having this discussion.

USERS: Don\'t copy libraries. EVER. Don\'t give them to even one friend. EVER.

Let me tell you something. That \"trusted friend\" who wants you to compromise YOUR ethical commitment is no friend at all, and certainly can\'t be trusted. It\'s never just one copy. Never. To believe that...well, I\'ve got some beautiful swampland in Arizona I\'d sure like to sell you.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-26-2003, 03:27 PM

I don\'t think Tascam would be well advised to jump into this mess. They should stay busy with their business--finishing 3.0.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-26-2003, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
How is it that you\'re always so informed about obtaining prirated software? How would you know if these illegally obtained products download in a timely fashion, decompress correctly and work satisfactorily? It takes a lot of time and energy to ferret this information out, and I\'m surprised at the consistently adamant tone you take whenever this subject is broached. Just out of curiosity, if you were participating in obtaining pirated software yourself, would you admit it?

Lee Blaske Come on, Lee. Munsie is not a pirate, or a user of pirated goods, he\'s a good egg (even if we do disagree about our politics). Knowing the enemy is always a good idea, and people who violate their license agreements are our COLLECTIVE enemy. They cause the exact situation, and the ugly consequences, that we\'re discussing.

But still, demonize the crack sites, demonize the people who run them, but save the ultimate hate for that person with the LEGAL copy who supplied it. That is the true slimeball in this situation.

Munsie

03-26-2003, 05:45 PM

Lee Blaske - \"(Munsie) How is it that you\'re always so informed about obtaining prirated software? How would you know if these illegally obtained products download in a timely fashion, decompress correctly and work satisfactorily? It takes a lot of time and energy to ferret this information out, and I\'m surprised at the consistently adamant tone you take whenever this subject is broached. Just out of curiosity, if you were participating in obtaining pirated software yourself, would you admit it?

Not that I would expect any commercial composer on this site to pay attention to an average joe home enthusiast\'s comments, but just incase you have you would know by now that I have been in the software business for a long time, coding software on the Atari systems, and then Genesis, Super Nintendo and then finally moving on to the PC market. It\'s very much my business to know about copy protection, piracy, file sharing, etc.

\"Just out of curiosity, if you were participating in obtaining pirated software yourself, would you admit it?\"

Don\'t forget I\'m using my real name on this forum unlike alot of other users, so that should answer your question.

The music/sample market is playing catch up to the rest of the software world. All of these CP tactics were tried many years ago. I remember adding physical \"errors\" in my floppy disk distributions and then coding the installer to look for those errors on the disk to make sure it wasn\'t a copy. It lasted about a month until hackers simply realized they could \"0\" out the bytes of that routine and have it gracefully continue on bypassing that part of the CP.

The reason most successful software developers don\'t care about piracy is because the market is big enough for them to get rich or make enough money to justify their development. It would seem sample/instrument developers think they should be making more money based on the potential customer base. But more than likely they will find out they could have made more money if they invested their CP time/money into more products and better marketing.

I know for a FACT if I sell 1000 copies of one of my products, there will be 10 times that many using pirate copies. It doesn\'t bother me because 1000 copies makes me alot of money! Now I can either make another product and try to sell another 1000 copies or I can spend my time and money going after the 10000 pirates, and like Spectrum said what do I do once I get them?

I guess I\'m in a good mood, something tells me I should fired back more heavily... images/icons/smile.gif

thesoundsmith

03-26-2003, 06:31 PM

what do I do once I get them?
They\'re very tasty with fava beans and a nice Chianti-or a bottle of rum. Yo ho ho! images/icons/wink.gif

Dasher

midphase

03-26-2003, 09:37 PM

Hello all,

I am not surprised that this topic keeps on surfacing. If you search the archives you\'ll see that this thread is just the latest incarnation of the same \'ol same \'ol. Funny thing is that everyone just keep saying the same exact things.....we might as well copy/paste our previous posts!

But for what it\'s worth, I\'ll butt in and throw my thoughts out there.

I said it before and I\'ll say it again, if the business of creating software and sample libraries wasn\'t profitable (including the fervent pirating factor) people just wouldn\'t be doing it....period! I\'m not saying this in an effort to defend piracy, but piracy exists in software no matter what. It has existed since the early days of Commodore 64 and even earlier. It\'s simply part of the equation and it\'s not going away.
Look at it this way....the material for software developers is cheap! That\'s a big advantage over say...hmmm...hardware manufacturers.....do you know how much hell they go through to make a gizmo? How about a gazillion times more than it takes to create your average sample library! But then again, they don\'t have to worry about piracy. It\'s really a trade off....you get relatively low production costs and relatively quick turn-arounds but piracy is a factor.

So here\'s my word of advice to the developers.....don\'t worry about the pirates, you can\'t control it. You may think that you can, but you can\'t. Joe from CP inc. will tell you that their latest protection scheme will assure that nobody will pirate your product and more people will buy your stuff....guess what? He\'s lying to make a buck off of your paranoia, and the sad thing is that you\'re buying it!

Stop worrying about it, it\'s just part of life, just like mosquitoes and really old drivers.
Piracy is not a variable, it\'s a constant.....can you make a buck off of your product even with piracy? If the answer is yes (and trust me it is for most) then quit complaining and enjoy creating samples for a living. If the answer is no then either give it away for free like Tob and others, or get out of this business before you lose your shirt.

Sorry to be blunt here...I\'m sure I\'ll piss off a lot of you...I\'m really not pro pirates at all, but I sure as hell hate to see the legit users get screwed.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-26-2003, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
BTW, in your example, if you were selling th 10,000 copies of software stolen from you in addition to the 1,000 you bought, you\'d be swimming in cash, and you could easily buy everything Nick, Eric, et al were putting out without batting an eyelash, and the whole try-before-you-buy demo thing which you\'re also hot on would be moot for you. Heck, if you were profiting from all the software pirated from you, you could hire Nick, Eric and Doug to build custom libraries to your specifications.

Lee Blaske And if my auntie had a cock, she\'d be my uncle.

ngstime

03-26-2003, 10:37 PM

....is anyone down to a 3 star rating yet?

Scott Cairns

03-26-2003, 11:34 PM

Now, if I had dealt with some faceless corporation when I bought these libraries perhaps my perspective would\'ve been different. (Just being honest here!) No one seems to think twice about making a copy of Office or Windows.
- Gee I just realised how my last post could be interpreted in so many ways...

I should add that the reason I always buy my software is;
1. I claim it on tax as a legitimate business expense
2. I get tech support
3. I get access to free upgrades
4. I get the manual or booklet.

Sorry, I know it\'s a bit off the subject but I always buy my software!!

I am checking my EULA\'s at the moment to see if I can legally sell Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash and Fireworks to a friend.

Cheers, Scott.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-26-2003, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:

The CP system that Spectrasonics uses (and presumably EW will use) can really help keep a lid on the sort of casual spread that can happen in those situations. Not everybody who could conceivably put their hand on a library somewhere along the line is an ace software hacker.
Doug and Eric can copy protect their samples by turning them into monolithic applications until the end of time, and I will say, party on!! I support them 5000% No problemo.

But when you take that party OUTSIDE the domain of the monolithic app, and ask GigaStudio to become the copy protection device, that move has consequences which thwart some very beneficial avenues of development.

Now if that\'s a fine tradeoff for YOU, for whatever perceived benefit you think YOU will receive, I guess I can accept that. But I sure don\'t get it. It doesn\'t compute. I don\'t understand your personal stake here. You think the monolithic apps are a good solution? Then why do you care if copy protection exists in GigaStudio? Where\'s your dog in this fight? Are you arguing for the principle of the thing?

I got accused of making an emotional argument. If emotional means passionate, yes I agree. But don\'t dare tell me emotional means baseless. This isn\'t nothing. It\'s an encroachment with consequences.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-26-2003, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by ngstime:
....is anyone down to a 3 star rating yet? What exactly does THAT mean?

ngstime

03-27-2003, 01:06 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by ngstime:
....is anyone down to a 3 star rating yet? What exactly does THAT mean? <hr /></blockquote>not you personally images/icons/cool.gif

I notice alot of people are losing stars while disagreeing on CP and war. If one doesn\'t agree with anothers viewpiont.... \"puff\" off with a star....

If mine was active, I\'d probably lose a star for mentioning tihs images/icons/smile.gif

SCARBEE

03-27-2003, 01:55 AM

Hey Bruce,

http://www.brucerichardsonmusic.com (\"http://www.brucerichardsonmusic.com\")

Your website has the best \"under construction\" page I ever seen!!

PS. Your trumpet sounds really cool - great sound.

CU

Thomas

Leon Willett

03-27-2003, 02:17 AM

I\'m about to set my self up with mucho expensive samples, to have a stab at the music bizz.

The main reason I\'m not using the pirate sounds that are available to me constantly (yes, everything is available for free) is because my conscience doesn\'t allow it. I feel close and in debt to those that make these sounds available. (Incidentally, I tried to make a flute sample library last christmas (impossible for the room noise in the church images/icons/frown.gif ) so I am aware of the monumental work that goes into this stuff, and I have mega-respect for developers).

But conscience is superflous here: if I felt no moral obligation, I still wouldn\'t. I daren\'t! How could I jeopardize my stab at the music bizz in such a dumb way!?!? This brings me to my question:

Are there really people making money from pirate sounds?

How come they take such a huge risk? I would have thought that its only the little fish that use pirate sounds as a hobby. I have friends that have pirate software, but are just messing around making hiphop tunes. I have one friend that recently got his foot in the door and made a jingle. The minute he got the gig, he panicked and bought GOS (if Gary is listening, its esteban something, and he lives in madrid--check your sales files images/icons/smile.gif ) and everything he had used for the demo. He spent about 2 grand in one go. I believe this is a quite normal thing to happen.

And if it is, it is in the developers\' interests. People have your sounds, everyone has your sounds. They strive to get their first gig using your sounds. If they get this gig, the money comes tumbling your way. If, by magic, it were impossible to obtain pirate sounds, many simply would not ever get this first gig, as they would have to use crappy soundfonts, or pay for studio time (like me).

This viewpoint only holds if there really aren\'t big fish skimping on paying for their sounds. (feel free to prove me wrong) Are there any? Have any big fish ever been caught?

PS: No, I have never used or wanted to use pirate sounds. This is not in contradiction to my views.

Leon Willett

03-27-2003, 02:40 AM

By the way, my money would have been where my mouth is:

If the flute library had worked out it would have been a free download. A paypal of $89 would have been the moral obligation of any downloader if it was used in any music sold. I know this was a mini-library, and we are talking about mega-libraries in this discussion, but the concept is there images/icons/smile.gif

PS: i love being post no. 100 images/icons/grin.gif

Roman Beilharz

03-27-2003, 06:34 AM

Bruce, I am glad that you already have been differentiating all this, saying, that we should not be throwing virtual ROMplers into the same pot with a CP\'d GS 3.0. These issues are not only two pieces of the same cake, they are even two different cakes, IMO.

Regarding VI-sample-players incl. content:
My first post was based on the thought, that we were talking about CP-integration into GS 3.0. I DO NOT think these VI\'s were better usable w/o CP!! They do a great job as they are and besides they amount to be \"whole instruments\" rather than mere content - Eric pointed this out very well answering my question over there in the GOS-forum. Meanwhile I have been testing and reviewing his stuff and they convinced me totally - coexisting with open standards. Some other reasons why I think these VI\'s are so successful: They are able to convey personality, there\'s no need for already having a softsampler, they provide easy-to-apply variations and look like \"individuals\". Besides they give you more bang for the buck, if you compare the sheer quantity of sounds e.g. that comes with \"Stylus\" with that of \"Metamporphosis\" - assuming that the quality of the sounds stays as striking as I find it looking at both products. Plus having a serious sample-player. These VI\'s seem the perfect successors of those well-sold Preset-Samplers such as the Proteus, Roland JV-series etc. . So spectrum, I don\'t think the conclusion, that the (much?) better sales of your VI\'s were based on the addition of CP alone, tells the whole story. It seems like comparing apples and pears. Btw. Eric\'s \"pears\" do exactly what I carefully proposed to you developers: give your products (and yourself) a \"face\" - even more than you ever did in the past - and you will have at the end better sales for non-CP\'d content, too. To me Eric is one of the \"living legends\" somehow, knowing that to a certain extent his image has been hyped in the media. I don\'t care: I get very exited whenever I rip off the packaging of \"a new Persing\" I get for a review. At least for me, this works with pure content, too. It felt great as well having the amazingly designed and packaged VSL-Cube in my hands. This seems to be secondary, but a copied DVD has NO glory, NO charm and NO fascination compared to that experience. Back to CP: if it currently works speaking of bundled Sample-VI\'s as a short term-solution, great, congrat\'s! - go for it. I love those new brothers. But note, that their CP might be a short-term-crook, only. The long-term chances I see, are what I tried to point out within my first post - not assuming I had found the perfect recipe how to change a situation we all consider to be sad \'n\' bad.

Regarding CP within GS 3.0:
If Tascam will drop CP for 3.0, they will do it for good reasons, such as outstanding performance and unique features, and for sure NOT TO IRRITATE some of their most important content-providers. They have to come up with outstanding performance, because otherwise they won\'t be able to survive the race that is going on in their market. So: If GS 3.0. will OUTPERFORM any other solution, there WILL be content for it. If you really decided then to drop supporting 3.0, Lee, Doug, Nick etc. - someone else will take your place at the 3.0-dinner. This is the way business works, even if it sucks and even if we hate Tascam for its middle-ages dis/non-information-policy.

I know, that you developers over here are the good eggs. I have deepest respect for each and every one of you. I know, that you care for support, your customers etc. and that you see the importance of personal contact to your users etc. But nonetheless it might be worth thinking about new ways, how to make the user/customer feel more involved, more heard, more RESPONSIBLE for what is available on the market and - hopefully, in the end - more concious of being able to bring innovation and improvements for musical tools to full swing, if they start to take licensing as serious as they should. I see every unlicensed copy as a loss for great ideas to reach the market. And I don\'t speak about sample-libraries, only now. You might call me an utopist, but I don\'t think the sample-library-developers \"did for 15 years\", what I had in mind writing what I wrote: Gary Garritan\'s GOS-manual to me is the first one I ever had in my hands, that deserves it\'s name - talking about sound-libaries, at least. And now look at all those akronyms and short descriptions on ugly booklets we have had for years. I think, there are still a lot of chances to improve the image, design, look AND FEEL of sampled content. To make the user really feel presented by the almost holy experience of touching unbelievably GREAT WORK. Be sure, they will want to HAVE that, they WILL buy it. And will stop thinking about samples to be funny gif\'s you download for free.

Roman

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by SCARBEE:
Hey Bruce,

http://www.brucerichardsonmusic.com (\"http://www.brucerichardsonmusic.com\")

Your website has the best \"under construction\" page I ever seen!!

PS. Your trumpet sounds really cool - great sound.

CU

Thomas Thank you, Scarbee. How funny, because frankly, my year has been so busy that I forgot that \"under construction\" thing was in there. I was trying to learn Flash all by myself, and doing all right, but got overcome by projects.

I recorded that trumpet track live with a Harmon mute, played into an original Groove Tubes MD-1, which is one of my favorite microphones in the universe. I never had mine upgraded to a 1a, because I was always afraid it would destroy the magic, but now the mounts have decomposed so I may have no choice. I need to call Aspen and see what he can do. The \"boogie man\" vocal utterings are me and Chuck Rainey, but ironically, the bass sample is a loop. I had always intended to get him to play the bass part, but he listened to it and thought I should leave it alone. In hindsight, I probably should have insisted. I think those porno-guitars are from a sample library called On the Jazz Tip, or something like that. The drums were played on my TD-7 kit, which tends to gather dust and serve as a really expensive, split-level drink holder these days. images/icons/rolleyes.gif

SCARBEE

03-27-2003, 07:46 AM

Chuck Rainey is a great bass player indeed!!

Have you ever thought making a trumpet library?

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 08:37 AM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Again, if the ability to enable or not enable CP is at the discretion of the library producer, what\'s the problem? At this point, it seems certain that if CP is not in GS, GS will be bypassed by a lot, if not most of the future top-shelf content. I don\'t see how GS could thrive under those conditions.I couldn\'t agree more - where are the top shelf developers going to come from to replace those that are about to walk? Are they hiding somewhere?? There are very few developers in this business that consistently deliver great products, and most have had it with TASCAM. GS is not the only choice now, we are very satisfied with the performance we are getting out of our NI audio engine, and it works with everything - both Mac and PC.

In eight pages of debate, I\'m still waiting for someone to tell me what they can\'t do with a library that includes challenge/response, as opposed to a library that doesn\'t have challenge/response.

Please explain this, because we consider this the most important issue right now.

Secondly, how does challenge/response registration impact the performance of the host application? Please explain this.

The argument whether CP works or not is not what\'s at issue here for us. Everyone has their own opinion and has expressed it here. Our experience has been, it helps. Others in our industry have reached the same conclusion, so we are more concerned with what CP \'won\'t\' allow you do in your daily work. Can we please discuss this? Please give me real world specific examples.

Thanks,

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

KingIdiot

03-27-2003, 09:09 AM

Challenge response doens\'t bother me.

I just want the functionality to stay.

I want to be able to batch process samples, or script edit them in a wave file editor.

The WA! format prevented this direct from Gigastudio, some say it was a form of copyprotection, I still think it was just a side \"benefit\" from nemesys not wanting to share the format (tho I\'m speculating). Without Awave, I\'d be screaming at the DD libs.

There will be libraries that this wont be much of an issue, as I wont do much or any editing, then there are ones that I will want to break the CD\'s for, if the CP it breaks this type of funcionality.

Sample libraries are not just for playback IMO.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 09:15 AM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
In eight pages of debate, I\'m still waiting for someone to tell me what they can\'t do with a library that includes challenge/response, as opposed to a library that doesn\'t have challenge/response.

Please explain this, because we consider this the most important issue right now.

Secondly, how does challenge/response registration impact the performance of the host application? Please explain this. I already explained one aspect that I am at liberty to discuss. Did you even read it? You have not even acknowleged it, nor have you acknowledged a single point made about YOUR considerable profits to date on unprotected libraries. Why single out GigaStudio, from Akai, from loops, from every other product that has made, and continues to make, a comfortable living for you.

When I see that kind of thing, my red flags go up. To me, it indicates an agenda.

And Doug, if GigaStudio 3.0 is a hit and breaks barriers to musical roadblocks, then I seriously doubt you will leave that money on the table, nor will sample developers who pursue excellence want to stay off a platform that delivers it. Excellence is what brought GigaStudio to prominence. In fact, it is what brought almost all said developers to prominence. The pursuit of excellence acknowledges the mighty dollar, but does not bow to it.

Or in cliche...If you build it, they WILL come.

Lee, you still have no dog whatsoever in this fight. You have still expressed no personal stakes in the matter. That is highly irrational behavior, to so vehemently defend a position that appears to have no bearing upon you personally. You consistently say that monolithic sample-apps are satisfactory for your needs. So I am not sure why you cannot be happy that development from your favorite vendors is pursuing that route. You consistently express contempt for GigaStudio, and speculate wildly about internal Tascam affairs such as funding. In fact, you are dead wrong. Van Buskirk and company have never had the luxury of so much help or so much support of their R & D efforts.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 09:29 AM

And to be crystal clear, I have no problem with a challenge response built into an installer, and I grudgingly accept it built into an application.

But when one asks GIGASTUDIO to become an engine for policing challenge/response, that is a foul ball. For the second time, I\'ll repeat a definite example:

GigaStudio\'s built in compression scheme not only increases streaming performance dramatically, it saves disk space. On a huge library like VSL, for instance, that is substantial potential for both polyphony and storage space. And because the theoretical seek and throughput times of hard drives are at a plateau with current and foreseeable future development, THAT COUNTS.

I want that algorithm opened up so that compressed libraries can be uncompressed, and vice versa. So that I have exactly the same access to programming that any developer has. But that entire branch of development, and the many potential sub-branches of it leading to greater design efficiency are impossible to implement alongside copy protection. In fact, as is well known, the adjunct use of that compression scheme has been in part a copy protection methodology, i.e., if you cannot convert to readable waveforms, you cannot \"pirate\" the library.

It doesn\'t take a whole lot of imagination to discern other related features which copy protection WITHIN GigaStudo will thwart. That aspect of sample development is an almost wide open field, with much promise for making quality library construction an everyman\'s option.

Furthermore, the insinuation that somehow the group of developers you distribute represents the grand total of musical ability sufficient to make great libraries is ridiculous. I promise you this. If GigaStudio 3.0 sees a desertion of developers by your hand, then I will personally take advantage of funding I have been offered and release a line of GigaStudio libraries, unprotected, and will put my money, and my backers\' money where my mouth is. And I will be very happy to take all that money you want to leave on the table.

What is your agenda? I know mine. I state mine. You profit mightily from scores of unprotected releases on many platforms. Will you also be eliminating support for every other platform, both sampling and looping, which won\'t answer to your ultimatum? I\'d like to hear an answer to that.

SCARBEE

03-27-2003, 09:41 AM

I will continue supporting the Giga platform and also other formats like Halion and Kontakt.

For me it is the features that counts - if Giga 3.0 have some great features, then it will be a pleasure for me to produce stuff for it! images/icons/grin.gif

I however fear that I will be left quite alone with my \"un-protected\" libraries.

It is very tempting to make a \"Kontakt\" instrument with built-in protection, but I will not be able to ship my bass libraries with this system, because you are limited to 1 instrument pr. instance.

I use 4 midi-channels/instruments to simulate bass - a guitar library would be 6/instruments/midi-channels.

So for me this is no valid solution now.

I put my naive faith in nice paying customers and good personal support. I have no other choice for now.

It is sad to see development being so directed by piracy...

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I already explained one aspect that I am at liberty to discuss. Did you even read it? You have not even acknowleged it, nor have you acknowledged a single point made about YOUR considerable profits to date on unprotected libraries. Why single out GigaStudio, from Akai, from loops, from every other product that has made, and continues to make, a comfortable living for you.First of all, Bruce - I think you just let the \'cat out of the bag\' that may explain your relentless opposition to this.

What exactly does \"I already explained one aspect that I am at liberty to discuss\" imply? That you are a consultant or beta tester for TASCAM? Please declare your interest here.

Second, yes I read your response. The \'compression\' allowed us to ship the products on 2 discs instead of 4 - there was no other practical benefit - otherwise all GS libraries would use it. In the case of the bosendorfer library that has been mentioned. The samples could be uncompressed with a popular \'off the shelf\' application if you wanted to re-edit the samples.

So it seems your real concern is your ability to edit/mangle samples and change and save programming - yes? All of this can be done with our CP audio engine. In fact our audio engine has far more tools for doing this than GS.

With regards to singling out TASCAM - we have no intention of supporting ANY platform that doesn\'t offer us CP. We are not making any more Akai, Emu etc. libraries either. Fortunately, our NI audio engine works directly with all popular hosts on both platforms, so it\'s not necessary to put the library out in multiple formats (which now number approx. 15!). We only considered continuing this for GS because of the current user base, and the fact TASCAM offered developers the opportunity to protect their libraries with 3.0 - but TASCAM\'s decision to renege on that agreement without any consultation with developers ended that.

Maybe it\'s a miscalculation, but I have fifteen years of experience to draw from here, and I predict most users will go where the \'state of the art\' libraries are, and they don\'t really care what plays them back, so long as they get the performance they expect. IMO that is the miscalculation you and TASCAM are making, that could result in GS becoming an \'also ran\' in the sampler market (remember, it was only a few years ago current GS users were mostly using Akai/Emu/Kurzweil and Roland samplers - where are they now?).

Supplying a library with our own engine also gives us the opportunity to \'customize\' that library, which adds useful features that may not be included in a generic sampler.

Maybe 3.0 will be so far ahead of everything else that we will change our minds - but I doubt it - there are many brilliant software engineers developing similar software, and they all run into the same roadblocks. At the end of the day performance is directly tied to the hardware, and how much data it can move.

Now let\'s hear another example because this can be done with our solution. Btw, our libraries can also be loaded into Kontakt, which has even more sample editing features.

Take care,

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Sony Betavision was superior to VHS, yet VHS won. Furthermore, in the sampler market, the competition is also coming forward with very unique features. Additionally, Tascam/Nemesys still seems to insist on the kernel based architecture which is more difficult to install and get running correctly, not to mention the fact that it often doesn\'t play nice with other sequencers (on top of not being cross platform).

Tascam has set up a number of hurdles for themselves, and the jury is definitely out on what impact 3.0 will have on the soft-sampler market. As of today, we still know absolutely nothing about it.

(BTW, Roman, I\'m not a sample developer. I\'m just a pro-developer user.)

Lee Blaske Unbelievable.

Are you the same pro-developer user who suggested on another thread that since enforcement was unlikely in \"Quiq\'s\" country of origin, he\'d be safe purchasing a used, hence pirated, collection of sample libraries (Including, in fact, a major collection represented by Doug Rogers)?

Just wanted to get that straight. Now back to our regularly scheduled response.

UNBELIEVABLE

I cannot believe the VHS vs Beta argument is being laid in making your case. So what, are you saying a REPEAT of that scenario is a good thing? That\'s exactly why I try to influence events to the best of my ability AWAY from that kind of result. When it comes to samplers, I don\'t want VHS to win. I want BETA to win. Don\'t you?

And when I say \"win,\" I mean \"win/win.\" I don\'t think Kontakt being a great platform means GigaStudio isn\'t a great platform. I don\'t think the opposite, either. Nor to I think monolithic sample-apps are bad. I think as many brands of good as can exist SHOULD exist. I don\'t see this as some big fat competition where there has to be a winner and a loser, a leader and a follower. That\'s not the spirit of artmaking.

Finally, your dalliance into the inner workings of GigaStudio, e.g., actual complaining about the Kernel-mode programming having compatibility issues with sequencers is yet again, unbelievable. YOU USE A MACINTOSH, DUDE!!! What stake do you have in how GigaStudio performs with sequencers? What are you doing in this argument? What is your position and your point? What the hell do you even care? Are you just yapping like that little dog in the \"Spike\" cartoons? Yeah, Spike. You tell em, Spike. That\'s right, Spike. You\'re my hero, Spike. Yeah, you get \'em Spike!!

I see right through your arguments, man. I have been around the block, know how the cow eats the cabbage, and what\'s up and what\'s down. This is all very abstract for you, becasue you have no stakes. I appreciate the argument on an intellectual level. I don\'t appreciate the fact that you\'d try to influence the direction of a product you don\'t even like or intend to use. What the heck is THAT about?

shawn

03-27-2003, 12:17 PM

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by shawn:
I\'m interested to know what happens if your company goes out of business and I have to reinstall the library I bought from you because of some hardware mishap.Hi Shawn,

OK - now we getting to some real issues that users have experienced in the past.

First of all, you are dealing with a fifteen year old company, that should provide some security.

Second, if something like that ever happened, I would personally make other arrangements to continue support. In fact, both us and Native Instruments would have to go out of business for it to ever become a problem.

Third, I think this risk exists for all businesses and their customers. What if you need a part for your equipment, and the manufacturer went out of business??

I appreciate the question though, this is exactly the feedback we are seeking.

Thanks,

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
[QUOTE]
What exactly does \"I already explained one aspect that I am at liberty to discuss\" imply? That you are a consultant or beta tester for TASCAM? Please declare your interest here.
My interest is twofold.

I spend a lot of time speaking to developers with several different companies, helping them 100% free of charge with any information, any opinions that need gathering, any design insight I might have, because I want to influence the direction and design of music software. I have a very good knack for this. I am in what I\'d characterize as an inner circle of end users, which gets to have quite a bit of influence in application design. I see many applications months before the companies\' own beta testing teams see them.

What I provide to these people has enormous value. When you run into Ron Kuper sometime at NAMM, ask him how Cakewalk has benefited from collaboration with me. I support what I believe in. I\'m a phone call away from more CTOs in this business than probably anyone else I know.

Specific to GigaStudio, I have had my brain picked numb by those guys, and I was happy to let them do it. I have no clue whatsoever what GS-3 will ultimately be, because from what I can see, the R & D phase of this release has gone completely into another dimension. What they presented at NAMM last year is certainly a distant iteration of where they seem to be going now. I\'ll bet I could speculate probably 80% of the feature set, working backwards from the information they wanted from me. I know that they have visited with many very prominent people, of whom I\'m absolutely the least significant bit. But the information I feel comfortable revealing is that through a personal relationship with Jim and Joe, I know that I have never heard them as pumped as they are right now. They are practically giddy. They are getting more support from Tascam, and higher quality support at that, than they ever imagined possible. They use the word \"genius\" to describe one of the people that Tascam put on the team, and say he brings a new facet to the application which they never even imagined exploring.

To me, that sounds exciting. These guys don\'t run around pumping people up, you know? Hell, they\'re so laid back sometimes that I wonder what they\'re smoking and where I can get some!!

Doug, I support you and Nick in anything you do, and you know that anything you ever need from me, you ask it and get it with no strings attached. Mi casa es su casa. I believe goodwill is important. I believe that anyone with talent, experience, and ideas should donate some of that to music tool development of all kinds, to help accelerate the process. Without the expertise of people who have seen this industry from the very beginning, and without those people being willing to donate time back, the evolutionary arc takes longer to unfold.

That\'s it. My whole agenda is right there. Ironically, the only software company payroll I have ever been on is Native Instruments, and I support Kontakt in touring appearances for them. But they know that someone is very likely to walk out the door with a new copy of Kontakt under one arm and a new copy of Giga under the other, and they accept that because I don\'t play games. We had a very frank discussion about it. At the time Native Instruments was looking for developers, yours truly was providing the contact information and hookups for LOTS of the very developers in question. I detailed every aspect of what Kontakt would need to do to support GigaStudio libraries. I would do the same in reverse. I do not believe in walls. I am a bulldozer of walls.

I have negotiated several \"truces\" between competing companies as well, hooking up top-level people in each company and helping with ways that applications can compete in a different spirit, one of competition combined with cooperation, for the ultimate benefit of people who enjoy using multiple technologies in combination.

I have made calls to hardware driver authors, and advocated for support of promising models. I make introductions and connections for people there when I can. If someone is having a misunderstanding, I\'ll try to jump in there and turn enemies into friends.

That\'s it. I hope that describes my activity, and explains my position--or at least the origin of my participation. I consider myself blessed beyond my wildest expectations, and because I have the luxury of a pretty flexible life when I\'m not buried to my neck, I think it\'s the least I can do to repay people who have made the impossible possible in such a short time. I know what it was like to produce commercial music twenty years ago, I was doing it. Today is better.

peter269

03-27-2003, 01:33 PM

CHALLENGE/RESPONSE HOST ISSUES

Doug, there are issues, and these issues have to do with the QC in which the challenge/response was written.

For example, with TC Works Native Bundle,we recently moved it to a new system with XP Pro on it. The C/R caused the system to completely reboot, depending on which selection we made. In talking to TC, we found that there was a problem with their C/R and the XP system. Once we got the bug fix, it went OK and so far no problems since.

If the C/R code is well written, there should be no problems with host system and the software app.

With EW/QLSO, you\'ll have to enter a testing phase to insure that with the NI engine, that the C/R works equally well in MAS as it does in VSTi as it does with DXi, etc. And you should also be aware, that there may be a need to continually test C/R as each host software program upgrades.

In the case of TC, the message is that there can be issues between the C/R and the OS that affect the system and the software you\'re sequencing in.

As with anything, the issue is the quality of the code. If you\'re using challenge/response, it means an ongoing budgetary commitment for testing to avoid tech support issues.

This next issue doesn\'t affect the host, but it does affect the customer and the expansion of his system.

With C/R, you\'re limited to that software being installed on that drive.

Our studio is running Steinberg\'s System Link. Let\'s say I want Ew/QLSO strings on both my main computer with Cubase SX and the second system running System Link. To do this requires two installs. How does C/R affect that?

Another consideration. A customer can afford one 2-GB system to start dedicated to EW/QLSO. He then gets a second system that\'s also 2GB of RAM and wants to move one of the orchestral sections to another machine. That\'s also a second install. How does C/R affect this?

What this boils down to, Doug (and other developers!) is that a C/R or other copy protection scheme, especially for extremely large libraries like EW/QLSO, VSL, etc., must take into consideration what we call the Delivery System.

The Delivery System is the realistic hardware and RAM needed to fully implement the library\'s capability. In planning, developers need to consider that unless their customers are very rich, and can afford to buy the Master Delivery System all at once, that most will build to it.

For the developer, this is an added dimension of customer service cost, because everytime there\'s a change, there\'s an internal tech support cost that has to be accounted for.

Another consideration - stealing, piracy.

Whether a customer is a thief or a pirate is determined by the licensing agreement. Now, as an end user, one reason I really like Virtual Instruments from Steinberg and N-I, is that as my system grows with System Link, I can reinstall or move the libraries from one machine to another in my studio and not be accused of being either a thief or a pirate since all I need is my master disk to re-authorize when asked for.

Another consideration - time.

Most C/R are handled by e-mail. This can take 24-48 hours, and if the purchase was made on Friday or Saturday, and you\'re closed on the weekends, means a potentially long delay in getting the code. Magix, for Samplitude 7, got around this by doing an online C/R which only took a few minutes, but it wasn\'t foolproof the first few times.

Now, the HOT ONE! GS\'s decision to avoid a copy protection scheme within GS 3.0.

This is MY opinion, and MINE ALONE.

When I first spoke to VSL last July, they were very firm at that time on waiting for 3.0 to insure their work wouldn\'t be pirated. More than fair.

However, my encouragement, when we discussed it, was to release a 2.5 version that was not under copy protection for this reason: If 3.0 shipped with CP, how would that affect all of the existing Giga libraries I now have? What if I need to move MV or KH from one system to another, or spread them out over two-three sytems. How would 3.0\'s copy protection inhibit/not inhibit the realistic need to move libraries around in a studio as your studio expands?

There\'s only one (1) answer to that question, Doug: We don\'t know. Until it\'s released and tested we can\'t know how it\'s going to impact the individual user\'s system and libraries previously acquired. And that\'s a big deal for those of us who have large libraries.

Yes, as a publisher, I agree wholeheartedly, that developers creative work must be protected. I face the same issues, just on a smaller scale.

But at the same time, the customer must also be considered and protected. Afterall, on most of these libraries, none of us know what the licensing agreement is until after we open the box, and is some cases, the jewel case, at which point it\'s too late to return the product.

Now these are very serious business issues. They have costs assigned to them from both the developer and the end user. There are fair use and non-fair use issues to consider and define.

Whether Truespec or Alexander University, all of these issues for us, because we practice Six Sigma Quality Planning, are quality control issues. And as a reference, any developer here should consider buying and reading from Amazon, Rath & Strong\'s Team Six Sigma Pocket Guide for $12.95US.

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Specific to GigaStudio, I have had my brain picked numb by those guys, and I was happy to let them do it.Thought so... Nick accused you of orchestrating this at the outset of this thread and you denied it!

On page 2 of this thread you wrote:

\"I like the way everyone thinks I am such an insider. Haha. Haven\'t I told you all 1000 times that they don\'t tell me any more than they tell any of you?\"

Now read the above quote from today and tell me how the two comments are consistent with each other.

I think you need to take another walk!

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Paul.Olivetti

03-27-2003, 01:58 PM

As a new member, I\'d like to state that it\'s hard to take the opinions of Bruce too seriously given his hyperbolic level of arrogance.

I welcome copy protection, so long as it comes with better licensing practises on the part of sample developers.

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by peter269:
CHALLENGE/RESPONSE HOST ISSUES

If the C/R code is well written, there should be no problems with host system and the software app.Agreed

With EW/QLSO, you\'ll have to enter a testing phase to insure that with the NI engine, that the C/R works equally well in MAS as it does in VSTi as it does with DXi, etc. And you should also be aware, that there may be a need to continually test C/R as each host software program upgrades.No, it\'s an internal system that has nothing to do with the host.

Our studio is running Steinberg\'s System Link. Let\'s say I want Ew/QLSO strings on both my main computer with Cubase SX and the second system running System Link. To do this requires two installs. How does C/R affect that?Most developers allow two authorizations without contacting the company. Usually additional authorizations, within reason, are provided.

Another consideration. A customer can afford one 2-GB system to start dedicated to EW/QLSO. He then gets a second system that\'s also 2GB of RAM and wants to move one of the orchestral sections to another machine. That\'s also a second install. How does C/R affect this?In this example, the customer would install different modules on the second system (the library comes in four modules).

Now, as an end user, one reason I really like Virtual Instruments from Steinberg and N-I, is that as my system grows with System Link, I can reinstall or move the libraries from one machine to another in my studio and not be accused of being either a thief or a pirate since all I need is my master disk to re-authorize when asked for.This is useful information. This option is open to us also.

Most C/R are handled by e-mail. This can take 24-48 hours, and if the purchase was made on Friday or Saturday, and you\'re closed on the weekends, means a potentially long delay in getting the code.We\'ve been doing this for two years with our Unity libraries, and there hasn\'t been a single problem with this (or anything for that matter). There is a grace period where you can use the library before you have to register, and it\'s usually long enough so this is not an issue.

If 3.0 shipped with CP, how would that affect all of the existing Giga libraries I now have?It wouldn\'t affect any existing library, CP is specific to each library.

Thanks for your input,

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

midphase

03-27-2003, 03:01 PM

What I am interested in is whether better copy protection affects the pricing of the products to reflect the developer\'s increase in revenue? For example, if VOTA is $500 and it gets pirated like mad and Nick is losing many many gazzillions of dollars over it.....if VOTA 2 had very good copy protection, would the price come down since the money loss due to pirating wouldn\'t be a factor?

I would hope that with pirate proof CP, developers would lower their pricing by about 40%......you know, the same way record labels lowered the prices of CD\'s when the media became affordable! images/icons/wink.gif

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Specific to GigaStudio, I have had my brain picked numb by those guys, and I was happy to let them do it.Thought so... Nick accused you of orchestrating this at the outset of this thread and you denied it!

On page 2 of this thread you wrote:

\"I like the way everyone thinks I am such an insider. Haha. Haven\'t I told you all 1000 times that they don\'t tell me any more than they tell any of you?\"

Now read the above quote from today and tell me how the two comments are consistent with each other.

I think you need to take another walk!

Doug Rogers
-------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\") <hr /></blockquote>You didn\'t read what I wrote. They still have told me nothing. I know nothing at all. They have asked me about a HOST of other issues, and they have asked not one opinion of me on copy protection.

And still, I know nothing. Nothing. I wrote, in very plain English, that I have been asked many many MANY questions about how I work, what is important to me, what I like in other products, what I like in this library, that library. What do I like to see in almost every aspect of music production.

What it seems to me that they\'ve done is a 360 degree assessment, something that is very popular in corporate cultures seeking across the board input. It\'s all questions, and people being questioned. The delivery of information is one way--from the person being interviewed, not to him.

Don\'t accuse me of things like that. If you think I can \"orchestrate\" a multimillion dollar corporation into submitting to my will, then why would I be screwing around with the music software biz?

I find it really distressing that I can carefully write exactly what I mean to say, and the response is a silly \"gotcha.\" Especially when that first line you quoted doesn\'t \"say\" what you\'re implying it says at all. The picked MY brain. Not vice versa. They picked Hans Zimmer\'s brain too, along with lots of others. As I said, I felt like the least significant person they spoke with. They do have a right to speak to users about these things, you know. That\'s who buys 99.x% of the licenses.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by Paul.Olivetti:
As a new member, I\'d like to state that it\'s hard to take the opinions of Bruce too seriously given his hyperbolic level of arrogance.

I welcome copy protection, so long as it comes with better licensing practises on the part of sample developers. Paul,

I hope that as a newcomer to the group, you might also take the time to more fully assess the situation before making that kind of judgement about a person. This is a heated topic. I think you would reconsider your first impression if you considered the totality of my participation here.

KingIdiot

03-27-2003, 04:12 PM

All I can say is that if gigastudio does perform extremely well, I\'d like to see Gigastudio versions of libraries.. While obviouly it wont be in the need for every type of library, being that your own engine may outperform giga (I can see the loop features in your upcoming products hard to beat---[ooh a pun]), but instances where there are significant benefits to using giga... I\'d like to see you guys support that.

I would hate to see the *only* reason you dont support Giga (or any other format), is copy protection. While I understand the need for it, I feel its a bit inconciderate of any sampler user base. This isn\'t being said because I\'m a giga geek, I actually like Kontakt alot, its more that I\'d like to see developers support powerful platforms, like Kontakt, and Giga to give us the best products. The best products, dont come from copy protection schemes.

I mean, what if giga performs extremely better than your engine on a single machine. That means users have to buy less Horse power to run stuff.....if you supply them with the format. You\'d be in fact forcing them to use something inferior. Thats really my only concern, that the copyprotection issue will possibly force us into something that isnt\' really the best option. (obviously this is only if giga is \"great\")

Again, ...if I could convert it myself to Giga 3.0, I wont have much of an issue. Will it be possible to do that?.... or am I going ot find myself creating 75GB (150GB?) of single note recordings to re edit and repgram into Giga (I\'ll start building the automated tasks now....)

I\'lll use your stuff in whatever format, they\'re all tools no matter what we say is better. Its jsut that I\'d like my tools to perform the best they can.

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Don\'t accuse me of things like that. If you think I can \"orchestrate\" a multimillion dollar corporation into submitting to my will, then why would I be screwing around with the music software biz?So, are you saying, you did not try and convince TASCAM that they shouldn\'t include copy protection in 3.0? You never had any conversations with anyone at TASCAM about this??

Yes or no?

Doug Rogers
------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Don\'t accuse me of things like that. If you think I can \"orchestrate\" a multimillion dollar corporation into submitting to my will, then why would I be screwing around with the music software biz?So, are you saying, you did not try and convince TASCAM that they shouldn\'t include copy protection in 3.0? You never had any conversations with anyone at TASCAM about this??

Yes or no?

<hr /></blockquote>Doug, of course I have had conversations with both Jim and Joe about this. Is that what you mean by TASCAM? It sounds so big and impersonal.

Those conversations were no different than the conversations I have participated in here. Why wouldn\'t I have conversations with people I know? I spent over two weeks interviewing Jim for Keyboard Magazine several months after Giga 2 was released. I have spent a lot of time with these people.

The conversations about copy protection were pretty much...\"we saw what you wrote,\" though. I said pretty much everything I had to say here last time this ugly subject came up. It\'s not like I have much new to say about it, except thank God someone at Tascam central command had the good sense not to sacrifice sampler flexibility to play sample cop.

I also have conversations with Jim and Joe about how our wives are doing, vacations, all things Texas, and many other subjects.

Are you mounting a crescendo to another big \"gotcha?\" There isn\'t one, man. I have absolutely nothing to hide. I\'m not going to speculate publically on features I\'ve requested or discussed, because that would be highly unethical (and I don\'t know which, if any of them, will get in). I would protect your information just as closely in any similar situation.

dougrogers

03-27-2003, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by dougrogers:
So, are you saying, you did not try and convince TASCAM that they shouldn\'t include copy protection in 3.0? You never had any conversations with anyone at TASCAM about this??

Yes or no?
Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Doug, of course I have had conversations with both Jim and Joe about this.Then, here\'s what you said in another post today.
They have asked me about a HOST of other issues, and they have asked not one opinion of me on copy protection.They can\'t both be accurate statements, can they??

Why don\'t you own up to what we already know - that you worked on TASCAM (going as far back as Mike McRoberts) on this issue.

That\'s the truth, isn\'t it?

Doug Rogers
------------------
EASTWEST
www..com (\"http://www..com\")

meeehoon

03-27-2003, 06:06 PM

ORRRHHH CCRRAAAPP!!! I can\'t believe I just spent the last 30 mins reading through these posts!!! Just a couple of days ago this thread was nearly dead and when I woke up this morning!!! WHOOAAA!!! Missing out man!!! graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

I think all of you need to take a break and have a decent cup-a-noodle... Not those crraappyy Maggi ones, but those imported Mi-Gorengs that\'s supercharged with MSG... Yeh baby!!! That will get your blood racing!!! After all, my nick is not noodles for nothing... heheeheheh...

meeehoon

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 07:08 PM

Doug,

You continue to quote me in snips that attempt to demonstrate some sort of dishonesty on my part.

I will attempt one more time to clarify.

I had conversations with many people, publically, here, on this issue. I expressed my displeasure at the prospect of built-in copy protection for third-party content within GigaStudio and stated my reasons. Ad nauseum.

In subsequent conversations with Jim, Joe, and yes, ONE conversation (the only one I ever had) with Mike McRoberts, I indicated my preference, but there was no real \"talking about it\" beyond a recap of what they\'d already read here.

That\'s it, man. No year long campaign. Nothing like that. I was absolutely AMAZED (and psyched) to hear this, and the day I found out about it was the day Dan Dean posted a one-word reply in another forum, and Nick followed that with this thread. That date, March 23, was the day I found out about this.

But what I\'m curious about, now that you\'ve been Perry Mason-ing me down on this point, is this: What would it matter even if I had been campaigning behind the scenes? How is that any different than you leading a charge at NAMM trying to get it implemented? It would be just a situation of two people with two visions, trying to put the best case forward for what they believe.

But that\'s not how it went down. I talk to Mr. Van Buskirk now and again. I talk to Joe Bibbo at least once a week, but mostly more. For those of you who don\'t know, Joe was the CTO of Nemesys. I don\'t even know his title now that it\'s Tascam\'s baby.

In all the conversations I\'ve had with Joe over the last few years, literally hundreds of them, maybe TWO conversations had a thing to do with this issue, and as I said before, they were really non-conversations because it had already been said on the forum here. Yes, they read it. My second post is totally accurate. No one there has asked me my opinion about copy protection. They know my opinion about copy protection.

Joe and I have much more important things to talk about than that. He has been quizzing me for a long time about how different sample libraries work and are designed, since I know a great deal about that subject. That is the meat of 99% of our conversation. I supply them with information that hopefully will help them improve their product. So what? I do it with Native Instruments as well. Cakewalk as well. Sonic Foundry as well. Waves as well.

I even called you and Nick to help identify a polyphony bug in Kontakt\'s release sample layer. You were out of town. I was put in touch with Nick. We vetted it out on the phone, and I made a report to Native Instruments IN AN ATTEMPT TO HELP YOU OUT WITH ANOTHER EXPLANATION OF THE BUG.

Jesus.

Look. I\'m a person. I have an opinion about this copy protection thing. That\'s it. Any campaign I\'ve run on the issue has been here, right in front of everyone including you. Capiche?

Kenn159

03-27-2003, 07:10 PM

So Doug you are telling any and everyone that will listen ,why we dont want CP and none of us that are against CP are on your back about it, because even if we dont agree ,you are still intitled to your opinion.
So give Bruce the same respect he and all of us have given you .
If Tascam ask him and others for there opinions in helping them to make a decision about CP , then he has a right to voice his opinion in a free country wether you like it or not.
To try and blame him for there desision is wrong.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-27-2003, 07:14 PM

Matter of fact:

When I noticed the Kontakt bug, I didn\'t even call Native Instruments first. I called YOU first. I thought it was something very critical that you needed a heads-up on. I guess it was your wife I spoke with, who put me in touch with another person in California, who then put me directly in touch with Nick.

Turns out, I had identified a design flaw in Kontakt\'s release trigger layer. In an effort to reduce polyphony consumption and boost performance, any repeated same-note would cut off the release trigger--in other words, the release triggers had been designed to be monophonic on repeated notes. Don\'t take my word for it, anyone with a release version of Kontakt 1.2 can easily demonstrate this bug for themselves if they have libraries with releases.

I didn\'t do this to be smart, I didn\'t do it to get paid, I didn\'t do it to suck up, or for any reason except I saw a rock in your path and I wanted to clear it away for you. Turns out it was a rock you guys hadn\'t even seen, because you hadn\'t gotten that far in programming releases to have run into it.

I just find it unbelievable that people would think I play favorites. My behavior has never demonstrated that.

By the way, thanks for whoever keeps trashing my user rating. That\'s real great. I take the trouble to make a stand on an important issue, and to talk about some pretty deep subject matter, and I get rewarded with that kind of crap. Have some balls and e-mail me or take it up with me in a post. Sheesh.

Munsie

03-28-2003, 12:05 AM

\"Afterall, on most of these libraries, none of us know what the licensing agreement is until after we open the box, and is some cases, the jewel case, at which point it\'s too late to return the product.\"

Oh Dear God, PLEASE those of you who are going to purchase any new library from this day on DEMAND to see the licensing agreement online BEFORE spending your money!!!!!!!!!!!

ngstime

03-28-2003, 12:27 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
By the way, thanks for whoever keeps trashing my user rating. That\'s real great. I take the trouble to make a stand on an important issue, and to talk about some pretty deep subject matter, and I get rewarded with that kind of crap. Have some balls and e-mail me or take it up with me in a post. Sheesh. It wasn\'t me....

As someone who got burned by the CH/RE CP on a supportless Studio Vision Pro, I paid alot of money through out the years for SVP. Ya, Ya, so sad.... life goes on.... no one cares....
Until they pay $3000 for QLSO and East West fades away into the sunset.... never know, it could happen. It could happen to NI too!
....and now we\'re stuck with a $3000 QLSO that will no longer work.

I\'m against CP for samples for this very reason!
pirates could care less, paying customers get burned.

Aaron Dirk

peter269

03-28-2003, 02:51 AM

Originally posted by Munsie:
Oh Dear God, PLEASE those of you who are going to purchase any new library from this day on DEMAND to see the licensing agreement online BEFORE spending your money!!!!!!!!!!! If you don\'t know what\'s in the licensing agreement, how do you know when you\'ve become a pirate and a thief?

A licensing agreement is a contract between you and the developer/distributor. By not knowing what it says, you\'re accepting terms by default that you may not agree with.

Consider:

1. For Truespec, we ask all our Giga customers if they already own a copy of GigaStudio if this is a second or third system. If they say yes, we refer them to Tascam to get a site license for the second system.

2. For Native Instruments, they have a totally different licensing agreement. According to the Native Instruments office in Germany for Kontakt, because the copy protection is on the disk, asking you to insert it periodically to reauthorize, they don\'t charge a site license fee for multiple machines within the same studio.

So with one company, you\'re a pirate, while with the other, you\'re legally OK for the exact same action.

Chadwick

03-28-2003, 03:16 AM

Wasn\'t me either, Bruce images/icons/wink.gif

In Bruce\'s defence, I can vouch for the fact that it is possible to have \'conversations\' about V3 with the Nemesys crew which basically run one way - theirs. Even though you might be asked a few questions, it doesn\'t turn you into an insider with the dope on what they\'re going to do with your answers.

KingIdiot

03-28-2003, 04:29 AM

I KNOW WHAT THEY\'RE DOING!!

it involves a horde of monkeys tho, so I prolly shouldn\'t share images/icons/smile.gif

dont you hate it that I can tease you guys with insider info! ;P

Bruce A. Richardson

03-28-2003, 05:57 AM

You are seriously violating your NDA, monkey boy. Look out, or I\'ll have to use my insider connections and teach you a lesson.

Paul.Olivetti

03-28-2003, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Paul.Olivetti:
As a new member, I\'d like to state that it\'s hard to take the opinions of Bruce too seriously given his hyperbolic level of arrogance.

I welcome copy protection, so long as it comes with better licensing practises on the part of sample developers. Paul,

I hope that as a newcomer to the group, you might also take the time to more fully assess the situation before making that kind of judgement about a person. This is a heated topic. I think you would reconsider your first impression if you considered the totality of my participation here. <hr /></blockquote>Fair enough.

Bruce A. Richardson

03-28-2003, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by Paul.Olivetti:
Fair enough. Thanks man. Doug and I might be playing a little hardball on this issue, but at the end of the day, we\'re not going to be pulling out the voodoo dolls or anything. Life\'s too short.

But getting caught in the crossfire is probably not advisable, haha.

Leon Willett

03-29-2003, 05:56 AM

Doug and Bruuuuce sitting in a treee......

esperlad

03-29-2003, 02:32 PM

Are you guys certain that version 3.0 will *not* have any CP at all?

Has Tascam confirmed this?

As for future Quantam Leap products, I really would like to see a giga versions of these libraries for the sake of the other users. If giga 3.0 decides not to include any CP, there is still another solution. Have the samples watermaked and then have the buyer sign a form stating that the person will be held legally responsible and accountable if the watermaked samples that were sold to the stated person were found elsewhere. Legal action could be taken and this could help protect the property in question. If they won\'t sign the form, the item(s) will not be shipped to the potential buyer.

If Tascam is indeed failing to keep consistant contact with the developers, perhaps Mr. Richardson could investigate this issue and find out what the situation is.

Personally, I would like to see this situation have a happy ending.

Hildog

03-29-2003, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by esperlad:
If giga 3.0 decides not to include any CP, there is still another solution. Have the samples watermaked and then have the buyer sign a form...Just to satisfy my own intellectual consumer curiosity, how does watermarking samples work anyway ? I\'m not looking for specific technical details if that would undermine someone\'s CP scheme, but I don\'t understand how you could watermark a sample library without compromising its quality.

As far as CP schemes go, I think it\'s pretty easy to understand the challenge/response thing and most of the other schemes that people use, but how would this watermarking thing work ? Does anyone currently use it ? Or would answering that question give away the whole reason for using watermarking ?

Nick Phoenix

03-30-2003, 01:14 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Matter of fact:

When I noticed the Kontakt bug, I didn\'t even call Native Instruments first. I called YOU first. I thought it was something very critical that you needed a heads-up on. I guess it was your wife I spoke with, who put me in touch with another person in California, who then put me directly in touch with Nick.

Turns out, I had identified a design flaw in Kontakt\'s release trigger layer. In an effort to reduce polyphony consumption and boost performance, any repeated same-note would cut off the release trigger--in other words, the release triggers had been designed to be monophonic on repeated notes. Don\'t take my word for it, anyone with a release version of Kontakt 1.2 can easily demonstrate this bug for themselves if they have libraries with releases.

I didn\'t do this to be smart, I didn\'t do it to get paid, I didn\'t do it to suck up, or for any reason except I saw a rock in your path and I wanted to clear it away for you. Turns out it was a rock you guys hadn\'t even seen, because you hadn\'t gotten that far in programming releases to have run into it.

I just find it unbelievable that people would think I play favorites. My behavior has never demonstrated that.

By the way, thanks for whoever keeps trashing my user rating. That\'s real great. I take the trouble to make a stand on an important issue, and to talk about some pretty deep subject matter, and I get rewarded with that kind of crap. Have some balls and e-mail me or take it up with me in a post. Sheesh. Yep. That\'s right. Just for the record, I don\'t fault or accuse Bruce of anything, besides conviction. All I ever said and meant was that Bruces incredibly persuasive posts seemed to have influenced Tascam. Actually, I know for a fact that they did, because of a conversation with Mike McRoberts at Tascam. So Bruce, you are actually powerful enough to influence a multi-million dollar corporation. One person, no matter how long his hair, can, indeed, change the course of history.

Isabella Rowlins

03-30-2003, 02:55 AM

Excuse me all. This is my first posting on this forum and I am probably not the right person to comment on these issues. So bare with my lack of understanding.

I have been reading through the history of Northernsounds and it seems that some people here are \"hiding\" their professional interest, yet trying to influence the debates.

I wonder if this is a common practice here on these forums? Or just a few cases?

The reason why I ask is because I am a music teacher. I am currently preparing a course in digital composing and I want my students to have good and validated sources of information. Is this forum trustworthy or is it alot of people having secret agendas fighting against eachother?

I hope somebody will help clear these questions for me. Because frankly I am rather confused.

Isabella Rowlins

Chadwick

03-30-2003, 04:49 AM

Hi Isabella - welcome to the frayum - err forum.

I understand your point, but I\'d be very interested to know who you think is wearing sheep\'s clothing.

Although there are a couple of new voices in the conversation, I\'d say that so far, it\'s pretty much common knowledge around here that:

Doug is East West,

Nick is Quantum Leap (distributed by East West amongst others),

Bruce is a luxuriously locked old hippy who (amongst a great many other interests) lends his great experience to writing articles for various industry mags.

Peter (amongst other interests) runs a publishing house, and retails DAWs.

Hans, Scarbee, Lanesp are quality library developers (or associated with).

Spectrum is Eric Persing. April Fooler and occasional synth tweaker.....OK he\'s the best there is and now he\'s given up selling sample libraries unless they\'re packaged inside a virtual sample player. Oh, and he thinks we should EAT any sample pirates we catch (ugh Eric, ugh - I mean, do you know where they\'ve been?) ...

George Bush is Sauron (according to Mr.Kazoo anyway)

Munsie is a hopeless metal head, desperate to create the definitive death-metal-band-in-a-laptop. (Small package, but it\'ll have to sound big - he\'s from Texas) images/icons/wink.gif

King (AKA Monkey Boy) spends too much time tweaking, and lately has been \'tweaking his thang\' for some of the best developers around.

Lee is ... really p!ssed off that we don\'t know what or when V3 will be?

If there is anything more substantial to the connections of those listed, or for that matter any of the other guys I don\'t actually know anything about, I think we\'d all benefit from your shedding a little light on the fact;)

Cheers
Rick

Bruce A. Richardson

03-30-2003, 06:21 AM

Originally posted by Isabella Rowlins:
I am currently preparing a course in digital composing and I want my students to have good and validated sources of information. Is this forum trustworthy or is it alot of people having secret agendas fighting against eachother?Isabella Rowlins Hi Isabella,

I would say that your students should consider the forum trustworthy, while taking any individual post with a grain of salt. Not saying that anything lacks truth, but I would certainly explain to them that agendas exist, and that they should learn to ask the questions that expose them. No time like the present. Once they\'re outside your walls, it\'s a competitive and sometimes brutal business.

Many participants here are students or very young musicians themselves. Some are professional musicians and composers. Some are producers of sample libraries, some are distributors of software and libraries.

You have stumbled across a debate in this thread which rages on many fronts. Everyone is interested in a balance which preserves the freedom to work while protecting intellectual property. As you might expect, where that line is drawn is the debated topic.

Good luck with your music technology course. I\'m teaching one of those myself next fall. Another resource you may find helpful is www.prorec.com (\"http://www.prorec.com\") , which is a webzine dedicated to PC music and adjunct technologies. There is a lot of material there, and a searchable archive.

Best regards,
Bruce

peter269

03-30-2003, 06:33 AM

To follow up on what Rick Chadwick wrote, many of us on the forum (and in Chadwick\'s list) are professional people, earning their full time income in music, who also own their own businesses as programmers, composers, developers, beta testers, publishers, etc.

Because we\'re the ones who train/produce/use it, we\'re highly independent and often outspoken, with strengths in various areas.

Because I\'m a CEO, I\'m often direct and to the point. Though a Berklee grad, my primary work after graduation was in the ad agency business working with Pepsi, MacDonald\'s and other accounts doing marketing/media planning.

This put me in a position to see the \"other side\" of the music industry.

Later I went into music text publishing with technology titles and collegiate curriculum including my revision of the Rimsky-Korsakov book, Counterpoint by Fux, and the revisions of the works of Percy Goetschius in counterpoint and composition. Our curriculum and the works we publish are rooted in the question, \"How did the great composers teach themselves?\"

Much of my view can be summed up as, \"Learn it right the first time.\" As a corporate customer of IBM in the AS400 days, I learned the value of training with technology and saw how simple, effective technology customer training positively affects sales.

My big hope is that this musical revolution we\'re all apart of will, with simplified, respectful, and effective customer training, ultimately make its way down to Grovers Corners so that Everyman can get involved with music production and enjoy it as much as we do.

KingIdiot

03-30-2003, 12:03 PM

King (AKA Monkey Boy) spends too much time tweaking, and lately has been \'tweaking his thang\' for some of the best developers around.
Hey, I ...eeek eeeek eeek....take offense to that...oohh aahhh eeek eeeeeeek....that statement.

I\'ve been moving more and more away from tweaking for developers, because a couple of them have pissed me off, and doing the tweaking has changed my \"position\" on this board. I still beta test and help, but no major editing, unless its stuff I\'d do for myself (and we all know I do alot of experimenting), in which case I might share. Part of this is because I dont want to play \"favorites\" to any develoiper, by helping one develop and not others.

The opinions I state on this board are mine and my own. One needs to remember that when reading them. I\'m not an authority on all subjects regarding samples, and dont think I\'m the smartest man, or all knowing person. I state things from personal experience, it doesn\'t mean its \"the right thing\" or \"the only way\" things should be/are. I\'m an end user first.

Tho not much of one lately, since I\'ve got all these orchestral libs and I\'m workign with freaking SOUND FONTS!!!! Copy protect That Bruce!!! images/icons/tongue.gif hehee

Isabella Rowlins

03-30-2003, 11:40 PM

Thank you all for the many comments. It seems that the forum is very widespread in both topics, users and competences. I will continue to go through the history archives in here and I hope you will answer additional questions for me.

Isabella Rowlins

David Govett

04-10-2003, 11:11 PM

\"After all, even if CP is available within GS 3.0, a library manufacturer could choose to enable or not enable it, couldn\'t they? That would leave the decision up to the library producer, so anybody would be free to market their product as they see fit.\"

You know, this is exactly the point I tried to get accross when MANY of the very people here were \"up in arms\" about the prospect of copy protection. I saw people give Tascam a huge amount of crap about doing this very thing and now, they are giving them the greif about possibly not doing it! (I\'m not refering to Doug and Nick, they have consistently wanted CP from the begining)

Its just that the whole tone about CP has changed from open hostility to the more reasonable quote above.

Very interesting.....

Dave

Hans Adamson

04-11-2003, 09:36 AM

David,

All sample developers I know has been wanting the CP from the day Tascam put it on the table. I do not believe that there has been a change of heart at any time from any of us.

Who are you referring to? The end users?

Hans Adamson
Art Vista Productions

peter269

04-11-2003, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
Will the sample libraries and virtual instruments I\'m buying today still be usable 46 years from now? These software products need continual updating and maintenance to continue to be useful on contemporary computer equipment. If piracy allows them to slip into a de facto state of public domain, needed updates and support won\'t happen. Excellent question with implications for today. We could start with Roland libraries, Ensoniq ASR10, and to some degree the EIII and E4 from E-MU.

Yes, there\'s Translator and CDXtract, but as good as they are, it\'s not the same as the original heard through a Roland unit.

And, there\'s the Akai format, but you know, the sound you get can be different from one system to the next depending on the import.

But, Lee, one \"clinker\" I\'d throw into this is that tbe B3 is a musical instrument whose \"sound\" is always current.

A sample CD is NOT a musical instrument, it\'s copyrightable software that like the \"old\" LPs, requires a \"player\" to work.

On the other hand, I don\'t have a problem with GS being imported by other programs, as that would be like saying that GS can\'t import Akai any more. And what happens should Giga have a Roland or E-MU import as HALion 2.0 has promoted, or NI with Kontakt.

To me, importation of other formats makes the sampler more valuable, not less, because you get total access to your library with one system, a major appeal of the \"old\" E4!

peter269

04-11-2003, 03:00 PM

Lee, I agree 100%. But have you noticed how some companies just don\'t want to cooperate?

peter269

04-11-2003, 11:53 PM

A question: Can you only copy protect the library if Tascam has implemented a copy protection set up, or can it be done independently of Giga?

christian marin

04-12-2003, 12:09 AM

But, Lee, one \"clinker\" I\'d throw into this is that tbe B3 is a musical instrument whose \"sound\" is always current.

A sample CD is NOT a musical instrument, it\'s copyrightable software that like the \"old\" LPs, requires a \"player\" to work.
peter, allow me to disagree here.
there is a *device* in the B3 from where the (imho incredible) sound originates, around which -although hardware - a *player* is built, complemented by a sound-modification-device (i\'m thinking of a leslie here)
on the other hand a library originates the sound, a sampler is needed to play them and the sound-modification is partly inherited within the library, beyond it offered by some additional features of the samler or third applications.

so i feel lee\'s point three is a valid argument if one looks upon this in the long term

you might be able to copy the circuits of a B3 (if one finds the components) or even forge the sound using a soft-synth/DSP, but it will take you at least some pain
to use the sound of an unprotected library is a simple copy&paste lacking any knowledge about the creation of such sound-samples

if a producer of a library no longer can feed his children from the revenues, he has to drop support and development (unless he makes his money on other sources and continues doing so as a hobby), ergo some kind of CP has to be implemented - and this _is_ dependent on the CP-features of a sampler, except the library is stored into some type of protected hardware

the latter would turn out as a dead end, because it would not allow tweakings/modifications to the sound according the needs/taste

i\'m not saying CP in samplers would be a final solution, since everything can be cracked somehow, but remembering the figures micheal post mentioned (and a lot of you agreed to the ratio) it looks going to get necessary

my two bit only, christian

peter269

04-12-2003, 01:47 AM

Hey, Christian. Great observations!

Izenagi

04-13-2003, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by peter269:
A question: Can you only copy protect the library if Tascam has implemented a copy protection set up, or can it be done independently of Giga? Interpreted a few different ways the answer is that for copy protection to exist it must be integrated into the GS application:

1. Libraries are not played until Tascam\'s GS processes the data.

2. Only the GS app (valid or cracked) can provide a satisfactory answer to the security checks embedded throughout the library.

But this only works if:

A) we as users are willing to provide personal information to these companies in exchange for services of value, and;

B) what Developers and Publishers say about what they need is close to reality and not too greedy.

Bruce A. Richardson

04-13-2003, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by Izenagi:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by peter269:
A question: Can you only copy protect the library if Tascam has implemented a copy protection set up, or can it be done independently of Giga? Interpreted a few different ways the answer is that for copy protection to exist it must be integrated into the GS application:

1. Libraries are not played until Tascam\'s GS processes the data.

2. Only the GS app (valid or cracked) can provide a satisfactory answer to the security checks embedded throughout the library.

But this only works if:

A) we as users are willing to provide personal information to these companies in exchange for services of value, and;

B) what Developers and Publishers say about what they need is close to reality and not too greedy. <hr /></blockquote>AND if end users of said samples are willing to:

1) Accept a sampler with no waveform i/o access.

2) Accept the idea that mom and pop sample producers will be able to afford a support infrastructure which offers 24/7 mission-critical guarantees...on the money they have RIGHT NOW (not the Reaganomic fantasy trickle-down cash from post-protected sales, since this infrastructure would need to be in place up front, right?).

3) Give up all cross platform compatibility.

This user won\'t accept any of these points. It doesn\'t make sense. It only adds up if you\'re getting some sort of other compensation in the deal to make the start up viable. Who is funding the support? Where is the economic engine? Why is it in someone\'s interest to sell you a standalone player app every time they sell you a sample library? That seems to be the new model. Aren\'t you essentially buying the player over and over and over again? How many pluggo synth engine licenses equal a GigaStudio? Or is there some other economic engine purring under the table? Is there a back end on referral sales from monolithic sample-apps to their counterpart full-bore samplers? Do those samplers turn into crippleware when said monolithic sample-app files are loaded?

When things stop making sense, ask hard questions.

Simon Ravn

04-13-2003, 06:26 PM

Maybe a bit OT, but I agree that I don\'t like the way things are going - every library in its own new VSTi. If that continues, you will be sitting with 20 VSTi\'s open to compose an orchestral piece with the latest libraries in a few years. 30 if you want to include guitars, piano, \'ethnic\' percussion etc. I don\'t like it. It will become soooo tedious to set things up this way.

Nick (and others), if you\'re reading this. Please consider supporting GS in the future. GS is not perfect, but I prefer GS on a couple of machines to running 20 different VSTi\'s spread over those machines. There must be a way to make it work. How about at least an upgrade possibility, so if you buy a VSTi version, for a small fee you can get a GS version with watermarking and whatever else you want to put in it. That way it will require more effort (and a little more money) from the user, and you will have less copies of the GS version out there potentially being pirated. Of course it\'s still possible, but if your VSTi\'s dont use watermarked samples, it\'s actually a lot easier to pirate those...

peter269

04-14-2003, 01:28 AM

Sorry, Simon, but I firmly disagree on this one, especially now that we have Steinberg\'s System Link.

If you\'re using Cubase SX or Nuendo, it couldn\'t be easier. Using either the VSL2020 or an audio card with S/PDIF, you can set up to get an addition 16 virtual ports and up to 256 channels. The system stays beautifully in sync.

Using VStack (for non-Cubase users) in a stand alone PC, you can set up 16 ports and up to 256 MIDI channels depending on the VSTi.

You can install pro effects like Powercore, Native Bundles from TC Works and Waves, etc.

What could be better!

The whole VSTi approach makes for an effective and efficient production system with affordable upgrades. And CP using the disk or challenge/response is available to the developer.

All around, I see this as a win/win setup for both customer and developer.

MikeGraybill

04-14-2003, 02:40 AM

After watching and pondering this topic as it grew for the last few days, I have no great answer in my mind. All I discovered I can speak for is the consumer in me. Plain and simple - I spent alot of money getting Giga up and running solidly on a network of computers that finally has most of the bugs worked out. At this point, between VSL and the other fantastic brass, percussion, and other libraries out there, along with the ease of mixing 5.1 in programs like Nuendo or Vegas, the reason I was looking forward to QLSO was to see just how many more amazing sounds I could have at my finger tips. I don\'t need it. But I planned on adding it. If it\'s not going to conform to my stable setup, I have no interest in it, and that is unfortunate for all concerned.

If Sony publicly announced that due to falling cd sales because of rampant mp3 pirating, it was releasing a new \"harder to pirate\" medium as the only means of buying a sony artist recording, and I\'d have to add it to my CD, MD, DAT, MP3 collection of players, well... I think sales would drop considereably more than they already had for sony.

My setup works great the way it is and I have no intention of changing it for one or two libraries. I saw a picture of Hans Zimmer the other day with his copy of VSL for giga... wonder if I\'ll see any pics of him with a product that didn\'t conform to his setup.

Not trying to be an *** here, but I guess I\'m feeling really disappointed. I was looking forward to this stuff, and if I\'m feeling this way but making this choice, I\'m sure there\'s many more where I come from.

Lewis

04-14-2003, 03:09 AM

I am not so sure there is reasoning in all this scepticism. Diversity can be a healthy thing. Not only does it push the market and make people yell on composer forums. It also pushes the envelope of what can be achieved.

New times are ahead of us. We have more options then ever. Whats all the whining about? I for one support BOTH Tascam and EWQL/Kontakt.

I want to have the choice? Whats wrong with all you ex-communists. This is NOW. We dont want Microsoft Monopoly in this business. We want diverstiy.

Love - Chris

spectrum

04-14-2003, 05:28 AM

Originally posted by MichaelAngelo450:
I saw a picture of Hans Zimmer the other day with his copy of VSL for giga... wonder if I\'ll see any pics of him with a product that didn\'t conform to his setup. Check pretty much any recent interview with Hans, and you see that he uses loads of different things....not only Giga.

Hans and the vast majority other pro composers and producers use lots of VSTi plus Giga already. It\'s a very standard way of working these days to work with many interfaces, it is hardly the end of the world. Think about effects plug-ins for example....no one is screaming for a single effect interface. It is often actually far easier to deal with multiple interfaces, since they can be simplified to deal with the task at hand. (Single effects are always easier to figure out than multi-fx units, for example)

There are good ways to work efficiently with these plug-in rigs as well, and the truth is that you can do far more things this way than you can with Giga alone.....both as a developer and as a user. Certainly to stick with one interface is comfortable and familiar, but that is also quite limiting as well....since you miss out on many innovative things that are going on outside your world. I\'ve always thought it\'s important to be open minded as a musician to different ways of working.....you always learn something new that way.

Giga is a fine platform, and I\'m sure there will be plenty of development for it. However, it has never been the sole source for useful sounds. Giga and Plug-ins will very happily co-exist as musical tools for the foreseeable future. The only question will be if Giga can maintain its momentum on development and new sounds in the marketplace over the long term.

The situation with Kurzweil, Emu, SampleCell, Akai and Roland was not so different than the current situation with GIGA.....Good platforms that didn\'t keep up with the market. Giga is still robust, but a great deal depends on how they deal with the challenges they face, as outlined in this thread.

Giga has a very small market share compared to other platforms, and they focus almost exclusively on the Orchestral Composer market, which is very important, but fairly small in the overall picture of the market. How they address competition from cross-platform plug-in engines will be very important to their continued success.

spectrum

Lewis

04-14-2003, 05:58 AM

Spoken like a saint. My point exactly. But why does it sound so much cooler coming from you Spectrum? Hehehe. Help me here. I wanna sound cool - just when I write words like you.

I think its time we stop this anachronistic debate. There will never be any standards in this business unless it gets ISO certified - which I dont think is gonna happen.

Its evolution and I wouldnt want it any other way. Thats (d)evolution for people that dont want change - and (r)evolution for people who are open minded.

This is the techworld guys. It MEANS change. Its the essence of tech.

Love - Chris

Bruce A. Richardson

04-14-2003, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by Lewis:
Spoken like a saint. My point exactly. But why does it sound so much cooler coming from you Spectrum? Hehehe. Help me here. I wanna sound cool - just when I write words like you.

I think its time we stop this anachronistic debate. There will never be any standards in this business unless it gets ISO certified - which I dont think is gonna happen.

Its evolution and I wouldnt want it any other way. Thats (d)evolution for people that dont want change - and (r)evolution for people who are open minded.

This is the techworld guys. It MEANS change. Its the essence of tech.

Love - Chris Your paraphrase doesn\'t seem to be Eric\'s point.

It is very easy for you to talk about being \"openminded\" when you are not looking at huge stakes in your way of working. You are apparently just defining your way of working. Which is great. But someone who is invested in a way of working and in artistic techniques derived from that is not \"devolving\" just because he doesn\'t want to jump onto every new thing that calls itself \"evolution.\"

Evolution wears many coats. Eric is right--How Giga competes has to do 100% with how Giga competes. But Giga has competed at every turn by forcing evolution--in fact, the very evolution that led to a renaissance in sampling. So, careful about that devolution/evolution thing. Sometimes \"new\" and \"evolved\" are not the same thing.

Who says Giga 3.0 is not significantly evolved over any of these other presumably evolved choices? Everyone seems to expect Giga to \"zig.\" They almost always \"zag.\" And zagging is the stuff evolution is made of.

Bruce A. Richardson

04-14-2003, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by peter269:
Sorry, Simon, but I firmly disagree on this one, especially now that we have Steinberg\'s System Link.

If you\'re using Cubase SX or Nuendo, it couldn\'t be easier. Using either the VSL2020 or an audio card with S/PDIF, you can set up to get an addition 16 virtual ports and up to 256 channels. The system stays beautifully in sync.

Using VStack (for non-Cubase users) in a stand alone PC, you can set up 16 ports and up to 256 MIDI channels depending on the VSTi.

You can install pro effects like Powercore, Native Bundles from TC Works and Waves, etc.

What could be better!

The whole VSTi approach makes for an effective and efficient production system with affordable upgrades. And CP using the disk or challenge/response is available to the developer.

All around, I see this as a win/win setup for both customer and developer. Spoken like a true Steinberg dealer.

Problem is, who has really tried to produce fully orchestrated music on that kind of rig, with high demand instruments? What happens when 30 instances of sample-apps all start yoo-hooing at the disk subsystem? What happens when two of them are pianos and one is a deluxe french horn with five second reverb tails? How do those plugins communicate and arbitrate who gets what polyphony when?

We don\'t know that, because NO ONE is doing it. I have tried to simulate it with multiple instances of plugin samplers, though, and I think I have evaluated the basic situation pretty well.

Kip\'s Bosendorfer runs on Kontakt and on GigaStudio. Same machine, same library mapping (although the Kontakt version is 24-bit, so you see I cannot do a true test, but close):

Giga: 160 voices, as long as I have the energy, without a single artifact. CPU is barely reading 4%, mostly 3%

Kontakt 1.2: At 29-30 voices, gapping, dropouts, CPU is tapped, adding anything else chokes.

OK, that\'s 24 bit vs. 16, but that bit-depth issue ain\'t the whole story. Hans using some plugins on his DAW while driving GigaStudios isn\'t the whole story either. I put plugins on MY DAW while driving GigaStudios, too. That\'s not the point. When you start taking an actual trackload from actual heavy production, and start banging it against the various technologies, THAT is the story.

Folks, I like Kontakt. Do a search here, and see who was promoting it like gangbusters before any of you cats had a clue what it was. I think it rocks, and I use it all the time. But not for the things I use Giga to do. Different tools, different toolsets, different strengths.

As far as I can see, Hans Zimmer is as true a testament to GigaStudio\'s important role as any person on this earth. He\'s a longtime Steinberg endorser, but hey, where are those Halion tracks? Why aren\'t his Giga machines obsoleted by all this wonderful plugin-technology?

Simple. Because GigaStudio still does what it does better than any other solution...even with two years of accumulated dust on the current version. There is a place for it. The minute Hans thought something would work better for him, his band of hard-working elves would have that rig installed and running, and Giga would be in the dumpster. But it\'s not--despite the fact Hans can have whatever he wants whenever he wants it. Don\'t miss that point. It explains things.

MikeGraybill

04-14-2003, 07:30 AM

Well, I am certainly not claiming to be any expert with regards to Mr. Zimmer\'s working habbits, only pointing out an obvious pattern of giga and giga library endorsment (SI, etc). I\'ve never seen him back other platforms or methods (not to say he hasn\'t, I just haven\'t seen it, and the giga-oriented library endorsment is clearly prominent.) I only brought it up as a case in point consideration with regrads to a composer who has, beyond my ability to do so, built a creative structure largely around the Giga platform. My first thought was, if I had such large quantities of money contingent upon me making my deadlines, (on a scale I have yet to face personally, and can hardly imagine), what would it take for me to rock the boat so to speak by playing with an approach fundamentally different than that which I\'ve built so much around?

I have no idea what the real answer to that question is, as I\'ve never met the man and can only imagine what it would be like to set foot into his facilities. I was just speculating as to whether or not someone in his position would likely share this position.

As a young composer myself with the time to basically play around and find my preferred method of working, I really have different limitations. First and foremost is always $$$ for us younger ones. In this case, I have sunk a decent chunk of my funding into a giga-based project studio. That meant licenses, and many libraries. While I would have no problem at all adding another SX license for additional VST support and fx, adding enough of those to run a library like the QL would turn very expensive very fast. I\'ve already invested in strong, heavily orchestrally supported sampling software, and the machines to run them on. Patterns have been established, and as of right now, when I need to turn something out very quickly with the utmost effeciency, I can.

I guess the core of my meandering 2 cents is this: Giga was an investment like any other, and I hate to hear that something I invested in didn\'t deliver a new and interesting option for my consideration when it could have. I like VSTi\'s, and have actually been looking for a few specific ones that apparently haven\'t been made yet regarding percussion. I delayed getting atmosphere only because of the expense of VSL and a machine to help run it smoothly, but it is very much the next purchase I make. I say this because I want it to be clear I have NO problem at all with new technology or the VSTi approach to sample based music.

I am only saying that my fundamental investment (both time and money) was giga, and it\'s a shame I should have to choose. Obviously there are others that look forward to working with multiple engines for multiple libraries on the same machine, and a VSTi approach isn\'t a bad thing. But for those of us that will continue to use Giga as the driving force behind our proven and reliable setups, it is not worth the effort or the money right now, and it won\'t be for some time.

Simply put, I would pay for QLSO if it were released for giga, but have neither the time nor additional finances to add more machines and more licenses just to be able to use a new library. When and if it becomes 10 libraries of the scope of the QLSO or VSL, then I\'ll sing a different tune. But until that day, its just not worth it. I mean, I\'ve listened to well known pro composers on this forum say that they are still holding off on VSL because of the additional learning curve! What are the chances those guys are going to replace giga for one library?

To be clear, I have nothing but respect for the companies involved here. There are still several products of the QL and Spectrasonics variety that are on my list of things to buy... assuming the next great things stop coming from all corners and breaking my budget every month images/icons/wink.gif I only wanted to cast my little public vote by saying that for now, it\'s giga for me, and I hope to be able to add the wonderful stuff being made to my \"giga\" collection in the future.

Simon Ravn

04-14-2003, 07:39 AM

Bruce: Funny, my initial tests of Kontakt gave me the same bad results. Sometimes I got dropouts as low as 5-10 voices, with some VOTA converted patches. Oddly enough I seemed to be the only one with these problems, but I am \'happy\' that I am not alone then. Also it seemed pretty flaky and bugged. Another reason for me to not trust the NI/EastWest solution to replace my GigaStudio that works flawlessly every day - sure sometimes I get dropouts at over 140 voices or so, but I can live with that. But 10 voices... (20 mono).

Hasen

04-14-2003, 08:47 AM

Err guys, the current Kontakt has non-working streaming. What\'s the point in comparing it when they haven\'t updated it to the engine Nick is using for the QLSO yet?? Even when users have managed to get the streaming working Kontakt 1.2 it doesn\'t provide anywhere near the performance when streaming is disabled. Its just buggy right now.

If you\'re gonna compare Giga performance with a VSTi then at least compare it with something that reliably streams like HALion or EXS24.

Or just read Nick and Doug\'s polyphony tests of the QLSO engine...

peter269

04-14-2003, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
[QB] [QUOTE]Spoken like a true Steinberg dealer. /QB]I AM a Steinberg dealer. I\'m also a dealer for Magix (Samplitude and Sequoia), Cakewalk Sonar, Native Instruments, AND GIGASTUDIO.

Steinberg\'s System Link is the most elegant thing going for Cubase SX and Nuendo users. BUT! It\'s also a great thing even for Cakewalk, DP and other users since VStack works in a standalone environment allowing up to 16 MIDI ports and up to 256 MIDI channels.

At $60 list, it\'s a steal!

This IS a great thing, whether the host computer is a Mac or a PC, whether the sequencing program is a Steinberg product or someone elses.

So it\'s a great win for both the customer and the developer since there\'s now a dual platform delivery vehicle (with VStack) that supports their work in so many ways!

Kontakt/VSTi, System Link and VStack are a powerful production system where the host and secondary machines can operate at the full 2GB of RAM, and up to 4GB of RAM per system.

That is a significant customer benefit to gain 1GB of RAM (Kingston) and expand the system for $389US.

Granted there are issues with Kontakt. But other tests besides yours have yield 300+ voice polyphony within 1GB of RAM. The streaming isn\'t perfect today, but I\'m sure NI will get there, as others have.

In the past and current present, Tascam has gotten EXCELLENT support from us and will continue to do so, as will now Native Instruments, and Steinberg for the innovation they\'ve displayed in System Link.

Bruce A. Richardson

04-14-2003, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Hasen:
Err guys, the current Kontakt has non-working streaming. What\'s the point in comparing it when they haven\'t updated it to the engine Nick is using for the QLSO yet?? Even when users have managed to get the streaming working Kontakt 1.2 it doesn\'t provide anywhere near the performance when streaming is disabled. Its just buggy right now.

If you\'re gonna compare Giga performance with a VSTi then at least compare it with something that reliably streams like HALion or EXS24.

Or just read Nick and Doug\'s polyphony tests of the QLSO engine... Well, as I said, I have nothing in the world against Kontakt. I am both an endorser and a clinician for Native Instruments. I am way slick at using Kontakt, and I\'m very aware of the technology\'s current development state. Kontakt has a very healthy future.

My point is not \"Kontakt bad.\" It\'s Giga-good. Regardless. It has charms of its own, and for some hardcore tasks, it\'s the tool that best does the job. When I see words like \"evolution\" being attached to one product, and \"devolution\" being attached to another, no matter what they are, it makes me worry that people really don\'t understand how one technology compares to another.

At any rate, all of these technologies are first rate. That\'s my point.

peter269

04-14-2003, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
At any rate, all of these technologies are first rate. That\'s my point. Well said.

sporter

04-15-2003, 07:32 AM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:

Also, regarding Nemesys zagging, is there more history we should know about? What other products are they responsible for besides GS? I thought their other interests were in the Telecom biz. Is it possible that GS 3.0 will be a new cell phone? Perhaps a personal transportation device? Cold fusion? A cure for the common cold?

Lee Blaske I don\'t like reading your comments, but I can\'t disagree. One thing that keeps me encouraged is that it will not take much to leapfrog the competition. Kontact has 24 bit sampling, more polyphony, and works as a VSTi. I think GS had all those features nailed down long before Kontact was released, and including them in 3.0 will be a piece of cake.

I like to think the long delay has to do with sizing up the competition, and coming up with something that will blow it out of the water. I think that NI is killer competition, and that will ultimately be a good thing if Tascam decides their mission is to outdo them. GS already has a lthe user base and a huge library of samples available. I don\'t think it will be a monumental task to remain king of the hill.

I\'m trying to be optimistic. I\'ve invested a lot in GS, and I still find it superior to other software samplers despite the fact that it\'s showing a bit of its age.

But in end it\'s all speculation...Hopefully we\'ll know something soon.

sporter

04-15-2003, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Lee Blaske:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />I like to think the long delay has to do with sizing up the competition, and coming up with something that will blow it out of the water.That\'s an interesting thought, and certainly if they do it, we all win.

History, though, shows that inventors and companies just can\'t seem to do that at will. You just can\'t send your developers off to the lab, bidding them to come back with the next greatest thing. For instance, Yamaha has been trying for years to come up with something that would duplicate the success of the DX7, yet they haven\'t been able to do it (and lack of capital certainly isn\'t the problem for them). The musical world held its breath when Ray Kurzweil, a true genius of an inventor, took on the task of building a musical instrument, but the results were disappointing.

Lee Blaske <hr /></blockquote>Thanks for you thoughts and excellent insights.

I guess I\'m thinking in terms of guerilla tactics..blowing the competition out of the water and such. But your mention of Yamaha and Kurzweil reminded me that it\'s not that simple...which is a good thing for those of us who buy these products.

Yamaha hasn\'t come up with a decent encore for the DX7, yet as I look around in my little studio, I see their name on my P250 (an amazing instrument), my studio speakers, my acoustic upright, my mixer. And sure enough, my Kurzweil PX1000, along with my PC2R and MicroEnsemble are still at the top of my list for excellent sounds and I use them all the time in making tracks...

My point is that while these innovators did not gain market dominance, they are along way from meeting their demise. They actually grew the market with their inventions, and gave us an environment in which other players could flourish.

I just hope the Giga/Yamaha analogy holds truer than the Giga/Studio Vision analogy. images/icons/smile.gif

Rich Pell

04-15-2003, 10:06 AM

Bruce when i read some of your posts they make me laugh.Especially when u can somehow make broad-sweeping coments on what can and cannot do with there Daw systems.How do u know that NO ONE is creating huge sample based orchestral works on samplers other that GS.As a matter of fact this \"No One\" composer has been making large full orchestral pieces for T.V. for about 6 months now ,using a only a single(though custom built)PC with SX and Kontakt 1.2.Though i dont feel ive really pushed my setup to the limit, i have done some \'tests\".6 instances of Kontakt with 8 Inst. in each multi.1 instance using Malmsjo and 1 running E/W Stienway B.All inst.(SAM horns,an mish mash of different String libs.) on there own midi channel going to there perspective tracks.Thats over 40 tracks of midi.Along with my own live recorded audio stuff.(guitars .vocals.solo Violin etc.).so maybe 2 or 6 audio tracks. and numerous plug- ins ..,ususally Wave ren. verbs..Once i threw Absynth on top of all that just to see how it would handle another VSTi and my performance meter was only at 40%!!!A friend with a good G4 came by and we tested my system.We were able to load in a play 16 Waves renesance verbs befor my PM hit 80%.It also helps if u have a UAD-1 card or something like that.My whole piont is: that i think if u do your research correctly a built 1 high end PC based Audio Daw(which BTW is cheaper in the end than any MAc based system)u can get similar if not BETTER performance(i.e latency issues etc.)than having to run your sequencer on one PC with GS on a seperate machine.I have been lucky to get the Kontakt DFD running smoothly(I know about all the bugs) and have been getting excellent results.Enough to to want to try and avoid using GS and its inherant headaches.I`m sure I`m \"missing\" meastro tools and .art files for now.But I`m confident that alot those performance features will be implimented in the \"new\" Orch librarys(QLSO) etc.Lets face it, with Samplers all we`re trying to do is simulate the real thing anyways,so why not make it convienent to use so we can get to the best part... writing.This post is not intended to start a battle,just to offer some insight into other realistic alt. to GS`s so called domination of the \"midi Orch. World\".I know u use Kontakt Bruce but your system may not be set up correctly.Hope this post helps anybody out there.Any one wanting to know my system specs. just let me know.....Rich

Nick Batzdorf

04-15-2003, 04:26 PM

I\'d like to know your system specs! (Because I may be succumbing to one of these machines in the near future.)

Bruce A. Richardson

04-15-2003, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by Rich Pell:
Bruce when i read some of your posts they make me laugh.Especially when u can somehow make broad-sweeping coments on what can and cannot do with there Daw systems.How do u know that NO ONE is creating huge sample based orchestral works on samplers other that GS.As a matter of fact this \"No One\" composer has been making large full orchestral pieces for T.V. for about 6 months now ,using a only a single(though custom built)PC with SX and Kontakt 1.2.Though i dont feel ive really pushed my setup to the limit, i have done some \'tests\".6 instances of Kontakt with 8 Inst. in each multi.1 instance using Malmsjo and 1 running E/W Stienway B.All inst.(SAM horns,an mish mash of different String libs.) on there own midi channel going to there perspective tracks.Thats over 40 tracks of midi.Along with my own live recorded audio stuff.(guitars .vocals.solo Violin etc.).so maybe 2 or 6 audio tracks. and numerous plug- ins ..,ususally Wave ren. verbs..Once i threw Absynth on top of all that just to see how it would handle another VSTi and my performance meter was only at 40%!!!A friend with a good G4 came by and we tested my system.We were able to load in a play 16 Waves renesance verbs befor my PM hit 80%.It also helps if u have a UAD-1 card or something like that.My whole piont is: that i think if u do your research correctly a built 1 high end PC based Audio Daw(which BTW is cheaper in the end than any MAc based system)u can get similar if not BETTER performance(i.e latency issues etc.)than having to run your sequencer on one PC with GS on a seperate machine.I have been lucky to get the Kontakt DFD running smoothly(I know about all the bugs) and have been getting excellent results.Enough to to want to try and avoid using GS and its inherant headaches.I`m sure I`m \"missing\" meastro tools and .art files for now.But I`m confident that alot those performance features will be implimented in the \"new\" Orch librarys(QLSO) etc.Lets face it, with Samplers all we`re trying to do is simulate the real thing anyways,so why not make it convienent to use so we can get to the best part... writing.This post is not intended to start a battle,just to offer some insight into other realistic alt. to GS`s so called domination of the \"midi Orch. World\".I know u use Kontakt Bruce but your system may not be set up correctly.Hope this post helps anybody out there.Any one wanting to know my system specs. just let me know.....Rich My system is set up quite well.

I\'m happy you\'ve been scoring television for six months with your rig. I\'ve been knocking out 26-52 episodes per year with mine, that level of pressure for the last six years at least...and on top of that, usually 5-6 scores for theater projects and several live appearances. So I do have some point of comparison, you see.

So I make you laugh? I\'m a little amused at your assertion that a one-machine rig offers nearly the flexibility, redundancy, and outright raw power necessary to stay atop blistering deadlines. I\'d like to see that miracle machine, because in my studio, I have three machines burning themselves to a near crisp keeping up with my workload.

Integration comes at many levels. I\'m not doubting you can keep up with your workload with the machine and tools you\'re using. But you don\'t know better than me how I can keep up with mine. I guarantee you, the production model I\'m using is far closer to what other busy composers are using than your one-machine scenario. I cannot imagine reducing my machine count, even if processing were three times as fast. The flexibility and working processes are too much enhanced for me to give it up.

Rich Pell

04-15-2003, 08:56 PM

I think we can all safely say there will come a day in the near future(perhaps 2 or 3 years i hope!),when we will be looking at our old EXTRA PC`s loaded with GS 2.5 still on it, going~\"I can`t believe 2 or 3 years a go we actually needed a seperate PC to run a single sampler!!\".It doesn`t take rocket science to figure out this VST sampler things gonna be the future,whether its Kontakt 1.2.1 or GS 3.0 the,rate of CPU power/RAM thats available now should be enough for the majority of Orch.Comp.to run on 1 machine(Bruce and HAns Z. excluded of course).Nick, my set up isnt really that extrodinary.1)Thermaltake Aluminum case to keep it all cool. 2)Asus P4B mobo 533 FB 3)p4 2.4 proccesser 4)the much over looked Highpoint Rocket IDE controler card witch lets u use all your HD`s as masters(puts alot less stress on them and your system) 5 ) a gig or more(some people have 3 g`s) of really fast ram(Rambus is good) 6)3 -80 GB seagate Barracuda 4 (1 for programs and vsts,1 for Audio)and 1 for samples)obviously the bigger the library the more HD`s.I also have the UAD- 1 DSP card for effects that puts very little drain on your cpu in final mixdowns(2 revs less than 5%).I cant stress enough how the Highpoint rocket has improved the perfomance of my machine.i actually try to crash it sometimes jsut to see how much it can take and i have to do unsually bizzare things(loading and play 5 giga pianos?).anyways i hope this helps Nick and Bruce i hope your writing is going well and meeting the deadlines ,I know the stress of that and I mean not to offend.The post i was refering to before just seems a little outragous to me(like only the serious,worth a **** composers are using GS).I know some great sounding writers using samplecell and Akai samplers!Anyways, Peace to all and to all a good night(****, that was corny)..Rich

MikeGraybill

04-15-2003, 09:34 PM

I\'m a bit confused, if someone could explain this to me I\'d appreciate it.

The fastest method of working I\'ve found so far involves having templates setup which bring to my fingertips a pretty large number of instruments loaded and ready to play at one time. These are my foundation patches, which basically outline all the basics of an orchestra.

I used to have to render things on the fly a great deal more than I do now, simply because I didn\'t have the extra machines to handle so many samples simultaneously. I\'ve come a long way, but I still can\'t load as many instruments at once as I\'d like.

The more options I have available at once, the faster I work. Stopping the creative process to render something, unload an instrument and load another, seriously hinders speed and creative flow.

Maybe I\'m not understanding something here, but if you\'re able to work with an entire orchestral setup on only one machine, how many instruments are available to you at once? Or is it work, render, unload, load, repeat? That method caused me to actually not work for a while and just take a break until I had the setup I needed, as it was far too frustrating.

If there was a way I could have SI and VSL and the other ram hungry lib patches loaded at once, complete with percussion and all sorts of other goodies, all on one machine I\'d jump at it. As it is now, I DO have these ready to go everytime I sit down, but it takes 3 machines maxed out to do it. And I still have to trade off all the time, though that is usually more a case of tailoring the template to the particular project.

My machines aren\'t super fast, but respectable and basically uniform - P4 2.0\'s with 1gb ram each, and about 3HD\'s per machine. The reason I\'m asking this question is simply because I have maxed out each of these respectable comps to acheive the results I expect, and I cannot imagine trying to do this with one machine. How is this possible when working with modern libraries, and what methods are used?

spectrum

04-15-2003, 11:41 PM

As far as speed and efficiency goes for film/tv work, it\'s still better to separate your sound module and your sequencer PCs....that way the same sounds don\'t have to reload every time you open a song. What you lose is total recall with the sequence and some of the nice aspects of total integration that plug-ins offer. What you gain though, is massive stability and reliability that you can count on in a time crunch where you have to deliver a lot of music very quickly, and you can compose a lot of cues with your template setup, and not have to manage a lot of sound saving/loading routines....just your main template for the project.

It\'s worth noting that this is the advantage of that kind of setup whether it\'s racks of hardware samplers, a GIGA PC system, or a dedicated PC for VSTis....it\'s all basically the same way of composing with the same end result and same stability, since they aren\'t linked except via MIDI/Audio lines.

Adding another VST PC to a GIGA PC rig is a great way to go to really expand what you can do....and you aren\'t really introducing any elements to make your system less reliable, or giving up the benefits of your GIGA rig. This is how Hans and all the MV guys do it these days.

For Pop-style composing, a lot of people prefer using a single computer, since your pallete of sounds changes more from song to song, and project to project....and the integration and total recall of projects on a single computer are well worth the extra time it takes to load, or to configure/optimize your system.

A single faster PC can certainly handle all of larger scores requirements, but you may find that you have to balance the polyphony and resources from time to time if your scores are really dense. It can certainly be done (and obviously is being done), but the workflow is a little bit slower. (You don\'t have to render all that much on the fastest PC though)

Multicomputer setup takes time to setup and configure, but once its set up, you can get a lot done with templates. Not as flexible as an integrated system for processing and bouncing, etc.

Single computer setup is faster, but you have to balance resources a bit more and the system is not as reliable since any one component can take the whole thing down. Advantages are Maximum flexibility, total recall sample accurate timing, and portability.

Different strokes for different folks.....

Hope that helps...

spectrum

MikeGraybill

04-16-2003, 01:22 AM

Originally posted by spectrum:

Adding another VST PC to a GIGA PC rig is a great way to go to really expand what you can do....and you aren\'t really introducing any elements to make your system less reliable, or giving up the benefits of your GIGA rig. Very good point, and to be honest, I hadn\'t been seriously thinking about adding a VST pc until you mentioned this. I suppose I still hadn\'t really separated the concept of a single pc system from a VST approach. While it\'ll be hard choosing to do this over another giga machine (which really would make my life easier), there are enough vsti apps that are in my purchasing future to justify it, and I\'d have the added capabilities.

My original intent in posting to this thread was simply to voice my hope that QLSO would be released on Giga as well as other platforms. While I still hope this is the case, I was also just thinking that chances are, I won\'t be attempting to use the entire lib all the time, rather picking instruments from it and other libs. So even if I could only use the VST version, adding a VST machine would probably allow me to use what I needed from it, stabley. So I\'m thinking a bit differently now... perhaps a bit more open-mindedly. Thanks, spectrum.

spectrum

04-16-2003, 03:59 AM

My pleasure!

:-)

spectrum

Rich Pell

04-16-2003, 07:19 AM

Great points Spectrum,Yur much clearer at explaining than I.Some points to mention Michealangelo,obviously VSL only seems to work in GS since its its native format your gonna get the most amount of features(until try port it to EXS/Kontakt/halion).Eventually(SI,Garritan are working on it now,VSL is just considering) i believe most of the major Orch.libraries will be ported to Kontak /Esx/Halion.Kontakt is still buggy when Importing diff. formats though this is promised to be fixed with the next update(this month?) or convert yur Lib.with CS translator or CDxtract(this is a little time consuming).Every time u load in a song your vst sampler must load in the patchs~i do not find this inconvienent since even for Large Orchestral stuff in only takes 2 or 3 min. with kontaKt.Kontakt lets u save your Orch. \"template\" of sounds as Multi instruments(.nkm).I think u can save up to 16 or(8?)ints.(patches) in 1 multi if I`m not mistaken.U can make multi`s of strings .brass.perc. woodwinds. whatever and load and change them and resave as it suits u.I personally find the complete integration of vst sampler and less time consming.takes up less space and costs less money(that I`ve been spending on good mics and pre-amps).plus with a good SC and D/A converter(RME maybe) your u can bring down the latency to realistically 3 ms.Theres nothing better than seamless...hope this helps... Rich

Bruce A. Richardson

04-16-2003, 08:02 AM

Hehe,

Maybe I should hire Eric to ghost write my posts. When he says things, people nod up and down and believe him.

A multi-machine setup is a way of working which guarantees you\'re going to have X amount of bandwidth, and X amount of flexibility.

Rich, the thing I think you\'re missing in your \"two to three years later\" scenario is the very crux of this discussion.

If there is still a GigaStudio, I doubt I will be saying \"I can\'t believe I needed a separate PC..\" I will be saying something more like, \"Wow, look what GigaStudio is doing with this PC now, compared to what it did two years ago.\"

The way of working is still valid...the capabilities merely go up and up.

I like separate machines for many reasons. Not the least of which is a catastrophic incident. One of my machines goes down, and the worst that happens is that I get inconvenienced (i.e., I have to work like you do for a couple of days). When your single machine goes down, you are out of business until it\'s back up. If you have three editing teams an inch off your butt, that is a chumpy place to be.

Also, flexibility is key. I do some really large orchestral setups (although they\'re almost never a full orchestra, but various subsets). But I like to really turn on a dime. Sometimes I\'ll sequence up a bunch of stuff, then ditch the sequencer, load all that up into ACID, and chop it into a completely new thing. I\'m constantly pulling things in realtime (streaming via ethernet) to the DAW machine from the two satellite machines, while playing new loops into a capture file. The setup time to do that kind of application hopping on a single machine is somewhat cumbersome. On a multi-machine rig, it\'s far easier. You\'re manipulating separate \"things,\" not manipulating one thing to do separate tasks. The difference is very subtle, but anyone who has done it both ways can confirm what I\'m saying. The other, REALLY important thing to remember is that multiple machines, networked with today\'s OS software, are much more like a single gigantic machine than truly independant boxes. With network-savvy software, you get the best of both worlds.

I have totally automated backups (via the 4th and 5th machines in another office). I have internet, billing, and communications to worry about (because unlike Mr. Zimmer, I am not a brand name, just a high-volume working stiff).

There are just lots of reasons that multi-machine scenarios make lots of sense if your business depends upon cranking out a high volume of work. I get to participate here, because I can check in and take breaks while those other machines work, for one thing. Lucky you.

Now...

Where GigaStudio comes into the picture on an operation of that scale, and makes a truly significant difference, is twofold.

First, GigaStudio is all about network awareness, multiple machines, and large scale operations. It is designed ground up to be a hardcore, mission critical tool for a busy composing house, foley artists, soundstages, and commercial authoring of libraries.

Take for example the QuickSound search engine. Here is a scenario from just last night:

I\'m doing music and sound design for a play, \"In he Belly of the Beast.\" There are several courtroom vignettes which the audience perceives as documentary audio. I recorded the actors yesterday morning, but in order to make the cues really sing, I must do a full foley layer.

This is where QuickSound makes an hour-long job a five minute job. I need ambience. I type in courtroom, live, murmur and other key words, and QuickSound scans tens of thousands of individual sound effects (Hollywood Edge, a great library) and pops all those results onto the screen in less than a second. I drag the interesting ones onto the Distributed Wave screen, and there they are at the keyboard. I get my perfect ambience in seconds. Next, I want to give the feeling that the \"attorney\" is pacing the floor, while Abbott, being questioned, is stuck on the witness stand, confined. I search for \"male, footstep, ambient\" and up pop all the candidates. I drag them onto Distributed Wave, and within ten seconds, I am playing \"footsteps\" onto a waiting track. Now, at the end of the cue, Abbott says something really shocking--his foster parents tried to drown his little sister in front of him when he was a child. I search for \"crowd, agitated\" and get some hits. I drag those to the distributed wave, and find the perfect shocked reaction. I use the mod wheel to take off most of the treble as I play it in, so that the crowd sounds far from our virtual \"microphone.\" Next, I want the cue to end with the \"judge\" banging a gavel to quiet the crowd. I search for \"gavel.\" I get about ten hits, and drag a few of these onto Distributed Wave. Open a track, play the gavel. Now, I use a couple of reverbs to integrate the foley sounds into the overall ambience. I make the attorney and crowd more ambient than Abbott, who I want to sound as if he\'s wilting in front of a courtroom mic--so he\'s fairly dry.

And I\'m done. And it sounds fan-fking-tastic.

If I\'d had to search through FX CDs, or even to use Windows Search, I would have been working on that cue a looooong time. Using Giga/Quicksound/Distributed Wave, I got the entire thing done in about the same amount of time it took me to type the description to you.

That\'s big when you have lots of that kind of work coming your way every day, in addition to all the bed and feature music. Last night, I had to knock out fifteen of those cues, all about the same complexity with different action and settings. The CD is burning right now (on another machine). That\'s good.

The second thing GigaStudio does is provide a level of polyphony optimization for your overall work. This is crucial. People love to spew about polyphony performance, but context is truly everything. Polyphony control in a plugin setting is instrument by instrument. You can limit certain instruments\' polyphony in order to save for others, and you can limit polyphony in the same instrument by instrument fashion overall, and \"un-limit\" it when you mix, in order to get the best work flow--at the sometimes expense of hearing what you\'ll actually \"get.\" Sometimes not.

GigaStudio, being designed as a more monolithic solution, regulates polyphony algorithmically on two fronts. First, on the individual region (literally sample by sample), GigaStudio uses what\'s called \"self mask\" to intelligently regulate an individual instrument\'s polyphony load. If I play a very soft cymbal strike, for instance, followed by an extremely loud one, GigaStudio knows that second strike is going to completely shadow the first, so it fades and stops the ringout on the first and recovers that polyphony. Conversely, if you play the loud strike followed by the soft, Giga knows that the second strike will NOT mask the first, so both are allowed to ring.

On a more macro level, polyphony is regulated from instrument to instrument by the \"steal notes\" slider in Settings | Sampler. Here, depending upon what kind of piece you\'re building, Giga allows you to change the way it steals notes so that you get the best performance for a particular type of material.

These are very \"realtime\" kinds of tools, and after all, real time is what we musicians are all about.

Those are just a couple of examples of why GigaStudio has a lot of relevance. I expect GS3 to be equally relevant, in ways many of us have not even considered...just as GS2 redefined a lot of what we do.

Now, granted, there is a large population of users who may never even bump into the needs these tools solve. But...

Here\'s the thing--success is a terrible two-edged sword. You can struggle as a composer for years and years, and suddenly success will literally blindside you. All the sudden, your work life changes, literally overnight. Ever hear the phrase \"a slave to success?\" It happens.

And I just implore people (who might think these things and these ways of working are not important to them) just to think about it. Consider that any day, these features might just be VERY important to you, and that we all stand a very good opportunity of LOSING this kind of development if only what\'s \"popular\" technology from day to day ultimately ends up being produced.

All I ask from anyone who reads what I write is to simply ask questions, and consider all aspects of our tiny market, before being willing to, in essence, take sides in public debate--to crown a particular approach as right, and to say another is wrong or dead. They\'re all important to someone. We are all on exactly the same side...every one of us, in the struggle to keep our vendors funded and healthy. Without them, whether they\'re software vendors or sampleware vendors, we ALL lose.

Hasen

04-16-2003, 08:09 AM

I\'m glad this thread didn\'t go on and on.

Bruce A. Richardson

04-16-2003, 09:20 AM

Me too. images/icons/tongue.gif

Kenn159

04-16-2003, 09:36 AM

Very insightful Bruce.
I think whether you use giga studio with your business under time constraints or just record your own music at home on the weekends, everyone can appreciate simplifying and streamlining the recording process and can benefit by inovations like quicksound search.
It was interesting to see how you used it .
Youve got me interested in working with that function more.
What sequencer/Digital recorder software are you using and everytime you put in another soundeffect to you movie score , do you have to rewind the the piece first and enter the sound effect in realtime or jus pause it and enter it in steptime?

Kenn159

04-16-2003, 09:42 AM

Off topic here.

Reason obeys itself and ignorance does whatever is
dictated to it.\"

As in the Majority of the American public in this time of Bushism

Nick Batzdorf

04-16-2003, 12:02 PM

Good points, Eric. I\'m not scoring shows or films at the moment, but the projects I\'m working on still require me to turn out short cues pretty quickly; for me the answer is a combination of both approaches.

For one, why not get the most mileage out of each machine you\'ve paid for. Hans Zimmer doesn\'t care, but I still have to!

But mainly - as you say - I find it convenient to have the main machine load as much as possible with the sequence. Among other things, that makes it easier to bounce everything to disk when I\'m done so I can export it to Pro Tools for mixing. I can deal with the extra two minutes of loading time.

Having said that, I do use two extra Macs as well: a Powerbook running soft instruments while I\'m writing and an extra Altiverb when I\'m mixing; and a IIci running a NuVerb card. Plus I\'m experimenting with a 9600 that, in conjunction with a HUI on my main machine, will either run a MOTU PCI424-based system to replace my digital mixer or will run the remote software that shows its routings onscreen. I\'ve been trying to get rid of that mixer for years, since I don\'t mix on it, but so far there hasn\'t been a practical alternative...

***

And thanks for the info about your PC setup, Rich. I\'m just trying to figure out whether to put one together like that or just to buy a HP 2.2 P4 machine for $550.

Rich Pell

04-16-2003, 12:38 PM

we should probably make a new thread for this \"copyright\" disscusion.First, my comments have never been about the relevents of GS.More like \"who cares what sampler u use \"just as long as u get the results your looking for.Obviously for your huge workload Bruce,multi machines running Gs`s is the right thing for u right now.My original point being that large ,if not full orchestral scores can still be acomplished on 1 fast machine without GS and u wouldn`t even notice the difference.And many up and coming composers are getting turned on to this i think.So that i think i a few years u will find out that \"so and so famous -film composer\" was using EXS or whatever all along and not GS(the industry standard for the time being).Right now 1 Pc is fine for my workload.Ive considered adding another mahine that runs GS for my samples but theres really no need right now.Who knows, all i know is it can and is being done on 1 machine.Although having that extra machine if your main one goes down is also a valid point.Its actually now time for me load in my new Scarbee 73 that just came and try it out.happy Playing y`all ..Rich P.S Nick if u do get a HP p4 2.4 consider installing the Highpiont rocket card if your doing multiple drives.It might help.

Rich Pell

04-16-2003, 12:40 PM

BTW Who`s Eric?

spectrum

04-16-2003, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by Rich Pell:
BTW Who`s Eric? Why.....me of course.....

spectrum
(aka:EP)

;-)

Scott Cairns

04-16-2003, 06:02 PM

BTW Who`s Eric? - Hehehe Do you have a Roland Synth or sound module? You probably have a part of Eric sitting in your studio! images/icons/smile.gif

www.spectrasonics.net/artists/epersing.html (\"http://www.spectrasonics.net/artists/epersing.html\")

Bruce A. Richardson

04-16-2003, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by Kenn159:
Very insightful Bruce.
I think whether you use giga studio with your business under time constraints or just record your own music at home on the weekends, everyone can appreciate simplifying and streamlining the recording process and can benefit by inovations like quicksound search.
It was interesting to see how you used it .
Youve got me interested in working with that function more.
What sequencer/Digital recorder software are you using and everytime you put in another soundeffect to you movie score , do you have to rewind the the piece first and enter the sound effect in realtime or jus pause it and enter it in steptime? In that particular case, I was working in Vegas, which is fantastic for voiceover editing. I was using a combination of techniques. For the ambient beds, I auditioned them in Distributed Wave, then just dragged them across the network into Vegas. For the things like footsteps, I actually opened up tracks in Vegas and played those from the keyboard to get the timing and feel I was looking for. I have the Giga machines lightpiped to the DAW machine, so everything stays digital and clocked to the main DAW.

Rich, I agree, results from one sampling technology to another are not really discernable in the final product. To me, it\'s all about how I get to that final product, how much I enjoy myself while I\'m working, and how fast can I knock out the work. That\'s where I find a one-machine solution can\'t cut it. And for sure, losing a machine is much more survivable when you have two or three more in the wings, ready to fly.

You will totally dig the Scarbee 73. It is one of the best sample libraries ever produced, period. It makes me smile every time.