REVENGE IS MINE!!!!!!!!!!

[Nick Phoenix]

After only 2 months of watermark monitoring, I have NAILED a high profile composer pirate. We will be settling for a very LARGE sum of money. Apparently, he got my sounds at a SWAP MEET! Look out little piggies, the big bad wolf is on the prowl.

[dandean]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
After only 2 months of watermark monitoring, I have NAILED a high profile composer pirate. We will be settling for a very LARGE sum of money. Apparently, he got my sounds at a SWAP MEET! Look out little piggies, the big bad wolf is on the prowl.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Congrats Nick.

D



[This message has been edited by dandean (edited 09-26-2001).]

[PatS]

That is so cool! I\'ve always wanted to hear about someone catching a software thief. As the senior System Administrator for a software firm in Santa Barbara, I worry not only about outsiders breaking through our firewall and stealing source code, but also about our own employees using shareware and commercial programs without paying the license fees. People never cease to amaze me.

Anyway, congratulations! Use the settlement money to finance a vacation to Tahiti. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Pat

[donnie]

Congratulations NIck!!! You didn\'t catch him using any other libraries did you?

Donnie

[Bardstown Audio]

Hopefully this pirating thing will slack off.

Kip

[clueless]

I am not familiar with a \"swap meet.\" What is it?

clueless

[Munsie]

Kick ! I never could understand why a commercial composer would pirate samples, these are the guys who are SUPPOSED to buy the frickin libraries!!

Kip: Pirating will never stop. And with broad band (high speed internet) just about ready to go for the massess it will just get worse. Download a cd in about 20 minutes anyone?

Clueless: Swap meet is where people \"meet\" to \"swap\" items. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif In this case I would assume it was a public display of pirated wares or someone selling software at some local flea market or similar venue.

Keep those watermarks going, hey...this might even allow you to lower your prices!! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[paynterr]

How does the watermarking work out of interest? I guess each \'proper\' user has a unique id of some description?

[JoE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
After only 2 months of watermark monitoring, I have NAILED a high profile composer pirate. We will be settling for a very LARGE sum of money. Apparently, he got my sounds at a SWAP MEET! Look out little piggies, the big bad wolf is on the prowl.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nick, I\'m curious, too. Are you saying you\'ve used watermarking to track down an original buyer who violated his license by reselling the product? (That\'s the only way I can see a watermark leading to a successful hunt - but maybe I\'m just lacking imagination.) Or are you holding someone accountable for illegal possession of a product purchased at a swap meet?

Jens

[SCARBEE]

Well done Nick.

Is it an audio watermarking?

I would be VERY interested in this watermarking-technique if you really can find the pirates this way.

Scarbee

[clueless]

When I purchased QL Brass from , I sent no registration parameters to them or Nick. How does anyone know the CD is uniquely mine? Since most likely I discarded the receipts, how will anyone know this is a legitimate copy?

clueless

[Gav]

clueless,
You purchased the sounds from didn\'t you? They obviously know your name and information since you ordered it and they sent it to you. And they obviously know which exact copy of QL Brass they sent you since they had to put it in a box and mail it.
So there you have it. Nick now has a Name (yours) attached to a specific serial number (on your copy of his Brass library). You\'re now being watched!

Gav

[Nick Phoenix]

The \"SWAP MEET\" was a sample cd rom pirate fest. Many sample libraries were exchanged amongst working composers and others. There is a big problem here!

[Michiel Post]

Why do they always forget to invite us sample library producers at such SWAP MEETS? Seems like a perfect occasion to get to know the pirates http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/frown.gif

Nick, can you point me where to find info on the watermarking your library used? I\'m interested for my own titles.
Michiel POst

[ursatz]

Congratulations, Nick http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif. I\'m glad to see that sample library producers have an effective way to protect their property. (Now if only there were an equivalently effective mechanism for composers and performers....)

[Munsie]

\"(Now if only there were an equivalently effective mechanism for composers and performers....)\" Doesn\'t legal copyright cover this?

[ursatz]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Munsie:
\"(Now if only there were an equivalently effective mechanism for composers and performers....)\" Doesn\'t legal copyright cover this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If legal copyright were enough, the recording industry wouldn\'t be spending so much effort on their attempts (ultimately futile, IMO) to sneak \"uncopyable\" CDs into the marketplace.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
The \"SWAP MEET\" was a sample cd rom pirate fest. Many sample libraries were exchanged amongst working composers and others. There is a big problem here!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Congratulations, Nick. I hope you NAILED both the \"swapper\" and the \"swap-ee\" and exchanged information privately with other developers who could have been affected.

I have heard about such \"high profile\" swap meets in LA, one in particular. This may well be the same culprit, he has been detected and cut off from many sources of materials, so whatever he gets he deserves.

I find it laughable that someone would actually believe they could get away with this for very long. I provided a lot of loops for Sonic Foundry\'s original ACID release, and I can recognize my loops in a split second, even if they\'re buried in a piece. Even with orchestral libraries, it usually only takes a few notes for me to know the source of the sounds. For someone to believe that a developer who has spent months on a product wouldn\'t recognize his own work is just so stupid--especially with watermarking algorithms that are extremely detectable.

The irony of it is that most people with a public profile have no problem securing endorsement deals, etc., which would reduce their cash outlay. That someone on a high level would risk damages using pirated software is REALLY stupid.

Congratulations, Nick, for striking a blow to the casual piracy that hurts so many people. I think there should be a great deal of respect afforded developers of samples, who risk huge sums of money on a product which has a very slow rate of return.

Best regards,
Bruce

ps...Rare Instruments is FABULOUS.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michiel Post:

Nick, can you point me where to find info on the watermarking your library used? I\'m interested for my own titles.
Michiel POst<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Michiel,

I don\'t know which technology Nick uses, but I know that Ernest Cholakis at www.numericalsound.com (\"http://www.numericalsound.com\") has developed one, called \"Sonic Trace.\"

I believe it is the one in use by Dan Dean and Gary Garritan, although I am assuming that by association, and could be totally wrong.

At any rate, I have heard nothing but positive comments about Ernest, so I\'m sure he would be happy to answer any inquiries. His website is well worth a visit, anyway. He has done huge amounts of research on all sorts of musical subjects, and his work is a fascinating read.

Also, he has developed two very nice Giga libraries, Percussion Wall and Drone Archaeology.

Best regards,
Bruce

[SCARBEE]

Why can\'t \"high profile\" composers afford to buy libraries? I thought they were rich...

Scarbee

[KingIdiot]

They are!!! It doesn\'t change the fact that many people are inherently STUPID.

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

[donnie]

Hey Z6 we do pay royalties to the guys who play for us. As a matter of matter so far we\'ve paid them 100% http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Donnie

[Bruce A. Richardson]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by donnie:
Hey Z6 we do pay royalties to the guys who play for us. As a matter of matter so far we\'ve paid them 100% http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Donnie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Per Z6\'s post, I don\'t know of any sample developer here who \"steals\" anything from session players. The players know what they\'re being involved in and why, and they\'re paid for their work. It\'s actually pretty difficult to lift a coherent library from a musical track...people do it all the time for their personal libraries, but \"track lifts\" are generally not polished enough to release as a library product. Even with drums, you rarely can get \"clean\" notes with full ring-outs.

I think it\'s a little naive to assume that GigaStudio is going to put professional musicians out of business in session-land. That\'s just not true. Good players are always in demand for session and live work. If anything, GigaStudio is just one more opportunity for brand-name players to have royalty income and money-making product.

Think about it, this argument is as old as music itself...every time a new technology comes along there are always people declaring that the sky is falling. Pipe organs, valves on trumpets, synthesizers, sequencers, AutoTune, you name it...after each was introduced, the same old doom and gloom predictions tend to get aired.

Specifically referencing Nick\'s Rare Instruments, there\'s no way that those samples could have come from anything except a session specifically designed for the purpose. The isolation and chromatic repetition of specific articulations, etc., simply wouldn\'t be available from a track lift.

[Jamieh]

Sample developers are not \"stealing\" anything. They pay the players to play and they record them. If they players want royalties, they should ask for them in the contract. Most likely this would reduce the money they get from the recording session considerably, and I suspect most of them would like the money up front.

There should always be a market for live players. I believe the majority of film composers (excluding Zimmer) use live players whenever they have the budget. There have been TV and commercial composers using crappy synthesizers for years, so they aren\'t paying players anyway. Most of the people using samples don\'t have the budget to go out and hire a real orchestra for every project.

[This message has been edited by Jamieh (edited 09-28-2001).]

[Tokyo Joe]

This thread reminds me of the time, back in the \'80s, when the UK Musicians Union tried to ban synthesizers (?!). Their argument was that synths were going to lose their members (those that were session musicians) work. Of course it didn\'t.

Nothing, not even Gigastudio, can replace the sound of a great musician.

[Jamieh]

Why do people steal software? I know people that make 6 figure salaries who still think it is ok to make copies of software their friends have purchased so that they don\'t have to go out and buy it themselves.

People will steal anything that is easy to steal, especially if the odds of them getting caught is low.

[Z6]

Well done guys. So how about the developers paying the players royalties? (for a discussion see the \"Synth Sounds\" thread).

Anyone who \'steals\' someone else\'s work deserves stick for sure. I just hope that a lawyer somewhere realizes that this whole area of sampling is not so clear cut and the developers have a responsibility to protect more than just their own bank accounts.

This thread is just too much of a love fest. face up to your own \'intellectual property\' responsibilities and come clean on this.

Kudos to the first developer who offers royalties as a matter of course to the people who create the sounds in th first place (even more kudos to anyone who already does this - please let us know if you have).


Here\'s my $0.02 from thread so you don\'t even have to look it up:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Z6:
Jeff makes a very cogent point. \'Perfect\' Pianos (or, as Jeff points out, even improved instruments) are just around the corner. There is no doubt in my mind that that\'s what we\'re doing.

But the piano is very mechanical. Anyone can \'play\' the piano for a sampling session (more or less). But take Nick\'s recent post. He\'s dancing around, jumping for joy. He\'s caught someone \'stealing\' his work.

For my money his \'Rare Instruments\' is the best library I\'ve ever heard.

But he\'s not only stolen the \'sounds\' he\'s stolen the players (stealing souls?). Do these guys really know what they\'re doing when they plonk themselves down for a session? Will they make the connection when the work dries up in a couple of years when they stop getting calls?

There are a lot of real moral issues here. The whole \'Giga\' paradigm has put a lot of livelihoods in real peril. Sure, a real Bagpipe player might be better than the samples (but maybe not), but who can be arsed when you can pop in a CD?

I\'m glad that Nick has found a way to protect his work, but does a few days sampling followed by a few weeks programming deserve this kind of protection? What about thirty years of practise? I believe that the people who are sampled should (no, must!) be given royalties on every single CD sold.

It would be nice to see some of the developers here get involved in appropriate re-embursement before they go singing and dancing all over the place when they catch a \'pirate\'. I\'m allowed to use Nick\'s work because I paid for it, but I\'d feel a whole lot better if I knew that some of it was going to the person who actually played the instrument.

It seems analogous to the British Empire raping countries for their natural wealth because those countries don\'t know that certain commodities even have value (and who can turn down a paying session?).

Anyway please guys (developers) get your hands into your pockets before you start dancing, because you\'re dancing on the grave of raw musical currency (and it makes me barf, to boot).

But back to the point: Any good synth sounds out there? (thanks for the posts so far - especially the demos - very nice indeed.)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Flame on.


[This message has been edited by Z6 (edited 09-28-2001).]

[Neal Keane]

tokyo joe said:
Nothing, not even Gigastudio, can replace the sound of a great musician.

Tokyo makes a good point. Let\'s compare apples to apples! The Sample Library is not replacing the musician...the samples are replacing the instrument. Similar to the guitar student that lets his Les Paul collect dust in the closet, there is no direct relationship between purchasing a sample library and successfully rendering a musical composition. The samples still have to be played with practiced technique, emotional care, and intelligence in order to create a personal musical statement.

Royalties are not paid to the instrument manufacturer (sample developer) because there is no guarantee that the performer (composer) will be able to create anything worthwhile from them.

In other words, the intent of the original musician who recorded the sample was to create a worthy instrument, not to win a Grammy.

[Damon]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jamieh:
I believe the majority of film composers (excluding Zimmer) use live players whenever they have the budget.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Zimmer most definitely uses live players on his orchestral scores according to Jeff Rona who works with him at Mediaventures.
I asked Jeff about \"Gladiator\" and he said a VERY large orchestra was obviously used.
I think the only movie Zimmer did entirely with samplers that was orchestral was \"Driving Miss Daisy\".
He does add samples on top of orchestral cues however.
Wouldn\'t it be great if we could hear Zimmers mock-ups? Hell, wouldn\'t it be great if we could hear Elfmans as well? http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

[Jamieh]

Damon, I only meant that Zimmer doesn\'t exclusively orchestra members and sometimes prominently features the samplers, such as the horn parts in Crimson Tide.

[Kenn159]

Ok my curiousity is getting the best of me.
How did you bust this composer using pirated samples?
The way Im imagining it would be ,you heard a certain composers music ,you Identified that your samples were in his song from some kind of audio watermark[I see them on american dollar currentcy] ,then you do some kind of search either through retailers that sell you library or some kind of database that stores the names and addresses of people that have purchased your library.
And then if you don\'t see that certain composers name , you contact him and ask him if he owns your library and how did he get it and who did he buy it from .
It seems like it would be hard to find and enforce this kind of thing, if Im wrong please enlighten us .

One the same note so you dont think that my curiousity is a sign that sample library producers shouldn\'t get paid for there hard work, I have done a fair amount of sampling on pre giga samplers and know all the hard work involved .
I think sample developers should be compensated for all there hard work.
Just curious how this watermarking thing works .

[Aaron Symonds]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Damon:

Zimmer most definitely uses live players on his orchestral scores according to Jeff Rona who works with him at Mediaventures. I asked Jeff about \"Gladiator\" and he said a VERY large orchestra was obviously used. I think the only movie Zimmer did entirely with samplers that was orchestral was \"Driving Miss Daisy\".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I read an interview with him regarding the music for The Thin Red Line where he said that one or two major orchestral cues were entirely sampled.

Snip

Wouldn\'t it be great if we could hear Zimmers mock-ups? [/QUOTE]

On the second Galdiator soundtrack there\'s a 6 min synth mock-up of the battle cue.

[Damon]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron Symonds:
On the second Galdiator soundtrack there\'s a 6 min synth mock-up of the battle cue.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I never knew there was a second Gladiator soundtrack. I\'ll have to check that out.

[Punda]

Wow, this is quite an informative sample library discussion. Nick, I have all your libraries and they are great. I guess revenge is yours. Great Nick continue your awesome revenge on pirated samples, wow!

[SCARBEE]

Originally posted by Neal Keane:

The Sample Library is not replacing the musician...the samples are replacing the instrument

Very true - well said!

But still it might be a bit more - if I purchased Miles Davis\' trumpet I wouldn\'t be able to make 1 decent sound (I can\'t play a wind instrument at all), but if someone sampled this instrument and I got the sample-CD then I could actually play a tune with it.

Scarbee

[This message has been edited by SCARBEE (edited 09-30-2001).]

[OH]

>The Sample Library is not replacing the musician...the samples are replacing the instrument

Very true - well said!<

So here we are again: Thanks whoever that Sample library producers don\'t have to pay Fender & Co for sampling there instruments and we don\'t have to pay more in the end. I still think it to be funny that you can sample an instrument (like a Korg Synth), but there is copyright on their samples...

FUNNY


------------------
O.H.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kenn159:
Ok my curiousity is getting the best of me.
How did you bust this composer using pirated samples?
<snip>
It seems like it would be hard to find and enforce this kind of thing, if Im wrong please enlighten us .
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can\'t speak for Nick, but it is actually quite easy for a sample developer to \"bust\" a pirate user, once the samples are watermarked.

Anyone who affixes music to a film, video, or CD, and sells it commercially is providing the \"proof.\" If his product indicates use of a library for which there is no record of his purchase, he is simply contacted and asked about it.

If the composer cannot provide proof of purchase, or cannot provide adequate documentation that a properly licensed instrumentalist was hired to \"play\" the session in question, then he is liable to the extent of the law.

A hobbyist using pirated samples would be very difficult to detect. However, a working musician whose product is easily obtained is a sitting duck. This is true of all aspects of copyright. A professional musician, composing for any commercially distributed medium, has very high exposure to legal action if he decides to risk using fraudulently obtained samples in his work

[clueless]

Bruce,
Here lies a problem for me then. I don\'t save my purchase receipts -- actually I\'m inconsistant about it. So I purchase soundware CDs as needed and use them for clients on projects. I don\'t make copies of the sample CDs to distribute or profit from; I don\'t loan the CDs to friends and colleagues. But I will go to jail anyway because I didn\'t save the paperwork. Something sounds strange here. I don\'t want to even begin to sound like I\'m defending software pirates or those who purchase from them but the burden of proof must be on the developer to prove that a \"user\" has committed a crime. I suspect that I am not the only one who would have a hard time finding every purchase document.

clueless

[SCARBEE]

Hi clueless,

A professional composer/producer HAVE receipts as you need them for your tax-papers - to prove expenses. I love my receipts for this reason! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Scarbee

[clueless]

For tax purposes, yes. How long do you save your receipts? I don\'t keep files beyond the required 5 years.

clueless

[jsaras]

I think I\'ve heard Nick\'s sound libraries used exclusively in a bunch of porno flicks.

[leadbelly]

Congrats Nick!

This a well deserved break for sample library creators. I have Quantaum leap guitars and bass, brass and Rare Intsruments. Nick is clearly one of the most forward thinking producers out there.

Nick, you slick;
They can\'t pull a trick,
If your samples they pick,
Cause watermarks your schtick;
(I know, I\'m sick at this limerick)

Peace,

leadbelly

[Nick Phoenix]

Originally posted by Z6:
Jeff makes a very cogent point. \'Perfect\' Pianos (or, as Jeff points out, even improved instruments) are just around the corner. There is no doubt in my mind that that\'s what we\'re doing.

But the piano is very mechanical. Anyone can \'play\' the piano for a sampling session (more or less). But take Nick\'s recent post. He\'s dancing around, jumping for joy. He\'s caught someone \'stealing\' his work.

For my money his \'Rare Instruments\' is the best library I\'ve ever heard.

But he\'s not only stolen the \'sounds\' he\'s stolen the players (stealing souls?). Do these guys really know what they\'re doing when they plonk themselves down for a session? Will they make the connection when the work dries up in a couple of years when they stop getting calls?

There are a lot of real moral issues here. The whole \'Giga\' paradigm has put a lot of livelihoods in real peril. Sure, a real Bagpipe player might be better than the samples (but maybe not), but who can be arsed when you can pop in a CD?

I\'m glad that Nick has found a way to protect his work, but does a few days sampling followed by a few weeks programming deserve this kind of protection? What about thirty years of practise? I believe that the people who are sampled should (no, must!) be given royalties on every single CD sold.

It would be nice to see some of the developers here get involved in appropriate re-embursement before they go singing and dancing all over the place when they catch a \'pirate\'. I\'m allowed to use Nick\'s work because I paid for it, but I\'d feel a whole lot better if I knew that some of it was going to the person who actually played the instrument.

RESPONSE:
I don\'t pay royalties to the players, I just pay them really well. The sarangi player on Rare Instruments got $2000 for a one hour session. Actually, hardly any of the players on Rare Instruments were session players. Mostly, they were just happy to share their instruments.
I apologize if my rejoicing seems in bad taste. I had begun to think that there was nothing that could be done about pirating. So this SMALL ray of hope is encouraging.

[SCARBEE]

Originally posted by Z6:
I\'m glad that Nick has found a way to protect his work, but does a few days sampling followed by a few weeks programming deserve this kind of protection?

To speak for myself: I have spend 6-7 months recording and programming Scarbee J-Slap and 6 months more to do J-Fingered. 8-12 hours, 6-7 days a week. I play the bass myself.

I think Nick, Gary and other developers spend
this amount of time too on their libraries.

Scarbee

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SCARBEE:

To speak for myself: I have spend 6-7 months recording and programming Scarbee J-Slap and 6 months more to do J-Fingered. 8-12 hours, 6-7 days a week. I play the bass myself.

I think Nick, Gary and other developers spend
this amount of time too on their libraries.

Scarbee<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I wasn\'t trying to imply that you guys didn\'t put enough work into it, nor that you didn\'t deserve to have your work protected.

It seems from the responses that nobody believes that the \'musicians\' who do the sessions deserve anything but a nice fee.

Nevertheless, I would advise caution. Just because the current state of the technology doesn\'t completely \'do away\' with the need for musicians doesn\'t mean that someone who plays a session won\'t decide (after he\'s heard his \'music\' played on three or four hundred different tracks) that he should indeed get a piece of the pie. I\'m not a lawyer but it\'s hard to see a judge disagreeing with this (over the long haul).

We already have DJs jumping about \'twiddling knobs\' in lieu of craftmanship, and a judge may feel that 100% of royalties going to the recording engineer (samplist) might be a bit much.

It all sounds to me a bit like Robert Altman\'s film \'The Player\', where the executives want to \'eliminate the writer\'.

On a related point, there seems to be two camps here (amongst developers); one where they go it alone and another where they distribute through large companies who, I\'m sure, grab the lion\'s share of profit.

Have you guys ever thought of banding together? A kind of \'United Artists\' for the sampling world?

Whether you believe the musician deserves royalties or not, why would it be so bad to have an iron rule where a musician (if playing a \'difficult\' instrument that requires many expert articulations) could get 2-5% of royalties?

You\'re all here on this group. Would it be such a stretch to market everything yourselves? That way you could use current samples and package them many times (individual downloads, \'greatest hits\', various selections).

If Scarbee is offering his time to tweak people\'s midi files, wouldn\'t that time be better spent offering \'custom\' CDs? You know, one of Nick\'s guitars, Scarbee\'s bass, Dan\'s violin etc., all on one CD? Plus the ability to download individual instruments and upgrades. You might even form a users club where we could pay a monthly fee to download stuff.

Right now, consumers have to decide between a range of coveted samples and fork out the whole budget for CDs that have stuff they might never use. I\'m sure that you could make more money by charging us less if you lost the \'middle men\' and pooled your resources.

Just a thought.

[Kenn159]

I dont think I have one single receipt to any samples that I have purchased.
I was never told in documentation that comes with the cd\'s or by the retailer that I bought them from that I needed to save them.
Although most samples that I have purchased I bought from East/West, I wonder if they have records of my purchases.
I get the impression that paranoia and fear is being created here in a attemp to limit pirating.
I find it hard to believe that the authorities will drag everyone away to jail or fine them some large sum for not keeping reciepts to sample cd\'s.
Come to think of it I dont think I have the receipt to my TV set,oh no they will think I stole it , Im scared now, not.

[Munsie]

\"I dont think I have one single receipt to any samples that I have purchased.\" Are you a commercial composer? If so I would think you would keep your reciepts for tax purposes at least. But I wonder, as long as you have the original cd and case and license agreement that comes with the cd in the jewel case, if that would be enough?

[Scott Speed]

Hi Z6,

Maybe I\'m just looking at this from a different perspective, but I honestly don\'t see how the majority of these sampling sessions would entitle the session players to anything more than their studio rates.
These sampling sessions typically involve musicians playing a series of individual notes at varying velocities. How does that entitle the player to a chunk of the royalties? We\'re talking single notes here! I don\'t see how that constitutes a serious creative contribution to the overall project unless the musician\'s style and reputation are being used to uniquely identify and promote the said sample CD.
Studio rates are not fixed, and in my experience, the notoriety and experience of the session player often dictates how high or low their established rates are. This has been in practice for decades and seems pretty darn fair to me.
And as far as \"playing a \'difficult\' instrument that requires many expert articulations\" is concerned, I think you\'re seriously confusing technical proficiency with creative issues. If someone can\'t play an instrument well enough to get some clean single notes on tape, they better have a day job! Technical proficiency is an absolute necessity for any session player, so I don\'t see why that in and of itself should be deserving of any royalties.
I think you also have to give the producers of these libraries a hell of a lot more credit. This is not an instance where the producer tells the player to just hit a few notes and we\'ll see what we come up with. Studio time is expensive, and (ideally) the producers have to have every detail worked out beforehand to insure quality and consistency in the finished product. The way each note is played, how the instrument is miced, the actual mic used, the room reverb, the EQ, the post effects, etc., all play a tremendous role in how the final sound comes out. How a musician plays a note is such a small piece of the picture when you look a the grander scheme of things.

Regards,
Scott


<various snips>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Z6:
It seems from the responses that nobody believes that the \'musicians\' who do the sessions deserve anything but a nice fee.

I\'m not a lawyer but it\'s hard to see a judge disagreeing with this (over the long haul).

Whether you believe the musician deserves royalties or not, why would it be so bad to have an iron rule where a musician (if playing a \'difficult\' instrument that requires many expert articulations) could get 2-5% of royalties?
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Haydn]

Another thing to add to Scott\'s machine above:

Most session players are paid by the hour for most recordings. They rarely ever get royalties. Usually only the composers or a band gets royalties for their recordings. Many of these bands never see a penny of their royalties as they\'re paying back the record company the money that was fronted to them to pay for recording and promotional costs.

If I played in a band and needed a trumpet player for a tune, I would pay him an hourly rate to add the trumpet. He would never see another penny from royalties after this. He would probably get more work though if he did a great job!

[DaveO]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Z6:
It seems from the responses that nobody believes that the \'musicians\' who do the sessions deserve anything but a nice fee.

Back to the Hans Zimmer example; I\'m sure only he is the one collecting royalties for the soundtrack; the musicians were all paid their scale for the session and that\'s it. Their advantage is adding \"Zimmer Sountrack\" to their resumes, and the additional work they\'ll get from it.

[pantonality]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>
Just because the current state of the technology doesn\'t completely \'do away\' with the need for musicians doesn\'t mean that someone who plays a session won\'t decide (after he\'s heard his \'music\' played on three or four hundred different tracks) that he should indeed get a piece of the pie. I\'m not a lawyer but it\'s hard to see a judge disagreeing with this (over the long haul).
<snip>
Whether you believe the musician deserves royalties or not, why would it be so bad to have an iron rule where a musician (if playing a \'difficult\' instrument that requires many expert articulations) could get 2-5% of royalties?
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You\'ve received a number of cogent replies to this already. As a musician I don\'t buy it. IIRC, the standard in copyright is that what you copyright has to be uniquely recognizable. Single notes can\'t be differentiated from other single notes and heck you can\'t copyright a chord. What you can copyright is a distinct melody and harmonization of at least a few bars. I don\'t think any judge in the land would award damages to musicians for sample libraries.

Frankly, this is a \"Sky is falling attitude.\" There will always be a market for great violinists, sax players, whatever. Those who can\'t play the instrument will use samples and sound pretty good, maybe even excellent. Great players will always find gigs and less capable players will have day jobs.

As for your iron rule about 2-5% royalties, go for it. If someone will pay you that, congratulations. If not, at least you will have tested what the market will bear. Itzak Perlman or Mark Knopfler might be able to get royalties. Frankly I don\'t think such a library would be worth paying a higher price for, but that\'s just me.

It sounds like it might make a good business idea. I wish you well in your new endeavor. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Steve Chandler

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pantonality:
Single notes can\'t be differentiated from other single notes and heck you can\'t copyright a chord. What you can copyright is a distinct melody and harmonization of at least a few bars. I don\'t think any judge in the land would award damages to musicians for sample libraries.

Frankly, this is a \"Sky is falling attitude.\" There will always be a market for great violinists, sax players, whatever. Those who can\'t play the instrument will use samples and sound pretty good, maybe even excellent. Great players will always find gigs and less capable players will have day jobs.

As for your iron rule about 2-5% royalties, go for it. If someone will pay you that, congratulations. If not, at least you will have tested what the market will bear. Itzak Perlman or Mark Knopfler might be able to get royalties. Frankly I don\'t think such a library would be worth paying a higher price for, but that\'s just me.

It sounds like it might make a good business idea. I wish you well in your new endeavor. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Steve Chandler

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks, Steve.

Great players don\'t always get gigs. I\'ve heard some magnificent buskers scraping a living - music is like any other business; who you know also counts.

Single notes can\'t be copyrighted - yet. What about a guitarist playing a tremolo - that can\'t be compared to a chord or a single note? What about some perfect triple tonguing by a brass player? There is more there than just the \'note\'. Paco de Lucia\'s tremolo is not just a bunch of notes strung together, but if he were to be sampled, I\'m sure people would want such an articultaion. Ditto for his rasguedo(s) (chords).

A good sample library depends as much on the player as the producer (given certain instruments).

Frankly, I\'m surprized at the black & white attitudes I\'ve seen here. A lot of crowing when Nick announces he\'s caught a pirate, then a commoditizing of the musician (well, I suppose this is a \'sampling\' group). I don\'t think the sky is falling, but there can be no doubt that work is lost when there are good sample libraries available. I can\'t understand why you\'re even arguing that.

People keep telling me that Musicians always get a fee when they play on a recording. I was aware of that, that\'s why I posted. But a \'normal\' session usually means one recording. If someone plays on a library and that library is then used on 1,000 or 10,000 recordings, I believe the musician who played on it might be a bit miffed, and I wouldn\'t put money on a judge throwing it out (at some time in the future).

One more point: If single notes can\'t be \'differentiated\', why are sample libraries protected? Please don\'t misunderstand. I\'m not belittling the producer at all, but where exactly is the comparable creativity? Nothing was composed (multisamples) and the \'programming\' could hardly be compared to a regular computer program. It is essentially the work of a recording engineer (and I don\'t know why anyone finds it \'insulting\' to be compared to a recording engineer).

I\'m told here that any old musician will do. This is not true. How many flautists can play a scale the way James Galway plays a scale? Are not Carlos Santana or Eric Clapton instantly recognizable by their tone? Neither are technically superhuman, it is inside each note that their character and musicianship is evident.

I am completely gobsamacked that everyone who posted on this (all musicians, I assume) has such a concrete belief that samplists should be protected, but not the musicians who blurt out the single notes, chords and articulations that are apparently so valueless. Exploitation takes many forms, and you don\'t have to be on minumum wage to be a victim.

Anyway, people will do what they want to do. I just wanted to say that any developer who recognized the musician as a part of the creative process would earn my respect (not that it has any value to anyone but myself) and give me hope that there are \'musicians\' out there who value their fellows enough to acknowledge that their very \'sound\' is indeed a part of the \'creative\' process.

[Munsie]

\"then the instrument makers might start to make some noise on this as well.\" There is no doubt in my mind, that in time if you sample a branded instrument you will have to pay royalties (or perhaps something worse) to the manufacturer. In another thread I wondered if this was even legal. (Synth Sounds)

[Synth2k]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Duncan Brinsmead:
I wonder what people would pay for a gigapiano where Horowitz performed the
samples?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whoa, now THAT would be interesting.

\"GigaPiano 2: Horowitz returns from the grave to create multi-gigabyte sampled piano!\"

:-)

I would actually love to hear a sampled piano sampled directly from Horowitz\'s beloved grand piano that he used, it was a beautiful instrument indeed. I don\'t know what it is, but new Steinway pianos just do not seem as good to me as the older pianos in both the way they play and the way they sound. Not that I would reject a new Steinway of my very own sitting in my studio!

Ryan.




------------------
Sonic Control
www..com (\"http://www..com\")
Giga Users Network at
www..com/gigasampler/ (\"http://www..com/gigasampler/\")

[nicholash]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kenn159:
I dont think I have one single receipt to any samples that I have purchased.
I was never told in documentation that comes with the cd\'s or by the retailer that I bought them from that I needed to save them.
Although most samples that I have purchased I bought from East/West, I wonder if they have records of my purchases.
I get the impression that paranoia and fear is being created here in a attemp to limit pirating.
I find it hard to believe that the authorities will drag everyone away to jail or fine them some large sum for not keeping reciepts to sample cd\'s.
Come to think of it I dont think I have the receipt to my TV set,oh no they will think I stole it , Im scared now, not.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I\'d be very surprised if East/West did not have records of your purchases, especially if you have bought QL Brass. Have you phoned them to check?

Nicholas
p.s. I bought QL Brass quite some time ago from Time & Space (UK distributors). They should have given my details to East/West.

[Duncan Brinsmead]

I wonder what people would pay for a gigapiano where Horowitz performed the
samples?

Perhaps people who used these samples could then sound like Horowitz.

Duncan

[Z6]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Duncan Brinsmead:
I wonder what people would pay for a gigapiano where Horowitz performed the
samples?

Perhaps people who used these samples could then sound like Horowitz.

Duncan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did mention in earlier posts that I was talking about less \'mechanical\' instruments. Instruments where the musician is part of the \'evolution\' of the sound.

But you can bet your arse when we get \'gigapianos\' with hundreds of layers and near-perfect controllers then the instrument makers might start to make some noise on this as well.

[Nick Phoenix]

You don\'t need to hold onto your receipts. We register you automatically. If we detect a watermark and trace it to you through ASCAP or BMI and have no record of you owning a license, you will be pleasantly contacted, and asked if you own a license. No worries!

[OH]

>[B]You don\'t need to hold onto your receipts. We register you automatically.<

Hi Nick!

Now I am curious. Living in Germany I wonder if you get the data of German customers? The thing is: I go into a shop and buy the product. Now: Who is the owner? The music-shop-guy who sold it to me. Or me. Or do the music-shop-owners pick up my address, send it to best-service and best-service sends it to you, so that I am registered in the end. Regarding the watermark thing: I understand it to be possible to trace as or in a sample. I just don\'T get how it could be traced in a final Audio-CD. Just curious.

------------------
O.H.

[nicholash]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
You don\'t need to hold onto your receipts. We register you automatically. If we detect a watermark and trace it to you through ASCAP or BMI and have no record of you owning a license, you will be pleasantly contacted, and asked if you own a license. No worries!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A couple of questions for you Nick:

1) What is the situation regarding having bought a license for QL Brass, if I compose a piece of music and use QL Brass for it, and then sell this music recording so that I no longer own the rights to it?

2) What is the situation regarding if I am hired to play instruments from my copy of QL Brass on someone else\'s music recording?

Nicholas

[Duncan Brinsmead]

>\"GigaPiano 2: Horowitz returns from the grave to create multi-gigabyte sampled piano!\"

Its not impossible.. he created some player rolls.. one could plug it into a disclavier and sample notes from his performances. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

I agree though, that good sampling of a wind or string instrument generally requires a fairly talented sample player. I remember my wind class at Curtis where the head of the school used to make everyone play solo a single \"a\" : 8 beats inaudible to forte and 8 beats down again. The clarinets had no problem but one would cringe when he got to the oboes and bassoons. If they didn\'t do it right he would simply say \"again\". Usually it got worse each time through until the player was in tears. It was just a single note, but more nerve racking than any performance.

Duncan

[noenoeil]

I just read this whole thread, now I need some tylenol. ;)
I\'m sure about one of the next questions here :
Hi, I work in a CD duplication factory, and we duplicated some sample libraries CDs for east/west so I\'m part of the process-should I ask for royalties ?

[Nick Phoenix]

As long as your name appears in the credits, you can do whatever you want with the samples. Forgive me if I don\'t divulge any more info on the watermarking scheme, the less everyone knows the better!

[Bruce A. Richardson]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Synth2k:
actually love to hear a sampled piano sampled directly from Horowitz\'s beloved grand piano that he used, it was a beautiful instrument indeed. I don\'t know what it is, but new Steinway pianos just do not seem as good to me as the older pianos in both the way they play and the way they sound. Not that I would reject a new Steinway of my very own sitting in my studio!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hard call there. While an older instrument may have desirable tone quality in some ways, it\'s also likely to have more mechanical noise, more rattles, buzzes and all manner of non-musical imperfections.

We forgive (and rarely hear) these things from twenty to thirty feet away in a performance hall. But when they\'re preserved in full glory to be triggered again and again, they\'ll drive you nuts in a sample library.

The quality of sampled pianos is actually far more about what room and what mic technique is used, given a decent quality instrument.

The first person to record a very well-pedigreed piano, in a dead-quiet, decently large studio--with nice omnis given some breathing room--will make the best sample library available so far.

You simply cannot use 18-24\" mic\'ing distances \"inside the lid\" and reproduce a piano as an instrument. Capturing it from that perspective will work well in many settings, especially pop and jazz where the other instruments are similarly close mic\'ed, but it does not give weight or size (or warmth) which people really desire for solo/orchestral work. Ironically, the quality missing from close-mic\'ed pianos tends to be intimacy...the barely-there pianissimos that are warm and SO round. It\'s easy to fake the fortissimos with enough reverb, but \"thin\" pianissimos are totally uncharacteristic.

I don\'t think the mic distances have to be excessive. Just getting 4 to 6 feet above the instrument would be a quantum leap, but this would require a truly world-class studio to accomplish.

People mic pianos tightly because of the noise floor, and the only way around it is to be in a studio that is so dead quiet you literally hear you own heartbeat in your chest. These rooms exist, but they are fairly rare. There is one here in Dallas, but it\'s a vocal room and not suitable for piano. You actually hear the blood moving in your ears in that room, it\'s very disturbing.

[Kenn159]

I had never heard of audio watermarking so I did a web search and here is the result of my first two hits.


SafeAudio explained and should we fear it ? - How does it work ?
Posted by DoMiN8ToR on Friday 27 July 2001

SafeAudio, you probably already heard about it. It\'s the music industries latest technology to make sure they will get their money from the public.

I\'ve never seen a industry that is so keen on money and tries in any way to protect it\'s products so desperately. Since they have stopped Napster they are disliked by more and more people, but they don\'t seem to care.

Macrovision

SafeAudio is an Audio CD protection developed by Macrovision. This Californian company has become famous by their VHS and CD (SafeDisc) protections. Both have been cracked, but do what they are designed for, protect the contents of media, or at least make it as difficult as possible to duplicate it. Of course most of the CD Freaks visitors are able to bypass the protections, but the average home user will not.

Altough SafeAudio is rather easy to bypass I think Macrovision can already market it as a success as it seems a lot of record companies have adopted the technology. Soon Macrovision will publish their results and I\'m very curious how much they\'ve made this year.

Think about this, Macrovision only excists because there are people like us that like to backup their music. Thinking of that, they should very happy with us .

Watermarking ?

A technology to prevent consumers from backing up is watermarking, this means that the digital signal of audio will contain a signal that marks it as an copy. SafeAudio does not work this way. Watermarking is controversial as in tests good ears could say whether an audio track was marked or not, thus the quality of the audio was degraded.

SafeAudio protects a CD only from ripping. This means that converting your CD to MP3/WMA files should be impossible. Stupid of course, as there are MP3 players on the market, just like a walk/disc man that you can carry around and for those you NEED to convert your CD\'s.

The technology

So SafeAudio is no watermark, but does protect the contents of a CD from ripping, what\'s the trick ?

Macrovision likes to use the CD standards to it\'s limit\'s as it does with SafeDisc 2, also SafeAudio has some tricks to fool your CD player.

During the production of SafeAudio, the production plant will change some of the error correction data of the CD. Error correction is besides the actual content very important for a CD. The smallest scratch or piece of dust will create gaps in the music but your CD player is able, due error correction methods, to replace these gaps with the actual music and you won\'t notice your CD player is doing it !

SafeAudio changes the so called EFM code on the CD. Easily said; EFM code makes sure the CD can be played in normal conditions, it is part of the error correction system that is used on audio CD\'s. Errors in (this)data can easily be repaired by a CD player in both your hifi set as your computer when playing audio CD\'s. If you want to rip this data however - (transfering it to your HD)- these errors will not be corrected by your HD as only a CD player know how to do this, resulting in gaps and bad noises in the audio.

Macrovision and TTR (that started developing this technology) say that the error corrections that are done while you play a CD in your normal CD player/computer can not be heard, for now there is no reason to believe they are wrong.

The main questions rises, can we bypass it ?


1: How does it work ?
2: How to bypass it
3: Conclusion




View reactions [29]
Next Page - 2/3

/////////////////////////////////////////////2nd hit


Re: *Beware* Warner Discs & Watermarking

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ daReview Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Steven Kastner on December 23, 2000 at 21:43:37:

In Reply to: *Beware* Warner Discs & Watermarking posted by Marcus on December 23, 2000 at 19:55:13:

: DVD-Audio discs offer higher resolution than compact discs in theory, however with audible watermarking being added to the majority of new releases, one could argue these discs are inferior to CDs!

: Please boycott the purchase of any discs with watermarking. Send a message to the recording industry that this is simply intolerable.

: According to Stereophile, the new Warner releases contain watermarking, from Verance -- http://www.verance.com. (\"http://www.verance.com.\") This practice degrades sound quality and insults law-abiding audiophiles.

: Marcus

: P.S. Also worthy of mention: Sony\'s SACD technology obviates any need for watermarking and therefore SACD\'s will not be watermarked, also according to Stereophile.

Stereophile has a right to their opinion. However, be advised that at the recent AES convention, Sony admitted that SACD does use LPCM coding at some point (they weren\'t exactly clear where) and that SACD is NOT an entirely 1 bit system. This DOES leave them vulnerable to hackers (and therefore piraters) as any other system that uses LPCM.

I will never be satisfied with ANY audible watermarking on any disc by any label. But I am all for a truly inaudible watermark. Such a copy protection system will encourage record companies to release music in high resolution formats. Without such protection, pirates will be able to flood the market with truly inferior counterfiets. They have done so with CD\'s for years. And they will be packaged beautifully, passed off on to an unsuspecting public.

I ask anyone in this forum to reveal any watermark\'s location on any disc regardless of label, so others in the forum can see if they can hear it.

In the meantime, you go ahead and boycott whomever you like. that is your right. I wonder if you can tell me where you hear any watermark on any DVD-A disc. Be specific. Tell me the disc, the cut and the time. Tell me what it sounds like. If you can point out a watermark that I missed, I will be happy to complain to warner, or any other label.

I have the CD, 4 channel discrete ( Door\'s Greatest Hits) reel tape and DVD-Audio release of The Doors\' \"L.A. Woman\" from Warner Music Group. The DVD-A release blows the CD and quad reel away. The same goes for comparing ELP\'s \"Brain Salad Surgery\" on CD to DVD-A. DVD-A is far superior.

I now have 15 DVD-Audio discs, including 3 from Silverline (no watermarking), one from Beyond (no watermarking) and 11 from Warner (may have watermarking). I have yet to hear an audible watermark on any Warner disc. Nor have the 20 other people who have heard my discs. If it\'s there, none of us can hear it.

Each time anyone has said \" I hear an audible click \" , a repeated replay of the exact same spot reveals a drum hit, rim shot, etc.
I also have what most people would consider a truly high end 5.1 system, composed of all Apogee ribbon speakers (crossed actively by an Apogee DAX active crossover to a pair of Apogee subs), a Newcastle pre/processor (which has true analog pass-through on ots six channel input), Llano and Acurus power amps . So you can\'t say my audio system isn\'t good enough to reveal such low-level detail.

Steven Kastner


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Follow Ups:


Re: *Beware* Warner Discs & Watermarking Marcus 14:09:08 12/24/00 (0)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : DVD-Audio discs offer higher resolution than compact discs in theory, however with audible watermarking being added to the majority of new releases, one could argue these discs are inferior to CDs!

: : Please boycott the purchase of any discs with watermarking. Send a message to the recording industry that this is simply intolerable.

: : According to Stereophile, the new Warner releases contain watermarking, from Verance -- http://www.verance.com. (\"http://www.verance.com.\") This practice degrades sound quality and insults law-abiding audiophiles.

: : Marcus

: : P.S. Also worthy of mention: Sony\'s SACD technology obviates any need for watermarking and therefore SACD\'s will not be watermarked, also according to Stereophile.

: Stereophile has a right to their opinion. However, be advised that at the recent AES convention, Sony admitted that SACD does use LPCM coding at some point (they weren\'t exactly clear where) and that SACD is NOT an entirely 1 bit system. This DOES leave them vulnerable to hackers (and therefore piraters) as any other system that uses LPCM.

: I will never be satisfied with ANY audible watermarking on any disc by any label. But I am all for a truly inaudible watermark. Such a copy protection system will encourage record companies to release music in high resolution formats. Without such protection, pirates will be able to flood the market with truly inferior counterfiets. They have done so with CD\'s for years. And they will be packaged beautifully, passed off on to an unsuspecting public.

: I ask anyone in this forum to reveal any watermark\'s location on any disc regardless of label, so others in the forum can see if they can hear it.

: In the meantime, you go ahead and boycott whomever you like. that is your right. I wonder if you can tell me where you hear any watermark on any DVD-A disc. Be specific. Tell me the disc, the cut and the time. Tell me what it sounds like. If you can point out a watermark that I missed, I will be happy to complain to warner, or any other label.

: I have the CD, 4 channel discrete ( Door\'s Greatest Hits) reel tape and DVD-Audio release of The Doors\' \"L.A. Woman\" from Warner Music Group. The DVD-A release blows the CD and quad reel away. The same goes for comparing ELP\'s \"Brain Salad Surgery\" on CD to DVD-A. DVD-A is far superior.

: I now have 15 DVD-Audio discs, including 3 from Silverline (no watermarking), one from Beyond (no watermarking) and 11 from Warner (may have watermarking). I have yet to hear an audible watermark on any Warner disc. Nor have the 20 other people who have heard my discs. If it\'s there, none of us can hear it.

: Each time anyone has said \" I hear an audible click \" , a repeated replay of the exact same spot reveals a drum hit, rim shot, etc.
: I also have what most people would consider a truly high end 5.1 system, composed of all Apogee ribbon speakers (crossed actively by an Apogee DAX active crossover to a pair of Apogee subs), a Newcastle pre/processor (which has true analog pass-through on ots six channel input), Llano and Acurus power amps . So you can\'t say my audio system isn\'t good enough to reveal such low-level detail.

: Steven Kastner

////////////////////////////////////////////


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ daReview Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

[OH]

>As long as your name appears in the credits, you can do whatever you want with the samples<

Please excuse Nick. I definitely don\'T want to provoke, BUT: I go into a shop, buy the library & might get a receipt. That\'s all. No name required for any \"credits\"...

regards

------------------
O.H.

[Synth2k]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Hard call there. While an older instrument may have desirable tone quality in some ways, it\'s also likely to have more mechanical noise, more rattles, buzzes and all manner of non-musical imperfections.

(etc. :-) ) [snip]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How very true Bruce. I assume that it would also depend heavily on how well the piano was maintained, when it comes to the resulting mechanical noises and so fourth that you would get out of the piano.

I would like to add one more point to your list of suggestions for a perfect piano: balance between the layers. Essential for \"classical\" playing in my opinion. Some of the sampled pianos I\'ve worked with for Giga have some velocity layers that just \"pop\" out at you when you least expect it. So far, one of my favorites is the Post Audio Media Steinway from the post piano suite disc. I\'ve found myself using it lately for almost everything that I have been doing that requires classical piano, simply because I have found that it can perform subtle shadings in dynamics so well. Anyhow, I realize that this is not a sampled piano thread! Just thought I would add that in.

Ryan.




------------------
Sonic Control
www..com (\"http://www..com\")
Giga Users Network at
www..com/gigasampler/ (\"http://www..com/gigasampler/\")

[Nick Phoenix]

If you\'re not doing anything wrong, you won\'t get hassled. We have a pretty good system worked out.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Kenn, that \"watermarking\" discussion sounds to me like a combination of whiny audiophile types and portable player freaks, who generally don\'t know their a*s*s from a hole in the ground on music technology issues.

Digital Watermarking occurs at far too low a level in the stream to be detectable in playback. It\'s much ado about nothing. The refrigerator cycling on and off in the kitchen probably has a more profound audio result. Anybody who talks about audible results in the same paragraph as \"ripping to MP3\" has pretty much blown his own argument right out of the water, anyway.

[Munsie]

Hi Nick,

For arguments sake, what if someone\'s purchase cannot be traced to a distributor or retailer, but they own the actual cd,case,contents, etc. Would that be legal enough ground to warrant the end user to produce commercial music legally? Just curious, thanks.

[Kenn159]

Digital Watermarking occurs at far too low a level in the stream to be detectable in playback. It\'s much ado about nothing. The refrigerator cycling on and off in the kitchen probably has a more profound audio result. Anybody who talks about audible results in the same paragraph as \"ripping to MP3\" has pretty much blown his own argument right out of the water, anyway.


That could be the case , although mp3 happens to be the only medium avalible for internet audio even if it is not the best quality .
I just wanted to past what i found on the internet and lt evyone draw there own conclusions .
As far as the refrigerator goes, if your in to serious audio I hope you dont have the frig on the same circuit as your audio equiptment.
Its best to isolate a seperate grounded circuit for your audio recording equiptment.

[Nick Phoenix]

Munsie,
Don\'t worry. If you bought a license to use the library (a legitimate copy) you are fine, no matter what store you bought it from.

[Deep White]

(no content)

[This message has been edited by Deep White (edited 10-14-2001).]

[Deep White]

(no content)

[This message has been edited by Deep White (edited 10-14-2001).]

[deedlebix]

I can\'t imagine it\'s just a matter of ability to turn up a receipt or not. While it\'s a good idea to keep receipts, it\'s not illegal to lose them. It\'s certainly not proof of piracy to be unable to show a receipt.

My guess about how this would work is this: Uniquely watermark the samples from each copy of a sample library using something like that described at numericalsound (link above). Then generate a list of pirated copies. That is to say, the same pirated copy probably gets spread around enough that the developers can search pirate forums, find one that\'s being pirated, add the id for that particular watermark to a list of \"badies.\"

Then, when a production comes out that uses their samples, they check the watermark. If it\'s one from the bad list, this composer is either using a copy that was pirated or they distributed their licensed copies to others.

Am I way off the mark here? (excuse the pun) Is this the way it\'s done?