I\'d like to find out what people think about this new trend of releasing demo samples, where it\'s going, and any possible drawbacks. I recently asked a sample developer for a demo .gig, and my request was refused, to my surprise. Are they really not interested in my business? Are we yet in a position where we can realistically say \"Hey, your library costs $XXX, I want to see how it feels to play it, otherwise I\'m not buying,\" or is that having too high an expectation this early in the game? Or perhaps I was being ridiculous and expecting too much in asking for a demo sample to play around with to get a feel for how the samples perform? (PS: I did ask nicely, by the way) [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
The only reason I can think of why a developer would balk at releasing demo samples is because they can be edited to stretch the key regions, and hence they become slightly usable. But how usable is that? Not very. GigaStudio 3.0 should allow creating .gig files that are not editable, that would be a cool feature for creating demo samples.
Anyway, I think at the very least, sample developers should stop releasing demo mp3s that include all kinds of other instruments--if I\'m looking at buying a woodwind library, for example, I don\'t want to hear drums and strings mixed in there. Maarten\'s approach is absolutely perfect. I want to hear each instrument, totally solo, performing different articulations, and I don\'t think this is asking too much.
Just my two cents.
EDIT: even a cooler idea for demo mp3s.. on the web page for the product, actually list the complete sample list as you would see it in GigaStudio (or whatever sampler), with each item being a link to an mp3 demonstrating how that particular instrument/articulation sounds. Sure, lots of work for the sample developers.. but lots of very happy customers who get a really great idea of what the library sounds like.