Main Forums >> Recording Techniques
        Print Thread

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: nmkDom]
      #221260 - 06/12/05 03:30 PM
Quote nmkDom:

It crashes periodically with a dongle error BOTH ON MY PC AND MY MAC.




Well if you're using the same dongle on both the PC and Mac then we can deduce from that that there is something wrong with the donglr and not the software itself! I take it you exhausted all communication with Steinberg in regards to obtaining a replacement dongle before you decided to joy-ride!?!


Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
nmkDom



Joined: 16/02/05
Posts: 106
Loc: The Toon
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: beyarecords]
      #221279 - 06/12/05 03:57 PM

Yes Beya I did try very hard to contact Steinberg, problem is they aren't Steinberg any more, and do not answer e-mails or queries. I installed Nuendo 3, Live 4, and Reason 3 on a brand new PC, and on a brand new Apple Mac notebook.

No problems at all with Live and Reason.

The problem is sporadic, it can go ages without crashing, or it can crash after it has verified all the VST stuff on startup.

It's too bad if the dongle is faulty, I haven't got time to figure it out. But I have suffered because Nuendo's copy protection system has interfered with my use of an expensive and legitimate product.

Nuendo is too good to ditch on a point of principle, and I've tried ProTools and didn't think it held a candle to Nuendo.

So what's my choice?

A pirate copy (I hate the thought of it!) lets me use a program I paid for and can't use. I still can't use it on my Apple because I don't have an OSX pirate version.

With every update of Nuendo I have to bite my lip, because I cant use it.

The only point I was making is that there IS at least one case where the use of a cracked version, however unpalatable, is at least partly justified.



--------------------
No More Kisses


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: nmkDom]
      #221295 - 06/12/05 04:11 PM
Quote nmkDom:


Yes Beya I did try very hard to contact Steinberg, problem is they aren't Steinberg any more, and do not answer e-mails or queries.




Then I suggest you take yourself to th nuendo forum, www.nuendo.com, go to the User section and send a PM to Fredo. All the Nuendo staff can be contacted directly from the site.

Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Ian Stewart



Joined: 24/10/05
Posts: 3638
Re: noiseconjecture new [Re: Chillum]
      #221319 - 06/12/05 04:45 PM
Quote Chillum:



Quote noisconjecture:

These arguments are rationalisation of you criminal activites. I bet you don't wear homemade clothes, get an amateur to cut you hair, go to someone who does dentistry as a hobby.



How dare you accuse me of criminal activities!

I'm not here to try and convince people that 'piracy' isn't wrong. I'm here because this is a subject which interests and concerns me, and I'd like to hear what people have to say about it. Hopefully this'll also help me clarify my own views on the issue.




I withdraw that accusation and apologise for any offence or upset caused and change it to the pro piracy arguments are people using rationalisation to justify criminal activites (except for the poor person using Nuendo, although I feel sure he could get it sorted out). I misunderstood that you were exploring the issues involved, and I do read things very carefully aswell.

Quote Chillum:


Are they better musicians because they're professionals, or are they professionals because they're better musicians?



This is something I've thought about and I think good musicians can use basic equipment and produce great music. Apparently Hendrix's first records were made on a really cheap guitar. For the way I work now I need a good computer, the rest is not expensive. I could use the basic versions of DAWs as suggested before. The main reason I bought the full version of Logic was because of Space Designer and one editing facility which I don't use as it turned out. I think it was a mistake. I personally would love to downgrade to Logic Express, or get a cross grade to DP, or better still Sonar on a Mac.
So, I could still make the music I want on inexpensive software. It is beyond me why amateurs or people at school want the same stuff as professionals (which I am). This to me is the Thatcher *me* attitude reinforced by Blair. What I want I take.
Heres a story. In the community dance world this administrator drove the fees for dance teachers right down, the hours worked were far greater than the contract. She was very influential in various community dance organisations such as the regional arts board. Her daughter of course grew up and studied dance and wanted to work in the community dance world. She couldn't because the rates weren't high enough to earn a living as her mother was instrumental in driving them down.
If this whole software piracy/ illegal copying is not sorted out the only music will be amateur and marketing concoctions. The rest of us will be saving up to buy a DAW at £4000, or else have to take our computer in where the software manufacturers reformat it with rootkits, palm print security etc.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Simon (aka UK03878)



Joined: 02/11/05
Posts: 1504
Loc: Munching a Carrot, The Fens
Re: noiseconjecture new [Re: Ian Stewart]
      #221329 - 06/12/05 04:58 PM
Quote noiseconjecture:


This is something I've thought about and I think good musicians can use basic equipment and produce great music. Apparently Hendrix's first records were made on a really cheap guitar.



The Curtis Knight records when he was rhythm player ?
However for the Experience Records - a Strat (which back then was a lot of money)
My old man saved and saved and saved for months to buy a Fender Precision which was the same price - 2 months wages I think he said...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Chillum



Joined: 21/03/05
Posts: 20
Re: steveman new [Re: steveman]
      #221337 - 06/12/05 05:05 PM
Quote steveman:

The open source movement would & could not exist without the current software industry. How do open source software developers earn a living? - mostly as PAID software developers. Without the current industry they'd have had no training in programming as colleges wouldn't have trained them if there'd been no industry to train them for in the 1st place. With no money coming into the industry it will stagnate - who'd choose to work in an industry that expects you to work for nothing? With no new people coming in, there'll be less innovation. This is the way all industries works - attract new blood and get fresh ideas.



Good points here. But professional programmers could still exist without the same business model used today.
Imagine a company needed, for example, some accounting software. They'd hire some programmers, and pay them an agreed fee for the job. The company would have their software, the programmers would have their rewards, everyone's happy. Nobody would then lose out if that software was released to anyone else who wanted to use it.

Quote steveman:

Quote:

Thirdly, I'd like to stray into the realms of fantasy, Captain Mainwaring. Imagine I had a machine capable of copying real, physical things for free...



Nice utopian fantasy you live in ...

By making the stuff for free, you immediately would put pie makers and shoemakers etc. out of business, that's basic economics. This would throw millions of people out of work, and while they'd not be short of shoes or cheese and onion pies they wouldn't have any way of buying a roof over their heads etc.



I'd imagine you could make a copier big enough to copy buildings etc.
And of course, the very first thing you'd do with a magic copying machine would be to make copies of it to give to all your friends!

Quote steveman:

Quote:

When does it become morally *right* for me to deprive people of something they could have for free? Because this is the behaviour that anti-piracy laws exist to enforce, and I'm really not sure what the moral justification for this is.



The justification is that people should be rewarded for their work, altruism is all very well but people do need to live. Why is it that software developers and musicians and other creatives are expected to work for free?



Another excellent point. Of course people should be rewarded for doing a good job.
And of course I do understand that there are substantial developement costs involved in a complex piece of software such as Cubase. Is it morally right, however, for Steinberg to continue to reap financial benefits from something long after it's paid for itself, and then some? Why couldn't they make an older version such as Cubase VST freely and *legally* available to everyone? It'd be great PR, provide a morally acceptable alternative for those who now 'pirate' software, and I'm sure if some of those people went on to become professionals, they'd want to buy the latest and greatest version.

On a related note, I read elswhere in this forum that copyright on a piece of music can last *70 years* after the death of its creator. How the f&*k does that reward the poor dead guy for his work?

Is it morally right that Simon May should have earned millions from the Eastenders theme tune?

I have some serious doubts about copyright law as it stands today.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Ian Stewart



Joined: 24/10/05
Posts: 3638
Re: steveman new [Re: Chillum]
      #221349 - 06/12/05 05:14 PM
Quote Chillum:


I have some serious doubts about copyright law as it stands today.



I agree about copyright law whether it be 70 years after someone's dead or James Brown getting the royalties when Clyde Stubblefield's Funky Drummer loop is used. This argument though has nothing to do with cracked software.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Simon (aka UK03878)



Joined: 02/11/05
Posts: 1504
Loc: Munching a Carrot, The Fens
Re: steveman new [Re: Chillum]
      #221350 - 06/12/05 05:15 PM
Quote Chillum:


Is it morally right that Simon May should have earned millions from the Eastenders theme tune?




Howabout one of the most famous themes in modern history - Windows logon - Eno should have gone for a royalty - he went for £35k
OR how about the Channel Four theme in the 80s/90s
David Dundas, composer of the four-note Channel 4 "theme", won a court battle to retain all rights to his creation and £1000 a week in royalties


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Chillum



Joined: 21/03/05
Posts: 20
Re: noiseconjecture new [Re: Dr. Fister]
      #221351 - 06/12/05 05:15 PM
noiseconjecture - no offense taken mate.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Martin: the return.....



Joined: 13/09/04
Posts: 408
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Pat]
      #221359 - 06/12/05 05:22 PM
Quote Pat:


If your car rental provider want to charge you that much for renting a car, you would go elsewhere!




OK then, point me at the software developers who work on a subscription or fee-per-use basis.


Quote Pat:

If you think £300 is too much to pay for cubase sx then try Music Studio from magix its only £50! (still no SOS review? Maybe reviewing this would give some more acceptability to this P.O.V to our descerning yet financially retiscent freinds...)




I dont think £300 is too much to pay for cubase SX if you use it every day - under those circumstances it's a great deal. But if you only use it once, or once every 2 years, it's expensive. Cubase isnt a great example I admit, as not many people buy a sequencer for occasional use.


Quote Pat:

But of course we couldn't do this "'cos magix aint cubase innit...bizarrely what we covet most is the "rip off" products made by the "corporate whores" we so despise..."




Poor old steinberg, eh? People have somehow inferred from their heavy ad & marketing spend that there arent any serious contenders to Cubase. They must be gutted...

Quote Pat:

Cusbase is only what £300 - this does not make it a premuim product... Sure its not dirt cheap but compare it to the price of say a Manley EQ or a RADAR system (or for that matter nuendo)




Ok so there's premium and there's premium. It's not really very fruitful to compare Cubase SX with a Manley EQ or a Radar system, given that both the latter items are complex hardware designs from much smaller companies. Once you've designed a Manley EQ, producing a 1000 units will still cost a fixed amount in materials, manpower (expensive, skilled manpower) and storage. Once you've written the code, making 1000 copies of SX costs nowt.

How many software music products with no hardware component cost more than £300? Nuendo, as you point out. Samplitude, Wavelab. I'm sure there are more but it's a limited selection. Pro Tools & TDM plug ins generally require a hardware component to run so they dont count.

How many software music products cost less than £300? The vast majority of them. In addition to that, it's at the top of steinberg's cubase family of products. Thats why i would class SX as a premium product, albeit a mass market one compared to nuendo.

Quote Pat:

Observant readers will notice the words "when I go to university next year" etc contained in many of the posts that whinge about how software is overpriced... Recording music does not in fact have to be an expensive hobby, but if you have bought in to the marketing mans hype that you need certain equipment so that your girlfriend or whover thinks the song you wrote about her sounds "pro" then I suggest you stop wasting time on internet forums & get yourselves a paper round...





Yes, but you didnt see that in my post, did you? And to be honest, i think it cheapens you to indulge in this kind of abuse as up until this point you were building up a decent argument, one which required a response on my part.

I am a student, as it goes. I'm also a professional composer & producer. And I'm studying Electrical Engineering, not music technology. So i dont go near any music software in my academic capacity. I do, however, have an insight into the product design process as a result of my studies which is something I've tried to bring to bear on my posts on this thread.

As you can imagine juggling my music making and my studying doesnt leave me with a lot of spare time, and you'll notice that I didnt contribute to this thread at all yesterday for this very reason. i've taken time out today to put my points across because i think it's a very important issue, and because my take on it is rather more complex than some of the fundamentalist opinions being banded about by others.

And learn to use the quote commands! i only want to rip your arguments apart figuratively, not literally

--------------------
www.myspace.com/benjunctionbox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
R. Spisketts



Joined: 29/01/05
Posts: 1319
Loc: Southsea
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dr. Fister]
      #221366 - 06/12/05 05:35 PM
A while ago, someone said something like

"musicians should worry less about their creative stuff and focus more on the business"

in which case, from a pure bottom-line point of view, it makes good sense to use pirated software, no?

sure... lying awake at night worrying about getting pinched might be counter-productive. And if you do a cost-benefit analysis factoring in all the time spent on p2p networks looking for a stable crack, then suddenly free pirated software isn't so free - unless you place no value on your precious time, that is!

Still, doesn't change the fact that its illegal. So the "look at yourself as a business" analogy doesn't work - since no smart business would do something so blatantly illegal as use pirated software...

... well, I'm a software developer by trade, and I've worked for just such a beast. If you think a few hundred £££ is a lot, well, a license for professional software development tools can run into thousands - multiply that by 20, 50 or a 100 staff and you're looking at a heap big pile 'o ££££. The company I worked for had a single machine setup with a publicly available collection of all sorts of software - along with all the cracks. Then they were fined by FAST. They carried on regardless.

So thats the illegal stuff... never mind all the morally objectionable practices that go on in business every minute of every day.

Oh and the company in question is thriving and successful, btw.

Some of the people here, I just wonder whether you live your lives according to the black and white moral viewpoints that you espouse? Or is it just forum soapboxing?

Anyways, no real point to make... the reference to business just caught my eye...



--------------------
Funk this, arm half due wink a trump


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Martin: the return.....



Joined: 13/09/04
Posts: 408
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: beyarecords]
      #221370 - 06/12/05 05:41 PM
Quote beyarecords:

Quote Martin: the return...:

THAT STATEMENT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT. iF IT WASNT, THERE WOULDNT BE ANY PIRACY, AND WE WOULDNT BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.




Wrong again!! The fact that the software is 'not your priviledge to use unless you paid for it' does not mean that there are not those amongst us, professioanl joy-riders that they are, who will not use it regardless.

Beya




beya, thats not what you originally said. Your original quote was:

Quote beyarecords:

THE PRODUCT IS NOT YOURS TO USE UNLESS YOU HAVE PAID FOR THE PRIVILEDGE TO USE IT.




Now it's changed to


Quote beyarecords:

'not your priviledge to use unless you paid for it'




In the last post, I made reference to fundamentalist opinions. No prizes for guessing that i was talking about you. You've posted a series of confrontational statements, not made any effort to back them up with an argument, and finally you came out with a statement that makes no logical sense at all. When challenged on this, you repeated yourself as if to drown me out by sheer volume, and when that didnt work you tried to change your original statement. There's no point in altering what you said now. The original is there for everyone to see further up the thread.

I've put quite a lot of time and effort into my posts to make sure that my arguments are backed up with an thorough explaination and research where necessary. I'd really appreciate it if you could afford me the same courtesy.

If you cant or wont do this, I'll assume your trolling and ignore you. I'd advise everyone else to do the same.

--------------------
www.myspace.com/benjunctionbox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dishpan



Joined: 01/09/04
Posts: 813
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: beyarecords]
      #221371 - 06/12/05 05:41 PM
> I take it you exhausted all communication with Steinberg in regards to obtaining a replacement dongle before you decided to joy-ride!?

Joy ride? The guy's bought the program and can't use it!!!

During a recording session a couple of years ago, my dongle died and I had to wait a couple of weeks for a replacement. I used a crack, and would do again without any thought.

Are you seriously saying I should have gone without work for those two weeks?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: R. Spisketts]
      #221374 - 06/12/05 05:43 PM
Quote Sir Lurkalot:

Some of the people here, I just wonder whether you live your lives according to the black and white moral viewpoints that you espouse? Or is it just forum soapboxing?




No being pompus is trying to convince others that it is ok to lie/cheat/steal due to the fact that everynoe you have worked for or know does it! If that's your thing then all the best to you, me personally I prefer to make my own path instead of following a trail.

Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Martin: the return...]
      #221382 - 06/12/05 05:50 PM
Quote Martin: the return...:

beya, thats not what you originally said. Your original quote was:

Quote beyarecords:

THE PRODUCT IS NOT YOURS TO USE UNLESS YOU HAVE PAID FOR THE PRIVILEDGE TO USE IT.




Now it's changed to


Quote beyarecords:

'not your priviledge to use unless you paid for it'







Can someone please tell what the difference is between
Quote:

THE PRODUCT IS NOT YOURS TO USE UNLESS YOU HAVE PAID FOR THE PRIVILEDGE TO USE IT



and:
Quote:

not your priviledge to use unless you paid for it




apart from nothing?!?!?!

Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dishpan]
      #221391 - 06/12/05 05:58 PM
Quote kris:

> I take it you exhausted all communication with Steinberg in regards to obtaining a replacement dongle before you decided to joy-ride!?

Joy ride? The guy's bought the program and can't use it!!!

During a recording session a couple of years ago, my dongle died and I had to wait a couple of weeks for a replacement. I used a crack, and would do again without any thought.

Are you seriously saying I should have gone without work for those two weeks?




I paid £1300 for the same application, and I can tell you I would have made the distributor give me another copy of the same application if I suspected that it was faulty.

Just imagine I paid £10,000 for a plazma TV and it didn't work, so instead of marching back to the place I bought it from, to get a replacement, I went out and picked one off the street that one of the neighbours had thrown out. You must be bloody joking. Either i'd have my £10,000 back or a new TV, trust me.

Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Martin: the return.....



Joined: 13/09/04
Posts: 408
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: beyarecords]
      #221393 - 06/12/05 06:00 PM
Quote beyarecords:


Can someone please tell what the difference is between
Quote:

THE PRODUCT IS NOT YOURS TO USE UNLESS YOU HAVE PAID FOR THE PRIVILEDGE TO USE IT



and:
Quote:

not your priviledge to use unless you paid for it




apart from nothing?!?!?!

Beya




If you download a cracked piece of software or copy it off someone, then it's yours to use. There's nothing stopping you from using it, it's there on your hard drive - all you have to do is open it up. If there was a physical barrier preventing you from using it, then the pirate copy would be worthless and no one would use pirate software.

But you dont have the legal right to use it (or priviledge, as you would say) until you pay for it. No one here is contesting that.

Surely thats the whole issue - there's nothing stopping people from using software, even if they havent paid for the legal right to do so. That is the situation being debated on this thread.

I cant put it any clearer than that - it seems totally obvious to me.

--------------------
www.myspace.com/benjunctionbox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Bill C



Joined: 13/10/04
Posts: 625
Re: steveman new [Re: Chillum]
      #221398 - 06/12/05 06:06 PM
Quote Chillum:

Imagine a company needed, for example, some accounting software. They'd hire some programmers, and pay them an agreed fee for the job. The company would have their software, the programmers would have their rewards, everyone's happy. Nobody would then lose out if that software was released to anyone else who wanted to use it.




the programmers lose out - because their potential market for the next gig is eroded by the giveaway ...

Quote Chillum:


On a related note, I read elswhere in this forum that copyright on a piece of music can last *70 years* after the death of its creator. How the f&*k does that reward the poor dead guy for his work?




it rewards his estate - if you have dependents that is more important than reaping the rewards yourself

Quote Chillum:


Is it morally right that Simon May should have earned millions from the Eastenders theme tune?




it's a superbly appropriate piece of music that brings a lot of dramatic value to a TV series that millions watch - as far as I'm concerned any material rewards for the composer are well earned - I wish I'd had the creativity to write it


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Martin: the return...]
      #221401 - 06/12/05 06:09 PM
Quote Martin: the return...:

Surely thats the whole issue - there's nothing stopping people from using software, even if they havent paid for the legal right to do so. That is the situation being debated on this thread.




Can someone who has software on their machine, use it? Doesn't even warrant a reply.

Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Bill C



Joined: 13/10/04
Posts: 625
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Martin: the return...]
      #221404 - 06/12/05 06:13 PM
Quote Martin: the return...:

Once you've written the code, making 1000 copies of SX costs nowt.




Not true, the more users you have, the more your support, distribution, sales etc costs will mushroom ...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Martin: the return.....



Joined: 13/09/04
Posts: 408
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: beyarecords]
      #221410 - 06/12/05 06:21 PM
Quote beyarecords:

Quote Martin: the return...:

Surely thats the whole issue - there's nothing stopping people from using software, even if they havent paid for the legal right to do so. That is the situation being debated on this thread.




Can someone who has software on their machine, use it? Doesn't even warrant a reply.

Beya




Yes of course they can. So how then is it not theirs to use?

The swings in the park are 'yours to use' if you feel like it - it doesnt follow from that that you own them, or that you own a licence allowing you to use them. It just means that there's nothing preventing you from using them.

Look at that, look again at your statement 'THE PRODUCT IS NOT YOURS TO USE UNLESS YOU HAVE PAID FOR THE PRIVILEDGE TO USE IT' and tell me it's not nonsense.

--------------------
www.myspace.com/benjunctionbox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Martin: the return.....



Joined: 13/09/04
Posts: 408
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Bill C]
      #221413 - 06/12/05 06:31 PM
Quote Bill C:

Quote Martin: the return...:

Once you've written the code, making 1000 copies of SX costs nowt.




Not true, the more users you have, the more your support, distribution, sales etc costs will mushroom ...




How much does reproducing 1000 copies of cubase SX cost as a percentage of the cost of reproducing 1000 Manley EQs? Leaving aside R&D costs? I'd suggest it's in the order of 0.1%. Not quite nowt, but very close.

It's hard to factor in distribution, sales and customer support - every company does this differently, so you cant compare like with like without serious research. But i would suggest that Manley's sales & customer service costs are considerable higher than Steinberg's customer for customer. Sales, distribution and support costs dont tend to mushroom as the user base expands, they get smaller per customer due to ecomonies of scale.

From the experience of some Nuendo users on this thread, it appears steinberg might have found a way of reducing their support costs in absolute terms too... but thats another story!

--------------------
www.myspace.com/benjunctionbox

Edited by Martin: the return... (06/12/05 06:37 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dark Fader
sith lord


Joined: 03/01/04
Posts: 652
Loc: Death Star
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Martin: the return...]
      #221427 - 06/12/05 07:00 PM
You're still missing the point, music software companies DO NOT MAKE BIG PROFITS. Also they are generally not large enough to exploit the advantages of economies of scale. (Suggested reading: Scale & Scope: Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, A.D. Chandler)

--------------------
...rubbish at words 'n' stuff.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Commander



Joined: 21/03/05
Posts: 3896
Loc: Marineville HQ (W.A.S.P.)
Re: steveman new [Re: Bill C]
      #221475 - 06/12/05 08:57 PM
Quote Chillum:


Is it morally right that Simon May should have earned millions from the Eastenders theme tune?



I think 'millions' is a little optimistic. I wrote the theme to 'Breakfast with Frost' which ran for 12 years and I have another show running five days a week on BBC2 called 'The Daily Politics' and one on BBC1 Saturday nights called 'Backlash' so I kind of have an idea as to what he makes. Oh, and the new Sony PSP commercial (forgot that one). There is a popular misconception that composers make stacks of money through TV. Very nice living? Yes. Millions? No!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Chillum



Joined: 21/03/05
Posts: 20
Re: Commander new [Re: Dr. Fister]
      #221490 - 06/12/05 09:54 PM
The 'millions' comes on pretty good authority (Phil Rice, who co-writes with Rick Guard), and it seems plausible to me considering the amount of worldwide syndication Eastenders must get. I admit I could be wrong on this though, you're in a much better position to know about it than I am.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Commander



Joined: 21/03/05
Posts: 3896
Loc: Marineville HQ (W.A.S.P.)
Re: Commander new [Re: Chillum]
      #221555 - 07/12/05 12:14 AM
Quote Chillum:

... considering the amount of worldwide syndication Eastenders must get.



Actually that's a good point. And it has been running for about 73 years. Quite possible in that case!

--------------------
Stand by for action - we are about to launch Stingray!
Cue irritating bongo music ...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
steveman



Joined: 17/03/02
Posts: 1142
Loc: London - UK
Re: steveman new [Re: Chillum]
      #221566 - 07/12/05 12:54 AM
Quote:


Quote:

steveman:
The open source movement would & could not exist without the current software industry. How do open source software developers earn a living? - mostly as PAID software developers. Without the current industry they'd have had no training in programming as colleges wouldn't have trained them if there'd been no industry to train them for in the 1st place. With no money coming into the industry it will stagnate - who'd choose to work in an industry that expects you to work for nothing? With no new people coming in, there'll be less innovation. This is the way all industries works - attract new blood and get fresh ideas.





Good points here. But professional programmers could still exist without the same business model used today.
Imagine a company needed, for example, some accounting software. They'd hire some programmers, and pay them an agreed fee for the job. The company would have their software, the programmers would have their rewards, everyone's happy. Nobody would then lose out if that software was released to anyone else who wanted to use it.




The programmers would be hired to do that one job, that's all, what would they live on the rest of the time? If their work was then distributed free to 1000's of other companies, they'd have no more customers for accounting software. They'd only get more work by writing custom software for each and every company, but if they did that it'd be pointless distributing it for free as it'd be useless to other companies by it's 'custom' nature.

Quote:

.... Is it morally right, however, for Steinberg to continue to reap financial benefits from something long after it's paid for itself, and then some?




By rights then Steinberg should have huge profits then - which they don't. As has been pointed out they were sold for £18 million - that was staff, any assets, intellectual property, the lot. They'd been going for around 15 years when sold, were the arguably the world's leading music software house and had pretty much invented modern computer music sequencing as we now know it. Hardly strikes me as a profit making powerhouse, and I'm sure if they were they'd not have sold out. If thety stop receiving income how do they pay for development of newer versions? When do they cut off, after the 1st 1000 customers? They'd no doubt be really pleased to find they'd paid good money for what was now available for free.

Quote:


Why couldn't they make an older version such as Cubase VST freely and *legally* available to everyone? It'd be great PR, provide a morally acceptable alternative for those who now 'pirate' software, and I'm sure if some of those people went on to become professionals, they'd want to buy the latest and greatest version.



This isn't a bad idea. It's interesting to note that the computer graphics mags regularly give away older versions of software, and have an offer to upgrade to the latest version for a much lower cost. Admittedly, it generally seems to be the smaller software houses that do this. The music softare market is much smaller, perhaps it's not economic.

Quote:


Is it morally right that Simon May should have earned millions from the Eastenders theme tune?




I'm not convinced it is, but then many of those who've reached the top in their professions seem to be rewarded way out of proportion to their talent / what they actually do. Not sure there's much we can do about it though

Quote:

I have some serious doubts about copyright law as it stands today.



So have I, and don't get me started on patent law ...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dishpan



Joined: 01/09/04
Posts: 813
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: beyarecords]
      #221615 - 07/12/05 09:01 AM
> I paid £1300 for the same application, and I can tell you I would have made the distributor give me another copy of the same application if I suspected that it was faulty.

I already told you the dongle NOT the program was faulty. I did get a new dongle, but had to wait two weeks to get it....


> Just imagine I paid £10,000 for a plazma TV and it didn't work, so instead of marching back to the place I bought it from, to get a replacement, I went out and picked one off the street that one of the neighbours had thrown out. You must be bloody joking.

I didn't take anything from anyone, as I've bought the program and wanted to be able to use what I'd bought. Exactly which part of this don't you understand?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Martin: the return.....



Joined: 13/09/04
Posts: 408
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dark Fader]
      #221629 - 07/12/05 09:36 AM
Quote Dark Fader:

You're still missing the point, music software companies DO NOT MAKE BIG PROFITS. Also they are generally not large enough to exploit the advantages of economies of scale. (Suggested reading: Scale & Scope: Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, A.D. Chandler)




Well, compared to what? We were originally talking about steinberg and manley - i think steinberg's profit's are going to be higher than manley's.

However, i agree that the $28.5M that yamaha paid for Steinberg does seem a bit small for a leading audio software developer.

I dont know how much debt steinberg were in or how much they had in the way of assets, so I cant read too much into that figure. I'm sure they would have contracted out thier manufacturing and distribution, so it's possible that they had very little in the way of concrete assets - maybe only their equipment and permanent staff of programmers.

Maybe lurkalot or someone else who works in the industry can shed some light on this?

I'm not having a specific pop at steinberg, the original comments were about large software developers in general - steinberg were just the example that came to hand.

Thanks for the book rec, I'll check it out.

--------------------
www.myspace.com/benjunctionbox


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
IvanSC



Joined: 08/03/05
Posts: 7799
Loc: UK France & USA depending on t...
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Bill C]
      #221644 - 07/12/05 09:51 AM
Quote Bill C:

Quote IvanSC:

Is there any other market where the product is licensed on a non-transferrable basis.





How about a musician playing a gig? - he won't be pleased if a member of the audience records the gig and sells the resulting recording to others without paying the muso.

(Ivan) Happens all the time to me - Since I am not a mega recording star and I got paid for the gig, what do I care?
Guarantee anyone who DOES have a recording deal worth money guards the recording on gigs thang well.

Quote IvanSC:


It really is a one-sided relationship, where the "buyer" is actually expected to pay in full up front for the product




... say a musician's going rate is £200 for a gig - he won't be pleased if the promoter says I'll pay you on a sliding scale starting at £30 depending on what we take on the bar.

(Ivan) Where ya been lately? Plenty of gigs are exactly like that. `70`s pub rock circuit in London was exactly that. You got to keep 80% of the door. Once you broke the fire limit at the Hope and Anchor a couple of times you got a crack at the Nashville Rooms or The Rock Garden on the same basis.
We`re all self-employed sub-contractors, mate!

Also, who do you know who gets £200 a night on a regular (like 4 nights a week) basis in the UK that doiesn`t have a serious rep going for them? I`d like to join please.

Quote IvanSC:

I could buy a hardware unit that does the same sort of thing for the price that these greedy baskets want for their plugins.






About the thread in general ...

I think the problem here is that "professional" versions of software are not expensive for genuine *money-making* professional use. It is pricey if you aren't making money from its use, but frankly if you aren't earning your living via the software you almost certainly don't need it - a cut down "lite" version will almost certainly suffice, albeit with less cachet ...

(Ivan) Yeah but even the "lite" versions are not THAT cheap anymore. And as for the upgrades....!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Bill C



Joined: 13/10/04
Posts: 625
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: IvanSC]
      #221660 - 07/12/05 10:20 AM
Quote IvanSC:


It really is a one-sided relationship, where the "buyer" is actually expected to pay in full up front for the product



Quote Bill C:


... say a musician's going rate is £200 for a gig - he won't be pleased if the promoter says I'll pay you on a sliding scale starting at £30 depending on what we take on the bar.



Quote IvanSC:


Where ya been lately? Plenty of gigs are exactly like that.




I realise that. My point, perhaps badly made, was that the software companies have the right to set a price for their products/services, as does a musician or any other supplier. There are always cheaper alternatives available to the customer with a limited budget.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
beyarecords



Joined: 18/11/05
Posts: 68
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dishpan]
      #221690 - 07/12/05 10:50 AM
Quote kris:

> Exactly which part of this don't you understand?




Probably the bit about the CRACK!!

Beya


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Pat
member


Joined: 18/02/03
Posts: 133
Loc: London
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Martin: the return...]
      #221799 - 07/12/05 02:32 PM
Quote Martin: the return...:

Quote Pat:


If your car rental provider want to charge you that much for renting a car, you would go elsewhere!




OK then, point me at the software developers who work on a subscription or fee-per-use basis.




Not fee per use, but an alternative "rental system"

http://www.samplitude.com/de/sfr_NE.htm

Or use cheaper software (for the majority of us)! As for you...

Quote Martin: the return...:

[I am a... professional composer & producer.




I guess it's only right and proper that you should use the the top line products - I guess the money you make should pay for a copy though?

Hollow sun used to let people download samples for free, and pay if they used them. Guess what? No one paid!

Quote Martin: the return...:

I do, however, have an insight into the product design process as a result of my studies which is something I've tried to bring to bear on my posts on this thread.




OK - Thank you - I do not have this experience so I will try and be more receptive.

I do however have some experience (for my part) in buisiness, and as far as I can see, if people do not buy your product, your buisiness will fail.

Quote Martin: the return...:

I dont think £300 is too much to pay for cubase SX if you use it every day - under those circumstances it's a great deal. But if you only use it once, or once every 2 years, it's expensive. Cubase isnt a great example I admit, as not many people buy a sequencer for occasional use.




Sic probo...

If its worth pirating you must feel you need it, in which case you shouldn't mind paying for it... If its not worth the cash buy something else...

Quote Martin: the return...:

Poor old steinberg, eh? People have somehow inferred from their heavy ad & marketing spend that there arent any serious contenders to Cubase. They must be gutted...




Logic/Sonar/Pro tools are all serious contenders to cubase.

If you want to use Logic you have to buy a Mac which makes it EVEN more of an exclusive club...

But like I say if you really need it stump up the dough...

What I am trying to say (perhaps inelegantly) is that we should all try to show the will to ignore the marketing hype - You could use for example Tracktion or like other have said cubase SE if you are that broke...

Quote Martin: the return...:

Ok so there's premium and there's premium. It's not really very fruitful to compare Cubase SX with a Manley EQ or a Radar system, given that both the latter items are complex hardware designs from much smaller companies. Once you've designed a Manley EQ, producing a 1000 units will still cost a fixed amount in materials, manpower (expensive, skilled manpower) and storage. Once you've written the code, making 1000 copies of SX costs nowt




I knew I should't have used the hardware comparison! School boy error...

OK, fair enough, but people *have* to pay for their hardware (unless they buy it at a dogy pub! )- There is not the potential there to copy it (but... please see other threads on Behringer & convolution!)- There is this potential for software which means that perhaps no one would buy a copy.

I think its also a bit unfair to suggest that the designers of software do not have other costs - For example support/bug fixes/developing improvements (cakewalk have now intergrated "auto tune" type stuff dor instance)

Quote Martin: the return...:

How many software music products with no hardware component cost more than £300? Nuendo, as you point out. Samplitude, Wavelab. I'm sure there are more but it's a limited selection. Pro Tools & TDM plug ins generally require a hardware component to run so they dont count.




Photo shop, Microsoft offfice suite (full, non oem version), SAGE, final cut pro, macromedia flash... In fact any software with a marketplace cosisting of pro's (I admit that the Microsoft products should perhaps be excluded here )

Quote Martin: the return...:

How many software music products cost less than £300? The vast majority of them. .




Exactly - Buy them intead!

Quote Martin: the return...:

Quote Pat:

Observant readers will notice the words "when I go to university next year" etc contained in many of the posts that whinge about how software is overpriced... Recording music does not in fact have to be an expensive hobby, but if you have bought in to the marketing mans hype that you need certain equipment so that your girlfriend or whover thinks the song you wrote about her sounds "pro" then I suggest you stop wasting time on internet forums & get yourselves a paper round...





Yes, but you didn’t see that in my post, did you? And to be honest, i think it cheapens you to indulge in this kind of abuse as up until this point you were building up a decent argument, one which required a response on my part.




Wasn't aimed exclusively at you Martin, but on relection, Sorry, it was a cheap shot... I remember being a hard up student too... I used to buy SOS every month but couldn't afford the equipment I wanted (all hardware in the mid nineties...). I had to wait till I got a job after I graduated...

Quote Martin: the return...:

I'm studying Electrical Engineering, not music technology




The world is crying out for people with your skills - You will certainly be able to afford what ever you want when you graduate - Because people will *pay* you for your work (like we should pay for the work of programmers)

Quote Martin: the return...:

As you can imagine juggling my music making and my studying doesnt leave me with a lot of spare time, and you'll notice that I didnt contribute to this thread at all yesterday for this very reason




As you can imagine juggling my music making, full time job & *my* studying (at night school for exams too boring to go into here...) doesn't leave me with a lot of time either, so you’re in good company.

I’m sure Max the Mac could add forum moderating & kids to the list…

Quote Martin: the return...:

i've taken time out today to put my points across because i think it's a very important issue, and because my take on it is rather more complex than some of the fundamentalist opinions being banded about by others.






I can only apologise for my simplistic understanding of the issues. I must admit the argument that “software is overpriced & I have no money” is a novel one that I have not come across before – Maybe I need some time to digest it….

Quote Martin: the return...:

And learn to use the quote commands! i only want to rip your arguments apart figuratively, not literally




“to be honest, i think it cheapens you to indulge in this kind of abuse”

Two pots are we, calling each other black! (Master Yoda – Deleted scene SW ep 2 )

Hope this is easier to “rip apart”!


Cheers,




Pat


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Henry-S
member


Joined: 11/07/04
Posts: 937
Loc: UK, Cornwall
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dr. Fister]
      #222124 - 08/12/05 01:31 AM
I haven't read the entire thread, because most of it is the same old argument of, "if you can't afford the software, you don't need it" or "yes i need to work on it and i need access to it at home".

The simple fact is, yes people should buy the software, they should support developers to continue to improve their product and for their employers to make their living.

But I think the point that people don't seem to get is that the exp you gain on programs which are at "uni's" and "colleges" ain't all that great sometimes. I tried to get a Cubase SX license when i was at Uni and it was utter hell. I was having to put together reasons for why i needed to use software which would entitle me to a student discount and countless other crap which made me think "jeez no wonder why all students just copy the stuff"

Now i am of the "view" that downloading and using a piece of software to learn on, is in a entirely different ball park to downloading it and sticking it on ebay to sell.

I mean jeez did everyone stick to 70mph when they drove home from work yesterday?

As many say, I'm sure there are plenty of users who downloaded Cubase or some other program and then really liked it and went out and bought it. These are users that they wouldn't have even had because they give no trial copies, no "shareware".

I see plugin companies who make demos which give a blip of sound every 30 seconds but you don't see sequencer companies doing anything like that, they give out a reduce version which you have to pay for, which means that you get to learn a piece of software that ain't going to be used anywhere, what a useful product.

The plugins will cost say £200-300 and you can demo them till your hearts content, make sure they do exactly what you want them to do. You pay nothing, because they are not useable versions for productions, just for hearing and using them. So why do companies not take the same approach to their sequencers and allow users to trial them. They are asking for £500 for a piece of software you cannot even use before hand and you "hope" you might like it and if you want to try it out your told "well buy this version and if you like it upgrade" but if you don't like it thats £80 down the drain.

Basically piracy is always going to be around and everyone has their opinion on it, but I think that some companies really have a way to go to offer the consumer a better option than just "buy our downgraded version".

I just hope that nobody has anything recorded off the tv, or radio and has kept it for more than 24 hours, because thats a criminal offence as well!

--------------------
There is nothing Grim about this Reaper
We Fell From The Sky


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Q00
member


Joined: 01/10/02
Posts: 821
Loc: sussex
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dr. Fister]
      #222131 - 08/12/05 02:19 AM
has anyone else noticed that this thread, which is the longest in a while, was started by Dr Fister who I believe got banned from the SOS forum a few days ago.

Perhaps he wasn't the small minded fool he made himself out to be. then again ..........


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
ZukanModerator
Zukan


Joined: 12/09/03
Posts: 9349
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Dr. Fister]
      #222167 - 08/12/05 08:38 AM
You know, I hate this damn topic.

This bastard rears it's head every couple of months and is littered with some poor analogies at best, and some dire attempts at justifications.

However, I will not be a hypocrite and sit on the fence on this one.

I use loads and loads of softwares, and more because I end up beta testing for the developers, or creating sound libraries for the products, or simply reviewing them, so I end up with cd after cd of NFR versions of these softwares, along with paid for versions of softwares that I use in my business.

Now, bear with me: I always chuckle when I hear of some 17 year old computer whizzo breaking into some governemnt's computer and 'moving things around', or a similar kid breaking into a well established populus raping bank and screws with their system just to show it's vulnerabilitities.

Why this little story?
Simple.

With all the developers or development houses that I work with, I have got to know most of the employees and owners, and I can tell you that companies you think are big multinational conglomerates are nothing more than a few guys trying to develop and market their creativity, and I find something abhorrently wrong and personal when I hear about them getting ripped off, especially when down the line they have to either close or lay off what meagre staff they have.

It is the same feeling I get when I hear of some artiste getting ripped off with clever manipulation of his works.

This type of theft is very personal and does affect the creator.

When you put a human face to this argument, things don't look so justified anymore huh?

--------------------
Samplecraze
Stretch That Note


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Dark Fader
sith lord


Joined: 03/01/04
Posts: 652
Loc: Death Star
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Zukan]
      #222173 - 08/12/05 09:07 AM
Very well put Zukan.

As you say, and as I've said before, we're not talking about fat cats here, these companies despite being leaders in their field, lead a pretty much hand to mouth existence and i for one don't want to see them disappear or have to cut back on new developments or probably where costs are likey to be cut, in QA. If you want them to exist in the future (with stable products) then buy their software! Simple.

Cheers,

Jim

--------------------
...rubbish at words 'n' stuff.

Edited by Dark Fader (08/12/05 09:09 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Bill C



Joined: 13/10/04
Posts: 625
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Zukan]
      #222177 - 08/12/05 09:19 AM
well said Zukan - you hit the nail right on the head sir


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Ian Stewart



Joined: 24/10/05
Posts: 3638
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Zukan]
      #222183 - 08/12/05 09:31 AM
Excellent Zukan excellent (I of course read your views on my post aswell) - that's how it is and expressed concisely. I hope all the *moral* users of cracked software realise just what they are doing and change their ways.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Digital



Joined: 08/12/05
Posts: 35
Loc: Brooklyn NY USA
Re: i hate it!!!! new [Re: Ian Stewart]
      #222214 - 08/12/05 10:28 AM
I hope that if some kid from some Third World country will get a used PC for Christmas and then managed to get his hands on a cracked DAW, MORAL USERS will change their ways and will not call him a thief or blame him for dire state of music software industry.

--------------------
Digital Emotions’ SOSF IQ quickie:
if 0VU = -20dBFS then HR = ?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator     Back to top
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | (show all)

Rate this thread

Jump to

Extra Information
1 registered and 23 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  David Etheridge, James Perrett, zenguitar, Martin Walker, Forum Admin, Hugh Robjohns, Zukan, Frank Eleveld, SOS News Editor,  
Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled
Rating:
Thread views: 46013

November 2014
On sale now at main newsagents and bookstores (or buy direct from the
SOS Web Shop)
SOS current Print Magazine: click here for FULL Contents list
Click image for November 2014
DAW Tips from SOS

 

Home | Search | News | Current Issue | Tablet Mag | Articles | Forum | Subscribe | Shop | Readers Ads

Advertise | Information | Privacy Policy | Support | Login Help

 

Email: Contact SOS

Telephone: +44 (0)1954 789888

Fax: +44 (0)1954 789895

Registered Office: Media House, Trafalgar Way, Bar Hill, Cambridge, CB23 8SQ, United Kingdom.

Sound On Sound Ltd is registered in England and Wales.

Company number: 3015516 VAT number: GB 638 5307 26

         

All contents copyright © SOS Publications Group and/or its licensors, 1985-2014. All rights reserved.
The contents of this article are subject to worldwide copyright protection and reproduction in whole or part, whether mechanical or electronic, is expressly forbidden without the prior written consent of the Publishers. Great care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the preparation of this article but neither Sound On Sound Limited nor the publishers can be held responsible for its contents. The views expressed are those of the contributors and not necessarily those of the publishers.

Web site designed & maintained by PB Associates | SOS | Relative Media