I do think that people are on the move in general to clear out hardware from the studio but I know a lot more musicians who have pared down to just a recording strip and few bits of hardware next to the computer than people people armed with only a desktop or laptop alone. I can't say that this will 'save' Creamware but I can say that here on the West Coast the companies that had hardware to sell fared a lot better than software companies when the economy got rough, so that's worth keeping in mind too. Hopefully the hardware is up to snuff. Audio inputs seem interesting...
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: valis on 2005-04-09 07:53 ]</font>
New CreamWare products in Frankfurt
-
King of Snake
- Posts: 1544
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
- Contact:
what "main game" are you talking about? AFAIK there aren't any hardware synths that work as a VSTi so far. Only thing I can think of is the upcoming Virus Ti. So no, the default standard is not VSTi, because most hobbyist/home studios still use at least some hardware synths.I disagree. The default standard in the home / hobby studio market is VSTi. If your instrument doesn't work as a VSTi then you're not in the main game.
And I'd say the standard in most software-only studios is Reason, not VSTi
just like every single other hardware synth on the market today then, so I don't see the problem and also nothing "retro" about it. (except for the emulations themselves of course).If they can't work as VSTi then they're just nice retro hardware boxes and nothing more.
Hey sure it would be great if you could load them as VSTi's, but it's hardly the problem you make it out to be.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2005-04-09 10:02 ]</font>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2005-04-09 10:03 ]</font>
That's why imho CWA should do something innovative for the first time in years and make one. It's been a long time since their last hit.On 2005-04-09 10:01, King of Snake wrote:
what "main game" are you talking about? AFAIK there aren't any hardware synths that work as a VSTi so far.
OK, if you want to get picky then I'll revise that to "the standard soft-synth". (I'll ignore Reason since I imagine your wink indicates it's a joke).On 2005-04-09 10:01, King of Snake wrote:
So no, the default standard is not VSTi, because most hobbyist/home studios still use at least some hardware synths.
And I'd say the standard in most software-only studios is Reason, not VSTi
Anyone see some of the other new releases lately (VSTi of course) such as Reaktor 5 and Kontakt 2 ? Amazing stuff which shows some real innovation.
See what all the big sample libraries such as Colossus, Ra and Symphonic choirs are coming out on ? Kompakt VSTi. These aren't toys, they're US$1000 pro composition tools. Outside the bubble-world of CWA workflow, VSTi is king.
If they can't work as VSTi then they're just nice retro hardware boxes and nothing more.
You said it: "just like every other hardware synth". Not the greatest marketing angle I'd want.On 2005-04-09 10:01, King of Snake wrote:
just like every single other hardware synth on the market today then, so I don't see the problem and also nothing "retro" about it.
And of course they're retro. What else are they ? They're hardware emulations of 25-year-old synths, and (it appears) have made no substantial advance on that concept.
But, I'm NOT saying they won't sell. People love retro. Maybe they'll be a huge hit.
Few more notes on the subject:
VSTi is king in the home/hobbyist market segment simply because anyone can log onto any p2p network and download hordes and hordes of plugins, ***NOT*** because VSTi are somehow technologically superior. This isn't something you can do with hardware (at this point, at least, except with a few odd "open" ARM CPU cores thingers I guess.)
Like Tom pointed out, the hobbyist/home studio market is the 90% marketshare that will bring in 10% of the revenues. As soon as you start to go up the ladder a bit, you will find that major studios still use PLENTY of hardware. Live musicians still use PLENTY of hardware. The only "softsynth" I've seen used live myself if Max/MSP, everyone else had at least a Nord, Juno106, Access, Waldorf, Novation, Korg stuff, etc. Hardware boxes crash a whole lot less than software and VSTi, which is a bit of a necessity for a musician, both live and in the studio (I guess if you just automate stuff with a mouse it doesn't matter as much.)
The other point, market-wise, about VST stuff, is that since anyone can sit down with the VST SDK and churn out code, you end up with a bit of an overflowed market. Great for the customer since he has more choice (but also has to sifter thru more gunk to get a the good stuff), but for a company, espcially a company like Creamware whose assets are concentrated on a dedicated hardware platform, moving into the plain VSTi market doesn't really make much sense and would probably be more along the lines of financial suicide than anything, as they'd have to port their whole code-base to it. And by the time they'd be done (if it ever gets done =P) you wouldn't see anything innovative yet, just what they had previously, ported to a less stable, and much less "garanteed availability" platform (processing-wise, I mean, since with dedicated DSP you can be 100% sure that stuff will get processed in time or not, while with a computer, sometime it does, sometime it doesn't, oops I was processing that mouse interrupt so I didn't have time to process that sample, sorry! etc)
Also, as far as large pro sampling collections are concerned, I'd say GigaStudio is king, not VSTi. I know alot of people doing commercials/short films/game audio design stuff, and they all use GigaStudio for the heavu sampling stuff, with a dedicated machine running GigaStudio itself (just like old style hardware sampler boxes.) I'm pretty sure people like Hans Zimmer and Tangerine Dream (and countless others) also use GigaStudio, all of them on dedicated machines. I can't say I know anyone that bought $2k sample libraries for Kompakt VSTi, while I could name at least 10 friends that have done it for Giga.
Finally, on the purely innovative side of things, it's pretty easy to name a few innovative products that killed or almost killed companies. Think of Waldorf and the AFB16. They were doing fine with hardware-only boxes, but the AFB was a bit of an hybrid, computer-controlled-thru-VSTi-like-interface of a filter array, and that's kind of what forced them to fold. Also think of what happened with the Noah, great idea and concept, but almost killed Creamware too. Think of the Hartmann Neuron, nice concept and idea also, but sound-wise wasn't anything really that special, and they probably would have folded if they hadn't realeased their technology on the VSTi platform.
Even when the innovation is pretty positive, it's not always a sure financial success. SFP was, and is still pretty innovative, but scares alot of people away.
These ASB boxes can only be good for Creamware market-wise, as they'll expose alot of people who don't know about Creamware products to their technology. If they like it and like the sound, chances are they'll start looking more seriously at the rest of their product line. Waldorf did something similar with the Rack Attack, went from a software VSTi to a hardware box, and, at least with that product, they were pretty successful.
Finally, the reason why everyone still "likes retro" (?) is probably more a matter of functionality/interface than anything else. Alot of too-innovative stuff ends up confusing people to no end (SFP, additive synthesis, etc.) and aren't always a huge commercial success. People also still buy and use "retro" guitars and insruments, not because they "like retro", but because the mechanisms have been tried, tested and proven true over large periods of time. Same with synths, really, and it's a whole lot easier to get music with something as simple and straightforward as a Nord, than having to go thru a hundred menus or debug countless software and driver issues and whatnot.
I'm still a bit puzzled about the whole VSTi integration stuff, as all sequencers I've seen and tried will let you send, receive and edit MIDI notes and CC values exactly as you would for VST instruments, the only difference is that you have some sort of a graphic interface to play around in with a mouse. No idea what the big deal is, not sure how much more functionality you can get in a VST vs hardware box, and anyway it's trivial to use both at the same time anyway, and/or, in this case, to just get the standard SFP plugin and run it in XTC mode.
Also (yeah yeah, I'm almost done now =P), on the "number of voices" front, you should check out the Macbeth M3X synths. Single voice, all-analog, around $2500, still selling like hotcakes, cuz it sounds like a ton of bricks. What matters in the long run, with audio, is how it sounds, not how much you pay for it.
VSTi is king in the home/hobbyist market segment simply because anyone can log onto any p2p network and download hordes and hordes of plugins, ***NOT*** because VSTi are somehow technologically superior. This isn't something you can do with hardware (at this point, at least, except with a few odd "open" ARM CPU cores thingers I guess.)
Like Tom pointed out, the hobbyist/home studio market is the 90% marketshare that will bring in 10% of the revenues. As soon as you start to go up the ladder a bit, you will find that major studios still use PLENTY of hardware. Live musicians still use PLENTY of hardware. The only "softsynth" I've seen used live myself if Max/MSP, everyone else had at least a Nord, Juno106, Access, Waldorf, Novation, Korg stuff, etc. Hardware boxes crash a whole lot less than software and VSTi, which is a bit of a necessity for a musician, both live and in the studio (I guess if you just automate stuff with a mouse it doesn't matter as much.)
The other point, market-wise, about VST stuff, is that since anyone can sit down with the VST SDK and churn out code, you end up with a bit of an overflowed market. Great for the customer since he has more choice (but also has to sifter thru more gunk to get a the good stuff), but for a company, espcially a company like Creamware whose assets are concentrated on a dedicated hardware platform, moving into the plain VSTi market doesn't really make much sense and would probably be more along the lines of financial suicide than anything, as they'd have to port their whole code-base to it. And by the time they'd be done (if it ever gets done =P) you wouldn't see anything innovative yet, just what they had previously, ported to a less stable, and much less "garanteed availability" platform (processing-wise, I mean, since with dedicated DSP you can be 100% sure that stuff will get processed in time or not, while with a computer, sometime it does, sometime it doesn't, oops I was processing that mouse interrupt so I didn't have time to process that sample, sorry! etc)
Also, as far as large pro sampling collections are concerned, I'd say GigaStudio is king, not VSTi. I know alot of people doing commercials/short films/game audio design stuff, and they all use GigaStudio for the heavu sampling stuff, with a dedicated machine running GigaStudio itself (just like old style hardware sampler boxes.) I'm pretty sure people like Hans Zimmer and Tangerine Dream (and countless others) also use GigaStudio, all of them on dedicated machines. I can't say I know anyone that bought $2k sample libraries for Kompakt VSTi, while I could name at least 10 friends that have done it for Giga.
Finally, on the purely innovative side of things, it's pretty easy to name a few innovative products that killed or almost killed companies. Think of Waldorf and the AFB16. They were doing fine with hardware-only boxes, but the AFB was a bit of an hybrid, computer-controlled-thru-VSTi-like-interface of a filter array, and that's kind of what forced them to fold. Also think of what happened with the Noah, great idea and concept, but almost killed Creamware too. Think of the Hartmann Neuron, nice concept and idea also, but sound-wise wasn't anything really that special, and they probably would have folded if they hadn't realeased their technology on the VSTi platform.
Even when the innovation is pretty positive, it's not always a sure financial success. SFP was, and is still pretty innovative, but scares alot of people away.
These ASB boxes can only be good for Creamware market-wise, as they'll expose alot of people who don't know about Creamware products to their technology. If they like it and like the sound, chances are they'll start looking more seriously at the rest of their product line. Waldorf did something similar with the Rack Attack, went from a software VSTi to a hardware box, and, at least with that product, they were pretty successful.
Finally, the reason why everyone still "likes retro" (?) is probably more a matter of functionality/interface than anything else. Alot of too-innovative stuff ends up confusing people to no end (SFP, additive synthesis, etc.) and aren't always a huge commercial success. People also still buy and use "retro" guitars and insruments, not because they "like retro", but because the mechanisms have been tried, tested and proven true over large periods of time. Same with synths, really, and it's a whole lot easier to get music with something as simple and straightforward as a Nord, than having to go thru a hundred menus or debug countless software and driver issues and whatnot.
I'm still a bit puzzled about the whole VSTi integration stuff, as all sequencers I've seen and tried will let you send, receive and edit MIDI notes and CC values exactly as you would for VST instruments, the only difference is that you have some sort of a graphic interface to play around in with a mouse. No idea what the big deal is, not sure how much more functionality you can get in a VST vs hardware box, and anyway it's trivial to use both at the same time anyway, and/or, in this case, to just get the standard SFP plugin and run it in XTC mode.
Also (yeah yeah, I'm almost done now =P), on the "number of voices" front, you should check out the Macbeth M3X synths. Single voice, all-analog, around $2500, still selling like hotcakes, cuz it sounds like a ton of bricks. What matters in the long run, with audio, is how it sounds, not how much you pay for it.
I'm not saying CWA should make VSTis, but that these products should *integrate* as if they were VSTi. Similar to the XTC concept, but this time something which is understandable and functional.
As for Giga, pop over to the Northern Sounds forum and see how many people are joyfully dropping Giga for the VSTi-based alternatives.
I maintain that VSTi is both the soft-synth standard and the overwhelming audio format of the future. Many people here think different. Sure, good.
Any more info about the new CWA boxes ?
As for Giga, pop over to the Northern Sounds forum and see how many people are joyfully dropping Giga for the VSTi-based alternatives.
I maintain that VSTi is both the soft-synth standard and the overwhelming audio format of the future. Many people here think different. Sure, good.
Any more info about the new CWA boxes ?
Personally I'm interested in sound quality, and not in the pro/non-pro thing. While you don't *need* great-sounding gear to make great music, I can't argue with my ears when it comes to how things sound. There's a lot of overpriced, scandalously low-standard 'pro' gear out there too. The pro/non-pro stuff is just marketing. What doesn't lie is sound quality and cost. In my experience it's very rare that something cheap can sound good - it does happen but it is simply not the norm from what I've seen.
IMO you don't have to have a fleet of expensively filled racks in order to make good-sounding productions. A few well-chosen pieces and good skills will do the job just as well. However I've seen time and time again that people who go an 'all-in-one-box' route really have a bad time of it, if not in terms of stability and sound quality, then definitely in terms of ergonomics - in spite of total recall etc, there are many other factors like having to keep switching buffer sizes for different tasks, badly-designed software UIs and simply the fact that a computer is not a very intuitive tool even if you've used computers for your whole life. While keyboard-commands are definitely a *great* thing, clicking around on tiny virtual buttons and menus is not, and never will be, an intuitive, speedy workflow.
Anyway I've totally lost track on where the discussion was... only had a couple of hours sleep in the last 40 due to being locked away in my studio.
IMO you don't have to have a fleet of expensively filled racks in order to make good-sounding productions. A few well-chosen pieces and good skills will do the job just as well. However I've seen time and time again that people who go an 'all-in-one-box' route really have a bad time of it, if not in terms of stability and sound quality, then definitely in terms of ergonomics - in spite of total recall etc, there are many other factors like having to keep switching buffer sizes for different tasks, badly-designed software UIs and simply the fact that a computer is not a very intuitive tool even if you've used computers for your whole life. While keyboard-commands are definitely a *great* thing, clicking around on tiny virtual buttons and menus is not, and never will be, an intuitive, speedy workflow.
Anyway I've totally lost track on where the discussion was... only had a couple of hours sleep in the last 40 due to being locked away in my studio.
-
hubird
Not sure if lucky is the right word.. feeling like a bit of a zombie right now. I do a regular job alongside my music so it's sometimes necessary to force myself to work through the night on a weekend 
Also, please don't think I have some kind of bad-ass studio.. it's definitely very respectable, with quite a few nice bits of inspiring hardware - it's a collective studio belonging to a few like-minded people who decided to pool their gear. It's by no means a 'pro' studio, and I would never claim it is (well, not yet anyway
).
Also, please don't think I have some kind of bad-ass studio.. it's definitely very respectable, with quite a few nice bits of inspiring hardware - it's a collective studio belonging to a few like-minded people who decided to pool their gear. It's by no means a 'pro' studio, and I would never claim it is (well, not yet anyway
).-
hubird
(except listening conditions, right).Go Creamware!
Just surviving in business is hard enough. Let's see the Peer to Peer Pirates shove one of these down a network...... with you on that Symbiote etc
Pro-tools.......hardware
Creamware.......hardware
Cubase .........going hardware as add on
There's no crack available for Nuendo 3 yet, and that's significant news. I would be making the dongle a complex, integral piece of hardware if it were my code.
There are enough VST's and programmers to sink a small ship. And with peer to peer, that just might happen.
It's all been said by others. I'm just adding my name to the list. But also, my understanding of Creamware is that their core business is software for radio stations. DSP boards and SFP are a flow on from their advances in this field. Why would they jump ship?
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mikka on 2005-04-10 22:51 ]</font>
Just surviving in business is hard enough. Let's see the Peer to Peer Pirates shove one of these down a network...... with you on that Symbiote etc
Pro-tools.......hardware
Creamware.......hardware
Cubase .........going hardware as add on
There's no crack available for Nuendo 3 yet, and that's significant news. I would be making the dongle a complex, integral piece of hardware if it were my code.
There are enough VST's and programmers to sink a small ship. And with peer to peer, that just might happen.
It's all been said by others. I'm just adding my name to the list. But also, my understanding of Creamware is that their core business is software for radio stations. DSP boards and SFP are a flow on from their advances in this field. Why would they jump ship?
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mikka on 2005-04-10 22:51 ]</font>
The "major studios" are closing down in their droves all across the world. The major synthesizer manufacturers have all suffered significant downturns in their business. The climate is changing (has changed?) and adding VST/AU integration will just ensure that this line of products has the best possible chance of surviving this and, indeed, thriving.
Along the lines of pirating...dongles can be cracked period. I give you Lightwave 3D, 3D Studio Max, even SoftImage and Alias. Each of which cost from $3000 on up to $15,000. Dongles by themselves can be emulated in software. What needs to be done is to integrate some of the functionality of the software into the dongle. Not just some "checks". I am in no way an advocate of piracy as I have been involved in protection schemes myself for other products. I am probably just stating the obvious.
it's not a question of effort - it's just fun hunting down the code up to the point where it sniffs the mark the dog left on the pole... and then turn it aroundOn 2005-04-11 19:17, stardust wrote:
...
The question is if it is worth the effort on both sides...
I have to admit that it was a learning process for me to accept the rules (that even software used without commercial intend is someone elses work) - not with an excuse here and a bit of convenience there, but consequently.
you're not gonna tell this to some of our much appreciated 3rd party developers, do you ?... because I think that a musician will pay a reasonable price for a good piece of (SW) craftsmanship.
reasonable price for good piece of programming equals to money.
...
they are the best example that these simple facts of life don't apply today - I really wish it would be different.
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-04-11 19:52 ]</font>
I think Wavelength cited the number of downloads relative to the number of payments as the reason he pulled some of his demos.
I'm not perfect either. I've used samples/progrrams I didn't pay for..... I guess many of us believe the end justifies the means. Maybe it's a part of primitive human nature..... but that's another topic.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mikka on 2005-04-11 20:12 ]</font>
I'm not perfect either. I've used samples/progrrams I didn't pay for..... I guess many of us believe the end justifies the means. Maybe it's a part of primitive human nature..... but that's another topic.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mikka on 2005-04-11 20:12 ]</font>
It varies.. most intelligent people realise that it's cheaper in the long run to just buy something and get on with making music rather than spend your whole time hunting for the latest cracked version, hoping it isn't buggy or non-working.
There is a definite hardcore though, that will actively seek out ways of getting as much as possible for free. It's even worse when it's seen as some kind of 'fight the power' activity, and the software companies are seen as an evil tool of the system. It certainly doesn't help when annoying protections are used, although this is obviously no excuse.
IMO the best protection is actually no protection, but good support. However I think that many software users also have to be a bit more educated into what goes into making a program, especially one that relies on other software products to work alongside them. Too often, salespersons in stores are way too quick to recommend something, without figuring out if it's suitable. I've seen this happen countless times when I worked in a music store. It's a shame to see someone bring something back (it wipes out the commission you earned when you sold it) but most salesmen have a 'get the box out of the door first, ask questions later' attitude.
The computer music market is exploding incredibly rapidly, without people really knowing what they're getting themselves into. I've seen so many people buy and install something a few days before a deadline, and if it doesn't work (or messes with their system), have absolutely no comprehension it was a bad idea to do this.
To get back on topic.. I honestly think that if someone values something enough they will buy it. CW are making a good move, the most logical move they could have made with their technology and code/hardware base. They could have gone into VSTi but really, it's a very small and risky market, compared with the potential hardware market. Most companies are lucky to sell a few thousand copies of a plugin. I've seen many many people simply out of their depth with a computer - it's a fundamentally incompatible concept for a massive amount of people. A box with knobs on it, with minimal menu structure, however, can be mastered relatively easily, and is still appealing to someone who is very much at home with a mouse, because they know only too well the deficiency of these silly rodents as a musical interface.
There is a definite hardcore though, that will actively seek out ways of getting as much as possible for free. It's even worse when it's seen as some kind of 'fight the power' activity, and the software companies are seen as an evil tool of the system. It certainly doesn't help when annoying protections are used, although this is obviously no excuse.
IMO the best protection is actually no protection, but good support. However I think that many software users also have to be a bit more educated into what goes into making a program, especially one that relies on other software products to work alongside them. Too often, salespersons in stores are way too quick to recommend something, without figuring out if it's suitable. I've seen this happen countless times when I worked in a music store. It's a shame to see someone bring something back (it wipes out the commission you earned when you sold it) but most salesmen have a 'get the box out of the door first, ask questions later' attitude.
The computer music market is exploding incredibly rapidly, without people really knowing what they're getting themselves into. I've seen so many people buy and install something a few days before a deadline, and if it doesn't work (or messes with their system), have absolutely no comprehension it was a bad idea to do this.
To get back on topic.. I honestly think that if someone values something enough they will buy it. CW are making a good move, the most logical move they could have made with their technology and code/hardware base. They could have gone into VSTi but really, it's a very small and risky market, compared with the potential hardware market. Most companies are lucky to sell a few thousand copies of a plugin. I've seen many many people simply out of their depth with a computer - it's a fundamentally incompatible concept for a massive amount of people. A box with knobs on it, with minimal menu structure, however, can be mastered relatively easily, and is still appealing to someone who is very much at home with a mouse, because they know only too well the deficiency of these silly rodents as a musical interface.