E
Emusic
New member
No I ain´t. Never heard of it but will google it now.
Last edited:
- Status
TerraMortim
New member
hmm? You even have their logo as your avatar lol www.emusic.com
E
Emusic
New member
Well; seems I need a new avatar then
Think I just googled music/emusic on picturesearch.
Thanks for the link.
Bringing the thread back on track; since this is the legendary thread; no I don´t use pirated music software. If I need it, I´ll buy it.
(Dont tell your Commando dad though; hes a pirate).
Think I just googled music/emusic on picturesearch.
Thanks for the link.
Bringing the thread back on track; since this is the legendary thread; no I don´t use pirated music software. If I need it, I´ll buy it.
(Dont tell your Commando dad though; hes a pirate).
Last edited:
D
Dax Productions
New member
No, that is EXACTLY my point. If you can't afford these... maybe you don't need them yet. For a studio that is doing lots of work and pulling in a bunch of money, $500 is a small price to pay for something that will help them turn out better work and, in turn, make even more money.
TerraMortim
New member
so...they're ripping people off because they know they can get away with it. . . .
DaveO
New member
Well, a $500 plug is clearly NOT in the same category as food so that must mean it's a non-necessity. If people are willing to pay $500 then guess what. They are NOT being ripped off. They're buying it because they ultimately decided it was more important for them to have the $500 plug in than the $500 itself.
So you're telling me your audio recordings are THAT valuable that you really need a $500 plugin? If that's really true then spending the $500 should be a no-brainer. It's worth every penny even at that price because you'll be making tons of money from the platinum status you regularly reach in sales with the help of that $500 plug in.
If you don't regularly reach platinum status, then guess it's it's also a no-brainer. You do NOT need a $500 plug in - legal or pirated. You are NOT the target market for it and I doubt you have both the musical and audio engineering ability to make proper and effective use of it. That's not an insult - it's a fact. The number of people hanging around here who CAN make effective use of a $500 would probalby not be that high.
Again, your arguments make no sense. All they do is cover up the fact that pirating is done ONLY because it's easy and the risk of getting caught is so low, let alone the risk of being convicted, let alone the risk of being imprisoned. Significantly increase those risks to where their similar to the risks of stealing a Strat off the wall at Guitar Center and I'll bet all the little kiddies pirating software on the PC mommy and daddy bought for them would never think twice about it.
And don't give your nonsense arguments about how software isn't a product or "real". Based on your response to my questions about your qualifications to speak on this topic, you clearly have no experience with the real world issues of intellectual property.
So you're telling me your audio recordings are THAT valuable that you really need a $500 plugin? If that's really true then spending the $500 should be a no-brainer. It's worth every penny even at that price because you'll be making tons of money from the platinum status you regularly reach in sales with the help of that $500 plug in.
If you don't regularly reach platinum status, then guess it's it's also a no-brainer. You do NOT need a $500 plug in - legal or pirated. You are NOT the target market for it and I doubt you have both the musical and audio engineering ability to make proper and effective use of it. That's not an insult - it's a fact. The number of people hanging around here who CAN make effective use of a $500 would probalby not be that high.
Again, your arguments make no sense. All they do is cover up the fact that pirating is done ONLY because it's easy and the risk of getting caught is so low, let alone the risk of being convicted, let alone the risk of being imprisoned. Significantly increase those risks to where their similar to the risks of stealing a Strat off the wall at Guitar Center and I'll bet all the little kiddies pirating software on the PC mommy and daddy bought for them would never think twice about it.
And don't give your nonsense arguments about how software isn't a product or "real". Based on your response to my questions about your qualifications to speak on this topic, you clearly have no experience with the real world issues of intellectual property.
T
Toker41
Better Than You
There is no reason to steal software. Sgt. Pepper was done on two 4 tracks. It's not the equipment, or software you have, it's what you can do with it. It's about talent, not expensive software. Here is a link to a song I did on N-track, which is a $50 program, and about $150 worth of mics, and a $200 Behringer mixer, and a cheap Soundblaster sound card (paid $35 for it). Great recording, and didn't have to spend a fortune, or steal software I couldn't afford.
Check out "Hopes Fading":
http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=2878&alid=-1
Check out "Hopes Fading":
http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=2878&alid=-1
E
Emusic
New member
What he said.
Hopes Fading is such a great song too
Hopes Fading is such a great song too
DaveO
New member
Very nicely done. I'd love to see certain clowns here who feel justified stealing $500 plug-ins do half as good a job with their $10000 worth of pirated software.
DaveO
New member
Wait a minute. How does the music industry "screwing" artists have ANYTHING to do with the price of audio recording software? Your lack of focus is further proof that you have NO, and I repeat, NO idea what you're talking about when it comes to the software business. You claim the rich are screwing the poor, (in unrelated industries, no less ...) so go ahead and document it. Show me how companies like Cakewalk, Cubase, etc. are screwing poor people. Show me their financials and how their business models and corporate policies are aimed not at producing software but at beating down the poor even farther than they are now. Give me a freaking break ...
I offer you a simple challenge. Show me how the average poor, uneducated, single mother in the inner city would suddenly benefit from Cakewalk lowering the price of SONAR by $100. Offer me something, anything. Please. Enlighten me with your business and social acumen.
Last edited:
punkin
Univalve & Avatar Speaks
The way I see it, some number of honorable, respectable, paying consumers have to pay for it so that the company developing the applications can afford to produce the products.
All the "crackers" and "hackers" can thank me the others like me now.
All the "crackers" and "hackers" can thank me the others like me now.
D
danny.guitar
Guest
Cost of the software = cost to hire developers + licensing for any 3rd party development + advertising + other business expenses.
Developers charge a shitload. Usually they are hired as a team, so it's not just one. Several developers, working over a long period of time, on a program that will only be sold to a small market = higher cost.
It's hard to get far writing software.
H
himynameisbuddy
New member
Personally, I download as many programs I can (not all at once) to try them out, but I always know that they just aren't the same as the real thing... so, once I've tried every program out, I pick the best one or two and purchase the real thing. I do this because companies always give out "free" versions, but they are always lacking qualities of the full versions. So, I get the full versions and give them a test run.
More companies should offer a full-version (*exactly* like the full-version), but it expires in 30 days or whatever. As long as it has all the same features, that'd be a good way to decide which product to buy
More companies should offer a full-version (*exactly* like the full-version), but it expires in 30 days or whatever. As long as it has all the same features, that'd be a good way to decide which product to buy
T
talontsiawd
New member
Ok, i have about $800 invested in software, more or less. I can digitally create pretty much any form of music with thousands of virtual instruments. I can record anything from a single vocalist to a full orchastra (i'm not saying my computer would support it, nor do have the hardware). I have hundreds of fx. And on to of all that, i can tweek and adjust every part of these things to my liking. I don't get where all these complaints about the cost come from. To me, it's an insanely good deal.
I know when i compare my hobbies to my friends, music seems pretty damn cheap when it comes down to what you realistically need.
I know when i compare my hobbies to my friends, music seems pretty damn cheap when it comes down to what you realistically need.
TerraMortim
New member
No offense... but that's a really stupid argument that I've heard several times on here. First of all..there is nothing that says if you aren't working on platinum hits, you don't have skills. Audio quality has little or nothing to do with the success of any given music. The general public, in fact, don't give a flying fuck if you're a whiz with a compressor, and would just as easily buy a song with horrible audio quality as the same song done by the best engineers on earth. You are one of the funny little people who state "This is fact' when you would have no way to actually know whether the statement were true or not. I wouldn't make assumptions, and leap to the "this is fact", statement, it can make you look an awful lot like a total moron if you end up being wrong. So, it kind of defeats the purpose of saying anything in the first place.
TerraMortim
New member
and of course it costs SO much more for URS to develop the vintage cobobulator tube dicksucking compressor '69 mark 2, as the entire Logic studio... and of course, Apple didn't have any more advertising than URS did... lol Not trying to be combative... just trying to make a point... the market can be much bigger by charging a smaller price. It's kind of a false economy, these companies, that try to jack up the price for their goods/services because they're worried about making money..then less people can afford the goods/services and it shrinks their customer base dramatically, and then they can whine and moan about how they barely get by, and need to jack up the price. (It's kind of like a lot of public services, at least where I live, like the bus system for instance). To increase their user base, they would simply have to lower the price of their product. It's a really good product (not $500 good, but still good) that a lot of people would be more than willing to buy at a price that someone who didn't have a fetish for throwing money away could afford.
Question... how can audio damage afford to sell all their plugins for around $100 or less (some as low at $30). They seem to manage the costs of finding developers and getting a surprisingly great sounding product.
TerraMortim
New member
Wait a minute. How does the music industry "screwing" artists have ANYTHING to do with the price of audio recording software? Your lack of focus is further proof that you have NO, and I repeat, NO idea what you're talking about when it comes to the software business. You claim the rich are screwing the poor, (in unrelated industries, no less ...) so go ahead and document it. Show me how companies like Cakewalk, Cubase, etc. are screwing poor people. Show me their financials and how their business models and corporate policies are aimed not at producing software but at beating down the poor even farther than they are now. Give me a freaking break ...
I offer you a simple challenge. Show me how the average poor, uneducated, single mother in the inner city would suddenly benefit from Cakewalk lowering the price of SONAR by $100. Offer me something, anything. Please. Enlighten me with your business and social acumen.
that was actually a side discussion about music piracy, and the RIAA.. not about software. I'm actually a bit more opinionated on that subject (music piracy/riaa), but since this was a bit similar (software), I thought I'd chime in. I'm more apt to buy audio software (do it all the time) than any RIAA affiliated recording (I refuse).
You're searching for things to discredit me, but you're not searching long enough, and finding fairly piss poor examples, obviously, because you are taking things out of their proper context and coming to rash decisions and trying your best to use it to prove the "he's an idiot, because he doesn't agree with me" card.
The software business is a business like any other. It's not as if all the principals of business go flying right out the window as soon as such and such company's product happens to be software. The same principals that apply to ACME Widget Manufacturing Inc will apply to Nigel Buttplug's Magical Software Company. The only difference is, it's actually a bit rosier on the side of software, as there isn't a cost per unit, just the costs of development, advertising and all that lot. Sure there's piracy, but in any manufacturing environment there will be plenty of waste that doesn't meet quality control standards, and thus can't be sold. In fact, many of these companies if they are actually making physical packaging have already sold their products at wholesale to music stores. SO, they're fine. The little guys are the ones that could suffer...so always support the little guys, and when you can support the big guys too, unless their Adobe, and in that case fuck em! lol
TerraMortim
New member
btw...I didn't "pirate" any $500 plugin.. I have SOME software of that nature, just because from time to time, I am required to get a certain result in my creative mind (or by the creative mind of a client) to have the right tool, and quick. Sometimes the tool needed is VERY specific, not like drum machine 001 or generic reverb o matic 9000. and as is fairly normal with artists, I'm fairly poor most of the time, and so are most of my clients. (I hate working with these over hyped purely commercially minded braindead bands, I'd much rather be creative, than copy everything that's on the closest Clear Channel radio station to the T) I, however am one of those funny little people who actually do have an ethic to buying the software I use all the time. I'm the sort of person that learns and discovers by doing it. Demos are completely unusable as they either time out before you can really get a grasp of it's use, or they have insane things like noise blasts or a fist comes out of the computer and honks your nose and punches your teeth out ever 10 seconds) In all reality, it takes me a good amount of time to actually see if a plugin is useful or not to me. What's just useless bells and whistles and what is actually very useful is not so obvious until you've explored it enough to decide whether you can make it bend to your will or not.
Just because you have a fairly hard assed view against piracy, doesn't mean you have the right to make assumptions about the talent of those individuals. In fact, it just shows that you're blowing out a lot of hot air, with no real substance. Does that actually make sense? No. What, does a certain Serial Number hold the key to great audio? It's just silly, and stupid.
DaveO
New member
There was no hot air. I stated you don't offer anything that shows you can speak intelligently on the submit of marketing software and I stand by that. For some odd reason you believe that all you have to do is create software (as if it was cheap and easy to do) and then you never have to do anything else but just sit back while money just pours in from every direction forever.
How can somebody be so cluelessly wrong. Once the product is out in the market my fixed costs remain. I still have office space to pay for, utilities to pay for, maintenance/service costs on the equipment and software my developers use, professional IT staff to keep my systems running and provide proper disaster recovery to protect the expensive investments I've made in software development, audio engineering experts to provide me with algorithms and models for all the complex signal processing that goes into my software, salaries for my office staff, legal/marketing/distribution costs, and the list goes on. My marketing plan is based on selling so many units per given unit of time and I need those continued sales in order to not only cover those costs but also to provide continued support for the product. Any idea what percentage of the life cycle development costs of a product occur AFTER the product hits the market? I seriously doubt it. Modifying code at any step of a typical development cycle costs about 10 times what it cost to change it in the previous stage of that cycle. Modifying delivered production code is OUTRAGEOUSLY EXPENSIVE to do. The biggest component of my costs go to the highly skilled developers I still have to employ to add the features you want yet brag about not paying for.
Let's not even get started on the R&D costs of developing the next generation of the software. I can't stay in business forever on the current product so I have to CONSTANTLY be looking for new ideas and new technologies to take advantage of in the future. I have to push the boundaries and make major improvements every so often and release a new product with those new and radical features using new and radical technologies that weren't even a wild dream when I first conceived of the current product. That costs huge money too. Ever think of that? Where do you think I get the money to pay for those costs? From the money I make selling TODAY'S product, of course. What do you think the software companies do, sail the high seas in their pirate ships, brazenly flying their Jolly Rogers while they pirat-ize peaceful, honest vessels?
That's not a hard assed view on piracy. It's a view based on a) many years of experience in multiple aspects of the business, and b) the fact that I understand what theft of service is - illegal. That's what software piracy is, plain and simple. You seem to have this asinine idea that pirates are sticking it to the rich, that they deserve to have it stuck to them, and that the masses should be thanking the pirates for awakening them to the atrocities thrust upon them. What nonsense. A doctor won't let you sit in his/her office while he/she sees paying patients. A lawyer won't let you sit in his/her office while he/she discusses cases with paying clients. A financial planner won't let you sit on sessions with paying clients. A tutor won't let you sit in while he/she tutors struggling, honest students. A university won't let you sit in on classes attended by paying students. The cable company won't let you tap into their lines to get every porn channel known to man. Those are all thefts of service, just like software piracy.
How about you leave your door open so all of us with hard ass views on piracy come over and use your studio when you're not there. You've bragged endlessly here about what a dishonest businessman you are so I would *never* consider using you to be my engineer, no matter how extensive your skills or how reasonable your rates are. However, if you're out taking your dog for a walk, at your girlfriend's house getting some, on vacation, or whatever, then you're clearly not using your studio. That means there are plenty of times I'm ENTITLED to just walk into your home or place of business and use everything for free, right? Right?! You weren't using it so there's no harm in me doing it. It's just there for the taking.
Convince me that if you came home after being away for a week and saw that someone broke into your home/studio while you were away, you wouldn't call the police. No, not you, you'd assume it was some poor person with outrageous audio engineering skills who has been ripped off by the rich fat cats who make pro audio gear. You'd of course conclude that person deserves to use your studio for free because "the man" has been sticking it to them and that's the reason they can't afford their own gear. And altruistic you wouldn't stop there. No way!!!!! You'd find out who they are so you could invite them and all their highly skilled yet poor colleagues to record for free in your studio anytime they wanted.
Puh-lease ...... Like I said, give me some facts that you can back up. Give me facts you learned from real experience. All you keep throwing out are the same illogical ideas about the rich software companies are purposely screwing the little guy. They're doing nothing of the kind. They're making business plans that maximizes the money they can make from a product. If their research shows they can make more money by selling fewer units for more money then that's EXACTLY what they'll do. If they're research instead shows that they'll make more money from selling many more units of lower priced units that's EXACTLY what they'll do. Of course, they'll only do that if they've proved to themselves that they'll be able to sell - are you paying attention? - THE RIGHT NUMBER OF LEGITIMATE COPIES AT THAT LOW PRICE. If they can't sell enough then they'll look for another business model, like selling fewer high priced units. If that happens then guess what - that would be YOUR fault. So who's the person screwing the little guy, hmmm?
How can somebody be so cluelessly wrong. Once the product is out in the market my fixed costs remain. I still have office space to pay for, utilities to pay for, maintenance/service costs on the equipment and software my developers use, professional IT staff to keep my systems running and provide proper disaster recovery to protect the expensive investments I've made in software development, audio engineering experts to provide me with algorithms and models for all the complex signal processing that goes into my software, salaries for my office staff, legal/marketing/distribution costs, and the list goes on. My marketing plan is based on selling so many units per given unit of time and I need those continued sales in order to not only cover those costs but also to provide continued support for the product. Any idea what percentage of the life cycle development costs of a product occur AFTER the product hits the market? I seriously doubt it. Modifying code at any step of a typical development cycle costs about 10 times what it cost to change it in the previous stage of that cycle. Modifying delivered production code is OUTRAGEOUSLY EXPENSIVE to do. The biggest component of my costs go to the highly skilled developers I still have to employ to add the features you want yet brag about not paying for.
Let's not even get started on the R&D costs of developing the next generation of the software. I can't stay in business forever on the current product so I have to CONSTANTLY be looking for new ideas and new technologies to take advantage of in the future. I have to push the boundaries and make major improvements every so often and release a new product with those new and radical features using new and radical technologies that weren't even a wild dream when I first conceived of the current product. That costs huge money too. Ever think of that? Where do you think I get the money to pay for those costs? From the money I make selling TODAY'S product, of course. What do you think the software companies do, sail the high seas in their pirate ships, brazenly flying their Jolly Rogers while they pirat-ize peaceful, honest vessels?
That's not a hard assed view on piracy. It's a view based on a) many years of experience in multiple aspects of the business, and b) the fact that I understand what theft of service is - illegal. That's what software piracy is, plain and simple. You seem to have this asinine idea that pirates are sticking it to the rich, that they deserve to have it stuck to them, and that the masses should be thanking the pirates for awakening them to the atrocities thrust upon them. What nonsense. A doctor won't let you sit in his/her office while he/she sees paying patients. A lawyer won't let you sit in his/her office while he/she discusses cases with paying clients. A financial planner won't let you sit on sessions with paying clients. A tutor won't let you sit in while he/she tutors struggling, honest students. A university won't let you sit in on classes attended by paying students. The cable company won't let you tap into their lines to get every porn channel known to man. Those are all thefts of service, just like software piracy.
How about you leave your door open so all of us with hard ass views on piracy come over and use your studio when you're not there. You've bragged endlessly here about what a dishonest businessman you are so I would *never* consider using you to be my engineer, no matter how extensive your skills or how reasonable your rates are. However, if you're out taking your dog for a walk, at your girlfriend's house getting some, on vacation, or whatever, then you're clearly not using your studio. That means there are plenty of times I'm ENTITLED to just walk into your home or place of business and use everything for free, right? Right?! You weren't using it so there's no harm in me doing it. It's just there for the taking.
Convince me that if you came home after being away for a week and saw that someone broke into your home/studio while you were away, you wouldn't call the police. No, not you, you'd assume it was some poor person with outrageous audio engineering skills who has been ripped off by the rich fat cats who make pro audio gear. You'd of course conclude that person deserves to use your studio for free because "the man" has been sticking it to them and that's the reason they can't afford their own gear. And altruistic you wouldn't stop there. No way!!!!! You'd find out who they are so you could invite them and all their highly skilled yet poor colleagues to record for free in your studio anytime they wanted.
Puh-lease ...... Like I said, give me some facts that you can back up. Give me facts you learned from real experience. All you keep throwing out are the same illogical ideas about the rich software companies are purposely screwing the little guy. They're doing nothing of the kind. They're making business plans that maximizes the money they can make from a product. If their research shows they can make more money by selling fewer units for more money then that's EXACTLY what they'll do. If they're research instead shows that they'll make more money from selling many more units of lower priced units that's EXACTLY what they'll do. Of course, they'll only do that if they've proved to themselves that they'll be able to sell - are you paying attention? - THE RIGHT NUMBER OF LEGITIMATE COPIES AT THAT LOW PRICE. If they can't sell enough then they'll look for another business model, like selling fewer high priced units. If that happens then guess what - that would be YOUR fault. So who's the person screwing the little guy, hmmm?
TerraMortim
New member
It sure is deemed okay when it comes to musicians...I guess we're all exempt from that, aren't we?
- Status