KVR Audio

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:01 am

realmarco wrote:didnt the d50 just have samples for the attack cross faded sine waves for the sustain part

Btw who the hell is gonna go after you from sampling a rompler Synth that came out 27 year ago
i mean really!

Roland's pretty uptight about this stuff. But yes, you're right there are 100 samples in the D50, 76 of which are attack samples and single short loop spectrum samples. The remaining 24 are loops constructed, I believe, from the first 76 samples.

muLperi · Post by **muLperi** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:06 am

Can someone copy & paste his comments here?

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:12 am

UltimateOutsider wrote:
realmarco wrote:Btw who the hell is gonna go after you from sampling a rompler Synth that came out 27 year ago
Roland, according to Persing. It's kind of buried in that Facebook thread, but if you can find the part where he answers peoples' questions, there's some pretty interesting stuff there. He says Roland HAS gone after people for doing it, and won.

according to persing..

..then i ask myself why deepflight for example is still available then? obviously roland give a s**t about it as said. the whole debate is antic and very misleading.

Ghostwave · Post by **Ghostwave** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 7:45 am

Eric Persing wrote:Oy…..yet another company wholesale ripping off my work and the work of other talented sound designers from the 80s. Unlike many other kinds of emulations of analog synths, unless they have a specific license from Roland to do this product, it's not legal with sample-based instruments. (it's not legal to sample and redistribute sample-based products that have copyrighted samples and all of the D-50 stuff is copyrighted by Roland). As a highly respected news site, I wish you guys wouldn't promote illegal products like this without ensuring that they are legitimate.

deastman · Post by **deastman** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:19 am

murnau wrote:
UltimateOutsider wrote:
realmarco wrote:Btw who the hell is gonna go after you from sampling a rompler Synth that came out 27 year ago
Roland, according to Persing. It's kind of buried in that Facebook thread, but if you can find the part where he answers peoples' questions, there's some pretty interesting stuff there. He says Roland HAS gone after people for doing it, and won.
according to persing..

..then i ask myself why deepflight for example is still available then? obviously roland give a s**t about it as said. the whole debate is antic and very misleading.

Um... because Roland probably doesn't have people assigned to do nothing but troll the web looking for copyright violations? I'm sure these sampled instruments have just flown under the radar so far.

Tell you what, lets do an experiment- why don't you call up Roland's legal department and ask them if they care about deepflight?

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:05 am

deastman wrote:Um... because Roland probably doesn't have people assigned to do nothing but troll the web looking for copyright violations? I'm sure these sampled instruments have just flown under the radar so far.

Tell you what, lets do an experiment- why don't you call up Roland's legal department and ask them if they care about deepflight?

ehh.. what?

Gamma-UT · Post by **Gamma-UT** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:17 am

deastman wrote:Um... because Roland probably doesn't have people assigned to do nothing but troll the web looking for copyright violations? I'm sure these sampled instruments have just flown under the radar so far.

Actually, companies do, although Google Alerts does most of the grunt work.

deastman wrote:Tell you what, lets do an experiment- why don't you call up Roland's legal department and ask them if they care about deepflight?

My guess is that Deepflight is just far enough away from being something that Roland cares about to not get too much hassle. Looking at the history of Roland's actions, it seems there need to be two triggers:

Look and feel or naming - how close is it to a Roland trademark?
The sounds themselves - how close are they to the trademark sounds sold by Roland?

Libraries that have had a reasonable shelf life focus on the 'character' of the synth rather than the core sounds - things that sound a bit like the trademark sounds but are noticeably not the same. What makes the Binary Music library useful as a D50alike (such as providing two independent layers) is probably something that takes it too close to what Roland will accept.

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:37 am

FWIW i have contacted the developer of the LA-50 Kontakt library concerning what is posted here and also by Eric Persing at Facebook. He promised that he will try to get this problem sorted/solved.

Ingo

don1thedon · Post by **don1thedon** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:09 am

Quote from http://www.binarymusic.co.uk/la-50.html

LA-50
Following comments from the original sound designer of the D-50, we have withdrawn the LA-50 from sale until such time that hopefully, we can release it in a way that everyone would be happy with. Thanks for your understanding.

Just as I was gonna buy it ...

Ben H · Post by **Ben H** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:19 am

Following comments from the original sound designer of the D-50, we have withdrawn the LA-50 from sale until such time that hopefully, we can release it in a way that everyone would be happy with. Thanks for your understanding.

I knew that was going to happen

Numanoid · Post by **Numanoid** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 12:31 pm

don1thedon wrote:Quote from http://www.binarymusic.co.uk/la-50.html

LA-50
Following comments from the original sound designer of the D-50, we have withdrawn the LA-50 from sale until such time that hopefully, we can release it in a way that everyone would be happy with. Thanks for your understanding.

I got a feeling that is why UVI withdrew Digital Synsations (which contained a D50 instrument too). But they relaunched it, so must have been withdrawn pending some kind of approval by Roland?

By the way that sound designer really does need to back up his claims. If devs are withdrawing stuff just because Persing has picked up some water cooler talk...

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:20 pm

i bought la-50 this morning because i saw this thing coming: the dev is a nice guy so his decision now didn't come that unexpected after reading the whiny persing fb comments today.

electro · Post by **electro** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:27 pm

What prevented Roland from doing the D50 like Korg Legacy?
http://www.roland.com/products/en/HQ-OR/

electro · Post by **electro** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:31 pm

Maybe Spectrasonics should be the ones to create a full blown D50 VSTI.

Ghostwave · Post by **Ghostwave** » Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:51 pm

I think what happened to LA-50 is very sad.
I can understand Eric Persing not being too happy about having the D50 sampled but he has no right to come out and have the LA-50 removed.
Though the sound design on the D50 is his work, Roland is not his company. He was contracted to do those sounds and if someone has to make Binary Music stop selling LA-50, it should be Roland, not Persing.
I have tons of respect for him as what he did regarding MIDI and sound design in the 80s and 90s is nothing short of amazing, but his company is Spectrasonics. What work he did for other companies is out of his hands, unless the contract said so.
However, I agree that Binary Music should have had Roland's permission to sample the D50, no matter how old it is. And I still can't undestand why Roland doesn't come up with a software version of the ROMplers of the 80s and 90s since there's still a demand for it. I know they are much more interested in hardware but computers having the power they have now, software solutions cannot be disregarded anymore.
Like many have said in the past, Roland should IMO bring back the glory of its analogue days (and not in VA form) and everything digital pre-2000 should be nicely packed in a soft synth.

Roland D50 VST