UVI Vintage Legends, demo version now available

[Failed Muso]

From what I hear, NI's licensing jackboot is bigger than UVI's

Not quite true. UVI only allows you to order a smaller number of licences (NI is minimum 500 IIRC). When same number of licences is taken into account, the price is pretty much the same, or even bigger for UVI. I guess you could make a deal with either NI or UVI to cut you some slack, but what I heard from some developers that were asking around for UVI licencing, they were (unpleasantly) surprised, because they expected more competitive pricing than what NI offers, and they didn't get it. So...

Well, I am not privvy to the specifics of either licensing process, only going on what others have told me, therefore I bow to your superior knowledge on the subject, but have to ask why UVI licensing should have to be more favourable than NI?

You are MISSING a point. There's a clear distinction between Kontakt library and Kontakt PLAYER library. UVI library is equal to Kontakt Player library. Anything else that isn't an UVI library can ONLY be opened in MF3, and this is equivalent to non-Kontakt Player libraries for which you must have full version of Kontakt. Gotcha?

For example, if Hollow Sun were to go UVI/MF3 way, because of (pretty high) licencing fees for UVI Workstation we couldn't do an UVI library, so you would need to have MF3 to use them - so it would be the same case as with Kontakt right now.

If I have bought a library for Kontakt format, I expect it to work in either the Player or the full app itself. I appreciate dev's like Steve who put the disclaimer on about the demo mode but one has to ask why Steve hasn't succumbed to NI's Player demands.

As I said, I know of no UVI format library that doesn't work in the workstation. That may change, but right now, if I buy UVI format content, it works in both apps. This cannot be said of Kontakt format library.

Anyway, we have deviated FAR from the OP, so I'm going to digress. I have the rest of Vintage Legends to work through for my review and I also have Gospel Musicians "Pure Sine" library to review too.

Merry Xmas!

[ChiTown24]

As I said, I know of no UVI format library that doesn't work in the workstation.

That's because, if I'm picking Evil Dragon up correctly, you can not make a UVI format library in the first place without paying the license. So, naturally all UVI libraries work in the workstation.

Evil Dragon's point, I think, is that any Kontakt Library will at least function for 15 mins in the free player. No license fees required. A MachFive 3 library won't function in the UVI workstation at all unless licensed to be a UVI library.

[EvilDragon]

but have to ask why UVI licensing should have to be more favourable than NI?

If they want more 3rd party developers on board, they should offer more favourable licencing than NI. Simple as that.

[EvilDragon]

As I said, I know of no UVI format library that doesn't work in the workstation.

That's because, if I'm picking Evil Dragon up correctly, you can not make a UVI format library in the first place without paying the license. So, naturally all UVI libraries work in the workstation.

Evil Dragon's point, I think, is that any Kontakt Library will at least function for 15 mins in the free player. No license fees required. A MachFive 3 library won't function in the UVI workstation at all unless licensed to be a UVI library.

Correct, that was my point Failed Muso didn't seem to realize.

[MrDuke]

I've reported quite a number of issues and nothing really seems to get done about anything. They just seem to release a steady stream of shiny looking GUIs with sometimes quite disappointing content.

UVI is also responsible for MOTU's BPM, and it took them years to fix a crippling bug in that, so...

Browsing for files is a pain in the ass again by comparison to Native Instruments Kontakt.

Is it better in Mach Five 3? A lot of people say it's more usable than Kontakt. I've always found the Kontakt user interface clunky and counter-intuitive.

[MrDuke]

... so I'm going to digress. I have the rest of Vintage Legends to work through for my review and I also have Gospel Musicians "Pure Sine" library to review too.

You were going to do a M5-3 review also, but never did?

[SWAN808]

I have the ear of a few people at UVI and will mention it to them

Ive noticed your reviews seem very pro UVI with little or no criticism. I like some UVI stuff but there clearly are some downsides. It appears you have an advanced copy of the new library and pretty much every one they have made...Im just wondering what your relationship with UVI actually is?

why UVI licensing should have to be more favourable than NI?

Its a fair point - but the main one I would say is that NI have a much larger market share and broader reach.

[kb123]

As I said, I know of no UVI format library that doesn't work in the workstation.

That's because, if I'm picking Evil Dragon up correctly, you can not make a UVI format library in the first place without paying the license. So, naturally all UVI libraries work in the workstation.

Evil Dragon's point, I think, is that any Kontakt Library will at least function for 15 mins in the free player. No license fees required. A MachFive 3 library won't function in the UVI workstation at all unless licensed to be a UVI library.

Just to clarify a bit. When a uvi format library is created, it is targeted at the uvi workstation platform. This format is also readable by Mach 5 - 3. Its a subtle, but important difference, as at the present time, it is not specifically targeted at Mach 5 - 3.

[Failed Muso]

... so I'm going to digress. I have the rest of Vintage Legends to work through for my review and I also have Gospel Musicians "Pure Sine" library to review too.

You were going to do a M5-3 review also, but never did?

This is true and I have a good reason why it has been delayed

I was laid off from my day job in June of this year and so a lot of things went on hold whilst I tried to rectify that situation. By the beginning of August, I had found a new job and it has me doing a lot of travelling. I cover the whole of EMEA (Europe, Middle East & Africa) and there's only one of me, so I have had to re-prioritise a lot of things I do outside of my day job, which of course pays the bills

Suffice to say, I will be trying to play catch up over the next few weeks and hope to have an MF3 review up soon.

Thanks for your patience and support

[Failed Muso]

I have the ear of a few people at UVI and will mention it to them

Ive noticed your reviews seem very pro UVI with little or no criticism. I like some UVI stuff but there clearly are some downsides. It appears you have an advanced copy of the new library and pretty much every one they have made...Im just wondering what your relationship with UVI actually is?

why UVI licensing should have to be more favourable than NI?

Its a fair point - but the main one I would say is that NI have a much larger market share and broader reach.

I'm not sure what you're implying here. Ok, I lie, I can see exactly what is being implied

Allow me to clarify. I am a nobody, really. I'm independent, I'm unbiased, that is to say, I have no reason to review anything with any outside influence and I am certainly not in anyone's pocket. I sent UVI a speculative email some while back, asking if there was any chance I could do a review of their Emulation II library. They responded and said yes. Since then, I have continued to do reviews of theirs, and others, products. They seem to appreciate the fact that my blog has a heavy preference for things like Fairlight's, Emulator's, Synclavier's and other vintage classics, so I guess they see it as a worthwhile venture.

If my reviews of UVI products appear to be overly glowing, it is only because I find them to be excellent products on a personal level. If you read the reviews and/or watch the videos, you will clearly see me make critical remarks such as my opinion on their pricing, on their naming conventions and other issues. But not everyone is the same, and some people won't like their stuff. I am sure you will find negative reviews if you look for them.

I am not on the UVI payroll (I wish!) and trust me, if they released something that I thought was an absolute dog's dinner, I would have no hesitation or problem saying so. I have a good relationship with the company inasmuch as we talk regularly and they supply me with content for the purpose of independent review. This is common place for any company, whatever they make/sell and there is no contract, written or otherwise, between us. It is what is known as Marketing. They could stop sending me stuff for review at anytime just as I could stop reviewing it. With regards to VL, not even I knew the exact details of its content until it was released. I am certainly not privvy to secret knowledge or insider info.

If I am "pro UVI", it is only, and I repeat, ONLY because I like what they do Oh, and I get none of their library before it is released to the public. From what I can tell, they're working on stuff right up until the release date and I certainly wouldn't want to review a beta.

As for the licensing issue, I agree that if you face stiff competition, you need to make yourself more attractive in some way, and that may well be one way, but you also need to consider that in doing so, you deliberately devalue the thing you are trying to sell and that can have a detrimental knock on effect. I am sure they have sound business reasons for doing what they do. Whether they are successful with them, only time will tell, I guess

Anyway, we seem to have performed a classic thread derailment here and I fully accept my own part in that. Therefore, out of respect for the KvR rules and the OP, may I suggest we bring things back on topic?

[ChiTown24]

So in other words you get the libraries for free ?

[SWAN808]

ok man fair enough

[Failed Muso]

So in other words you get the libraries for free ?

but you get the libs free - Im not saying you are trying to mislead anyone - but that in itself is going to produce bias.

Id be surprised if the airusersblog didnt also get them free

They are cool videos - both you guys help because UVI are so lacking in marketing. I cant understand why.

If I had to pay for every product or service I review, I would need to be a very rich man indeed. I am supplied with review copies. This does NOT produce nor ensure a positive bias. Every magazine you read, every website review you look at, ALL get review copies in this manner. It does not preclude a positive review and I wholly resent any implication otherwise.

Companies see blogs like mine and others like AUB, as useful marketing tools. My blog has a very specific audience, an audience that will have a predilection for their products, so it makes sense for these blogs to talk about their products. This is marketing 21st century style. And it clearly works. I have software developers, record labels and other organisations approach me with a lot of stuff, and I do what I can. I still have stuff that I said I'd review 6 months ago waiting in a queue. I try and do what I can, and what I think will fit in my blog in terms of content and appeal to my audience.

I make no money from this and yes, a perk of the job is that I get some cool stuff and meet some very cool people. Because of my blog, I have had the chance to work with people like Peter Vogel, Steve Howell & Dave Spiers, companies like Akai, Alesis, Fairlight, GForce, Hollow Sun and UVI, artists like Martyn Ware, Mark Reeder and other such luminaries in this industry, but I pay out of my own pocket for my website and my hosting. I spend a lot of time designing and writing and put a lot of effort in promoting the site myself. It is down to me that I have built an audience that companies in this field recognise and seek to leverage that point of access to potential customers.

You're all free to do the same as me and I'm sure that if you put as much time and effort in, over and above a day job that pays the bills, you too could reap such rewards.

But I totally resent and unequivocally deny any suggestion that because people send me stuff to review, it guarantees any form of bias whatsoever. It is most certainly not the case.

[SWAN808]

I know you resent the idea - I would too - but that doesnt mean the bias doesnt exist. The bias exists because you want to continue getting the free stuff. Unless you are happy to piss off UVI and stop getting stuff - then it will exist. The negatives will be softened. youd be better off accepting a possibility of it and arguing the point that you try to be as honest as possible.
You understand - bias doesnt always mean off the charts inaccuracy - it just means a slant one way - a not 100% independent evaluation. If you get the stuff free and have a good relation with the developers - how can that be a totally independent review?

Is the audience on your blog into Electro House and are you? I dont think airuserblog was either...

You dont need to defend your entire blog or what you do - and I understand publications get free (or lended) stuff for review. That is also often biased - but not always - if the company needs the reviewer more than the reviewer wants the stuff.

Ive beta tested plenty of software and hardware getting it free - and like it or not - it influences your debate on the matter - because you have a relationship with the developer beyond a financial exchange. Its a difficult line to tread. You may resent someone bringing it up because it shines a light on a tricky area but I dont think either of us have said anything unfair here...

[Failed Muso]

I know you resent the idea - I would too - but that doesnt mean the bias doesnt exist. The bias exists because you want to continue getting the free stuff. Unless you are happy to piss off UVI and stop getting stuff - then it will exist. The negatives will be softened. youd be better off accepting a possibility of it and arguing the point that you try to be as honest as possible.
You understand - bias doesnt always mean off the charts inaccuracy - it just means a slant one way - a not 100% independent evaluation.

Is the audience on your blog into Electro House?

You dont need to defend your entire blog - and I understand publications get free (or lended) stuff for review. That is also often biased - but not always - if the company needs the reviewer more than the reviewer wants the stuff.

Ive beta tested plenty of software and hardware getting it free - and like it or not - it influences your debate on the matter - because you have a relationship with the developer beyond a financial exchange.

I'm sorry, but I refute that allegation 100%. If I wish to retain my credibility, I cannot, and therefore don't, show bias. Just because I really like their stuff, and therefore give them a positive review, does not mean it is demonstrating bias. What am I supposed to do? Say it's shit when it isn't, just to gain some credibility with you? I am absolutely not afraid of giving a bad review when something warrants it, and have done so. And if they decided to stop sending me stuff, then fine. That is not the reason I do any of this. I do it because I love the subject, I love writing, I love to inform and educate (it is what I do for a living) and the perks are just that. Perks. And trust me, if I gave someone a bad review, and then they blatantly stopped asking me to review their stuff, I'd be damn sure to let people know that. I hope, and am pretty certain, that the companies I deal with would not do that. They are taking a risk and expect a certain number of bad reviews in amongst the good ones.

Please don't talk to me in such a condescending manner and tell me what I should or shouldn't accept. You'd be surprised as to what my audience are in to. I don't need anyone to send me stuff for review. I was happy reviewing stuff that I had owned or used long before companies started sending me things, and still do (most recently a £100 Peter Gabriel box set that I bought myself, for example). If I was charging you to read my content, I'd accept a challenge to my credibility, but you don't have to read or view it and quite frankly, if I wanted to brown nose companies, I could easily do so. But my blog would not be respected and it wouldn't get the consistently improving hit rate it does if people believed what I wrote to be completely biased. I get plenty of feedback that agrees and disagrees with what I say or the opinions I have. But I get a solid visitor rate so I must be doing something right.

And let me once again clarify, because it clearly didn't register the last time, there is NO financial exchange. And before you say something along the lines of "you get £200 libraries for free, that's a financial exchange", what I get are review copies, whose licence I have to agree to as such. It also means I can't sell them on or offer them as gifts. And such licences can be withdrawn at anytime.

Once again, another KvR thread derails in spectacular fashion and ends in a load of bollox. I withdraw from this trainwreck