Getting Hive?

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
Hive 2

Post

fluffy_little_something wrote:
wagtunes wrote:There is one other thing that, with the exception of Hive, all my worst selling libraries have in common.

They are hardly ever discussed here. Trying to find threads on those synths is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

So there is no question that popularity does come into play, which again, is why my Hive sales are so surprising. I figured if it's a U-he synth, it'll sell.

Obviously, in that regard, I was wrong.
I don't want to hurt your feelings, but your presets just don't seem professional enough. I would not put them on my site if I were U-he. People here don't talk about them because they are not really worth talking about. Several people have tried to tell you repeatedly and usually in rather friendly and subtle ways.

Look at what renowned sound designers such as Hollo do, it is just another league, sorry to say that. Maybe it would make more sense for you to write less on KVR - most of which is in vain anyway as you will sooner or later discover - and spend the extra time on increasing the quality of your patches instead. If you want to sell something, it needs to be of a certain quality. It is not like throwing some free patches into the crowd because you don't have anything else to do.
Well, that's your opinion and your entitled to it. Obviously, there are people who don't agree with you or I wouldn't be in this business at all. I mean I'm not stupid enough to continue to do something if it's not even remotely successful. But I have libraries that do very well. In fact, better than I could have ever imagined. Softube Modular being at the top of the list of surprises. And then there is Serum, which for the longest time outsold every other library by at least 5 to 1.

So not everybody shares your opinion.

Post

ghettosynth wrote:
pdxindy wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:
With the two synths I have, the eq makes all the difference, even the basic ones built into the synths.
The eq can make the same synth sound more digital or more analog, lighter or heavier, modern or classic, etc.
Sure, that's not incongruent with what I said. Those tricks have been exploited for some time. They're a band-aid, not a cure.
What exactly is the problem that needs a cure?
Accurate emulation in the face of rapid modulation. If you think that you can make rapid modulation on a ten year old synth sound like today's cutting edge designs with an EQ , you are mistaken.
What I meant has nothing to do with modulation, I was referring to the basic sound character of a synth as such. Bright, dull, analog, digital sound etc. has nothing to do with modulation. You can hear the difference with a simple static sound, even the usual saw init patch.

I think most people would agree that a synth's filter is key to its sound, right? But then again, the filter itself is basically just a sophisticated 1-band parametric equalizer :wink:

Post

BDeep wrote:Great. Another thread about wags.
It's like Godwin's Law. The longer a thread continues, the higher the probability that it will be consumed by wagtunes' woes.

Post

Gamma-UT wrote:
BDeep wrote:Great. Another thread about wags.
It's like Godwin's Law. The longer a thread continues, the higher the probability that it will be consumed by wagtunes' woes.
So Wagsdin Law, then.
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

We're over 20 pages, does this mean we're now allowed to post cat pics?
Image
Feel free to call me Brian.

Post

I never make mistakes; I just blame others.

Post

Oops!
Last edited by recursive one on Tue May 23, 2017 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try

Post

Recursive, I'm sorry but that's just uncalled for and I've reported it.

Post

Sorry, edited the post. Don't think that vid was especially offensive, but nevermind :)
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try

Post

recursive one wrote:Sorry, edited the post. Don't think that vid was especially offensive, but nevermind :)
it wasn't! You're way too kind :)

Post

bmrzycki wrote:We're over 20 pages, does this mean we're now allowed to post cat pics?
Image
What a whopper, you might have to replace a couple of keys and controls :hihi:

Post

Urs wrote:My gawd what is happening :shock:
Indeed.

Post

Wagtunes, after reading few pages i still dont understand, what are you compaining about?

Post

Elektronisch wrote:Wagtunes, after reading few pages i still dont understand, what are you compaining about?
No complaints. Just observations and trying to understand the market, which right now has me totally bumfuzzled.

Post

wagtunes wrote: So then how does one determine the weight of each factor or is that an impossibility?
One can model sales based on believed input facts and then do an "analysis of variance" to yield a decomposition of the variance in your response (sales) attributed to by each of your independent variables (factors). This is a bit more complicated to get right than describing it, but people do this kind of analysis all the time. Moreover, no statistical model can consider factors that you leave out and so, consequently, it's all too easy to draw invalid conclusions.

However, this problem is intrinsically not univariate, i.e., as others have pointed out there are multiple input factors, and is intrinsically statistical, there WILL be data points that do not conform to the model.

As George Box said (paraphrased) "All models are wrong, some models are useful."

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”