KVR Audio

calex · Post by **calex** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:47 am

Version upgrades are not bug fixes, they are feature expansions. Look at how all the other companies are handling the Universal Binaries upgrades. They aren't mixing bug fixes with it. It's a separate offering. AAS, probably just to not take the effort to separate this stuff out, instead just decided to charge everyone for software platforms they might not need or want. Whatever you say about this, it's a hostile treatment of us owners of their software on the Windows side that don't use Pro Tools.

Minimoose · Post by **Minimoose** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:57 am

calex wrote:To charge us for bug fixes - as I say - OUTRAGEOUS.

Of course it is better to offer bugfixes for free if possible.

Otoh there are companies who don't fix bugs at all and instead incorporate new features( and new bugs along with it) and higher hardware requirements that at least i don't want.
All i might want is bugs fixed and sometimes i would be more than willing to pay 50$ or more for that.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:59 am

I paid $29 to update Ultra Analog to UB and even though I don't like paying to get basically the same synth back in working order, I do absolutely love UA and would keep it as my only synth if forced to.. so I didn't mind too much

calex · Post by **calex** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:02 am

I find these posts about not minding paying for bug fixes and technology upgrades that most of us on Windows don't need or want to be a bit suspicious - like they are posts from AAS personnel. I can't see how actual owners of this software would not care to have to spend $50 for what is a very limited number of minor bug fixes.

bullshark · Post by **bullshark** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:27 am

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

Already a thread about this.

CC4 · Post by **CC4** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:33 am

...i'm personally used to bug fixes and enhancements being free until they jump an entire version number.

sounddesigner · Post by **sounddesigner** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:24 am

I'm a huge AAS synth fan and usually they can never do any wrong in my eyes

, but paying for a bug fix is not right. I'm a strong believer in that if you sell someone a broken item then fixing it should be at your expense. Customers usually buy with the belief that something works right. but since i love their synths so much i forgive them

...

benjamind · Post by **benjamind** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:37 am

Yeah, and I guess that's why they can get away with that, because they know deep down that people are going to buy their synths. I know one thing - when Tassman 5 is out I might get the modelling collection. When will 5 be out? I asked that question quite a few months ago in a poll. Some said a year, some said more than that. I sorta think it's going to be even longer than any of those poll options I provided, and...maybe even never. If AAS gets the idea that the "Studio" instruments are easier to sell (and I'm sure even a 10-year-old would know this) then at best they'll get Tassman 5 out and then stop or they'll stop development after the universal binary/update for version 4 is released and just provide the occasional bug fix after that.

I think the development of AAS is going more towards individual instrument groups. Analog Session, String Studio, Lounge Lizard...what comes next?

Percussion Factory? Wind Workshop? Organ Parlour?

After those three, I'm not sure if we'd need anything else. Analog, Wind, Strings, Electric Piano, Organ, and Percussion, is likely all we'd need to have a whole collection of instruments at our fingertips.

We've got the first three, UA, SS and LL, now it's time for the rest

Ben

calex · Post by **calex** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:51 am

They should have had all of this just under Tassman. What they've done is pulled out programming that fits in Tassman and then they sell it like it's some kind of new product. Every last thing they have could just be inside Tassman. What they have done is made people pay for Tassman over and over again. It would be much better to have it all integrated within Tassman. If they wanted to sell modeling collections for Tassman, fine, but then they could have worked on fixing things in one place - within Tassman, rather than having to maintain all of this similar software. What a mess.

benjamind · Post by **benjamind** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:24 am

Calex, you are absolutely right that they could have kept it all in one instrument. But the thing that AAS made clear was that their new line of modelling VSTs use more optimised code so as to reduce CPU usage when people are playing the instrument.

And another point - although you and I both see this as paying for rewritten technology, most people view it as simplified and easier to use which means more productivity. More profits to AAS so they can get the funds to do more development on new synths.

I'm very keen on AAS doing something for brass and woodwinds similar to what they've done for strings in String Studio.

If I only I could know what they are truly up to. I guess I'll never know. But just the same I won't hold my breath for anything, as even the best plans sometimes change. But I can't see why AAS can't develop an instrument that allows us to create woodwind and brass instruments. It can already be done in Tassman but if they can rewrite an optimised version with more optimised resonator/physical models then it would be worth shelling out extra cash for that since it would be a lot easier to tweak without having to worry about complex design issues.

Ben

calex · Post by **calex** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:13 am

When I got Lounge Lizard, I was like - Hey, this isn't really a whole lot different than what's in Tassman. They went on about how they had worked really hard to optimize it and capture the true character of the keyboards, but it wasn't for 2 more releases that it started to be what it should have been in the first place. I'm hard on these folks as they just seem to be going after the bucks. Hasn't Arturia done Brass? Somebody did it. I'm getting to the point where I wish all the companies would merge and just put out one great comprehensive product. The amount of energy that these companies go into just to make something similar to the others - what a waste of potential. What I'd like to see is some really excellent integrated DAW packed with all the good stuff and tied nicely to control surfaces. It sure would be nice to have some standardization say in how presets are handled. Some kind of universal preset code that everyone uses. We should be a lot closer to ease of use music systems. Companies are off wandering around in the dark with all their proprietary approaches.

tq · Post by tq » Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:50 am

Calex, what you propose is called "communism". The other concept is competition. The idea is that if a few companies compete in a similar market and work on similar products, their products will become better. It's not a waste of potential.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:01 pm

tq wrote:Calex, what you propose is called "communism".

tq · Post by tq » Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:07 pm

Sorry, but I couldn't resist. All companies merge and produce a great product together...? Yeah. O.k., I stop here, or this will develop into another 10 pages of eyerolling.

kevink · Post by **kevink** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:13 pm

calex wrote: Hasn't Arturia done Brass?

Yes, but it sucks. I actually went through the hassle of buying one of their "no risk" demo dongles just so I could try it. The guy who said that the Arturia sax model "sounds like a kazoo being fed through a harmonica microphone into a practice amp" was pretty close. I sent back the dongle and got the refund.

The best brass model VSTs out there still seem to be Guido's freeware "MilesTone" and "Saxophunk". AAS still has a window of opportunity to deliver a professionally supported product that covers this space.

AAS technology updates - Paying for bug fixes?