'Cheating' Demo Versions

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

Post

Playing with the demo version of Minimoog V, I fell in love with the preset K.U_ELPevil and found it fitted perfectly into one of my tracks (and several of my Depeche Mode covers). I have not been able to find a cheap or free plugin that can make this sound (Image-Line's Wasp was the closest) The only trouble is I wouldn't ever buy Minimoog V for four reasons:

1. It's overpriced for a single instrument IMO.
2. It's a CPU eater.
3. It's not a brilliantly accurate emulation.
4. Minimonsta will blow it away for sure.

The demo emits white noise every few seconds, rendering it practically unusable in a production. So that's when I load it up in FL Studio and export each pattern (3-4 bars @ 120 BPM) to WAV files (it only took a couple of goes to be lucky enough to get clean samples with no white noise) and import them back as audio clips. Plus it saves me a shedload of CPU. Result! :-o

Has anyone else ever done this? Would anyone see it as unethical as it is effectively cheating the demo and being able to use the sounds and dodging the licence. Thanks Arturia for making the Minimoog V demo so 'usuable'. :D
Image
Analogue or digital – which is better? There's only one way to find out... FI-I-IGHT!!!

Post

Cheat Mode wrote:Has anyone else ever done this? Would anyone see it as unethical as it is effectively cheating the demo and being able to use the sounds and dodging the licence.
Seems ethical to me.

If there's a license for the demo version that says you can't use its output in commercial work, lawyers might be able to make that stick, but ethically they don't have a leg to stand on -- in my little world, once the software is legally acquired, I can do whatever the hell I want with it.

However, note that you're paying a price in inconvenience. Your time and stress levels may or may not be worth the price of the software.
Image
Don't do it my way.

Post

I do it all the time, with every demo I try. That's because the only way I can ever really feel like a synth will fit into my music is by actually putting it into a composition.

I see nothing unscrupulous about it. I was able to rule out Albino and a few other synths by this method, simply because, as much as I "liked" them, they just didn't fit in my music and the sound I was trying to create (and for that, maybe I'm just a wanker, but I am entitled to my preference)

And in this regard, the full, no-static, 30-day-time-limited demo of FabFilter One actually forced my hand, because I ended up using it on about six tunes.

Post

i used Fruityloops since version 2.72 by just making loops in it, exporting to wav, and putting them in ACID.. I recently acquired a registered producer edition, and love the fact i can compose whole songs in it, (And acid suxxxx) but i dont see anything wrong with working around the limitations.

Post

i think that working around the limitations is fine....they make the demos avaIlable so that you can see if you like the software. if you were going to be truly unethical, you could aquire the crack. if you find yourself using it enough and the workflow suffers, you may find yourself purchasing the software, and they profit. if you don't, they've lost nothing.

Post

uncadave wrote:if you were going to be truly unethical, you could aquire the crack
.and spread it on SoulSeek...

Post

I have used the demo version of izotope trash, if the actual product didn't have any C/R (or flash dongle) or ilok copy protection scheme I would purchase it.

I also used the demo of ACID Pro 5 recently, again, the copy protection was one of the factors in me not purchasing it, but it is only a time limited demo.

I don't think there is anything wrong with using the demo versions legitimately.

Post

I'm not so sure it's ethically right :? furthermore if you're talking about the software's original presets, and intend to use it in comercial tracks. It's a borderline case on the best scenario, if you ask me.

Anyway it's a good sign that people start to talk about ethics, beyond what it's legal or not; that's what matters, IMO.
Eventually something intelligent will appear written here. Watch this space.

Post

I don't see anything wrong with doing this.

Just like I know peeps make sample libraries out of trial-timed versions of music software. :-o

Post

Since when has anyone ever respected copyright in music?

Post

Borogove wrote: However, note that you're paying a price in inconvenience. Your time and stress levels may or may not be worth the price of the software.
that's how I feel about it as well. You got the demo version for free and you can use it how you like. You might have to mixdown a 4 bar loop 8 times in order to not get the white noise burst. A lot of inconvinience if you ask me.

Post

I see nothing wrong with what you did and I have done it on the odd occation too. I take the shorter route by just rendering the whole track twice and then just drop the second render pieces in where the first render has the noises.

It is sometimes the only way of getting a good demo so you can judge the sound properly, i.e. by burning the track to a CD and listen to it in your car, on a high-fi or maybe post it on te internet for feedback.

I hate demos that would not allow you to save or export to audio, because that way I can not really make a judgement beyond doubt and most often end up not buying the software.

Post

UltraJv wrote:Since when has anyone ever respected copyright in music?
Someone might start... :shrug:

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”