Free Clavinet Sample Kit

[hollowsun]

Ah... the good old Internet spirit. Such an annoyance. It was so much better when generous people wishing to share their work just for the sake of it....

If manna truly did fall from heaven and we lived in a world of milk and honey where we didn't have to work for a living and pay bills and rent and stuff, yes... it would be nice. But it ain't like that. It might be when you're 13 (or have the ideals of a 13-yr-old) but the reality is very different.

...regardless of the amount of time they had put in it, couldn't interract with thousands and thousands of people on a huge network.

I think you'll find in practice that thousands and thousands of people don't "interract" - thousands and thousands of people just take!

And time is not the only issue - it costs money to make free stuff available.


Steve

[alan alda jnr.]

in my opinion, people who are making sample libraries of instruments, and selling them do not have such a firm moral footing. Of course, if you're jacking someone's sample library, it's not cool, but you've got to remember the developer is jacking the original instrument maker too.

[zvon]

in my opinion, people who are making sample libraries of instruments, and selling them do not have such a firm moral footing. Of course, if you're jacking someone's sample library, it's not cool, but you've got to remember the developer is jacking the original instrument maker too.

I still don't know if that post makes me laugh or cry.

Basically you are calling sample designers thiefs and it would be OK that they do steal if only they would not sell their samples. In fact they only deserve it when their sample library is pirated and they should not complain about it. And the users of these libraries are double thiefs.

[alan alda jnr.]

in my opinion, people who are making sample libraries of instruments, and selling them do not have such a firm moral footing. Of course, if you're jacking someone's sample library, it's not cool, but you've got to remember the developer is jacking the original instrument maker too.

I still don't know if that post makes me laugh or cry.

Basically you are calling sample designers thiefs and it would be OK that they do steal if only they would not sell their samples. In fact they only deserve it when their sample library is pirated and they should not complain about it. And the users of these libraries are double thiefs.

No they're not thieves, and there are a huge number of really talented and hard-working sample developers. All i'm saying is that sampling is just that - sampling. I think a lot of sample developers forget that they are taking away from traditional instrument manufacturers in many instances. It is usually the goal of the sample developers to create libraries that sound exactly like the original instruments. They would have no business without the original instruments, and they don't (AFAIK) have to pay the original manufacturers at all. Surely you can appreciate that this is not the most firm moral footing.

When sampling first came along, samplers (i mean people who sample, not the machines) and sample library developers were treated as thieves, and they still are by many, but they are now i think becoming a little too self-righteous in some regards.

I use sampling as the primary basis for all my work. It is a great composition tool for me. I love sampling, but I do remember what sampling is after all.

My point is basically that in a perfect world people would never bootleg sample libraries or presets from synths and sell them on. But also in this perfect world, no-one would sample a steinway and sell it on with no contribution to steinway. But because of the very nature of sampling, and the culture of sampling (which i laud) these don't always happen.

There is also the distinction of: end user samplers (people) sample and modify, and obfuscate, whilst sample developers sample as perfectly as possible, reproduce, and almost never fail to namedrop the "rhodes" or "paiste". So you have identity sampling as well as sonic sampling in the case of libraries.

phew!

[Sascha Franck]

I think Alan is spot on.
Just thought of it: Every synth company is going all havoc if you sample their presets (even non samplebased ones), but what about all those grand piano samples? I mean, just because you can't exactly modify the one and only preset of, say, a Steinway, does it make things any more correct than sampling, say, Yamaha's DX7 "Lately Bass" preset?

[Seus Hawkins]

I somewhat agree.

Hollowsun>> I can't see how you should actually go out and complain(!) about others doing things like this for free?!

Surely, the person could feel that he had gotten so much help for free from others that he wants to sample this and give something in return, the cycle of "free" work continues. Some contribute, some do not. Why stop there by the way? What about low prices? And what about companies like world food program? Should they send out bills when they airdrop food to poor people in africa for instance?

Thank you very much for your work Jaybez!

Regards

[zvon]

I hope that Jaybez is finding this thread helpful and instructive.

Those last 2 posts lost me a bit, I do not know to whom they are really addressed. So just to clarify my position:

-My reply to Alan Alda Jr. was fueled by the fact that he said "people who are making sample libraries of instruments, and selling them do not have such a firm moral footing". He did not say "some people who are...". This is like saying "guitarists are drug addicts" or "female singers are like Britney Spears".

But he was more nuanced in his reply to my reply.


-I have absolutely no problem with sample developers selling or giving for free THEIR samples.

-I would not sample a piano or a preset from a synth/softsynth. I would sample a prepared piano or presets made by myself and sell them or give them as I see fit.

[Seus Hawkins]

Mine was directed at Hollowsun. :)

Sorry for the not clarifying that.

Regards

[hollowsun]

Mine was directed at Hollowsun.

Not quite sure what your grouse is with me or the service I offer.

I have to say that I too am uncomfortable with those who provide painstakingly lifelike multi-sampled Steinways or Bosendorfers, whatever - to me it is tantamount to sampling the presets from a synth that is currently available in the market. But I guess that these piano manufacturers are not that bothered - they obviously continue to enjoy sales of their products (the Labeque sisters are hardly likely to turn up at the Albert Hall with a laptop and a pair of Fatar keyboards for a performance!!!). And I guess these manufacturers take the pragmatic approach that someone who bought the 'The Old Lady' or whatever for a few hundred bucks are unlikely to have spent several thousand bucks for 'the real thing'.

The same goes for other 'traditional' instruments such as the orchestra. I have often wondered why the musos involved take part in such mammoth sampling products - after all, you'd think that they are signing away their careers by letting themselves get sampled in such detail. All I can assume is that it's merely a source of income for them (and a fun day out!) and, at the end of the day, their livelihood is not really going to be affected because however clever someone is with the samples, there's nothing that can really replace 'the real thing'.

Perhaps as well these detailed samples bring them work - for example, a composer for film mocks up his score on his Mac/PC using samples for the purposes of demo-ing their pitch for a job but use 'the real thing' (and hence employ 'real' musicians and use 'real' instruments) for the final job, perhaps augmented with samples.

But this is a different argument about the morals of sampling and bypasses the criticism that has been levelled against me - that I am somehow putting someone out of work. I do not (and have not) provided such samples in my catalogue. What I have done is to make authentic samples of keyboards, synths and drum machines that have long been out of production - in most cases, the original company went to the wall decades ago. If anything, I am preserving the heritage of these innovative products that have brought us to where we are now. I do not provide samples from currently available products because that would be unethical. In the few cases that I have made samples available from currently available products (for example, Chapman Stick), it has been done so in agreement with the manufacturer involved and has proven to benefit their sales (or at least, not affect them).

So don't adopt the moral high-ground with me please. I am fully aware of the wider implications (and dangers) of sampling various instruments for public consumption.

Neither am I criticising those who make free samples available - good luck to them. I did it for almost four years (much to everyone's delight!) but, ultimately, it bled me dry financially to the point where (unfortunately) I could not continue to maintain it. Personally, I think it is a sad indictment on the attitude of the sampling community that I received (and still continue to receive) a torrent of abusive 'hate email' for (reluctantly) withdrawing the service.

Steve

[Sascha Franck]

The same goes for other 'traditional' instruments such as the orchestra. I have often wondered why the musos involved take part in such mammoth sampling products - after all, you'd think that they are signing away their careers by letting themselves get sampled in such detail. All I can assume is that it's merely a source of income for them (and a fun day out!) and, at the end of the day, their livelihood is not really going to be affected because however clever someone is with the samples, there's nothing that can really replace 'the real thing'.

I've been reading some different comments about the situation, some orchestral musicians complaining about the Vienna Symphonic members being involved ito the making of VSL and so on.
Let's face it, these days you can do a full orchestral movie score for about anything (even big cinema stuff) with virtual things only. Sure, Hans Zimmer and the likes still can afford a fullblown orchestra, but a LOT of the smaller players simply can't. Best they'd do is something like doubling the lead voices with a real violin/viola or whatever.

And that's the cinema situation. For TV series, nobody doesn't seem to care any longer at all. It's all GPO, VSL and whatever. Production companies just won't pay orchestras anymore. I've just got some first hand comments from a rather famous movie/TV sroring dude who's been teaching at some workshop at the local conservatory.

[jmh]

Recollection from some Hans Zimmer interview in SOS a while ago... he commented the he made a deal with the musicians he sampled for his orchestral needs that it won't be used to replace real musicians in his projects - samples will be used for composition but the final thing will be played by real musicians.

Dunno about other big names in that industry, but I'd assume at least some are doing the same.

But those who cannot afford such a luxury... I personally don't see it as a bad thing, as it still allows people to reach higher quality output. If I were a performing musician, I'm sure I'd feel differently.

But I don't really grasp the moral issues discussed here, in regard to replicating instruments as closely as possible. Doing that with copyrighted material, such as samples or patches from synths, is an infridgement and that's clear. But doing a great multisampled piano being a moral violation towards the manufacturers and sellers of the real items? Not really.

More power to the musicians... and those with the money to buy or otherwise utilize the real things, still seem to do so. I wouldn't purchase a good piano (not meaning a Steinway concert grand, just a good piano) when for the same money I could get a Receptor or two and a pile of different piano libraries for timbral variety

Regards,

JMH

[Sascha Franck]

Doing that with copyrighted material, such as samples or patches from synths, is an infridgement and that's clear. But doing a great multisampled piano being a moral violation towards the manufacturers and sellers of the real items? Not really.

Where's the difference?

[jmh]

To me, it lies in the sample set of a great piano not being a complete replacement for the real thing.

Legally though, it lies in piano manufacturers not forbidding such in their end user license agreement

Not saying I agree with all the weird licenses and crap that's standard in electronic and software instruments and sample libraries etc... but at least I pretend I understand them. Laws and morals I tend to keep separate and try to follow the latter - and keep myself within the rules set by the former as long as it doesn't conflict with the latter

Regards,

JMH

[Sascha Franck]

I mostly agree with you, jmh.
I still don't feel bad about sampling and distributing sampler patches of Logics internal synths though. I actually don't even give a rats ass. In fact, ES2, ES1, ESM EVP88 and EVD6 are kickass sample sources and I can't see any legal or moral issue stopping me to use them for a lot of my sampler patches (which I will partially offer for free one day). I don't even have any problems sampling their factory patches.
I probably wouldn't do so if the situation was any different, but we all know about the dilemma...

[jmh]

I wouldn't neither

Regards,

JMH