I’ve been wondering about how and why effects and instruments are priced given the range of free to $1000 or more for any category. I know there’s development, distribution (downloads, CD, boxed), support, marketing and so on, but how different is the coding, features and other factors? Are sexy interfaces always more expensive? Why $249 instead of $149 or even $49 – margin versus volume?
Why are some convolvers free or only $20 while others are $700 plus? Reverbs can be free or well over $1000. Is the quality difference that significant, are professional prices a way of covering real costs for support and upgrades, or is there such a limited market that not enough copies will be sold at lower prices to ensure a fair profit? Only some of the most expensive products in any category come with extensive and I assume therefore costly libraries, so that doesn’t seem to be a consistent answer.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, including developers.
Some are expensive, some are free
-
- KVRian
- 564 posts since 16 Nov, 2004 from The People's Republic of West Palm Beach
I think you guesses so far probably apply in some cases. I get the feeling that companies price stuff based upon what they think the market will bear. As for the free stuff, some people are just doing what they love.
-
- KVRist
- 382 posts since 6 Apr, 2005 from Fair NJ, the Garden State, US
The pricing seems almost arbitrary to me. With some of the plugins, you do get the feeling that hacks are bit part of the price structure, but it's not enough to explain it. Consider, for instance, the cost of plugins for the UAD-1 and powercore. No hacks, and pretty head-to-head competition, right? But the powercore plugins are LESS development intensive (being generally ported from existing TC hardware) and much MORE expensive. They're also, generally, not as good. So go figure. I can't.
Grist for the glamour mill.
-
- KVRian
- 624 posts since 10 Apr, 2005 from Portland, Oregon baby!
heh, as a fledgling developer, i'm committed to releasing everything as freeware. i figure if anything i make is really any good and i try to sell it, it'll get stolen anyways.
===================================
DistBit (freeware versatile distortion VST)
my Sleeping Prophet music
DistBit (freeware versatile distortion VST)
my Sleeping Prophet music
-
- Banned
- 237 posts since 7 Oct, 2004
These issues have been touched upon in other threads before. I guess the fundamental question that needs to be addressed is: Is there a relationship between cost and effectiveness. (Obviously this question could be further broken down into other criteria and indeed further sub questions)
And if there is a relationship, then how strong is it ? I suspect there is a very weak relationship between cost and effectiveness.
And if there is a relationship, then how strong is it ? I suspect there is a very weak relationship between cost and effectiveness.
-
- KVRAF
- 12235 posts since 18 Aug, 2003
Why do people pay for the expensive ones? Consider NI's stuff, very expensive, but ask those who shelled out the money for any of it, and they'll almost always say it was worth it. There are lots of great alternatives at a lower price, but a lot of folk will have none of it. I've tried all of NI's stuff, and while a lot of it is great, it isn't head and shoulders above everything else out there.
Why do people shell out for stuff like Waves or some of the crazy-priced RTAS? I've heard people rave about some RTAS effects and I was completely unimpressed once I finally got to hear them. Why do people pay an extra $100 just to get something in a box from some guitar shop?
Answer what the customers are thinking, you'll figure out the answer of what the pricers are thinking. One thing I know, a lot of folk just like to buy stuff, it is an act encoded into their DNA. And some people refuse to believe that something free or inexpensive can match something that costs an arm and a leg.
Beyond that, I don't know. It always bothers me to see dev houses continuously bumping their prices closer to compete with hardware. Makes no senses to me. With software there are no limits to materials, no freight shipping (doesn't have to be, and bandwidth/storage/webstores or mail order shipping can be had fairly cheap), no warehousing, no distribution deals (again doesn't have to be), no standards certification.
Strangely, lots of folk happily shell out $500 for some big synth, but won't donate ten lowsy bucks to some freeware developer whose stuff they use every day. I recently found out I was the first person to donate to a popular freeware developer group, which is sad to me considering how many people around here have thanked and fawned over them in many a thread. I don't expect everyone to donate, because not everyone can, but surely more than one guy could.
Some stuff really will cost you, there are some incredibly large projects that are too difficult to manage as a hobby. But it doesn't have to cost so much, yet still the people shell out the money.
Why do people shell out for stuff like Waves or some of the crazy-priced RTAS? I've heard people rave about some RTAS effects and I was completely unimpressed once I finally got to hear them. Why do people pay an extra $100 just to get something in a box from some guitar shop?
Answer what the customers are thinking, you'll figure out the answer of what the pricers are thinking. One thing I know, a lot of folk just like to buy stuff, it is an act encoded into their DNA. And some people refuse to believe that something free or inexpensive can match something that costs an arm and a leg.
Beyond that, I don't know. It always bothers me to see dev houses continuously bumping their prices closer to compete with hardware. Makes no senses to me. With software there are no limits to materials, no freight shipping (doesn't have to be, and bandwidth/storage/webstores or mail order shipping can be had fairly cheap), no warehousing, no distribution deals (again doesn't have to be), no standards certification.
Strangely, lots of folk happily shell out $500 for some big synth, but won't donate ten lowsy bucks to some freeware developer whose stuff they use every day. I recently found out I was the first person to donate to a popular freeware developer group, which is sad to me considering how many people around here have thanked and fawned over them in many a thread. I don't expect everyone to donate, because not everyone can, but surely more than one guy could.
Some stuff really will cost you, there are some incredibly large projects that are too difficult to manage as a hobby. But it doesn't have to cost so much, yet still the people shell out the money.
-
- KVRAF
- 2565 posts since 30 Mar, 2004 from Phoenix AZ USA
Hmm... why some cars are $12000 and others are over a million dollar?
Are the more expensive cars better then the cheap ones?
Usually yes but not always.
Is the $100,000 car that much better then the $50,000 car so it's worth paying twice as much?
Usually not but apparently it is for some people otherwise they would go out of business.
The DSP card plugs are generally much better then the native ones and the price is a real bargain.
Take for example the $399 UAD project card.
Amazing reverb, compressors, channel strip, delay,echo, chorus , flanger. Top notch EQ's and more.
All running without CPU hit so it's like a computer horsepower update as well..... all this for $399?
It's a real bargain.
Take just two top notch native plugs, let's say reverb and compressor, and I doubt you can find any that are as good as the UAD ones, you are already over $399.
Are the more expensive cars better then the cheap ones?
Usually yes but not always.
Is the $100,000 car that much better then the $50,000 car so it's worth paying twice as much?
Usually not but apparently it is for some people otherwise they would go out of business.
I totally disagree.Consider, for instance, the cost of plugins for the UAD-1 and powercore. No hacks, and pretty head-to-head competition, right? But the powercore plugins are LESS development intensive (being generally ported from existing TC hardware) and much MORE expensive. They're also, generally, not as good. So go figure. I can't.
The DSP card plugs are generally much better then the native ones and the price is a real bargain.
Take for example the $399 UAD project card.
Amazing reverb, compressors, channel strip, delay,echo, chorus , flanger. Top notch EQ's and more.
All running without CPU hit so it's like a computer horsepower update as well..... all this for $399?
It's a real bargain.
Take just two top notch native plugs, let's say reverb and compressor, and I doubt you can find any that are as good as the UAD ones, you are already over $399.
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
try out the free stuff, and see if you can get comparasion with the expensive stuff to match it. most of the time you wont get solo examples of the software, only full mixes. so, you have the option of "aquiring" the costly software to try it out, or maybe a friend might own it. anyway, every case is different, if you're actually interested in the performance of the software and not the brand/flashy gui/price, then you can only test it yourself. all reviews of software will be subjective. nobody should bother flaming me on that comment since i'm very certain its true, consider it yourselves before you bother.
personally, i've never found a commercial peice of software that is better than free software outside of the important stuff, like the host application. though, i've also been extremely disgusted with both free and commercial software with respect to the quality of the code, and the performance of the software, and the prices, brands and flashy guis. i tend to find the more flashy graphics you have, the worse the performance will be. and the higher the price, the worse the code. (code as in speed, cpu requirements, code size, resource size (interface files, etc)), (performance as in the quality of the output, or the usefulness.)
in the end, i found myself with no alternatives, and i had to make my own software. i'm still in the process, while some other software has begun to overcome the quality of my own, i still am not impressed. the gap is just not wide enough to make it worth while for me to spend money on software when i have the same thing that i've made myself. i feel i have a huge advantage with my own work than with someone else's.
personally, i've never found a commercial peice of software that is better than free software outside of the important stuff, like the host application. though, i've also been extremely disgusted with both free and commercial software with respect to the quality of the code, and the performance of the software, and the prices, brands and flashy guis. i tend to find the more flashy graphics you have, the worse the performance will be. and the higher the price, the worse the code. (code as in speed, cpu requirements, code size, resource size (interface files, etc)), (performance as in the quality of the output, or the usefulness.)
in the end, i found myself with no alternatives, and i had to make my own software. i'm still in the process, while some other software has begun to overcome the quality of my own, i still am not impressed. the gap is just not wide enough to make it worth while for me to spend money on software when i have the same thing that i've made myself. i feel i have a huge advantage with my own work than with someone else's.
-
- DC TC
- 2518 posts since 30 May, 2004
aciddose wrote:try out the free stuff, and see if you can get comparasion with the expensive stuff to match it. most of the time you wont get solo examples of the software, only full mixes. so, you have the option of "aquiring" the costly software to try it out, or maybe a friend might own it. anyway, every case is different, if you're actually interested in the performance of the software and not the brand/flashy gui/price, then you can only test it yourself. all reviews of software will be subjective. nobody should bother flaming me on that comment since i'm very certain its true, consider it yourselves before you bother.
personally, i've never found a commercial peice of software that is better than free software outside of the important stuff, like the host application. though, i've also been extremely disgusted with both free and commercial software with respect to the quality of the code, and the performance of the software, and the prices, brands and flashy guis. i tend to find the more flashy graphics you have, the worse the performance will be. and the higher the price, the worse the code. (code as in speed, cpu requirements, code size, resource size (interface files, etc)), (performance as in the quality of the output, or the usefulness.)
in the end, i found myself with no alternatives, and i had to make my own software. i'm still in the process, while some other software has begun to overcome the quality of my own, i still am not impressed. the gap is just not wide enough to make it worth while for me to spend money on software when i have the same thing that i've made myself. i feel i have a huge advantage with my own work than with someone else's.
sorry dude. this is off topic. i do find the subject interesting and all but i don't have much to say. you guys are putting it well. anyway... aciddose. can you make a drum synth man?
-
- KVRian
- 652 posts since 1 Apr, 2005 from Illinois
One thing that is particularly troubling to me with high-priced software is compatibility issues. Most audio hardware is self-sufficient and self-contained. Most audio hardware does not depend on a "host" or the CPU of a PC to operate at it's intended capacity. Software on the other hand is subject to the limitations of seemingly countless variations of PC's and Macs and other peripherals, not to mention each user's own personal set-ups and mismatches of computer gear.
I mean for example, let's say you buy a VST synth for your host software and it works just fine. Then the following week your host software has a "new and improved" driver update to add new features, yada yada yada. All of the sudden the VST synth you just paid money for quits working due to driver conflicts or whatever. Now you have to wait on the synth's manufacturer to come out with a "new and improved" update to fix this new problem (if they even care about it or deem it an important fix). And this cycle never ends until ten minutes later (I'm being sarcastic here to emphasize the point) when your software synth is outdated and is no longer supported because Microsoft or Apple changed their OS's which forces the entire world to scrap the old software. In the meantime, the new software for the new OS's are even more expensive, and while you were fighting with driver conflicts (or whatever the problem was) you lost precious time to actually work with the high-priced software to earn a living to pay for it.
I'm not saying some software is not worth paying for (I've bought my fair share like everybody else). I'm just saying that it gets harder and harder to justify shelling out cash for something that may or may not like my PC set-up, and unfortunately software is usually a "no refund" situation. Software is more and more looking like a poor investment to me. If I buy a $600 host and $2000 worth of VST's to go with it (not to mention the spare $3000 PC or Mac plus I/O hardware, etc), will that stuff actually pay for itself in the two-ish years that it is current and up-to-date? In my case, no. I do generate money via my recording studio, but by time I pay the bills and pay for other studio necessities, I don't have that sort of budget to work with.
I think perhaps some of these high-priced software developers are bank-rolling off of commercial studios who want to have "name-brand" software on hand to impress high-dollar clients. I mean, what big commercial studio would be caught dead not having a Pro Tools set-up of some kind? Doesn't matter if they know how to use it. It's there and it looks impressive and people know they paid a lot of money for it so they just assume the studio is "all that". I've heard some of the worst crap ever made on some of the best software available. And vice versa I've heard brilliant work done on a shoestring budget. I say if the software can pay for itself with the work you generate with it then go for it, otherwise feed your family and stay out of debt. But above all we can't fall for the illusion that all expensive software out there is worth the cost and will somehow magically make our recordings superior. There is no substitute for hard work and resourcefulness is there?
I mean for example, let's say you buy a VST synth for your host software and it works just fine. Then the following week your host software has a "new and improved" driver update to add new features, yada yada yada. All of the sudden the VST synth you just paid money for quits working due to driver conflicts or whatever. Now you have to wait on the synth's manufacturer to come out with a "new and improved" update to fix this new problem (if they even care about it or deem it an important fix). And this cycle never ends until ten minutes later (I'm being sarcastic here to emphasize the point) when your software synth is outdated and is no longer supported because Microsoft or Apple changed their OS's which forces the entire world to scrap the old software. In the meantime, the new software for the new OS's are even more expensive, and while you were fighting with driver conflicts (or whatever the problem was) you lost precious time to actually work with the high-priced software to earn a living to pay for it.
I'm not saying some software is not worth paying for (I've bought my fair share like everybody else). I'm just saying that it gets harder and harder to justify shelling out cash for something that may or may not like my PC set-up, and unfortunately software is usually a "no refund" situation. Software is more and more looking like a poor investment to me. If I buy a $600 host and $2000 worth of VST's to go with it (not to mention the spare $3000 PC or Mac plus I/O hardware, etc), will that stuff actually pay for itself in the two-ish years that it is current and up-to-date? In my case, no. I do generate money via my recording studio, but by time I pay the bills and pay for other studio necessities, I don't have that sort of budget to work with.
I think perhaps some of these high-priced software developers are bank-rolling off of commercial studios who want to have "name-brand" software on hand to impress high-dollar clients. I mean, what big commercial studio would be caught dead not having a Pro Tools set-up of some kind? Doesn't matter if they know how to use it. It's there and it looks impressive and people know they paid a lot of money for it so they just assume the studio is "all that". I've heard some of the worst crap ever made on some of the best software available. And vice versa I've heard brilliant work done on a shoestring budget. I say if the software can pay for itself with the work you generate with it then go for it, otherwise feed your family and stay out of debt. But above all we can't fall for the illusion that all expensive software out there is worth the cost and will somehow magically make our recordings superior. There is no substitute for hard work and resourcefulness is there?
-
- KVRAF
- 7316 posts since 7 Mar, 2003
Let me answer in this way: A lot of the free stuff I've downloaded and use KICKS THE PANTS of any stuff that is very expensive.
My Youtube Channel - Wires Dream Disasters
-
- KVRian
- 652 posts since 1 Apr, 2005 from Illinois
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Christian Budde's new EQ plug-in Posihfopit is one of the best EQs out there (Betabugs version coming soon, but I swear I'm not just biased!) and he's given it to the public for free.
Not talking about the above mentioned plug-in (which is Christian's, not a BBA plug yet), but in general at BetabugsAudio the entire development process is always unpredictable. Some seemingly simple things have taken several months of development and testing, while some of the (relatively; we're all about simplicity!) more complex ones have come together in what seems like a mere couple of days.
I would suspect that some commercial ware is the same. I bet there are multi-hundred dollar plug-ins out there that have been written in a day. On the other hand, I bet kick-ass developers like Paul Harvey (of Elevayta), who charge a very fair price for their work, are actually spending more time on their plugs!
Some things are worth the money. If I had the cash to spare, I would drop it on BFD in a second.
It's such a hard question to answer, and now that I've attempted to do so, I realize I haven't gotten any further than more guesswork. <laff>
Greg
Not talking about the above mentioned plug-in (which is Christian's, not a BBA plug yet), but in general at BetabugsAudio the entire development process is always unpredictable. Some seemingly simple things have taken several months of development and testing, while some of the (relatively; we're all about simplicity!) more complex ones have come together in what seems like a mere couple of days.
I would suspect that some commercial ware is the same. I bet there are multi-hundred dollar plug-ins out there that have been written in a day. On the other hand, I bet kick-ass developers like Paul Harvey (of Elevayta), who charge a very fair price for their work, are actually spending more time on their plugs!
Some things are worth the money. If I had the cash to spare, I would drop it on BFD in a second.
It's such a hard question to answer, and now that I've attempted to do so, I realize I haven't gotten any further than more guesswork. <laff>
Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 7316 posts since 7 Mar, 2003
I find the BBA plugs very much one trick ponies, but they're definitely good for that. Crayon Filter however, what a beast!
My Youtube Channel - Wires Dream Disasters
-
- KVRAF
- 4222 posts since 23 Feb, 2004 from Tucson Arizona USA
Here's one: A guarantee of compatability between studios has a high value.eduardo_b wrote: I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, including developers.
So you have something like the Waves bundle. Very expensive, very high quality, and just as important, it's got a certain credibility that makes it a standard. You can put in your contract that the production studio will deliver the project in a specified format to a post-production shop, they can load up their PT-based DAW with the same plugins and same paramaters, and pick up where you left off. This ability has an extremely high value in certain circles.