Some are expensive, some are free

[fac]

Most of KVRs topics are driven by the psychology of people wanting to justify their decisions. You ask on KVR, "what's the best synth for phat basses", and you'll get a list of the synths that people paid money for. Which isn't really an accurate list of synths for making phat basses...

I don't fully agree with this. I think people recommend their paid-for synths because that's what they know and that's what they use.

If someone asks me to recommend an additive synth, I would recommend Cameleon because that's the one I have and I actually like it, not because I paid for it. I haven't tried other additive synths, either free or commercial, so I wouldn't do more than mention them.

[james0tucson]

Well of course they'ss blow the paywares out of the water - their value for money ratio is infite ( that's what you get when you divide anything by zero ).

Would that be an infinite negative value, or an infinite positive one? What other mathematics are we allowed to redefine however it suits us?

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/DivisionbyZero.html

[james0tucson]

My parents have a funky two bedroom house on the North Kohala Coast in Hawaii. Is going there any less of a joy than driving down the coast to one of the "exclusive resort hotels"? Not to me, but it would be to some people.

Not sure I follow you there Fripp. I can't think of *anything* that has a steeper demand curve or higher perceived value than a single family property up there.

A 2-bedroom house in Iowa might be a $25,000 proposition, in Tucson it would be $205,000, but a coastal place in Hawaii? Couple million at least, and that's without even being on the Kohala cape.

Now if you're saying a nice hotel resort would be preferable to dealing with the rules and ridiculous attitudes of staying with your folks, I can understand that.

I'd be more the "bungalow on Kauai" type, myself.

[fac]

Well of course they'ss blow the paywares out of the water - their value for money ratio is infite ( that's what you get when you divide anything by zero ).

Would that be an infinite negative value, or an infinite positive one? What other mathematics are we allowed to redefine however it suits us?

And in any case, just because a synth is "freeware" doesn't mean its cost is zero (note I did say "cost" not "value"). In order to obtain a good free synth you must first have an internet connection and plenty of time to browse, download, test and try, and finally filter the crap out of the bunch, not to mention users are usually beta testers as well. It's *really* time consuming. And for most people, time costs money.

[eduardo_b]

Put another way... the quality of reverbs or compressors have little value for the musical contents. But when discussing about technicalities, it would be preferable for it to stay that way. So far so good, I might add, though we're driving towards that direction thanks to me, in other words I might have just shot myself in the foot ;)

Technicalities are important to gearheads just because, whereas those who only want the tools to create music spend as little effort as possible on these details. The "how too" may, in fact, force someone to have to know more about technical details, but more often they'd rather just know what knobs or sliders will help them find the sound they want or discover a sound they hadn't even conceived of.

I have to assume that an intuitive interface makes one plug-in more useful than an equally good or even better plug-in (technically) that makes one struggle to get things to work. Would someone pay more for a well-designed interface that isn't the typical jumble of controls in a multitude of sections or panels?

...I'd like to point out that just because something is "software only", it doesn't mean that it automatically has had lower manufacturing costs...

I have to disagree if we're talking hardware versus software equivalents instead of software to software comparisons. The costs for components, assembly, quality control, shipping and so on are vastly greater than coding software that can be fixed or modified fairly easily and then manufactured by simply making copies to download.

At the same time, I can easily see how more complicated, innovative plug-ins could cost more to develop than other simpler plug-ins in the same category. And uniqueness that adds value can justify a higher selling price if the added value is perceived as worth the extra cost.

Of course, price is an important factor in competing with another products. But I still wish people understood the amount of work behind a product instead of blindly begging for groupbuys all the time. Not to mention that groupbuys on some level might devalue a product, yet another albeit not so important factor to consider before going for it.

I suppose one could make an argument for or against group buys, but I simply can't see a downside to them. Although there may be exceptions, I would contend that overall, group buys generate far more revenue for developers than they would ever see selling one at a time for twice or three times the price. And I don't get how this would devalue the product given that the group buy is a limited time offer. And as I've already noted, increasing the installed base has got to be a good thing for developers, who are competing for market share.

I guess it's again one of those situations where I need to use the term "SynthEdit effect". 'Making plugins is so easy, there's a tool that lets you do that in a jiffy' and so on. But I for one am still willing to pay more for a plugin that has at least the possibility of being somewhat optimized when it comes to CPU usage, isn't as likely to use the same basic building blocks as dozens of other products etc.

I am very curious about this, and have long wondered how so many plug-ins from the same building blocks can have any significant differencs in the kinds of sounds they produce or how they modify them. It almost seems like the interface might be the most unique aspect. Or is it how the building blocks are combined?

--eduardo

[eduardo_b]

I think most of NI's plugs are over-priced. I own pro-53 and probably wouldnt of bought (well my parents did but you know) it if i came ot KVR earlier. Dont get me wrong it is the highest-quality synth in my arsenal (well imposcar has a better raw sound but no unison detune or modulation).

It appears that NI has substantial overhead given not only their web site but the physical retail products that must be manufactured and shipped, and the seminars they put on around the world. At the same time, I think that when prices exceed a perceived value, it invites piracy because the cost for a cracked version is so much less than the discounted price for the retail product. And the more intrusive and troublesome the copy protection, the more likely that cracked versions will appeal to those who resent being treated as criminals instead of customers.

Sure the free ones dont sound as good, but divide the quality by the dollars spent and the free ones blow imposcar/pro-53 out of the water.

I'd say many of the free synths are quite good, and the ones in mid-price range (around $80) can compete in many ways with the more expensive commercial synths you've alluded to. In the hands of a creative person, these less expensive and free synths can result in innovative music.

--eduardo

[eduardo_b]

Market=supply and demand. If people perceive that Waves Pure Titanium Bundle for $2,399.95 is the default professional's choice, and they are well financed, they will gravitate to that and other "pro standards". That's the demand, and some companies have made a marketing decision to go that route, so they are the supply. Lexicon made their flagship reverb $65,000, although the hardware is probably worth not much more than a high quality PC.

Given that professionals are either including the costs for these tools in their pricing to clients or spending someone else's money to buy them, they do not have to bear the final costs in the way that hobbyists do. Lexicon may well run out of customers if the number of studios going out of business continues to increase -- there will be lots of used Lexicons on the market and new studios will be few and far between.

--eduardo

[Alex@ProgressAudio]

Actually I think the main point, and I'm not sure its been mentioned, is that the price reflects whether or not the developer is actually trying to make a living from their sales.

NI synths are not overpriced, they cost that much because they have to in order to be able to pay the people who made it their wages.

In contrast, the majority of low priced or free software is made by people who do it in their spare time, but have a "real" job that they live off. Very few developers could survive from just making plugins, you simply don't get enough money for the amount of work you have to put in. I'm a PhD student by the way, so for me developing plugs is a sideline.

I don't agree that the solution is to drop prices so that you sell more, because at the moment prices have been driven so low that you would have to sell a huge number of copies to ever make a profit, and that's difficult when its still a specialist market, and when you have no advertising budget so you can never reach enough customers.

I think the amount of freeware that's available at the moment is good for customers in the short term, but its bad for talented developers hoping to make a career out of writing plugs

[Meffy]

I am very curious about this, and have long wondered how so many plug-ins from the same building blocks can have any significant differencs in the kinds of sounds they produce or how they modify them.

;-)

Or is it how the building blocks are combined?

I think so, yes.

[eduardo_b]

Actually I think the main point, and I'm not sure its been mentioned, is that the price reflects whether or not the developer is actually trying to make a living from their sales.

I certainly agree that pricing must make it possible for a full-time developer to earn a living and keep on doing so. Whether the asking price reflects this depends on how many copies must be sold to achieve this at that price.

NI synths are not overpriced, they cost that much because they have to in order to be able to pay the people who made it their wages.

I tend to agree with you on current products that are being updated and upgraded. I think NI gives good value for money (although I also think their registration and login processes for every little thing are overbearing). On the other hand, they have products that have not been updated in years that sell for far more than they should -- having long since paid for the costs of development and distribution for these products. I suppose one could argue that these profits go back into current product development and costs, but I noticed that not too long ago GMedia lowered their synth prices by a third for products that have been out for a long time and are no longer being updated.

In contrast, the majority of low priced or free software is made by people who do it in their spare time, but have a "real" job that they live off. Very few developers could survive from just making plugins, you simply don't get enough money for the amount of work you have to put in. I'm a PhD student by the way, so for me developing plugs is a sideline.

Interesting. So you're saying that most of the plug-in developers are likely to have other sources of income from somewhere -- possibly within the industry or from a "real" job? It would be most enlightening to know how many copies of some popular plug-ins have been sold in order to understand what the economics are really like. How many hours do you think you've put into Soup to get it to version 1.6?

I don't agree that the solution is to drop prices so that you sell more, because at the moment prices have been driven so low that you would have to sell a huge number of copies to ever make a profit, and that's difficult when its still a specialist market, and when you have no advertising budget so you can never reach enough customers.

For the sake of discussion, are you saying that $85 for Soup is not profitable because you can't possibly sell enough copies in a market that is limited in size but large in competition? Would $199, the price for Cameleon, make all the difference if you had to live off the income from Soup?

I think the amount of freeware that's available at the moment is good for customers in the short term, but its bad for talented developers hoping to make a career out of writing plugs

Well, I suppose this depends on how many people end up playing with music creation on their computers, in much the same way that digital photography is now one of the primary reasons why so many people use computers at home. I don't think most of the low-priced music software in stores accept VSTs, and they usually include a number of DXi plugs as part of the program. But I would think the overall market for VSTs has got to be growing, although at what rate I couldn't even guess.

--eduardo

[eduardo_b]

I am very curious about this, and have long wondered how so many plug-ins from the same building blocks can have any significant differencs in the kinds of sounds they produce or how they modify them...Or is it how the building blocks are combined?

I think so, yes.

But, wouldn't all the reverb sections or reverb plug-ins made in SynthEdit, for example, sound the same? What makes them different if the same reverb module is being used?

[Meffy]

As you said, how they're combined. Also, there are independently developed modules that provide different flavors. :-)

[Alex@ProgressAudio]

Interesting. So you're saying that most of the plug-in developers are likely to have other sources of income from somewhere -- possibly within the industry or from a "real" job? It would be most enlightening to know how many copies of some popular plug-ins have been sold in order to understand what the economics are really like. How many hours do you think you've put into Soup to get it to version 1.6?

Yes in my experience the majority of developers making relatively cheap plugins are actually making a living from doing something else. The thing about the internet is if you make a nice web page for your products its easy to give people an impression that its a team of developers in a fancy office, whereas in reality its one guy working on plugs at home after work or at the weekend.

Its hard to estimate how many hours I've spent working on Soup, because I've had other commitments such as my PhD. However a total of 800-1000 hours probably is a realistic total. The release of version 1 came roughly a year after I started the project. So far, the profits from sales wouldn't even pay my rent for a month, so I can't live off it no.

[eduardo_b]

The thing about the internet is if you make a nice web page for your products its easy to give people an impression that its a team of developers in a fancy office, whereas in reality its one guy working on plugs at home after work or at the weekend.

I would therefore have to assume that they never really expect to make much from their endeavor, and the work is as much about personal satisfaction that people use their instruments and effects as it is about covering expenses with money from sales. Is it basically unreasonable to expect to earn a decent living coding plug-ins unless one works for one of the small number of larger concerns in the business?

Its hard to estimate how many hours I've spent working on Soup, because I've had other commitments such as my PhD. However a total of 800-1000 hours probably is a realistic total. The release of version 1 came roughly a year after I started the project. So far, the profits from sales wouldn't even pay my rent for a month, so I can't live off it no.

Well, that represents close to six months working in a full-time job, so my obvious question is, why do you do it, and what are your expectations for Soup. Make a few quid here and there or eventually turn it into a substantial profit center? A group buy of 50 plus people, even at $50, would be more than $2500, which seems as if it might be far more than you've seen so far in total. And doesn't Share-It take at least 5% off the top? It can't be the money that motivates you. :-)

--eduardo

[AndrewSimon]

eduardo_b

How many hours did you put into this thread?
Why do you do it?

As far as the cost of plugs I will say that the smart developers will charge as much as they can get away with.
The real pros are here to make money and hopefully lots of it.
They don't know or care about expressions such as "fair value" they are here to make money not justice to the music world.

Luckily in a free market, the market itself brings the price down to reality.
Yes free market works quite well.

If all the plugs in the world would have been free then there wouldn't be any argument here, everybody would have just used what they liked and I believe most of today's expensive plugs would have made it to the top of the list of most people.