why are most soft synths and effects so expensive?

[Alex@ProgressAudio]

What occurs to me from reading this thread is that most users measure the value of software based on the state of their own finances. Guys with thousands to spend on a studio think $200 for a quality synth is good value, whereas those on a tight budget call it an overpriced rip-off.

Basically, if its free or you can afford it then its good value, if you can't afford it its over-priced. But users have to realise that the value of a product isn't based on how much cash you personally have in your account. And its no reason to resent developers for making something you can't afford.

I'm not convinced by the argument that freeware is so great that it negates the need for any commercial products. Yes there's some great freeware (amongst lots of crap) but there's also a lot of great commercial software. And people bitch and moan about the price because the're thinking "I really want this but damn I can't have it" and they take it out on the developer. Hey if freeware was just as good and you could get everything you want then why would anyone bother moaning about commericial product prices if they had no need for these products?

I find it insulting when anyone refers to developers as greedy, its absolutely ridiculous. How can it be greedy to ask for money in return for doing a job? Isn't it more greedy to expect a highly skilled guy to work for hundreds of hours on a complicated piece of software and then give you it for free or for whatever price happens to suit you?

Phew ok rant over

[BONES]

But you are looking at the process whilst I am interested only in the results. i.e. Finishing a song. Filterscape may have the most unique synth engine in history but at the end of the day I can get the right sound to fit into my song from any of a hundred different instruments and that is what matters in the end.

[Urs]

But you are looking at the process whilst I am interested only in the results. i.e. Finishing a song. Filterscape may have the most unique synth engine in history but at the end of the day I can get the right sound to fit into my song from any of a hundred different instruments and that is what matters in the end.

Certainly so! That's up to you. Others however might think different.

Filterscape is a one trick pony in 3 different dresses, but for some people this certain trick does exactly fit their needs. And no other software so far has managed to resemble said trick in any as comfortable and usable manner. Hence - back to topic - that is why this piece of software has a value for those people.

Urs

[bluediver]

No offense, but I really don't know what you're talking about. There are literally hundreds of free soft synths and effects available (do a search for free instruments or effects on this website if you don't believe me), and also dozens for less than $100. Those that sell for more than $150 consititute a tiny minority. I use both, and I can assure you that many of the free and low-cost ones are quite capable of producing excellent results. I'm quite sure that with the proliferation of free and low-cost plug-ins over the past few years, the average price has in fact dropped dramatically.

[Urs]

In the end, according to developers participating here, they can't really afford to price their products where many would like[...]

I'm honest here. I don't *want* to price it any lower. I could certainly afford it, if I wanted to contribute to killing then market completely. Or if I wanted to do something else next year. Fellow developers like NI don't have any chance other than to keep the price "high" (whatever one defines as being high). And they're pretty happy that we small ones don't go cheapware.

In the end we could also come up with a calculation that will prove that the *low* prices (other may define low differently) we have today are te beginning of the end of audio software industry. I hope not.

I sometimes have the idea that if Absynth costed 1500$ and everything else was priced accordingly, we wouldn't have any discussion like this. And maybe we'd have a sane market. But the tracks were already set before I entered the scene.

Urs

[shamann]

I sometimes have the idea that if Absynth costed 1500$ and everything else was priced accordingly, we wouldn't have any discussion like this. And maybe we'd have a sane market.

In that scenario, you would likely have only a handful of viable softsynth makers left, a big three essentialy. And the only necessary market to be filled by independent competitors would be a lower price bracket. Which is essentially how we got to this point in the market.

Besides, shareware and freeware existed long before Absynth for the simple reason that producing software isn't that difficult to do. Good software is harder, sure, but software in general, there simply aren't as many barriers as other businesses that require a great deal more capital up front.

[Rangtangtang]

There is no real easy answer for now, but taking a slight detore - it might be profitable for some music software developers to consider down the track a bit whith computer games. I was just thinking say the combining of music creation whith playing a game in a virtual world. Like you live in this flat and youv got this funky 60's recording set up. You look out the window and see the people and cars go by and when its late it gets dark. You can close or open the blinds to let the sunlight in or turn the light on. When your hungery you can step outside down to the local take away and get something to eat. But this funky studio whith the classic multitrack real to real in this virtual world is all fully function for you to create your tunes. And like various people come to visit you or ring you up on the telephone - fans, a neibour, the manager, the drug squad ect. Even things to aid you in sparking your creativity could happen. When you get tired of or need a rest from music creation, you can suddenly be in game mode, like shoot-em up. You go out into the maze of streets looking for the bady or those hidden secrets and..............on and on and on and on. And it could even lead to a movie deal and.......

[glaucomys]

Investing capital is not justification for the price. Investments come in more than one form, more often than less, the best results come from NOT throwing money at something to make it grow. Education and mindset are far more important, and those take more time to develop than the product. I will always feel happy to pay for what Urs and other developers make because they clearly have a mindset that translates into their work and I appreciate their thinking and their process.

There are a lot of free synths out there, they make v1.0, maybe v1.1 and then they go to the side as because there is no motivation to refine the product and the dev got the need out of their system. Look at what Z1 was and then look at what Z2 is! That is progress and that comes from him being able to keep his mind on his work, his mindset is to make it better and better, I can see it, I'm sure lots of others can see that, and that is the difference between free and pay.

Sure, there are a lot of great free tools, but many of them are just reinvented wheels, and I'd rather have 5 great tools rather than 1,000 rehashes of the same idea, over and over.

Some commercial devs got too big, they feel like the Adobe of the audio world and they are catering to too many needs and mediocrity is starting to manifest in what they create. Less features in each revision, more fear in breaking new ground and more money goes to marketing than it should. The product should sell itself by being innovative. This is just the cycle of evolution and extinction. It is also dumbing down the consumer base, which might be considered capitalistic conditioning.

It might just be the mindset of the consumers these days and their twisted sense of entitlement that keeps them from realizing that paying $200 for a synth is not too much. If they continue to do this, they will eat their own feet in time and we will all have a Juno and a 909 in our foreheads. How can a developer break new ground with a 9-5 (because he/she has to sell at a low-low price), balance a relationship (assuming they have a social life) and still think of making something new and unique, do the R&D and then actually execute the proof of concept and make it a functional product?

Writing code is not just typing, I have a feeling that too many people think that it is a zero resource venture. It isn't. Time is very valuable, we are all mortal. Books cost $50+ a pop and making sure that you have a computer that is current enough is also a cost that is always a consideration every 6-9 months. Talent is not something you can pull out of thin air and if you have it, you deserve to be paid for it and encouraged to grow more. Talent is a measure of the quantity of A -vs- B and so far I see very little talent in the industry. Growth requires food.

To step a little further into the fire, if so many people were not writing music that sounds like the next person and always trying to capture some classic or popular sound and looking to impress a girl or their friends, maybe they would demand more and get more, but only if they are willing to pay more. R&D is not instant, it is temporal.

From where I stand, I'm more than happy to pay anywhere between $1 - $1000 for a softsynth because I used to have racks of synths (that were only ONE INSTANCE) and they were all far more expensive than what is out there today in the realm of software. Look at what is being made most of the time, emulations.. enough already. Hybridize at least..

The music industry is suffering in ALL areas because of homogeny and the twisted sense of entitlement that the new consumers have, and I'm not an old man, I'm still very young, I just started early.

Think about it, in time if the small devs are put out of business, do you think they will stop making synths? No, and they are not going to give them away either, they are going to keep them for their own use and in a 'non-refined commercial form', maybe give it to a few close friends and that is it. They do it because they love it, and that is what makes them feel alive. The same reason you make music eh? Should we start a discussion about some people writing music that isn't worth 1 cent? It isn't much different.

okay, now I will step out of the fire

[mbell]

I was just thinking say the combining of music creation whith playing a game in a virtual world... funky studio whith the classic multitrack real to real in this virtual world... fans, a neibour, the manager, the drug squad...

aka Guitar Hero 2

[diverdee]

cost is relative really isn't it?
When I had plenty of dosh I blasted it on all sorts of stuff.
Now money's a little tighter, other considerations & responsibilities etc. I have to think harder before purchasing anything.
If I lived in a country with a relatively low average wage in dollar terms it would be even worse.
I guess the cost partly reflects the cost of living where the devs live also.
I'm glad there are free tools, I am glad of the tools i've paid for & I will purchase more of those which I feel I need & which my budget permits.

[HanafiH]

I'm almost positve that the Poly800 was once the all-time biggest selling synth until it was usurped by the M1. I have never seen sales figures but I recall reading articles in mag's at the time about each of those.

I've never heard that. All the sources I've had over the years quote the M1, DX7 and D50 as the best selling synths of all time, in that order.

The Poly800 as a budget synth sold well, but didn't reach the level of popularity as those three, all of which captured the imagination of users by offering things that were pretty new and groundbreaking for the time.

Even the Casio CZ-101 sold very well, but not to DX7 levels...

A huge factor in the DX7's sales volumes is the fact that it allowed very heavy and fragile electric pianos to be replaced with a very much lighter, smaller and cheaper unit. I remember reading on a Yamaha site that of all the units returned for servicing, less than five thousand did not have the original presets still intact. It was bought as a piano, not a synth.

[FaX]

I'm not convinced by the argument that freeware is so great that it negates the need for any commercial products. Yes there's some great freeware (amongst lots of crap) but there's also a lot of great commercial software.

Phew ok rant over

Nor am I .
I am however convinced of the arguement that freeware is good enough to 100% negate the need for any warezed software.
I see no need for people to use warezed resources when so much decent freeware exists.
I have a meazely income and am more than happy with the freeware I use and the results I get.
I have a few very good (IMHO) payware tools & host.
If I could afford more high end tools I would certainly buy them.
That said I refuse too use warezed vst's and vsti's.
Infact my entire FX folder is freeware due to this fact.
Doesn't stop me getting good results.
That said I don't think tools like Zebra etc are overpriced in the slightest for what they do.
Most software is dirt cheap compared to hardware.
That said on todays current secondhand market I could get combined a Wavestation A/D , AN1X , RY30 & Akai Sampler for the price Reaktor retails for in my country.
So I will more than likely reinvest in cheap secondhand hardware at the end of this year.
I can sequence and record it with my host.
It may take up more space but it's gonna be 100% CPU efficient computing wise and will give my notebook more than a few more years good use.
Lets face it I can't afford a new notebook either.
Or afford endless software updates and soundcard etc updates either,
So economy of scale is a big factor for me.
Which is why I am starting to save already for a few purchases at years end.
It may not be for others.
How ever I think alot of this thread is about arguing two sides of the same coin.
Freeware has it's place and whilst it exists I don't see why anyone should use warez .
Unless you're stupid enough to think you get some palcebo 'sonic gain' from doing so .
The execution of ideas with the tools you have is more important than desiring stuff that in all reality will not make your music any better.

Phew ..... another rant over. (good overall post BTW Alex).

[stefancrs]

Who said people using warez NEEDS the stuff they leech from pirate sites?

[FaX]

Who said people using warez NEEDS the stuff they leech from pirate sites?

Then why the f**k do they bother ?
Not having a go at you.
I just don't get the logic of people that do this sort of crap that's all.
Could someone explain or atleast help me understand what kind of moronic logic these people use.
Man I must live in a bubble or something.
The whole thing just baffles me.

[stefancrs]

Who said people using warez NEEDS the stuff they leech from pirate sites?

Then why the f**k do they bother ?
Not having a go at you.
I just don't get the logic of people that do this sort of crap that's all.
Could someone explain or atleast help me understand what kind of moronic logic these people use.
Man I must live in a bubble or something.
The whole thing just baffles me.

I couldn't answer that. I know that some people constantly make sure they have the latest version of every "cool" thing all of the time. If they're into audioware, they WILL make sure they got the latest h2o releases, no matter if they will even install them or not. I don't know why people do this, but they do it. It's some kind of "have it all" mentality or something.

When it comes to effects, I actually think there's almost better freeware than commercial stuff around, when it comes to certain kinds of effects atleast (compressors, limiters, eq's, delays etc). The people into leeching all the cool warez don't know, and probably don't care, about this though. Not that it would help the people getting "ripped" if all the ones downloading illegal versions of their applications instead started using free stuff, but it might help the ones making the free stuff.