The wrong approach to the new model of music software
My name is Evan Taubenfeld, and I'm a former Warner Bros Records recording artist and Sony/ATV & EMI Music Publishing writer. I presently run Mighty Seven Songs (a publishing company joint venture between Crush Music, Songs Publishing, and Ozone Entertainment). I am very sympathetic to the challenges facing software makers since musicians and publishers are intimately aware of the growing pains caused by technology and its disruptive powers. Today, it seems as if we're at a crossroads with respect to music software and its ownership model moving forward. Half of the manufacturers have embraced the future and empower their customers while the other half seems to do the opposite by placing restrictions and burdens on loyal paying customers.
I'll use my current situation as an example of this problem. I have two computers (a Mac Pro in my studio and a Macbook Pro for traveling/remote work). Forward-thinking software companies like Apple, Native Instruments, Spectrasonics, IZotope, Lennar Digital, Vienna, Celemony, Rob Papen, Plogue, etc. allow you to install and use your purchased software on multiple machines simultaneously. They reward paying customers with trust and have established a middle ground where everyone wins. The software maker gets paid and paying consumers can use it on their computers as they wish.
Then there are the other companies: Waves, Avid, Antares, etc. These companies lock you to either a physical USB key or restrictive cloud syncing. In either scenario, you cannot use your purchased software on more than one computer simultaneously. This creates an undue burden and headache for the paying consumer that does not exist for those who pirate the software. For example, even the notoriously strict and stringent software maker Adobe allows Creative Cloud members to use their software simultaneously on two machines.
I'll focus on Waves since there is very good reason to believe that Avid may not be in business long enough to address this kind of problem. Waves Mercury TDM, which I proudly own, retails for $10,000. I also pay the required $240 each year to maintain their support, updates, and customer service. You may think it is ludicrous to spend so much money on an intangible product that is easily pirated, but I feel strongly about paying for the software I use.
Problem is, I've been working mobile more often, and I usually open sessions in my studio via remote desktop (bouncing things, tweaking parts) while editing or having sessions open on my laptop at the same time. Even when I'm at my studio, I'll often go back and forth in rapid succession between the two machines and keep sessions active simultaneously. Because Waves can only be used on one computer at a time, I've been stuck dragging a USB key between computers and quitting/reopening sessions constantly, which is finally starting to impede my workflow (this is actually faster than their "convenient" cloud syncing, which requires manually deactivating and activating their license on your respective machines each time you change computers).
I emailed customer service multiple times to ask for some sort of reasonable solution and was told to buy a second license. I was told not to worry since I'd only need a native license, and when I expressed my concern about being forced to pay $5,000 to use it on a second machine, I was told "you can always check with your local dealer for specials." I quieted my frustration and reminded him that I've already paid $13,000 (thats was the price when I bought Mercury TDM years ago) and just need to open Waves on my personal laptop and desktop at the same time, but he said I had no other option.
I couldn't believe after being such a supportive customer that I'd be boxed into such a corner. I was venting to a friend who pointed out the obvious "Just use cracks. I use Waves on 5 machines at once." Unfortunately, as I stated earlier, that is not within my comfort zone and so I'm stuck.
How did we arrive at this juncture where the paying customers have less flexibility than the ones who pirate the software? The solution is so simple, so within reach. If Waves, Avid, Antares, and other companies allow paying customers to use their licenses on multiple machines simultaneously, then they will continue to encourage people to buy their software. I will likely be switching to Logic full-time from Pro Tools (aside from the licensing reasons, I'm also planning for the future) but don't presently have a viable alternative to AutoTune. I've loved and used Waves for over 10 years but am now looking into other solutions that will give me more flexibility.
My advice to you? Invest in the software companies that reward their customers (some of which I listed in above). They will be around for years to come and the deserve your business. If you're thinking about purchasing anything from the manufacturers who want you locked in, don't do it. It's not a spiteful or vengeful act; it's just not a smart road to go down.
I hope that Waves, Antares, and others may use this letter to rethink their approach.
Thoughts and comments appreciated.
open letter to music software companies
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
Trouble is that it's a question of the revenue they receive over-all. They have little to no concern for customer satisfaction beyond whether a particular customer will make a purchase or not.
They seem to believe that they will make more via the few customers who "cave" in your situation and pay the extra 5k - 10k for an additional license.
This isn't too hard to believe. It doesn't matter how many cracked versions are in use in "the wild", it only matters ultimately the total number of licenses which are purchased.
The only argument you might come up with is that of the possibility such license restrictions will lead more users to seek cracks directly rather than purchasing a license and this in the end will result in a lower over-all number of licenses sold.
Fact is though that argument has very little ground to stand on. You are an example yourself that it is untrue.
They seem to believe that they will make more via the few customers who "cave" in your situation and pay the extra 5k - 10k for an additional license.
This isn't too hard to believe. It doesn't matter how many cracked versions are in use in "the wild", it only matters ultimately the total number of licenses which are purchased.
The only argument you might come up with is that of the possibility such license restrictions will lead more users to seek cracks directly rather than purchasing a license and this in the end will result in a lower over-all number of licenses sold.
Fact is though that argument has very little ground to stand on. You are an example yourself that it is untrue.
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
-
- KVRian
- 626 posts since 25 Jun, 2013
I read that whole thing, and yes, I agree.
This is the great irony of the whole situation:
The music software companies are a little behind the times.
The games industry deals with the issue of piracy with things like Steam and GOG.
Unfortunately, there is no Valve equivalent in the music software world to tie everyone together and give them a proper DRM platform that doesn't hurt the community.
You're not the first person to sing this sad song, but it's only a matter of time before things straighten out.
You said it yourself:
Companies like Roland are dealing with it by attaching their gear to hardware. That's not a proper solution either.
I feel compelled to sheepishly nudge you over these first world problems.
But that was very well written. The first quote really needs to be emphasized.
This is the great irony of the whole situation:
Nothing more really needs to be said than this to prove how asinine a practice these things are.bigevil wrote:I couldn't believe after being such a supportive customer that I'd be boxed into such a corner. I was venting to a friend who pointed out the obvious "Just use cracks. I use Waves on 5 machines at once." Unfortunately, as I stated earlier, that is not within my comfort zone and so I'm stuck.
The music software companies are a little behind the times.
The games industry deals with the issue of piracy with things like Steam and GOG.
Unfortunately, there is no Valve equivalent in the music software world to tie everyone together and give them a proper DRM platform that doesn't hurt the community.
You're not the first person to sing this sad song, but it's only a matter of time before things straighten out.
You said it yourself:
These things are growing pains until these companies learn to deal with them.bigevil wrote: I am very sympathetic to the challenges facing software makers since musicians and publishers are intimately aware of the growing pains caused by technology and its disruptive powers.
Companies like Roland are dealing with it by attaching their gear to hardware. That's not a proper solution either.
I feel compelled to sheepishly nudge you over these first world problems.
But that was very well written. The first quote really needs to be emphasized.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 3 posts since 14 Dec, 2013
perhaps, however I've been very vocal encouraging my peers to purchase the software they use. I can no longer recommend any of the companies who have these kind of limitations in place. I myself will stop the additional $240 /yr revenue stream they're getting from me.aciddose wrote: The only argument you might come up with is that of the possibility such license restrictions will lead more users to seek cracks directly rather than purchasing a license and this in the end will result in a lower over-all number of licenses sold.
Fact is though that argument has very little ground to stand on. You are an example yourself that it is untrue.
HaganeSteel I appreciate your comments and thoughts.
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
Perfect. I've done this for the past decade. I have purchased the software I use, but even if software is of reasonable quality if the price is wrong I won't even bother to look at it.
It's another thing entirely when you work in the music industry and your primary income is dependent upon the tools you use. In which case it isn't a question of "want" but of "need". It all boils down to how that need is satisfied and what motivates customers to purchase a license.
I have been told that customers who are not capable of producing a significant ROI for a product priced at something like 10k are "worthless." They simply do not care about "small time" producers "out of their league".
If you knew how you were viewed from inside these software companies I think you might change your tune a little with regard to how supportive you are
It's another thing entirely when you work in the music industry and your primary income is dependent upon the tools you use. In which case it isn't a question of "want" but of "need". It all boils down to how that need is satisfied and what motivates customers to purchase a license.
I have been told that customers who are not capable of producing a significant ROI for a product priced at something like 10k are "worthless." They simply do not care about "small time" producers "out of their league".
If you knew how you were viewed from inside these software companies I think you might change your tune a little with regard to how supportive you are
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
-
- KVRAF
- 7873 posts since 21 Dec, 2002 from MD USA
KVR loves to bash Waves, but I have always loved them.
my music: http://www.alexcooperusa.com
"It's hard to be humble, when you're as great as I am." Muhammad Ali
"It's hard to be humble, when you're as great as I am." Muhammad Ali
-
- KVRist
- 338 posts since 15 Jul, 2007
I'm hoping that the market will eventually dictate the banishment of these artificial restrictions. As our workflows/lives creep more and more into portable devices of various form factors, it's becoming harder to justify the "tied-to-one-box-at-a-time" model.
That being said (and aciddose alluded to this), I think Waves is a bit more insulated from general consumer dissatisfaction (and their associated purchasing power) than a lot of the vendors you mention because of the positive reputation (and thus high product adoption rate in spite of their high price point) they enjoy in professional circles.
So ultimately - good on you for speaking up about this. Perhaps it will influence some of your peers to put some pressure on Waves (and vendors with similar policies) and lead to changes that will benefit all of us. Still, I'm not over-optimistic that this change will come anytime soon. Reasonable and nicely stated case, though.
That being said (and aciddose alluded to this), I think Waves is a bit more insulated from general consumer dissatisfaction (and their associated purchasing power) than a lot of the vendors you mention because of the positive reputation (and thus high product adoption rate in spite of their high price point) they enjoy in professional circles.
So ultimately - good on you for speaking up about this. Perhaps it will influence some of your peers to put some pressure on Waves (and vendors with similar policies) and lead to changes that will benefit all of us. Still, I'm not over-optimistic that this change will come anytime soon. Reasonable and nicely stated case, though.
-
- KVRAF
- 2982 posts since 9 Dec, 2008
How about reselling? Transfer fees? Updates and upgrades?
OP your good boy/bad boy list us much too simplistic. It's your opinion, fine, but you certainly don't speak for me with this grand 'open letter'.
OP your good boy/bad boy list us much too simplistic. It's your opinion, fine, but you certainly don't speak for me with this grand 'open letter'.
-
- KVRian
- 966 posts since 16 Feb, 2010
I get what you are saying about supporting software that you use, but you have already payed a huge amount for this product. Installing a crack for personal use is not damaging them in any way, so my (personal) opinion is that you would be well within your rights 'morally' to do this. (obv, theres a seperate issue with potential virus/malware)bigevil wrote:I couldn't believe after being such a supportive customer that I'd be boxed into such a corner. I was venting to a friend who pointed out the obvious "Just use cracks. I use Waves on 5 machines at once." Unfortunately, as I stated earlier, that is not within my comfort zone and so I'm stuck.
This doesnt change your original point of 'this is a silly business practice' which i totally agree with. the customer shouldnt even be put in that position..
-
- KVRist
- 353 posts since 22 Feb, 2004
At this point it looks like Valve themselves are going to beat everyone to the punch. There's already all kinds of audio & visual software popping up on Steam. They're the only ones with enough balls to be visionary when everyone else are reluctant and think it's a bad idea, just like when Steam was starting out in 2003.Unfortunately, there is no Valve equivalent in the music software world to tie everyone together and give them a proper DRM platform that doesn't hurt the community.
-
- KVRAF
- 3184 posts since 10 Jan, 2005
Does Native Instruments allow using their software on multiple machine ssimultaneously? Really?
http://www.native-instruments.com/knowl ... product%3F
"The end user license agreement (EULA) for Native Instruments products allows the simultaneous installation on two computers (three computers for all versions of MASCHINE and KOMPLETE), as long as only one installation is used at any given time."
- Mario
http://www.native-instruments.com/knowl ... product%3F
"The end user license agreement (EULA) for Native Instruments products allows the simultaneous installation on two computers (three computers for all versions of MASCHINE and KOMPLETE), as long as only one installation is used at any given time."
- Mario
-
- KVRAF
- 1548 posts since 12 Jan, 2010 from Copenhagen
I have a lot of software that allows using it on more than one computer simutaneously.
It' really is just plain wrong that some companies don't setu a scheme that allows this.
I personally think having a powerful enough computer with the main software and controlling it from a remote access interface would be a solution. As bandwidth increases this will be possible and seamless. A personal cloud solution..
I've thought out the multiple computer for one production setup and it is expensive and means you end up with a lot of hardware redundantcy. Mulitple computers to update mulitplte files across several computers have to be saved and backed up for each project. I just can't afford it frankly..
So one super powerful computer at home. One light durable portable computer for remote access.
Dongles and copy protection stay safe at home.
A relatively cheap remote computer in your bag at all times.. Maybe a 17" super light is available in the future? Audio production on a small screen is a pain.
As mulitthreading and SSD matures, you won't really need to have several computers to do most projects..
Just my thoughts.
Good topic for sure..
It' really is just plain wrong that some companies don't setu a scheme that allows this.
I personally think having a powerful enough computer with the main software and controlling it from a remote access interface would be a solution. As bandwidth increases this will be possible and seamless. A personal cloud solution..
I've thought out the multiple computer for one production setup and it is expensive and means you end up with a lot of hardware redundantcy. Mulitple computers to update mulitplte files across several computers have to be saved and backed up for each project. I just can't afford it frankly..
So one super powerful computer at home. One light durable portable computer for remote access.
Dongles and copy protection stay safe at home.
A relatively cheap remote computer in your bag at all times.. Maybe a 17" super light is available in the future? Audio production on a small screen is a pain.
As mulitthreading and SSD matures, you won't really need to have several computers to do most projects..
Just my thoughts.
Good topic for sure..
Last edited by TwoToneshuzz on Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
waves break, but somehow it all makes sense.
-
- KVRist
- 147 posts since 30 Jun, 2013
Stop behaving stupidly and don't pay dongle based software companies or use their software in any way and let them know.
Then they will think about it.
Then they will think about it.
Last edited by pinkpanther on Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 1548 posts since 12 Jan, 2010 from Copenhagen
It isn't only dongles that disallow/cripple use of programs on more than one computer at a time...pinkpanther wrote:Stop behaving stupidly and don't pay dongle based software companies or use their software in any way.
Then they will think about it.
waves break, but somehow it all makes sense.