KVR Audio

ObsoleteAcc99 · Post by **ObsoleteAcc99** » Wed Nov 11, 2015 10:44 pm

[DELETED]

chokehold · Post by **chokehold** » Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:20 pm

Not here to take sides, because it's probably clear whose side I'm not on, but just to showcase my "luck" with backup copies.

Got a brand new WD backup drive, mounted internally and never moved, broke down after 4 months irreparably.
Got an external backup drive, PSU blew up and fried the drive, gone irreparably.

Started backing up my stuff online, "because online drives are safe" - right?
And now I'm stuck with 5 Barresi Evil Drums SDX installer DVDs that I'll never find in a shop again safely stored on a f*cking Bitcasa c*nt drive that will not let me download them from any of my 4 various computers with overall 8 operating systems in 3 different locations. Downloads start and cancel halfway, the support f*cks at Bitcasa are useless about this.
"It's working here", well whoop-dee-doo, how awfully helpful.

It's not for lack of trying, but some backups just vanish into the dark depths of teh interwebz, no matter how much you try to avoid it. Because bad luck, that's why. I'm still shaking in fear of the day that my 1.5 TB Spitfire sample drive smokes it... yet I'm sure those guys will do their best to sort me out, should that ever happen.

So for someone like me, it's especially comforting to know that I don't need get too upset if the next sample drive bites the dust, because I can always download my estimated 300 GB of Sonokinetic samples over and over again.
Fast and for free.

EnGee · Post by **EnGee** » Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:50 pm

Just an opinion!

If IK adds the cost to the final price, it means it charging 'every' customer even if he/she won't re-download. So maybe they are being fair to charge only those who want to re-download?

Personally, I don't find it that offensive to pay extra for re-downloading. It is only going to happen when I loose my backup, right? So, I consider it like a part of the cost to 'solve' a problem. Also, the charge for good servers and service are not cheap if quality is required. Yes, there are very cheap servers but are they using these cheap servers? I doubt that.

bigcat1969 · Post by **bigcat1969** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 12:05 am

Complete lack of knowledge question. I'm a poor dude using Mediafire and the cost is pretty low. I think I can add 2.5 terrabytes for 10 bucks, though they seem to keep adding bandwidth to my account... maybe people are helping and I don't know it?
Anyway not that I have close to the bandwidth usage of a huge company like IKM and they probably have more expensive plans, but it seems like bandwidth can be pretty cheap in this day and age. Wouldn't the PR be worth it if they had a more generous policy for probably a relatively small amount of money?

OK shoulda read the whole thread before posting...

Gonga · Post by **Gonga** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 1:11 am

chokehold wrote:Not here to take sides, because it's probably clear whose side I'm not on, but just to showcase my "luck" with backup copies.

Got a brand new WD backup drive, mounted internally and never moved, broke down after 4 months irreparably.
Got an external backup drive, PSU blew up and fried the drive, gone irreparably.

Started backing up my stuff online, "because online drives are safe" - right?
And now I'm stuck with 5 Barresi Evil Drums SDX installer DVDs that I'll never find in a shop again safely stored on a f*cking Bitcasa c*nt drive that will not let me download them from any of my 4 various computers with overall 8 operating systems in 3 different locations. Downloads start and cancel halfway, the support f*cks at Bitcasa are useless about this.
"It's working here", well whoop-dee-doo, how awfully helpful.

It's not for lack of trying, but some backups just vanish into the dark depths of teh interwebz, no matter how much you try to avoid it. Because bad luck, that's why. I'm still shaking in fear of the day that my 1.5 TB Spitfire sample drive smokes it... yet I'm sure those guys will do their best to sort me out, should that ever happen.

So for someone like me, it's especially comforting to know that I don't need get too upset if the next sample drive bites the dust, because I can always download my estimated 300 GB of Sonokinetic samples over and over again.
Fast and for free.

The best backup solutions are redundant over multiple drives and locations, and updated very regularly. I always have at least two backup drives in my system (6TB drives now), as well as 2-3 external drives (2TB each), and since I went that way (used various other technologies for years beginning with floppies in the early 90s, tape, etc.) I've had rock-solid reliability over 6 computers - for the last 15 years or so.

Fleer · Post by **Fleer** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:02 am

EnGee wrote:Just an opinion!

If IK adds the cost to the final price, it means it charging 'every' customer even if he/she won't re-download. So maybe they are being fair to charge only those who want to re-download?

Personally, I don't find it that offensive to pay extra for re-downloading. It is only going to happen when I loose my backup, right? So, I consider it like a part of the cost to 'solve' a problem. Also, the charge for good servers and service are not cheap if quality is required. Yes, there are very cheap servers but are they using these cheap servers? I doubt that.

Exactly

VitaminD · Post by **VitaminD** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:26 am

EnGee wrote:Just an opinion!

If IK adds the cost to the final price, it means it charging 'every' customer even if he/she won't re-download. So maybe they are being fair to charge only those who want to re-download?

Personally, I don't find it that offensive to pay extra for re-downloading. It is only going to happen when I loose my backup, right? So, I consider it like a part of the cost to 'solve' a problem. Also, the charge for good servers and service are not cheap if quality is required. Yes, there are very cheap servers but are they using these cheap servers? I doubt that.

Who is to say the companies providing unlimited downloads are using very cheap servers?

braj · Post by **braj** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:41 am

Presonus downloads are quick

I really don't think that is a valid argument in this day and age to say they need to cover the cost via a fee. They just chose to do what others haven't, they don't have some fairy-dust sprinkled servers no one else has. Anyhow, perception is like 9/10ths of reality, whatever the cost for the servers, IK surely pays an additional cost in disgruntled users.

EnGee · Post by **EnGee** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:25 am

VitaminD wrote:
EnGee wrote:Just an opinion!

If IK adds the cost to the final price, it means it charging 'every' customer even if he/she won't re-download. So maybe they are being fair to charge only those who want to re-download?

Personally, I don't find it that offensive to pay extra for re-downloading. It is only going to happen when I loose my backup, right? So, I consider it like a part of the cost to 'solve' a problem. Also, the charge for good servers and service are not cheap if quality is required. Yes, there are very cheap servers but are they using these cheap servers? I doubt that.
Who is to say the companies providing unlimited downloads are using very cheap servers?

I don't know. Who?

It is not possible that those companies already added the cost to the price when the potential customer buys?

chili beans · Post by **chili beans** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:57 am

Wow, does anyone here even play music? Worrying about a companies download bandwidth? Really?

trimph1 · Post by **trimph1** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:07 am

chili beans wrote:Wow, does anyone here even play music? Worrying about a companies download bandwidth? Really?

Why not? When you pay to use their servers?

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:10 am

The OP was p*ssed off because of no reply not because IKM charge for additional downloads.

Anyway, i use two 4TB external drives which content is always in sync. That two drives break at the same time is nearly impossible.

From an economical view the possibilty to download 3 times instead of unlimited during six month is better for everybody and would raise IKM reputation.

TheKid · Post by **TheKid** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 7:09 am

Numanoid wrote:
TheKid wrote:And what happens now? This thread gets deleted, I bet.
You are over-estimating the importance of your input

Args come on, you know what I meant. Now that I read it I also... Ah f&@% it.

chili beans · Post by **chili beans** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 7:12 am

trimph1 wrote:
chili beans wrote:Wow, does anyone here even play music? Worrying about a companies download bandwidth? Really?
Why not? When you pay to use their servers?

Right, anyways i backup all my downloads to a fostex 4 track than bounce down to two tracks to save space

stardustmedia · Post by **stardustmedia** » Thu Nov 12, 2015 7:18 am

murnau wrote:The OP was p*ssed off because of no reply not because IKM charge for additional downloads.

Exactly. And the reply from IKM came promptly (first reply). Doesn't seem so bad. It's not good for any company and it's not an excuse, but it can happen, that customer tickets get lost in the mass.

murnau wrote:Anyway, i use two 4TB external drives which content is always in sync. That two drives break at the same time is nearly impossible.

I still get the feeling that a lot of people don't realize how important nowadays backups became. No matter if companies charge for extra downloads or not. Especially that backups now can be done quite cheap (compared to 10 years ago). I understand that still a lot of people around the world don't have 2-3 thousand bucks for a computer (or computer system), but even if you spend only a couple hundreds for a computer, I recommend not to save another 50 bucks for an external USB-drive for backups.

POOR customer service.