Synth vs preset packs = same price

[rezoneight]

Payed presets for free synths like Synth1 feel "strange". But then again, nobody needs to buy them... But as mentioned, it feels strange that some people make this free synth for everyone to use and then someone makes couple of presets and ask money for it (why they don't make presets for commercial synths and ask money for that)

Arguments like "the synth developer can get money from other stuff so they don't need money/that's why can make free synth but the sound designer needs to get money from presets" is a bit strange to be honest If a sound designer needs the money, maybe design payed presets for payed synths?

How does it feel for you that people use Synth1 in their commercial music? Some people make a lot of money with that, more than any preset designer could even dream about.

This whole idea that there is something wrong with people making paid presets for it is wrong because its free is total bullsh1t. This goes against a ton of stuff out there that says otherwise (quite a bit of the open source world for that matter). As someone noted earlier if someone is selling Synth1 as their own, *that* most certainly is wrong. Making presets for it and charging for them? Not so much. There is no moral issue here in my opinion.

[rezoneight]

So much fight for presets. This was not why I started this post Everybody just relax ok.

Welcome to KVR

[rj0]

True. Professional sound packs should (and almost always do) sound better than the factory ones.

Why should they? Most commercial synths will have factory patches created by professional sound designers. i.e. People they pay to make them. I would expect the factory banks to shit all over any 3rd party stuff.

And you've brought up another good point. Sound packs vary in quality as well. So, very much a reason to demo both the target synth (for its sound, and as many factory presets as are included in the demo) and the sound pack (as best as can be managed, and unfortunately, some are marketed mixed in just a soundtrack or two, which can make them very difficult to evaluate).

[chk071]

Payed presets for free synths like Synth1 feel "strange". But then again, nobody needs to buy them... But as mentioned, it feels strange that some people make this free synth for everyone to use and then someone makes couple of presets and ask money for it (why they don't make presets for commercial synths and ask money for that)

Arguments like "the synth developer can get money from other stuff so they don't need money/that's why can make free synth but the sound designer needs to get money from presets" is a bit strange to be honest If a sound designer needs the money, maybe design payed presets for payed synths?

How does it feel for you that people use Synth1 in their commercial music? Some people make a lot of money with that, more than any preset designer could even dream about.

This whole idea that there is something wrong with people making paid presets for it is wrong because its free is total bullsh1t. This goes against a ton of stuff out there that says otherwise (quite a bit of the open source world for that matter). As someone noted earlier if someone is selling Synth1 as their own, *that* most certainly is wrong. Making presets for it and charging for them? Not so much. There is no moral issue here in my opinion.

Yeah. And, as I mentioned earlier, the relevant thing is what the developer states in his license or end user agreement. If there is no explicit mention that you cannot use Synth1 commercially, then everything is allowed.

And, arguing that he did it for the community, thus it'd be unfair to make money of it doesn't make sense either. What if he used parts of the code he used for Synth1 for commercial projects, or it was a test bed for him to develope his coding skills? We don't know, and we will never know. Again: Relevant is the license, and, if he doesn't disallow making money with Synth1, then there is reason at all not to do so.

Amen, brothers.

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

It seems that sound designers work for some people doesn't matter - interesting how electronic music will sounds without our work,probably tribal-ish hihihi

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

and one another thing - respect to all programmers developing all these amazing synths,but they still need us for new ideas :)Cheers

[rj0]

And you've brought up another good point. Sound packs vary in quality as well. So, very much a reason to demo both the target synth (for its sound, and as many factory presets as are included in the demo) and the sound pack (as best as can be managed, and unfortunately, some are marketed mixed in just a soundtrack or two, which can make them very difficult to evaluate).

I guess this brings up another relevant (to the OP query) note.

Because of the accessibility of synth demos, I've rarely purchased any that disappointed. I've had a lot more disappointments in sound packs (in large part because of the inability to truly demo them in advance).

[SoundHunterrr]

This is very true! Usually demo for synth will give almost all sounds the full synth will also have = you can listen the sounds/try if the synth sounds work. But sound paks (expansions?) will not give you this demo option. You can listen some demo video or song made with using some of the sounds

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

Agree,but you can't demo all presets, because it means you already have it and you may decide not to pay,but still to use it,so if you like demo song or few individual demo or free presets,so you have to pay in advance.
It's whole another story ,that people aren't motivated to buy it just listening single preset,but need insiparational instrumental,so ones you make best selection of your work,then need to make best demo you can...anyway i'am not complaining,it's just really hard work to make high quality set and demo,unless you copy paste other people work ...cheers

[tehlord]

You have some first hand experience?

Yes, quite a lot.

If I made a synth, I'd sell it a bit cheaper and collect the income from extra stuff like preset packs, extra oscillator modes, if it has samples then some extra built in samples etc.

Then you would go out of business fast.

Plugins can sell by the thousand, expansion banks do not for the most part.

Its actually a common and successful busyness strategy. KV331 with Synthmaster comes to mind. You can even look at the big players. NI sells more sound packs for Kontakt/Reaktor than their raw engines, some even buy collectors ultimate... And some of their sound packs are in the same price region as their engines... Though in this case the line gets blurry, as those packs also contain special scripts and other code under the hood. Some are like new instruments and not just sound packs, they allow a much higher degree of tweaking, that way they are also interesting for sound designers, not only for sound consumers... (95% of all DX7s which needed repair had still their unchanged presets stored...)

That's why I said 'for the most part', although I still don't see expansion packs selling for the same price as the software they run on with the exception of NI (how do you even put a price on NI plugins as nobody buys them one by one?).

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

It's about passion and devotion,that's why paid sets are better than free ones.
That's why cost money,because you need to spend time and money to create it and then need something in return cause again it's hard work not charity ,personally i think all people discussing 'free' sound are hypocrites,probably never did anything for free in their life for anybody.

[Jonas Harmon Lane]

Preset design obviously takes a lot of time and effort.
Perhaps a better way is donation-ware?
Those who value the work pay those who don't won't.

[digitalboytn]

and one another thing - respect to all programmers developing all these amazing synths,but they still need us for new ideas :)Cheers

That's a bit of BS right there

[rj0]

Amazes me that I don't remember seeing this mentioned. Elephant in the room?

One other consideration for synths vs. preset packs, last checked (I may be a bit out-of-date) is that, if a synth disappoints, there's a pretty good chance (depends on the company) that (again, with permission from the company) you can resell the license (e.g. in the KVR marketplace, Sell & Buy) and recover some of your costs. My impression (it hasn't crossed my mind in recent times) is that resale of preset packs are far less likely to get the OK of the developer/company (once again, check in advance). The main case where I can recall preset packs being resold is when the preset packs are purchased through the same company as the synth, and then they can sometimes be sold as a bundle (synth licenses and preset packs together), or as part of the transfer of an owner's entire account, but, ... well, you know the drill.

[BONES]

I think my analogy fits.

No it doesn't and even a moment's examination reveals why. If you don't have a word processor you can still write a book, if you don't have a synth you can't make any patches. The synth is more analogous to language in that a novel is all about language, just as a patch is all about the synth it is made for. Translating a novel into a different language requires the same kind of effort as translating a particular patch from one synth to another. In both cases you are trying to recreate both the intent and feeling of the original in a foreign environment.

99% of all possible parameter combinations on a synth don't sound good and musical.

Rubbish. 99% of the sounds a combination of oscillators, filters and modulation sources is capable of might not be musical but it's the person who designs/develops the synth who weeds those out so that what's left is almost always musical. Some of it is simple, like making sure the pitches it outputs conform to a musical scale/register. Other things are less so, like ensuring the range of values for a particular parameter fall within an area that is musically useful. That's why some synths are great and other aren't - because of the design/engineering of the developer. The person making patches is standing on the shoulders of the person/people who made the instrument. That why you get more people making banks for DUNE or Serum than you do for JX Synth.

It is the sound programmer that turns a soulless frequency generator into a musical instrument.

No, it's the people who make the synth (see above). The proof of it is in how easy it is to use a random patch generator on a synth and see that almost every time it comes up with something musical. Do it enough times and you'll come up with a bank as good as the best "sound designer" can. In fact, looking at the structure of some patches, I think a lot of professionals use patch randomisers to make their patches.

SE is not even freeware. So why anyone would criticize a developer for making and selling a SE plugin is beyond me. In fact, SE needs money as well, and if SE plugin developers were not supposed to make money with their products, most of them would not make the effort in the first place, i.e. not buy SE and not pay the price of a SE license.

That's not true at all. Almost all the best SE plugins were/are free and, in the old days at least, the forums were full of really helpful people who contributed to everyone else's work. So for anyone to think that anything they made in SE was good because of the work they put it is arrogant in the extreme. If I had charged money for any of my synths, I'd have felt like I was cheating a dozen different people who had helped and guided me in getting to a finished product. I repaid their kindness and generosity with my own.

Your idea that things are supposed to be free is off in a world where everyone has to pay their bills. Most people don't lead lives of luxury, they have to think twice how they spend their spare time, and their money.

As do I. I am extremely careful with my money and in any given month I probably only have a few hundred dollars over and above what I need just to survive. So when I decided to give the FBM guy money for MonoFury, for example, that was because I'd decided to do that instead of going to the pub for dinner with friends one night. That's what makes it a meaningful gesture, not a hollow one.

In fact, when a good sound designer makes a commercial sound set for a free synth, that is actually a huge compliment for the synth developer.

How does that work when you don't even think synth developers make anything musical?

The sound designer doesn't have to give anything back. If the synth developer wanted something in return they would not make their synth freeware in the first place.

It wouldn't occur to you that someone might give a synth away for free to encourage others to be similarly generous? That to turn around and charge money for something they have enabled you to do is just kicking dirt in their face?

The dinner analogy is appropriate here - when someone invites you to their home for dinner, you don't turn up empty handed, then eat their food and drink their wine, you turn up with a bottle of wine or a box of chocolates as a reciprocal gesture. They will always say "you didn't have to do that" but everyone knows it is the right thing to do and if you don't at least make an effort, you probably won't get invited back. Selling patches for a free synth is like deciding you don't want to go to dinner at your friend's house and getting someone to pay you $20 so they can go in your place. It's taking someone else's generosity and using it to make money for yourself.