Synth vs preset packs = same price

[BONES]

Why would it be "the right thing to do"? The developer never said he has anything against people making money using his soft synth. It's not "the right thing to do", that is Teksonik's and your assumption.

It's not an assumption, it is good manners and one of the Ten Commandments that underpins our entire society - do unto others as you would have them do unto you. So when someone gives me something for free, I take their example on board and do the same thing - I do unto others as has been done to me. Someone gives me something for free, I give something of my own to people for free.

And I'd be very surprised if you never used any free software, samples, or whatever in your music production.[/quote]
Which is fine because I have never earned a penny from them, either. I spend at least 4 or 5 times more than I make form music. e.g. We got paid the handsome sum of 576 Euros, after tax and accommodation, for playing at Wave Gothik Treffen in 2017 but the trip cost us around 4000 Euros in total. What I try to do is acknowledge every act of generosity in a meaningful way, either by reciprocating - also making free stuff available - or putting an acknowledgement somewhere in the liner notes of a release where I have used something I got for nothing.

How many times have you paid for donationware? I get the impression not many people do it, given that the FBM guy made the effort to email his thanks to me and seemed genuinely grateful, like it was a most unusual occurrence.

[SneakyBeats]

You have some first hand experience?

Yes, quite a lot.

So you're saying that for example Synthmaster is a shit idea and will die soon?

[chk071]

Which is fine because I have never earned a penny from them, either. I spend at least 4 or 5 times more than I make form music. e.g. We got paid the handsome sum of 576 Euros, after tax and accommodation, for playing at Wave Gothik Treffen in 2017 but the trip cost us around 4000 Euros in total.

The question is why you assume that the people selling preset packs for Synth1 make the BIG MONEY with it. Maybe they pay on top as well, for hosting a website, renting web space to host their presets, or advertising for them.

But, that's the important thing, right? You don't know. You don't know either what Ichiro Toda had in mind when he developed his synth. The relevant things should be stated in the license or end user agreement.

I have no idea where it shows though, otherwise I would post it here. It's probably only shown when you install the plugin. If there's no mention of terms that Synth1 should not be used in commercial preset or music production, then everything is allowed. Regardless of whether you personally like it or not.

[rezoneight]

Which is fine because I have never earned a penny from them, either. I spend at least 4 or 5 times more than I make form music. e.g. We got paid the handsome sum of 576 Euros, after tax and accommodation, for playing at Wave Gothik Treffen in 2017 but the trip cost us around 4000 Euros in total.

The question is why you assume that the people selling preset packs for Synth1 make the BIG MONEY with it. Maybe they pay on top as well, for hosting a website, renting web space to host their presets, or advertising for them.

But, that's the important thing, right? You don't know. You don't know either what Ichiro Toda had in mind when he developed his synth. The relevant things should be stated in the license or end user agreement.

I have no idea where it shows though, otherwise I would post it here. It's probably only shown when you install the plugin. If there's no mention of terms that Synth1 should not be used in commercial preset or music production, then everything is allowed. Regardless of whether you personally like it or not.

When the guy had to bring up “the Ten Commandments” (which I’d note only covers two religions) it’s time to stop arguing. We’ve got another moral crusader on our hands. He’s just not willing to duck out of the conversation like Teksonic.

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

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

If you say so :):)Cheers

[e-crooner]

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.

My analogy was about free vs commercial word processors. Not alternatives to word processors.
My analogy was clear: both synth plugins and word processors are software-based tools that evolved from hardware originals. In both realms there are free and commercial products. Free stuff only became possible because of the immaterial nature of software. Unlike with hardware, a company making software does not actually lose anything when giving away software for free.

To me novel is just a term for the type of sequence of letters in a book. That would correspond to the type of combination of parameters of a patach, e.g. brass or bass.

I don't see any possibility of introducing translation into my analogy, no analogy is perfect. Nor is it necessary regarding this thread.


The reason why there are more soundsets for some synths than for others is money. It makes more sense to make sounds for a popular synth and one with more features because there are more possible combinations/sounds and because the more complex a synth gets, the more users might be overwhelmed.
Still, the overwhelming majority of parameter combinations on any synth sound ugly. For instance, just imagine a 2-osc synth. Each has 5 octaves. So you have 60 semitones for each. In synths with a random feature, there are probably internal rules and limitations, else almost every random patch would be out of tune and sound wrong.

A synth as such is just a fancy signal generator, it is sound designers and musicians that turn it into a music instrument. Occasionally the synth developer also makes some of the factory patches, but they are usually not so good in my view.

I don't share your view on SE. Many of those that made good SE plugins also charged for them (Memorymoon, Superwave, Psychic Modulation, etc.). Even Chris Kerry, who contributed a lot to the SE platform, made SE plugins and sold them. He even made his own modules and sold them.
I bought a number of SE plugins myself in the past.

I also donate when I find something is really worth it. But that is directly to the person from whom I get something. However, when I get a freeware synth and make commercial patches for it, I don't sell them to the synth developer, but to fellow users. That doesn't rule out that I donate to the synth developer. One doesn't have to do with the other.

Quite simple, it is a compliment to the synth developer because he made a good tool which I can then make patches for. It is not a compliment to the synth developer's musicality.

The dinner situation is very different. It is a direct give and take between the guest and the host. Basically like donating 20 euros to the synth developer. If however the guest who invited me for dinner gave me a free brush set during the dinner, and I then go home and paint a couple of masterpieces and sell them to collectors, that would be perfectly fine.

I am not a Christian/Jew, but the golden rule, as it is called, is not part of the 10 commandments afaik. It is an old motto from ancient Egypt, Persia etc.

[kevvvvv]

gawd ... I hope this doesn't develop into endless bitching

[SoundHunterrr]

This is Manu pages only argue if synth1 presets can be sold or only free? I did not mean this when I asked my question. Sorry for this

Maybe can I delete this subject post totally since it is only fight post now?
Or @admin @moderator can delete?

[kevvvvv]

These guys will ease up now they've said their bit.

Was still a good post. I certainly followed it.

[Psuper]

This is Manu pages only argue if synth1 presets can be sold or only free? I did not mean this when I asked my question. Sorry for this

Maybe can I delete this subject post totally since it is only fight post now?
Or @admin @moderator can delete?

I'm biased, but feel I'm the only one who provided genuinely good insight for you without making a fuss.

Regardless, this is the way of the world of forums.

[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.

I'm still focused on the OP's query (paid synth, paid preset pack, equivalent prices). Any feedback on the above (resale of preset packs)?

[e-crooner]

gawd ... I hope this doesn't develop into endless bitching

Yes, I guess we have gone off-topic a bit
I will no longer reply to replies here, I have made my point and if Bones sees things differently, fine with me. But I do reject the notion that his view on commercial patches for free synths is any more moral than mine...

Regarding the topic, while some sound sets are expensive, I don't remember any that was more expensive than the plugin itself.
I think there is a kind of limit that people will pay for a sound set, just like there is a kind of limit for synth plugin prices. Beyond that they will likely collect dust on the virtual shelves

[oneway]

My opinion ymmv:

Paid preset packs > a new synth

- I modify presets and create new ones so packs are a bunch of new starting points that will seed 3-4 custom creations each.
- Preset packs are usually focused on a specific sound I’d like to embrace. Factory libraries tend to have a lot of over-designed show-off patches.
- I map my most-used synths to hardware controls, so there are less things to map if I use less synths.
- No new GUIs to learn (some GUIs are BAD, especially true of the synths that cost less than preset packs).
- Less software to keep up to date and less inevitable issues to report or deal with.
- Good presets give me interesting ideas of how to make the most of the software.

[FigBug]

Pricing is weird, especially with software / digital goods, since the price to reproduce is essentially $0. You need to disregard the notion that amount of effort required to create a product has any bearing on the price. Take Logic Pro, it's $199 and it took a lot more effort to create than any synth or sound bank. I think it comes with 20+ synths. Ableton Live is $749, it didn't take 4x as much effort to create as Logic.

Serum is $189, almost the same price as Logic. but way less effort to create. I'm seeing Serum sound packs from $25 - $100.

How many people need a DAW? Pretty much everybody here. So Apple can spread the development cost across maybe a million+ users.

How many need Serum? Not as many, you can use the synths that come with your DAW, Massive, Rapid, etc? Those development costs are spread over a lot less users.

Now, how many people need a Riddim soundpack for Serum? I'm guessing not very many. Sure, it was a lot less effort to create than Serum itself, but it's potential market is tiny. So it's relatively high price of $45 is the only way it can recoup its investment.

So, if you want a sound pack for a specific synth, for a specific genre, you have to understand it's a tiny market and you're going to have to pay more for it than some other more generic synths, since they have a broader market.

Or you may find something for free.

What's your time worth? If you have a client paying you, it may be better to buy the sound pack than bill them the time to generate the patches yourself. If it's your hobby, maybe you find the fun in building the patches. Do you only have a few hours a week to work on music, buying patches might be worth it so you actually get something finished.

Only you can say what patches are worth to you. But it they are selling for $25 - $100 for packs, it must be worth it to somebody.

[chk071]

Serum is $189, almost the same price as Logic. but way less effort to create.

Are you saying that Steve Duda has as much development manpower as Apple?

Prices are determined by what people are willing and capable to pay. And that's about the whole "magic". There is neither something like a "fair" price, nor any rational explanation behind prices. The market dictates prices. If nobody would buy Serum, there wouldn't be a point in selling it for $189. Obviously, there are enough people who are buying it for that price, or who take the rent to own scheme.