Motorola DSP563xx Emulator (BETA) (Access Virus, Nord Lead, Waldorf MW...)

[chk071]

Me too, as that is the only thing which matters here really, not our interpretation of non existing terms in their EULA.

[SLiC]

Yup, I don’t think hardware ever had a EULA as no one was expecting chip emulators at the time!

[resynthesis]

Do what you will elsewhere but do NOT post ROMs for the Virus on public forums and say HERE GO GET A FREE VIRUS PLUGIN.

To be realistic, that's exactly how it works though. "Hey, here's a free emulator, but we don't tell you where to get this ROM." "Yo guys... can you tell me where to get ROM's?..." "Google "synthesizer ROM archive"." "Aight, cheers."

If you want to be legally on the right side, then don't even look at this emulator (as a user), or any other emulator. Sorry to say, but, that's how it is. Regardless of the legal niche they found for the emulator itself.

Not that I think Motorola would approve of this depth of reverse engineering either...

Motorola used to be super cool about this sort of thing. I used to develop operating systems and compilers and Motorola were always very quick to help with detailed processor information. They were also super helpful with emulators for cross platform targeting. Maybe things have changed though

Intel though...

[PAK]

You bought hardware, you did not pay for a licence to use their ROM any way you chose in any device you choose.

That's correct. But you said (direct quote) "you are not allowed to copy and use the ROM". That's (pretty obviously) untrue, given it's made available for that purpose!

In terms of usage outside of the original device: If you paid for the license, but can no longer use the software (EG Your broken Virus B/C cannot be easily repaired), conditions now exist where it's certainly -possible- to argue actions, to allow your continued usage of said software, are reasonable and fair under the law, regardless of any written T&C.

Your rights will vary greatly by country, or even individual states in the case of the USA. So you wouldn't just need a copyright lawyer, but one familiar with the jurisdiction of any trial! The point is there can be some grey area IF you actually own the device the ROM can be used on..

When I bought my Powercore Virus I didn’t assume I could just copy it and use it on multiple machines, you had to buy more licences (and even pay extra for more voices)

Not quite. There was a single and a multi version. The single was restricted to one instance per card. But, if you had more than one card, you could actually run as many instances as you had cards. However your wider point is correct. Your actions must also be shown to be reasonable and fair - which you might struggle to argue if you used it on 20 computers

Has anyone asked Access/Kempler and been told it’s OK, or is everyone just assuming it’s OK? I would love to see a response.

In terms of the emulation there is nothing to ask. In terms of existing ownership, allowing usage of the ROMS, any law would vary by location and circumstances regardless. It's certainly within their rights to say it's prohibited, but whether a court would agree would be a matter for them..

[SLiC]

All very fair…emulators are definitely legal, ROM use within the emulators seems more of a grey area…although most seem to agree you ‘should’ own the hardware to use the ROM (semi) legitimately…but then which hardware…the snow, the B, the C, the Ti? In many cases you were paying for more DSP grunt as you moved up the hardware, but stick it in an emulator and it’s pretty much unlimited (or use Linux on a Pi with a few knobs and you are cloning hardware!)

PS…My powecore was just the base, only 4 part multitimbral and only 16 note poly and it was still about 300 quid just for the licence! I couldn’t sell this licence when they dropped the powercore, so I guess I am allowed to use the ROM but just limit myself

[chk071]

Yup, I don’t think hardware ever had a EULA as no one was expecting chip emulators at the time!

I frantically looked for some EULA's on their site and in their manuals yesterday. Didn't find anything. Looks like they don't care indeed.

[PAK]

All very fair…emulators are definitely legal, ROM use within the emulators seems more of a grey area…although most seem to agree you ‘should’ own the hardware to use the ROM (semi) legitimately…

Yes. Ownership gives some theoretical rights. Though the only way to be sure would be written permission from Access or winning a legal dispute. The whole area isn't well defined, and not by accident. The bigger companies, who can afford to be litigious, tend to avoid ambiguous use cases. They prefer grey areas than risking legal precedents they don't want.

PS…My powecore was just the base, only 4 part multitimbral and only 16 note poly and it was still about 300 quid just for the licence! I couldn’t sell this licence when they dropped the powercore, so I guess I am allowed to use the ROM but just limit myself

Legally far from certain. But morally, IMO, entirely ok if you own the license. And, yes, it was indeed expensive.. IIRC About £600 for the multi-license. It was based mainly on the B, with the extra arp patterns of the C included. So a "mostly B" hybrid. Since the Powercore system was hacked (all plugins unlocked) you'd likely have an even harder time selling a card with licenses now. Though it probably makes the cards, by themselves, easier to sell.

[sin night]

I don’t want anything “grey area” on my systems, so this is a no-go for me… BUT: given that some synths are no longer avaible, the chip current chip shortage, the fact that some chip used in thise synths are eol or no longer avaible and so on, wouldn’t it be cool if this project turned into a solid platform providing the emulation, plugin compatibility, etc and then the user could purchase the rom licenses (maybe in an encoded format, so the user can’t share it?) from the various synth companies?

It may turn into an additional source of revenue for those synth companies (of course it may compete with some of their current products, but I’m still positive about the additional revenue) and users would get the benefits of a properly licensed and supported software. Make the emulator avaible at a resonable price, roms as expansion at a reasonable price (maybe with a small cut going to the team developing/maintaining the emulator platform) and make everybody happy perhaps?

[kmonkey]

You can trash anything that goes before BUT...so there you go. People have specific knight moral templates and then in their life comes "BUT" caused because of different subjective variables and in their mind anything after BUT is justified. And it's all a personal story.

Bla Bla.

Instead of enjoying these pretty amazing (literally) achievements and making music - people waste time arguing over ROM legality while the developer of the original ROM itself doesn't care at all and is likely moved on to another project because he probably realized one crucial thing - life is limited by time and it expires at some point.

In all honesty and after reading the whole thread I still do not understand what are you KVR internet knights are expecting? What would be the perfect outcome for you? That DSP563xx developer hangs himself or ceases to exist. Should he invent the time machine and go back to the point of releasing this and just don't do it?

Or should he harass Access to continue and revive old Virus support?

Is there a tube amp anywhere in this story? Because it's the tubes right?

[D-Fusion]

I hate to correct you but even if you do own a Virus you are not allowed to copy and use the ROMS

Nonsense. They are freely available on the Access website, in MIDI format, for a reason. Needless to say overly-broad generalizations like this aren't correct. You DO have some rights in these areas if you paid for a license (which you did if you own the relevant Virus hardware / software). License terms must also be shown to be reasonable when tested under law. IE Just writing terms won't always make it so..

However, if you don't own a license, there's no caveats - theoretical or otherwise. You aren't allowed to use the roms. People then might consider asking Access to provide a sanctioned way or authorize a true native port. Your usage, in this scenario, is no different from using any other warez..

BTW: There is a LOT of precedent in this area due to game emulations. It doesn't stop with the software either. Projects, such as MiSTer, suggest it's only a matter of time before we start seeing synth hardware itself cloned via FPGA technology..

When you buy a synth it is yours and you can upgrade it via rom.
If you want more you have to buy another one.

You don't buy the Rom Files since they are there as a service for your product to fix problems or add more to your product.

It is the same with many vst's and hw where you can use the product but you are not allowed to sample the sounds into a sampler and use it outside of the Product.

[SLiC]

The ideal solution would be the hardware manufactures permitting the use of ROMS they no longer sell or support. Either for altruistic reasons, good publicity or sell them, I don’t really care…but it’s too good an opportunity to miss for keeping vintage synths and 1000s of presets alive.

Personally I think there are better synths now in VST form anyway, so nobody really needs theses synths for music, but they definitely mean a lot to a lot of people (like retro video games)

[Chris-S]

Just tried this out and it runs fine on my 10 year old laptop (didn't expect this).
I'm wondering why there is one preset only (Taurus JS). So it does not contain all factory patches?

EDIT: Solved, had to click on the preset name on the left side, not on the PRESET button on the top header.

[chk071]

You can trash anything that goes before BUT...so there you go. People have specific knight moral templates and then in their life comes "BUT" caused because of different subjective variables and in their mind anything after BUT is justified. And it's all a personal story.

Bla Bla.

Instead of enjoying these pretty amazing (literally) achievements and making music - people waste time arguing over ROM legality while the developer of the original ROM itself doesn't care at all and is likely moved on to another project because he probably realized one crucial thing - life is limited by time and it expires at some point.

I think they care, a lot. And, I'm sure from their point of view, it's all legit. I think this discussion is interesting nonetheless, when we're all trying to do the right thing. That's why I stopped using warez 20 years ago. Because I care about people, and their necessity to bring food on the table, and I don't want to harm that by not caring about intellectual property, or usage terms. (And, frankly, one day you simply wake up, and think a bit more about what's going on around you, and realize that nothing which surrounds you could be possible without the hard paid work of others.)

That said, I use this plugin, and the downloaded ROM. It's grey area for me, because I don't understand enough of the legal circumstances, and I only can assume that it's not 100% legit, because you still download the ROM's and use them, without owning the hardware. I just can't imagine how that is the intended way, especially as it cannibalizes hardware sales to some degree.

[chk071]

Just tried this out and it runs fine on my 10 year old laptop (didn't expect this).

Me neither. Have you tried applying unison, or played some pads with long release? It kind of slaughtered my former CPU (Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3), which I'm sure is faster than your laptop's CPU.

[Chris-S]

It's a Core-i7 @ 2.6 GHz. The Impact-Benchmark reporting 220 MIPS.

GUI-Issues:

- L and R are swapped (PAN-knobs)
- No master volume (CC7) knob (at least couldn't find one)
- When turning a knob with the mouse wheel the readout value (top display) is not updated
- (Equalizer not working)

EDIT: Virus B apparently does not have an equalizer