Fabfilter Twin 3 --Released Feb. 7th

[MrJubbly]

So, Fabfilter have now released Twin 3 on iOS (which was where the whole OS discussion derived from). i.e. It was actually related to this topic Fabfilter, with regards to their focus and UI design choices of late.

https://apps.apple.com/nl/app/fabfilter ... 1671810470

And like I had previously suggested, it is being offered on that OS at a vastly marked down RRP (€30) than to most desktop OS users (€129).

So if it is the case that some of FF's design choices were more to cater towards the iOS crowd, even if at the expense of what works best for their desktop/laptop customers, then that is not really fair, imho. Since, it's almost as though those paying top dollar (or Euro) are doing so to subsidise development for touchscreen/tablet users, who don't pay nearly enough.

Changes, which primarily benefit the latter who are paying much less for the product, while inconveniencing the former, who are paying full whack for it. That doesn't seem right.

And btw, I'm not just thinking of myself here, as I actually got Twin 3 with a big (65%) discount myself, since I already paid for the full Fabfilter caboodle. But what about for other desktop users, who don't own their Total bundle, or other bundles that offer similar discounts? And iOS users can pay just 30 euros?

That's the problem with the multi-platform approach. Somebody else is always paying for the development time and resources to accommodate a completely different group of users. Hence the whole complaint about Windows users updates being slowed down to accommodate Apple's macOS and hardware shenanigans, etc.

So while I agree, this Twin 3 thread shouldn't become sidetracked into just a platform-specific topic, it does still have relevance, if certain platform development choices being made by Fabfilter for Twin 3 and other new plugins are having a net negative impact upon other users due to this business strategy.

[Jac459]

That doesn't seem right.

Well, I paid full price for this synth and yet I have a very different perspective than you.
What I paid full price is the capacity to use the synth from a computer, use it inside a full fledged DAW and eventually, use it to create the top chart song of tomorrow (hum).

iOS users are just paying for the capacity to do some music doodling on the go. Sure they have the same synth. But they don't have at all the same capacity to use it.
It is a doodling tool only.

Plus, this is a simple to create another revenue stream for fabfilter, and the more music software developers make money the happier I am and the more we have chance fabfilter to succeed and continue to support our products for long.

So basically:
1 - I am not jealous of iOS users, it is not a comparable usage, then not a comparable price tag.
2 - this is a smart and relatively low effort way to create more revenues, go for it fabfilter !

[plexuss]

The reason mobile apps are cheaper is because that's all people are willing to pay for it. The reason desckop apps are more is... you get the idea. It's not a conspiracy. It's the way contemporary business works. If FF could get more $ for the mobile version, they would.

[bermudagold]

That doesn't seem right.

Well, I paid full price for this synth and yet I have a very different perspective than you.
What I paid full price is the capacity to use the synth from a computer, use it inside a full fledged DAW and eventually, use it to create the top chart song of tomorrow (hum).

iOS users are just paying for the capacity to do some music doodling on the go. Sure they have the same synth. But they don't have at all the same capacity to use it.
It is a doodling tool only.

So basically:
1 - I am not jealous of iOS users, it is not a comparable usage, then not a comparable price tag.
2 - this is a smart and relatively low effort way to create more revenues, go for it fabfilter !

i don't think it is that clear cut...there are powerful audio and midi tools for ios...and you can alternatively use them as inputs and a traditional computer as a multitrack recording board...so those who can afford to center their studio around a couple ipad pros can get their tools for orders of magnitude less money...and they are...look at the ios based studio channels online...studio live today, garageband guide, henry tha bizness, nutrix, sound test room, and Haq Ataaq...hundreds of thousands of subscribers...definitely not "doodling"

Spacecraft is a 10 dollar ios app but a 100+ vst...similar question raised with Tracktion pro features going to tracktion free...the higher paying user base is subsidizing the lower paying user base...and depending on development resources and the size of each user base it gets tricky and questions will rightly be asked...and the notion that these things don't impact bug fixing and feature requests in a finite resources world, or that supporting anything apple is "low effort" seems pretty inaccurate.

[MrJubbly]

The direction that Fabfilter's design and UI choices have been going for the past few years, does seem to be designed to cater towards a tablet/touchscreen workflow, rather than a purely desktop, mouse + keyboard workflow.

Such as the changes to the modulation system and accessibility thereof. i.e. pretty much what would work best on a tablet, with a relatively small display size. But, not really the ideal choices for a desktop + mouse with a huge 4k monitor display in mind.

I think the fact that their new modulation section collapses to just one open panel at a time is evidence, as that would be what works really well on the limited touch screen displays of an iPad. Rather than, taking full advantage of all the real estate that could be exploited by a high resolution large-screen display.

So, it's not really a complaint that PC users are largely 'subsidising' development of these new FF plugins for tablet users, who are paying far less. But that we are doing so, at the expense of having updates finely tuned and focused for professional desktop environments and workflows.

By all means Fabfilter, maximise your revenue flows. But never do so at the expense of your core customers (desktop users) who are your prime financial contributors. Desktop users should always be your main focus (since that is where your bread and butter is) and should never be compromised for tablet 'doodlers' ~ or whatever people have suggested they do with your "discounted" (i.e. "heavily subsidised") plugins.

If that means that tablet users have to be the ones who are mildly inconvenienced and need to find workarounds, or other methods to maximise their own user experiences, then so be it. But this should never ever be the other way around, for your core customers who pay you top dollar for what they expect to be finely-tuned and focused professional (i.e. not compromised for amateurs or otherwise) products.

[plexuss]

[snip]
...we are doing so, at the expense of having updates finely tuned and focused for professional desktop environments and workflows.
[snip]

You may have identified the underlying reason for my critical feelings about the Twin 3 UX/UI. It makes sense. But we still don't know if it's true. It would definitely save money and increase profits to use the same UI for all platforms...

[Jac459]

Well, I paid full price for this synth and yet I have a very different perspective than you.
What I paid full price is the capacity to use the synth from a computer, use it inside a full fledged DAW and eventually, use it to create the top chart song of tomorrow (hum).

iOS users are just paying for the capacity to do some music doodling on the go. Sure they have the same synth. But they don't have at all the same capacity to use it.
It is a doodling tool only.

So basically:
1 - I am not jealous of iOS users, it is not a comparable usage, then not a comparable price tag.
2 - this is a smart and relatively low effort way to create more revenues, go for it fabfilter !

i don't think it is that clear cut...there are powerful audio and midi tools for ios...and you can alternatively use them as inputs and a traditional computer as a multitrack recording board...so those who can afford to center their studio around a couple ipad pros can get their tools for orders of magnitude less money...and they are...look at the ios based studio channels online...studio live today, garageband guide, henry tha bizness, nutrix, sound test room, and Haq Ataaq...hundreds of thousands of subscribers...definitely not "doodling"

Spacecraft is a 10 dollar ios app but a 100+ vst...similar question raised with Tracktion pro features going to tracktion free...the higher paying user base is subsidizing the lower paying user base...and depending on development resources and the size of each user base it gets tricky and questions will rightly be asked...and the notion that these things don't impact bug fixing and feature requests in a finite resources world, or that supporting anything apple is "low effort" seems pretty inaccurate.
[/quote]

Well, I respect your opinion, and thanks for the detailed explanations, but I still disagree.
All the points you have made are true. But I still disagree with the conclusion.
I am an ex ableton and reason user. Both have tools for iOS. I never saw any question in a forum "what is the most powerful version, iOS or PC?".
Even if your examples are valid, it is still sketching tools in my view. You could make a point about one of the best album of electronic music of all time "music for jilted generation" from prodigy being made on something with much less features than what you can find now on an ipad.
You would be totally right.
But again, compare to modern expectations, the offer on ipad is not up standards, that's why it is never discussed in a forum like kvr...

Your second point is about bugs management across platforms. Being an IT manager myself, I can only agree with that. BUT, again, some bugs will be specific, a lot will be common (using modern frameworks, "plumbing" bugs are reducing compare to "feature" bugs).
And in the meantime, the revenue stream will increase and so does the capacity for fabfilter to hire more developers and testers.

Well... that's my view but like yours, it is not based on pure facts, so I may be wrong. But I just prefer to trust fabfilter on that.

And if I wanted to tease you, I'd say that the advantage of my view compared to yours is that it doesn't make me upset .
Enjoy your weekend.

[Jac459]

i don't think it is that clear cut...there are powerful audio and midi tools for ios...and you can alternatively use them as inputs and a traditional computer as a multitrack recording board...so those who can afford to center their studio around a couple ipad pros can get their tools for orders of magnitude less money...and they are...look at the ios based studio channels online...studio live today, garageband guide, henry tha bizness, nutrix, sound test room, and Haq Ataaq...hundreds of thousands of subscribers...definitely not "doodling"

Spacecraft is a 10 dollar ios app but a 100+ vst...similar question raised with Tracktion pro features going to tracktion free...the higher paying user base is subsidizing the lower paying user base...and depending on development resources and the size of each user base it gets tricky and questions will rightly be asked...and the notion that these things don't impact bug fixing and feature requests in a finite resources world, or that supporting anything apple is "low effort" seems pretty inaccurate.

Well, I respect your opinion, and thanks for the detailed explanations, but I still disagree.
All the points you have made are true. But I still disagree with the conclusion.
I am an ex ableton and reason user. Both have tools for iOS. I never saw any question in a forum "what is the most powerful version, iOS or PC?".
Even if your examples are valid, it is still sketching tools in my view. You could make a point about one of the best album of electronic music of all time "music for jilted generation" from prodigy being made on something with much less features than what you can find now on an ipad.
You would be totally right.
But again, compare to modern expectations, the offer on ipad is not up standards, that's why it is never discussed in a forum like kvr...

Your second point is about bugs management across platforms. Being an IT manager myself, I can only agree with that. BUT, again, some bugs will be specific, a lot will be common (using modern frameworks, "plumbing" bugs are reducing compare to "feature" bugs).
And in the meantime, the revenue stream will increase and so does the capacity for fabfilter to hire more developers and testers.

Well... that's my view but like yours, it is not based on pure facts, so I may be wrong. But I just prefer to trust fabfilter on that.

And if I wanted to tease you, I'd say that the advantage of my view compared to yours is that it doesn't make me upset .
Enjoy your weekend.

[bermudagold]

Well... that's my view but like yours, it is not based on pure facts, so I may be wrong. But I just prefer to trust fabfilter on that.

And if I wanted to tease you, I'd say that the advantage of my view compared to yours is that it doesn't make me upset .
Enjoy your weekend.

no worries...I'm not upset about it...I'm merely pointing out that MrJubbly is asking fair questions...
And I'm not speaking from pure speculation, there are data points out here to collect...virsyn was a pioneering top developer...most of his legacy products still hold up and compete today...and yet the data he was looking at convinced him to drop computers and focus solely on ios,...obviously the impact on his ROI to supporting both was not "low effort"

[Jac459]

no worries...I'm not upset about it...I'm merely pointing out that MrJubbly is asking fair questions...
And I'm not speaking from pure speculation, there are data points out here to collect...virsyn was a pioneering top developer...most of his legacy products still hold up and compete today...and yet the data he was looking at convinced him to drop computers and focus solely on ios,...obviously the impact on his ROI to supporting both was not "low effort"

Well your first point was that iOS price should not be so low and that we are kind of subsidising them when we buy for PC/Mac.

The example of Virsyn (I don't know them) seems a perfect counter example to your initial point as you describe it, because Virsyn doesn't seems to even need PC to get all the money....

[MrJubbly]

no worries...I'm not upset about it...I'm merely pointing out that MrJubbly is asking fair questions...
And I'm not speaking from pure speculation, there are data points out here to collect...virsyn was a pioneering top developer...most of his legacy products still hold up and compete today...and yet the data he was looking at convinced him to drop computers and focus solely on ios,...obviously the impact on his ROI to supporting both was not "low effort"

Well your first point was that iOS price should not be so low and that we are kind of subsidising them when we buy for PC/Mac.

The example of Virsyn (I don't know them) seems a perfect counter example to your initial point as you describe it, because Virsyn doesn't seems to even need PC to get all the money....

Well, the real issue is whether or not Fabfilter are intentionally compromising the finely tuned UI/UX workflows of their new products, which were traditionally designed for use within desktop studio environments, in favour of perhaps, more cumbersome (or less efficient) workflows which primarily cater towards and benefit tablet users.

The fact that the core group of customers who are likely to be most inconvenienced by these design and workflow choices, also happen to be the same ones contributing the vast lion's share of Fabfilter's development costs, is merely the cherry atop this particular stink pickle.

And if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But for me, the moment I read about the support for iOS/touchscreen tablets, a penny dropped. And the bafflement and frustration I'd had with some of Fabfilter's recent updates and workflow choices over the past few years suddenly made sense.

In that, the reasons, as a desktop user, I felt rather unsatisfied and underwhelmed by Fabfilter's new updated products of late, was precisely because of that fact ... I'm a desktop user! While, Fabfilter have been catering primarily towards another entirely separate group of users on different devices entirely ... and primarily at the expense of the former group, to boot! (...right in the nads!)

[Jac459]

Well, the real issue is whether or not Fabfilter are intentionally compromising the finely tuned UI/UX workflows of their new products, which were traditionally designed for use within desktop studio environments, in favour of perhaps, more cumbersome (or less efficient) workflows which primarily cater towards and benefit tablet users.

The fact that customers who are likely to be the most inconvenienced by these design and workflow choices, also happen to be the ones contributing the vast lions share of Fabfilter development costs, is merely the cherry atop this particular stink pickle.

And if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But for me, the moment I read about the support for iOS/touchscreen tablets, a penny dropped. And the bafflement and frustration I'd had with some of Fabfilter's recent updates and workflow choices over the past few years suddenly made sense. In that the reasons, as a desktop user, I felt rather unsatisfied, was precisely because of that fact. I'm a desktop user, and Fabfilter have been catering primarily towards another entirely separate group of users on different devices instead ... and at primarily at the expense of the former group - to boot! (right in the nads!)

A large part of PC Laptops are now touch-screen and I am sure having this support is awesome for them... Also, I do love their UI and workflow, so I guess it is a question of taste...
For the rest of what you say, you may be absolutely right, I think history will tell...

[MrJubbly]

A large part of PC Laptops are now touch-screen and I am sure having this support is awesome for them... Also, I do love their UI and workflow, so I guess it is a question of taste...
For the rest of what you say, you may be absolutely right, I think history will tell...

Well, we'll have to see how this all pans out over the coming years. But, even the new preset menu Fabfilter has designed, has a very 'touch-screen' type of layout to it.

Note: That's not part of my misgivings, since that particular feature hardly inconveniences desktop users. But, I can totally see how that could have been designed with touchscreens in mind. Like I say, that's one feature where the change hasn't inconvenienced either side, and actually introduces benefits to both. So hopefully, the same can be done in other areas in the future. But I really hope that in doing so, Fabfilter don't lose "touch" with their former and core user base.

[Double Tap]

Well, the real issue is whether or not Fabfilter are intentionally compromising the finely tuned UI/UX workflows of their new products, which were traditionally designed for use within desktop studio environments, in favour of perhaps, more cumbersome (or less efficient) workflows which primarily cater towards and benefit tablet users.

What a ridiculous thing to say. It’s one thing for you to dislike a design - guess what, other people don’t - but if you really think a company is sabotaging its products then you need to take a look at yourself. Your complaint has now taken up several pages and it’s time to move on. Perhaps you’ll have more joy if you actually write to Fabfilter.

[SLiC]

Well, the real issue is whether or not Fabfilter are intentionally compromising the finely tuned UI/UX workflows of their new products, which were traditionally designed for use within desktop studio environments, in favour of perhaps, more cumbersome (or less efficient) workflows which primarily cater towards and benefit tablet users.

What a ridiculous thing to say. It’s one thing for you to dislike a design - guess what, other people don’t - but if you really think a company is sabotaging its products then you need to take a look at yourself. Your complaint has now taken up several pages and it’s time to move on. Perhaps you’ll have more joy if you actually write to Fabfilter.

I am not so sure this is ridiculous at all, they have compromised on the design. If you try to design a single unified UI/UX for both touch and mouse use there will no doubt have to be be some compromise, I also think it looks and works more like more like an iPad app than a desktop program...but other may like that look I guess, I don't personally.

I prefer the way Bitwig do it, their GUI actual changes significantly if you select the touch UI/UX option- this seems like a better way to do things to me, optimise for mouse 'or' touch workflow.