How do you like Tracktion?
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
Your free license still works you muppet, just tell Mackie your new machine number..
-
- KVRAF
- 5782 posts since 10 Mar, 2003 from Music Shed #8
I'm not sure that's a consistent analogy - aren't you perhaps mixing up "tools for production" with "product storage media"?james0tucson wrote:No, my copyright silly -- my right to access my creative works and to reproduce them in whatever form they were created in. If a piece of software does not work in 2029 because a company is gone and there is some unbreakable cryptography involved, then my rights will have been abridged, don't you get this?IIRs wrote:you mean your right to keep getting everything free?
What if Mozart had used paper that automatically locked the world out after a certain time?
You apparently think I'm kidding, but I fail to see what makes a company's copyright interests superior to the artist's. Why should the artist use a tool that's guaranteed to stop working at some future date?
I (used to) work with a pencil and paper - I still have the drawings I decided to keep. I never had An Eternal Pencil, however.
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
Maybe there was an even better composer alive at the same time who did..james0tucson wrote: What if Mozart had used paper that automatically locked the world out after a certain time?
-
- KVRAF
- 8144 posts since 13 Jan, 2003 from Darkest Kent, UK
I basically agree with james though i don't think it's really fair on Traction... from experience i've changed my machine ID many times and never had a problem so I'd be surprised if you couldn't get a key for your new install.james0tucson wrote:Why should the artist use a tool that's guaranteed to stop working at some future date?
As said before, look at the dongle malarky with Cubase...
It's strange times really, if you bought a hardware multitrack there's absolutely no guarantee it would still work or be able to be supported in 2029 yet we expect software to still be useable. Lord know what kind of systems we'll be running by then...
I guess Cakewalks serial no. is the most open system, tattoo the serial on your arm and you'll be forever able to access your work.
.g
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
I sort of agree with james, too-- if I'm still using Tracktion 1.6 in 29 years, and Mackie has gone tits up without releasing a "universal key", I'll be pissed.
Now, I'm serious-- on the surface, your point IS valid!
But now for my typical response, which is the counter argument:
1. If you're using Tracktion 1.6 in 29 years, I feel sorry for you.
2. When companies go boobies up, it HAS been customary for a universal key to be released. Not sure what Cubase would do about a universal dongle.
3. As part of your archiving process, you have the option to export each and every track as an individual .wav render. Take advantage of this and make 'track-based' audio archives, which would be the equivalent of having the master reels. Then it would be completely portable as long as the .wav format is supported 29 years from now. (If not, SOMEONE will have coded a converter anyhow)
Actually, the wavs are better than the master reels-- as GaryG alluded to-- good luck finding a pristine and working reel-to-reel if you happen to be an artist who owns his own master reels and wants a remix/restoration job done. Of course, they exist out there SOMEWHERE, because the last one was sold not THAT long ago. But get back to us in 29 years, and bring a price list while you're at it. The .wav's that Tracktion (and other software, for that matter) allow us to produce are infinitely more protective of the artist's rights than even a physical tape of the performance!! 
I can't see that as an infringement no matter HOW I look at it.
Greg
[edited a bit here and there for improved clarity]
Now, I'm serious-- on the surface, your point IS valid!
But now for my typical response, which is the counter argument:
1. If you're using Tracktion 1.6 in 29 years, I feel sorry for you.
2. When companies go boobies up, it HAS been customary for a universal key to be released. Not sure what Cubase would do about a universal dongle.
3. As part of your archiving process, you have the option to export each and every track as an individual .wav render. Take advantage of this and make 'track-based' audio archives, which would be the equivalent of having the master reels. Then it would be completely portable as long as the .wav format is supported 29 years from now. (If not, SOMEONE will have coded a converter anyhow)
Actually, the wavs are better than the master reels-- as GaryG alluded to-- good luck finding a pristine and working reel-to-reel if you happen to be an artist who owns his own master reels and wants a remix/restoration job done. Of course, they exist out there SOMEWHERE, because the last one was sold not THAT long ago. But get back to us in 29 years, and bring a price list while you're at it.
The .wav's that Tracktion (and other software, for that matter) allow us to produce are infinitely more protective of the artist's rights than even a physical tape of the performance!! I can't see that as an infringement no matter HOW I look at it.Greg
[edited a bit here and there for improved clarity]
Last edited by Lunch Money on Tue Sep 27, 2005 4:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 1974 posts since 21 Jun, 2002 from Earth
so basically you need a sequencer that has NO copy protection whatsoever, not even a serial number... because if you lose the S/N and the company goes out of business you are screwed...james0tucson wrote:You apparently think I'm kidding, but I fail to see what makes a company's copyright interests superior to the artist's. Why should the artist use a tool that's guaranteed to stop working at some future date?
Sounds like you need a 4-track...
sorry, I won'y be an ass any more... it's just a hair rediculous when 9r5% of the sequencers available have some means of authorization (even if it's as simple as a serial number).
ModuLR / Radio
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
How long till they stop making cassette tape do you think..?ModuLR wrote: Sounds like you need a 4-track...
-
SuitcaseOfLizards SuitcaseOfLizards https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2363 - KVRAF
- 10879 posts since 3 Apr, 2002 from Austin, TX USA
Interesting read.. I can understand the viewpoint that you shouldn't have to go far out of your way to keep your work accessible to you, but the only guaranteed media for that is pencil and paper! 
I think it's a serious over-reaction to flame like that just because you can't be bothered to go get another key, I've gotten 3 replacement keys in the recent past (bad mobos, etc. computer problems) without a Single Issue.
Oh, go off and use Audacity and wave files! Then as long as you have a computer that works you won't *have* issues.
I think it's a serious over-reaction to flame like that just because you can't be bothered to go get another key, I've gotten 3 replacement keys in the recent past (bad mobos, etc. computer problems) without a Single Issue.
Oh, go off and use Audacity and wave files! Then as long as you have a computer that works you won't *have* issues.
Bandcamp: https://suitcaseoflizards.bandcamp.com/
Linux Mint, Waveform 13 Pro, U-He synths, Audio Damage effects,.
Linux Mint, Waveform 13 Pro, U-He synths, Audio Damage effects,.
-
- KVRAF
- 4908 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Colorado Springs
James,james0tucson wrote:No, my copyright silly -- my right to access my creative works and to reproduce them in whatever form they were created in. If a piece of software does not work in 2029 because a company is gone and there is some unbreakable cryptography involved, then my rights will have been abridged, don't you get this?IIRs wrote:
What if Mozart had used paper that automatically locked the world out after a certain time?
You apparently think I'm kidding, but I fail to see what makes a company's copyright interests superior to the artist's. Why should the artist use a tool that's guaranteed to stop working at some future date?
I defended you back in the thread - but this logic makes no sense. Let me see if I have your argument straight:
You expect that since you created a work in some company's particular software; that it's the company's responsibility to make access to this said work guaranteed for all time. Is that right? Because your work done in their software is copyrighted?
Since when does Copyright function as an insurance policy for access to copyrighted material for the future?
Fill me in with more details - I fail to understand the logic you presented here? It looks to me like you will have to write your own sequencing software, and ensure that MS, nor Intel, nor AMD, nor Apple, nor anyone involved with preservation of the OS of the code that you write ever change their systems - since that would render your copyrighted material inaccessible as well.
-Scott
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Snap! See, I even forgot about the OS! Win95, which isn't THAT old, is already unsupported.
-
- KVRAF
- 6490 posts since 14 Jun, 2004 from Rochester, NY
-
- KVRAF
- 4222 posts since 23 Feb, 2004 from Tucson Arizona USA
No, I am saying that because the company effectively guarantees that the software will expire, I cannot use it as a container for my creative works, because I value my right of control more highly than I value any benefit that could be gained by entering into such an arrangement.I defended you back in the thread - but this logic makes no sense. Let me see if I have your argument straight:
You expect that since you created a work in some company's particular software; that it's the company's responsibility to make access to this said work guaranteed for all time. Is that right?
As a consequence of the rights reserved under my copyright, my access to these works should be unabridged.Because your work done in their software is copyrighted?
It serves as a protection against my access to my material being taken away from me. That's one of the rights reserved in "All Rights Reserved." I don't give the paper company the right to come in and burn my manuscripts. Likewise, software shouldn't expire.Since when does Copyright function as an insurance policy for access to copyrighted material for the future?
I'm able to run old software on emulation systems. Already, some old systems are a problem because of old dongles, which the emulators can't support. There is a distinction between obsolescense, such as the items you refer to, and a tool that *intentionally* expires, and when it expires, does so by hard cryptographic means that will not be salvageable at all.Fill me in with more details - I fail to understand the logic you presented here? It looks to me like you will have to write your own sequencing software, and ensure that MS, nor Intel, nor AMD, nor Apple, nor anyone involved with preservation of the OS of the code that you write ever change their systems - since that would render your copyrighted material inaccessible as well.
*I* am the only person with the authority to lock down my creative works by cryptographic means. To allow anyone else to do so, represents a surrender of rights that I am in no way able to make.
I'm surprised my position is so hard to understand. I'm not being any more adamant about the preservation of my rights, than the software folks are being about theirs! This is nothing but my equal and opposite reaction -- swing your fist all you want, but don't be surprised at my reaction when your fist hits my nose.
To grant an expiration privilege to software means I must consider the tool only a means to an end. I cannot assume that I can continue working on a project at some later date, if I have no assurance that the software will be accessible -- and the software is *guaranteed* to become inaccessible via cryptographic methods, after the hardware it's tied to, fails.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
You failed to address the myriad of other points brought against your stance, though, james... this makes your argument weaker.
Right now, considering the follow-up responses AFTER the one you chose to address, I'd say your argument is quite weak indeed.
One thing, if you DO want to continue along the same lines, though, that I fail to 'get': what is this intentional obsolescence you're referring to?? ALL software makers DO intend to upgrade their software, and will eventually drop support for older products.
This is true for your OS, as well. And as a previous poster noted, are you going to take the OS maker to task for developing software that will be intentionally obsolete? What about people with WindowsXP installations that will one day be unable to receive further 'validations' of their installs? I much more serious problem....
I can still get keys for T1, though I now use T2.
As mentioned, many companies have a history of releasing a "universal key" upon folding or dropping a product, depending on where the rights reside.
I dunno...
You ignored too many other valid points to make it much of a worthwhile discussion anymore.
Right now, considering the follow-up responses AFTER the one you chose to address, I'd say your argument is quite weak indeed.
One thing, if you DO want to continue along the same lines, though, that I fail to 'get': what is this intentional obsolescence you're referring to?? ALL software makers DO intend to upgrade their software, and will eventually drop support for older products.
This is true for your OS, as well. And as a previous poster noted, are you going to take the OS maker to task for developing software that will be intentionally obsolete? What about people with WindowsXP installations that will one day be unable to receive further 'validations' of their installs? I much more serious problem....
I can still get keys for T1, though I now use T2.
As mentioned, many companies have a history of releasing a "universal key" upon folding or dropping a product, depending on where the rights reside.
I dunno...
You ignored too many other valid points to make it much of a worthwhile discussion anymore.
-
- KVRAF
- 4908 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Colorado Springs
James,
Let's say you are a painter. Your work is copyrighted. Company X that makes the paints that you used to create your copyrighted work paint goes out of business or intentionally changes it's line-up of paint color offerings; on purpose, to follow the whimsy of the market.
They choose not to reveal the spectrum analysis of the colors they have discontinued.
It's now your job to find another source for similar paint colors; not theirs.
It looks incredibly similar to me.
I'm sorry, I can't see it any other way.
It's a $150 program, for crying out loud, to do things that musicians in the 80's and even the 90's would have killed for - programmed obsolesence or not.
Have fun making music with this dark cloud hanging over your head.
-Scott
Let's say you are a painter. Your work is copyrighted. Company X that makes the paints that you used to create your copyrighted work paint goes out of business or intentionally changes it's line-up of paint color offerings; on purpose, to follow the whimsy of the market.
They choose not to reveal the spectrum analysis of the colors they have discontinued.
It's now your job to find another source for similar paint colors; not theirs.
It looks incredibly similar to me.
I'm sorry, I can't see it any other way.
It's a $150 program, for crying out loud, to do things that musicians in the 80's and even the 90's would have killed for - programmed obsolesence or not.
Have fun making music with this dark cloud hanging over your head.
-Scott