KVR Audio

GospelMusicians · Post by **GospelMusicians** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 3:28 pm

What do you guys think about the subscription model? Say for example a full synth/rompler worth thousands of sounds and presets and say a preset a day, with a ton of new packs monthly.

What would you be willing to pay a month for?

Spitfire31 · Post by **Spitfire31** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:05 pm

I hate subs with a vengeance – money leaking all the time. I have boycotted Adobe CC and am still running CS6 – works just as well as always and can still do more than I can use.

You will not catch me with a subscription.

/Joachim

Aloysius · Post by **Aloysius** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:07 pm

thecontrolcentre · Post by **thecontrolcentre** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:13 pm

Not for me.

jasco · Post by **jasco** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:13 pm

Vortifex · Post by **Vortifex** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:17 pm

fundamental · Post by **fundamental** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:19 pm

I'd say often the licensing terms that come with subscriptions give the seller too much power. If it's possible to stop subscribing and still retain the rights to use a particular product then it's more palatable. I recall hearing about some software options which let you get a full license (without *needing* to continue to subscribe) to a product after X months of subscription and immediate access to any updates while subscribed. That sounds like one of the cases where a subscription might make sense.

Personally I prefer upfront costs, but people seem to have success with the subscription model as well.

DJ Warmonger · Post by **DJ Warmonger** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:25 pm

NO.

I hate regular fees and avoid them as much as I can. They simply mean for a part of a month I'm working for somebody else.

bronxsound · Post by **bronxsound** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:26 pm

subscription is a no go for me

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:44 pm

Not for me... Never.

GospelMusicians · Post by **GospelMusicians** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:56 pm

Hahaha...So the consensus is no?

It's very interesting. If I were to bundle all of my libraries that I have made, it would cost about $1,500 to purchase outright. To get to have access to all of them for $10/month, it would take you 12-years to pay for the libraries and within that 12-years, you would get a new preset every day.....

From a pure math point of view, subscriptions are a win-win for the customer and the vendor if done right....

Is it because there is a traditional way of doing things and it "feels"' just wrong to change up the way of doing things?

soundbylaura · Post by **soundbylaura** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 5:09 pm

Subscribing to East West Composers Cloud works for me because I don't need all of their instruments all of the time. I've downloaded their entire library so if I need something from Silk I'm ready to go, pay my $29 and start playing. Then after a month I turn off the sub until I need them again. It's easy for me to print off tracks and in a pinch substitute another instrument if needed.

Flip side, I do not subscribe to fx plugins because I use them differently than VIs and want them available at all times. I'm also not a fan of Gobbler but that's a different discussion.

Same goes for Pro Tools - I have a permanent license, don't subscribe. I need it every day & am unwilling to put control of that in someone else's hands.

In sum: I find value in both models.

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 5:15 pm

GospelMusicians wrote:Hahaha...So the consensus is no?

It's very interesting. If I were to bundle all of my libraries that I have made, it would cost about $1,500 to purchase outright. To get to have access to all of them for $10/month, it would take you 12-years to pay for the libraries and within that 12-years, you would get a new preset every day.....

From a pure math point of view, subscriptions are a win-win for the customer and the vendor if done right....

Is it because there is a traditional way of doing things and it "feels"' just wrong to change up the way of doing things?

But who would want to spend $1,500 on presets for one vendor (maybe for Nexus or high-end FX for post-production)? Or even rent that many... People tend to just buy what they need. I mean, you could be sending me (or someone else) presets that I may never use.

I prefer to own stuff as well... That way it can disappear all of a sudden if a company gets in trouble. Plus, now that a lot of major digital vendors are going sub - All those subs will soon add up.

Too many things can go wrong with subs imo. They start off cheap and then the price can change. Too many variables for my liking.

But it might work well for someone else - just not me.

sprnva · Post by **sprnva** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 5:17 pm

I think people just prefer to "own" their stuff, with the option to sell it on later when they no longer use it. Or they don't want to add anything else to their monthly outgoings. A compromise might be similar to Xfer's one where once you've paid X amount in subscription fees you own the product. So if you have a library worth $100, after a subscriber has paid that amount in subscription fees they could claim a $100 library of their choice to own. It could work as an incentive for them to keep subscribed.

It should be optional though. Regardless of how good the deal is on paper, there are those who fill flat out refuse to rent their software. I'm one of those, but I always try to see both sides of the story.

Robmobius · Post by **Robmobius** » Thu Nov 10, 2016 5:33 pm

sprnva wrote: It should be optional though. Regardless of how good the deal is on paper, there are those who fill flat out refuse to rent their software. I'm one of those, but I always try to see both sides of the story.

Yeah, I think so too. It suits some people... so it should be there as a choice.

IMO, Softube have this nailed. You can go the sub route on a monthly basis, or for a year. But you've got the option to buy the perpetual licenses as well, at a very good rate. That's their Volume 1 Bundle.

What do you guys think about subscriptions?