View Full Version : Transfer of Ownership Legal?

05-07-2002, 10:21 PM
Hi I am reselling my Gigastudio 96 to a friend of mine, as he really loves this program.

Gigastudio 96 is registered by me, I know that with sample libraries this is a no no, but if I sold my Gigastudio 96 used, is there a way that I could just have Tascam transfer ownership? Anyone knows if it can be done?

I would really appreciate any input


05-08-2002, 08:57 PM
Since the post about the guy that was selling his Advanced Orchestra was taken out....maybe I could ask the question again to the various developers on this forum...

Why is there no return policy on sample libraries? Is it not logical to assume that if a person that purchased the library to begin with (and doesn\'t need it within a reasoneble amount of time) and returns it, he would take necessary steps to retain his legal status and not copy the library?

Also, concerning trasferrance of ownership....you can do it with cars, houses, boats, even pets! Why not software???

I guess the point that I am trying to make is that the legitimate users are being treated like potential criminals....while the pirates are not affected by this in the least!

Can\'t we all rectify this situation and allow a user to:

A. Return a product within a reasonable time?

B. Transfer ownership?

05-08-2002, 09:29 PM
I certainly do not want to speak for all the developers so this is just my opinion.

Unfortunately a return policy with software or sample libraries is just not ever going to work. Yes, I know it\'s a pain for the honest people out there BUT thats just the way the world is now. Unfortunate as that is...

I do think however that it is up to the developer to put enough information on his/her site to let the user make a wise decision. Several developers such as Kip, Gary, Dan, etc. have tons and tons of demos on their site so the consumer can make a wise decision about the product.

Thats just my take on it.


05-09-2002, 09:52 AM
QUOTE \"I do think however that it is up to the developer to put enough information on his/her site to let the user make a wise decision. Several developers such as Kip, Gary, Dan, etc. have tons and tons of demos on their site so the consumer can make a wise decision about the product.\"

I think that in some cases demos are just not enough! There\'s gotta be some sort of compromise that makes it fair for end users and protects the developers. There are a lot of criminals in the world, but we can\'t just go around assuming everybody is one!

How about no money refund but a \"store credit\"?

The seller has the buyer\'s addres, credit card info, and purchase history...I think he should be able to determine when someone is taking advantage of the system!

I really think we need some sort of reform to buyer\'s rights here. I\'ve spent way too much money of libraries that I never touch (and whose demos sounded great!!!)
I want to keep on supporting developers but not at my personal financial loss and by having my consumer rights stepped on.

It would make me feel enourmously better if the developer that I purchase a product from has some way to address costumer satisfaction (even if there\'s a 99.9% chance I will love the library).

BTW, concerning the trnsfer of ownership, it\'s not true that it\'s illegal. Some (intelligent) software developers actually support it. It generally involves the seller to send a letter to the developer stating that he\'s selling the product and the buyer\'s name. Then the buyer contacts the developer and generally pays a nominal transfer fee. This is the type of policy that both protects the developer and respects the consumer.

Am I nuts for asking the software community to adhere to the same laws that regulate all of the other businesses???

Sometimes I think that the only reason that developers are allowed to continue their distrustful practices is because nobody has ever challenged them in court!

05-09-2002, 10:14 AM
There\'s one thing that you are overlooking with your argument. Regarding other businesses; if you buy a skirt at a shopping mall and then deciede you don\'t like it then you can take it back, return it, and get your money back. That is a very simple transaction.

However, with software, if you buy take it home install it whats to keep you from keeping it on your computer when you take it back to the store? This is not a sudden change in policy. Since the existence of software you have not been able to return it for that very reason.

Big Fish Audio however does offer a store credit/exchange on libraries if that helps.


05-09-2002, 04:06 PM
Donnie, that does help a lot! Kudos to Big Fish for taking the risk of the occasional pirate in return for better customer service.

I\'m 100% behind the concept that the developer not be ripped off, and that piracy must be eliminated, but as the consumer I do feel unfairly treated sometimes. There\'s just realistically nothing to be done about it, so I live with it... images/icons/rolleyes.gif


05-10-2002, 08:24 AM
\"There\'s just realistically nothing to be done about it, so I live with it... \"

Don\'t ever allow yourself to think like that. If everyone believed what you just said we would still have slavery, women wouln\'t be allowed to vote, cigarette companies would advertise on the health benefits of smoking, and Germany would rule the planet!

Sorry to be so dramatic, but come on people, let\'s not become complacent.

05-10-2002, 08:30 AM
Here\'s what we could all do...

The next time you\'re ready to purchase a library, call the developer and let them know that you\'re not happy with their return policy and let them know that it is affecting your decision to purchase the library.

Ask if they are willing to change their policy or issue a special condition that would allow you to exchange the product if you\'re not satisfied.

Money talks! Let\'s stop just blindly sending our hard earned cash to these guys without talking to them and letting them know how we feel.

If enough people are raising these questions maybe things will change.

I am in no way implying that developers don\'t deserve our cash, but simply that they need to work on some return/exchange/trade policy that treats the consumer in a fair way.

05-10-2002, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by donnie:
I just have one question....Do you guys demand the same from your local computer stores about software you have purchased? What would they tell you?

Donnie<font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Just to play \"devil\'s advocate\" here for a second, I\'ll offer that in most cases the consumer has no reason to return software to a computer store other than to replace defective merchandise.

In addition to working with music software, I also do a good bit of work with graphics software and I play a lot of games. Graphics software can get quite expensive, so making a purchase of such a tool is roughly equal in cost to that of a sample library (or more. typical prices range between $200 and $1500, sometimes more for high end 3D programs). I would never even think of making a purchase of any such software unless I was able to try a hands-on demo of it.

Nearly every developer of such programs offers a demo version, too. They usually have some limit on them (they expire after a certain time period or number of uses, they have crippled save functions, etc.) Therefore there is no excuse for me not to have a good idea of whether I\'ll be satisfied with the program in question should I purchase it. Combine the demo with reviews of the product and any consumer can make an informed decision as to whether it fits their needs.

Most games, too, offer a demo to those skeptical of whether they will like the game, or who don\'t know if it will run on their system. Its certainly not a 100% foolproof way to ensure your satisfaction, but again combined with reviews, this can lead to more good purchases than bad.

Now, obviously sample library developers can\'t offer a \'try before you buy\' kind of demo... but often buyers are left to base their purchase off of word of mouth (via forums like this) and a couple short demo songs. Personally, I find demo songs most useful when a broad range of users with varying skill and equipment present their compositions. I particularly like the Garritan Orchestral Strings site for this, and I used to like the section on Donnie\'s DSSoundware site with the user demos as well, though Im not sure where that went since the layout switched.

I would like to see more reviews of sample librraies out there as well. I only know of a few places online (I typically don\'t get print magazines) that review libraries at all, and they don\'t always cover ones I\'m interested in. Some developers do a good job of linking to reviews of their products from their website (like Dan Dean), but this varies considerably from one developer to the next. I think alot more could be done on the developers end of things to present buyers with more information about their libraries, which would in turn facilitate less people worrying about returning them in the first place.

I don\'t have much in the way of constructive opinion to offer on the topic of reselling libraries that have fallen out of use. I\'m sure most people that buy these libraries have one or two that they have either outgrown or simply don\'t have a use for anymore. I have a few like that... and I wouldn\'t mind being able to legally transfer my license to someone else. I don\'t have a solution though, since clearly developers can\'t trust consumers to be honest. It would be nice though to see some kind of move towards helping out the consumer in this area.

05-10-2002, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by donnie:
I just have one question....Do you guys demand the same from your local computer stores about software you have purchased? What would they tell you?

Donnie<font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">But software companies have found various ways we can actually try the product before we buy it.

With libraries it\'s like what we get is a finished Word document and the developer saying, \"Look at this! You can see how great it is, so if you buy it and don\'t like it; tough.\"

My overall impression is that many developers spend a lot of time worrying about how to protect their intellectual property but when we get to these discussions, there seems like a lot of intransigence from developers. At least Donnie actually takes the time to respond on these subjects; most just stay out of it. Although Donnie does seem to have taken it upon himself to keep \'pointing out\' why this unnacceptable practise should be acceptable to paying customers, rather than actually \'engaging\' in any potentially fruitful discussion.

Why keep arguing about how easy it is to buy/copy/return? Again, the customer is presumed guilty.

No matter how good a library is or how hard the developer worked to create it, sample libraries are about as flimsy an example of intellectual property as could be imagined. Hopefully, some of these ridiculous licenses will be tested in court at some point - just writing it down and calling it a contract is ludicrous. Nick\'s VoTA license comes to mind as the most ridiculous license ever conceived. Whether people mind or don\'t mind is irrelevant. The market will decide in the long run. When you are not even allowed to give away a product - or even if you throw it in a bin, someone finds it and uses it, and you\'re liable; then something is seriously wrong with that product.

Sample libraries are more than a collection of recorded sounds; they have a physical and logical existence in the market. Again! When you produce a product that has less than zero intrinsic value, you are not producing much of a product at all. It is an invitation to theft, because while the developer thinks he\'s saying \"Buy it, you\'ll love it. You\'ll use it for years. You won\'t want to part with it.\" He is really saying, \"It is a piece of worthless c r a p. After I get your money, you may as well use it as a frisbee, because if you give it away or sell it, I\'ll sue you. It has no value beyond the artistic value you ascribe to it.\"

If you don\'t allow a secondary market to flourish, an illegal secondary market will develop in its place. You can fight reality all you want, but penalizing the paying customer is not the answer. Even the statement \"It\'s too easy to copy etc.\", is implicitly insulting to potential customers (not suggesting that the guy who wrote it meant it as such).

The fact that one developer does have some kind of return policy proves that all of this hot air is unnecessary.

I am no longer prepared to buy a library on \'spec\'. This is no big deal to developers here who might just say, \"Suit yourself\". But a guy suggested that we argue with developers (forget it mate).

I\'m suggesting we don\'t buy at all. Actually, I\'m not really suggesting that. I\'m saying that I won\'t buy another library until there is a way for me to seriously test it before I purchase. And I\'m suggesting that until developers find a solution to these problems, more and more people will do the same.

I do have a question for developers (or Donnie, because he seems to be the only one who can even be bothered talking about this): What if there were a thousand potential customers, but only a thousand. What if every single one of them said \"I won\'t buy until I can try.\" Would you rather that you never sold a single library ever again because of this, or would you prefer a pirated copy to proliferate and you then snag maybe 20% of your potential market?

The deeper problems here exist because of the nature of the \'products\' themselves. I\'ve read a lot of posts talking about the difficulty of producing expression, etc., using samples. Sample libraries are like copying pages of Shakespeare rather than developing a vocabulary.

The real creativity, the real core of these products exists somewhere else and the product itself is already a copy. That\'s the essential problem.

The genius of many people has made, and makes, this sector possible, and it is the sometimes virually paranoic response of most of the vendors (methinks they protest too much) that fuels the fire of piracy.

Donnie, I have no need for any percussion libraries. But should I ever decide to buy one I would want to try yours first because from everything I\'ve read it is probably the best out there. But if I can\'t try it I will never buy it.

Right now, the market is small, marginal, idiosyncratic, but when there are twenty, thirty, one hundred percussion libraries and a thousand pianos to choose from, some of the more precious developers will either go to the wall, or put their wares up to be tested aginst the competition. Right now, we have to suffer the fact that many developers out there now are not businessmen. They are amateurs in the right place at the right time with the right equipment at hand. They produce some lovely libraries but few have produced any robust products.

I have another question. Are sample libraries available to borrow from libraries anywhere? Anyone tried their local library? I can borrow lots of copyable stuff from libraries and the world hasn\'t ended yet. That would be the perfect solution for me (and quite a few developers would snag some more revenues from me and many others).

Until then, I\'ve had it with this ridiculous system. Anyone who runs a business without a sensible return policy is a scheister; a cheap thief; no better than a criminal. I\'m tired of paying to be called a thief. I won\'t let you guys steal any more money from me.

Try it. Buy it. Return it. Sell it. Give it away. When I can do all of these things, then you are selling me a product; until then it is little more than theft.

There has to be more to it than \'landgrabbing\' waveforms. If you can copy sounds and sell them, it shouldn\'t be such a stretch to copy good business practise.

I look forward to trying and buying my next library.

05-10-2002, 05:40 PM

I think you made a lot of great points.

I guess a good argument here would be for developers to decide exactly what they are selling. Are they selling us Licenses to use the sounds or are they selling us the medium that those sounds are on?

Look at music libraries.....usually they send you CD\'s at no charge, then if you use them for commercial purposes you are required to pay them the license fee. As a system it seems to work quite well (although I despise their existence since they\'ve taken out a big chunk of work from composers).

If all I am buying is a License, then trying out a sample library shouldn\'t harm the developer since if I want to use it in commercial applications I would need to purchase the license.

I dunno, maybe the prices are an issue too....if all libraries were priced at $50 or less, I suppose the risk of buying something that I might not use is a bit minimized. With more and more libraries going for upwards of $500 and even over $1000, it takes that risk to a whole other level.

The Miroslav collection is priced at $4000.....when was the last time any of you (including Mr. Miroslav himself) spent $4000 on a product that you couldn\'t return?

I would love to hear what Nick and Gary\'s takes are on this subject. I think since the whole financial downturn of the economy people are being a lot more careful with their money....how has this affected you guys?

05-10-2002, 06:11 PM
Being involved with Big Fish I guess you can say I have taken steps to help solve this problem. If you don\'t like LOP then you CAN return it and get full store credit on any of the other thousand or so libraries Big Fish has. Is this an exceptable solution?


05-10-2002, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by donnie:
Being involved with Big Fish I guess you can say I have taken steps to help solve this problem. If you don\'t like LOP then you CAN return it and get full store credit on any of the other thousand or so libraries Big Fish has. Is this an exceptable solution?

Donnie<font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">I think this is a step in the right direction. Good for Big Fish. But personally, I won\'t buy anything until I can get my cash back without any headaches. If the store accepts that I\'m not satisfied, then keeping my money and offering \'credit\' is just a way to keep my money, and it highlights what is really going on here.

As midphase pointed out, it\'s not such a big deal to get shafted for fifty bucks, but you would have to be certified to take a chance on the Miroslav collection (for example).

I do not believe that anyone ever bought that collection \'blind\': and if I\'m right, that means that every single customer was a pirate, a criminal, before they coughed up the cash.

In the case of expensive libraries, it\'s probably the pirates that provide the best marketing for libraries .

Anyone out there (developers maybe?) ever buy the Miroslav or GOS \'sight unseen\'? I doubt it.

My dollars don\'t count for much, but as long as I withold them, it at least increases the pressure to \'get real\'.

Watermark your wares and you\'ll catch people profiting from your efforts. You will never stop piracy, and current policy is an insult to the thinking consumer.

The fact that with a decent return policy, someone can buy it, copy it, then return it is nothing at all to do with me, or anyone else who wants to try before we buy and get our money back if unsatisfied.

What if I buy something from Big Fish - don\'t like it - return it, then do the same thing thirty times? How many times will Big Fish let me do that? There are plenty of libraries out there that I could be unsatisfied with.

I want to go to a library. I want to borrow Miroslav, GOS, etc. I want to work with them for weeks, months, so that I can decide which is best for me.

The paradox is that I\'m willing to spend a lot of money on libraries. I\'ll cough up $1,000 to $2,000 or more on a library if I really want it. Like most people here I can spend a lot of money on my toys. But it takes me too long to \'research\' a library. I get sick to death of the demos, and begging for opinions when I really want to work with it.

I want to be able to sell the library, or give it away or return it. Until I can do that, I\'ll make do with what I\'ve got.

So, no. Store credit is not an acceptable solution for me.

So if any of you developers want to make some big bucks from Z6, please direct him to a place where he can obtain some pirated copies because guys; I want to try them all. Do you understand? I want to do what most developers and studio professionals do. I want some way where I can try them all. Maybe I think I want a piano, but when I work with LOP I realize that I have to have that instead.

I\'d like to see more discussion here as to how that could be achieved and less clucking every time the \'P\' word is mentioned. Developers could make the reality of piracy work for them if they wanted to. My little example is only a tiny demonstration of how developer revenues would increase with more of an open door policy. Sure, you might be able to say \"Hell, there are twenty thousand unlicensed copies out there.\" But each copy is marketing your product to people who might buy it. And you WILL make more money than you otherwise would have - probably a lot more (ask Bill Gates). And one thing is for sure, you will not make less than you would have done.

Imagining that every unlicensed copy is a lost sale is dreaming. Every unlicensed copy is a potential sale!

You will not stop piracy, but you have stopped me buying libraries.

Now, where do you developers go to try libraries I wonder?

Robert Kral
05-10-2002, 08:53 PM
Lotsa good points here. I remember back in the 80\'s when I got my EPS it was assumed, in fact guaranteed by the Music stores, that most sounds would be free! Well, it\'s a 2 megabyte machine, what can I say.

Anyway, how\'s this for a suggestion. I agree we need to try before we buy. But how can we possibly do this without piracy? It\'s actually SIMPLE:

These libraries should be made available to MUSIC STORES where we can go in and try them in the store. We can\'t pirate it there, it\'s owned by the music store who wants to sell it to you, not give it away. Sure this isn\'t the same as working with it at home where it\'s al quiet as can be and you can try it on your projects etc...BUT, this really is a relatively simple answer. Stores need to be set up with gigastudio and a sequencer, then we can go in and check out what\'s on their hard drive and play these sounds. You\'d certainly get a feel for what was on the library.

Are developers cautious? Maybe they wouldn\'t want the entire library available this way. I mean if the ENTIRE library was available and you sat there for 8 hours and decided it wasn\'t for you because you nit-picked at every sample. Perhaps the developers like the shroud of mystery: you hear an mp3 and have to imagine the rest of the library etc.

If so, we could meet them half way: The developers / distributors could supply the music stores with a hilights CDRom. You\'d go in and check out a HEALTHY sampling of the contents, then you could decide.

It certainly wouldn\'t hurt for music stores to have GIGA up and running too: how many more people would buy THAT once they tried it? I\'d say almost everyone.

05-10-2002, 09:15 PM
Roberts point is well taken, and go beyond the various \"listening stations\" that I\'ve explored in Guitar center for samples.

Tell me, long shot, has anyone explored the leasing option...wherin I lease you my machine + samples for 100 years and you send me a check and list me as a co-composer at .0001%.

Theoretically, the samples are still licensed by me and the music produced is mine...

ALright I am stretching it

truly I am an idiot\'s idiot...

05-10-2002, 11:29 PM
I just have one question....Do you guys demand the same from your local computer stores about software you have purchased? What would they tell you?


05-11-2002, 12:01 AM
I did some research on this topic a while back, I also was amazed at the no return policy of typical Giga libraries. Then I found out the \"paying\" market is VERY small on the Giga platform. I used to think certain \"popular\" libraries, advertised on this forum, would sell 1000\'s of copies! It\'s more like if they sell 100 copies of any library they\'re doing good. This is why the no return policy. I\'m a software developer and if I didn\'t adopt a 100% customer satisfaction guarantee I would be out of a business. Finally with Halion and a few other popular samplers supporting the .gig format, I\'m sure as developers start selling more copies, making more money, their business models will change for the better. I also agree if you don\'t like the price, or their policy, DON\'T BUY IT! That\'s our only defense. I\'ve said it so many times on this forum, the ONLY reason certain giga libraries are expensive is because WE WILL PAY FOR IT. Don\'t buy it, the prices WILL fall. I\'m still waiting for a certain guitar library to come down to a reasonable $120.00-$150.00 range. images/icons/smile.gif

While I\'m ranting, developers had BETTER start telling us ahead of time that their libraries are installing copy protection programs, etc, on our computer BEFORE we buy. This bothers me more than the no return policies.

05-11-2002, 01:30 AM
There is a lot of food for thought in this thread (like the many others on this topic that have preceded it...) but so far, I think Robert has the closest to a rational solution for a portion of the user base, but I don\'t believe it would accomplish much-here\'s why:

Assumption 1: Donnie spends time and money developing a limited edition of the LOP library for release to the major chain store.

Assumption 2: The chain feels there is enough of a market for the product they agree to carry it and make the demo available \'in-store only\' for demo purposes.

Assumption 3: I go in to the music store to listen-along with the 200 other guitar head-bangers, drummers, keyboard wannabes and other denizens that hang out at these stores (when\'s the last time you could actually HEAR something with any degree of detail at your local GC?)

Assumtion 4, REALLY reaching: Miracle of miracles, the store is empty for a whole hour, and I get to hear the demo library in its entirety and I love it.

Conclusion: I go to Soundchaser or Jacksmusic.com and buy, because the price is better...

OK, Donnie made his sale, I got what I wanted, but the store is out of the loop, and won\'t be willing to support this for long. GC WILL match price, but you have to really push sometimes, and chances are you woln\'t actually be able to properly audition the sample library.

Another problem, what about all those people who don\'t liv near a GC or other large outlet? When I palyed the midwest briefly, I drove 500 miles to the \'biggest\' music store in some state-Indiana, Utah, one of those-and it was a mom and pop hole in the wall that thought (in 1992) that the DX7 was the \'hot new electronic gizmo\' (I believe that\'s a quote!)

A better, but equally convoluted solution might be to create a custom \'demo\' version of the library with one or more of the following:

Full sample, but notes a fifth or sixth apart, so the stretch is unnatural and not useful.

Sample with voiceover or other artifact in the background, not loud, but audibly annoying

Sample of the attack and .5 sec of the \'sustain\' part of the wave

Put \'em on a CD and sell the CD for $3, refundable with purchase of the set, or exchangable for another demo CD of a different library.

None of these are great ideas, but maybe somebody will think of something that extends this into something useful.

And Donnie, thanks again for the merchandise credit option. It IS appreciated, and will definitely make a difference when I\'m deciding what libs to get next.


05-11-2002, 10:52 AM
Hi all,
Interesting thread with some interesting ideas. Here\'s my cut on how to make it work. IT\'s not science fiction. We use this sort of technology in the chip industry:

0) I do some studying and figure out I want to try out a certain library for a certain part. I voice my MIDI part to match some specs for the library, like what range of notes the library responds to.

1) The developer or distributor sets up an email service where I mail a MIDI file and some info about which library I\'m interested in. Tis could also be a web page where the data is submitted.

2) The email/web server sends the MIDI file to an application that loads the MIDI file and bounces an audio file with my part.

3) The audio file is placed on an FTP server for a limited period of time. Maybe 24-48 hours.

4) An email is sent back to me with a ftp address, account & password. I go there and download my audio. I plug it into my sequencer and listen along with my other parts.

5) I like it, so I buy. I don\'t like it, so I try again to get better results or move on.

6) The server logs my IP address and gives me 5 chances per library, before it cts me off for a week.

As I say, we use stuff like this all the time in the IC industry. Some smart PERL programmer probably could wire this up in a few days. (Yea, right!) images/icons/wink.gif

Anyway, that\'s my idea...


05-11-2002, 09:47 PM
I think just like videogames and computer software....a demo version is in order (downloadable from the site would be even better).

If the developers put their minds to it they can probably figure out a good way to let us play with some of the sounds before purchasing them.

Today I went to Mars Music to purchase a keyboard that was on sale. Mars has a \"no returns\" policy on clearance items. I found this unacceptable, went to Sam Ash who has no such ridiculous policy, they matched the sale price and got my money! I love the keyboard, I played it in the store and read reviews on line....I still felt better giving my money to someone who valued me enough as a costumer to offer me the option to get my money back should I not like it.

The reason why this thread is so important on this particular forum is that developers actually read these posts. I can\'t think of any other place online that is so filled with developers....so I strongly urge everyone to let these guys know that we (the honest consumers) are sick and tired to be treated like pirates!

I believe BigFish\'s policy of store credit is a step forward, now if SoundsOnline and Ilio would do that as well we would be making some progress!

I also do urge some of the developers to reconsider their pricing structure, I realize that a lot of work went into your products, but a more competitive pricing might attract more customers while deterring piracy. If that\'s not possible, how about allowing us to purchase individual parts of your collection? With high speed connections, it would be feaseable to download individual instruments and essentially pay for what we actually need!

05-11-2002, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by donnie:
I just have one question....Do you guys demand the same from your local computer stores about software you have purchased? What would they tell you?

Donnie<font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">Donnie, the difference there is that most software out there is available in demo versions. Even expensive stuff like Filemaker Pro allows you to download a 30 day demo...

I think if sample developers offered an example CD that had an brief overview of their library, for say, 20.00, it might be a decent compromise. Demos just aren\'t enough. You can make almost any library sound good given enough time ( and good reverb;))

Robert Kral
05-11-2002, 11:51 PM
Mark: Great idea but I don\'t think it would work because YOU need to PLAY the sounds yourself to see if its what you like. No automated service or even giving your midifile to someone else to work with will give you that experience. It also assumes the programmer makes the correct use of the library etc: adjustts your velocities etc etc etc!

My suggestion does make the above assumptions as listed by soundsmith, but they are small assumptions when you really think about it and it could really work.

Donnie doesn\'t need to spend much time on a hilights CD for the stores: pick the top ten patches and burn a CD, should take about 10 minutes tops.

Yes the music store is noisy. Put on headphones, a lot of stores have quieter rooms for the set up etc.

Assumption #2 is the trickiest! It means the software would be sold at the store, which would be VERY convenient for a lot of us when we need a sound TODAY. This would promote competitve pricing in the store, to go neck and neck with online ordering. You could argue we\'d check it out at the store, then buy online. But you can already do that with all their instruments etc., and they still are in business.

WHY ARE THEY IN BUSINESS? (When we can buy EVERYTHING online or by catalog?)

That\'s exactly what I\'m asking for: to play giga instruments. It shouldn\'t hurt their business, it should create more for them. That\'s why they should be interested and prepared to do this.

The other assumptions about the store\'s environment is something I would HAPPILY live with in order to try patches from a new library before I buy. I don\'t need an empty store, and if someone else is playing the giga unit: that could be fun to meet the other user.

This wouldn\'t be perfect, but wouldn\'t it be great and so much better than the blind purchasing we do now?

05-12-2002, 07:44 AM
Just more thoughts on this:


1.) Somebody has about 10 libraries. He dies. What then? Give away the product is not possible according to the licenses. His son/daughter can\'t use it too. Back to the store? No, the money can\'t be treansferred back. Hmm... I don\'t know... any experience?

2.) We need to own the library to use it. We pay licenses to the developers for the library. Do we pay for the sounds or for the programming? Do the developers play Mr. Bosendorfer licenses to use his intelectual work, that created a piano? Well that\'s another story and not related with this topic but still a point to think of.

Buying products:

You can do superior demos with libraries. Still it can not fit my expectations on it. So better try it in real. But what would this look like if I try it at a store? Having a studio at home or at work I\'m used to work in, I would not have the opportunity in the store. You could be happy if the store provides you a 76-key midi-keyboard for testing. Is that more awesome? At least more than a thousands demos that can be created from loops and licks to.

I do not buy a new car because I it driving around in TV advertising for example. I\'ll buy it when I drove it myself. And I do not buy a BMW 525 when tested a 316i... Would you?

Regards. images/icons/smile.gif