Omnisphere's licence policy?

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Nahuel

To me his story sounds pretty realistic and you sound like a fan (when you imply that he's probably lying).

I implied nothing of the sort. Neither you nor I was listening to the conversation. From my experience, I have had GREAT luck getting replacement discs. And really, I didn't even have to try hard. I merely relayed my perspective and story, and wondered aloud what else was going on with a guy whose entire posting record here is just to slag a company who generally has a customer service history that can't be touched. And a fan? Yeah, I guess I am. From the moment Eric dominated the synth market with the D50 til present - no one has been able to touch his creativity IMO. Feel free not to use Spectrasonics products. I'm sure Eric won't mind. I suspect your music would be better off WITH their products though. But maybe not,.,..

[mikefennel]

Originally Posted by drBill

I implied nothing of the sort. Neither you nor I was listening to the conversation. From my experience, I have had GREAT luck getting replacement discs. And really, I didn't even have to try hard. I merely relayed my perspective and story, and wondered what else was going on with a guy who registers just to slag a company. And a fan? Yeah, I guess I am. From the moment Eric dominated the synth market with the D50 til present - no one has been able to touch his creativity IMO.

well i registered because i wanted to vent on the moan zone. thats what its for right?
i had no idea that this would become such an attraction and i have to admit i think it addresses something much bigger than my needing replacement discs.
to tell you the truth we can just buy another license its not a problem we have the money.

im not sure how the license agreements should be handled but i think more than less of the people here feel they need some adjustment.
i would like to see the software companies make more money and the users pay less and the piracy stopped!!!

[mikefennel]

Originally Posted by spectrum

It just has to not belong to a company.

Eric i have one thought about this statement. are you about to tell all your sellers that they cant sell your products to companies....

maybe this was a misstatement.

i could not imagine walking into West LA Music buying software and have the salesman say "mike, are you buying this for you or your company...as you know we cannot sell it to Universal"...
seems silly....

[drBill]

Originally Posted by mikefennel

i would like to see the software companies make more money and the users pay less and the piracy stopped!!!

[AbsoluteSpirit]

Originally Posted by mikefennel

well i really only mentioned Universal at the end. i believe they were on their way to working with me before i said my company name...

well, I suppose you did wait till post #14 before you *really* started hinting it wasn't a tiny operation lol

I've got no issues with Omnisphere btw It'd be nice to think they'd jump as quickly for all their customers...

(despite the avatar pic) I've been responsible for licensing , amongst other things, in some massive companies and the difference can be both frustrating and amusing - when you find out you're potentially liable for other peoples actions though, eeek!

[Nahuel]

Honestly I beleive the oposite, I beleive that when you are UMG (or better said an Engineer working for that compagny) compagnies are more inclined to ask for the highest prices, it was probably a try in order to sell a few more licenses... I had an issue with some audio software brand once, I started a thread on GS about it and had my problem fixed...Any smart buisnessman would never let such situation ignored too long. This board has become very powerfull, a lot of audio products consumers are reading and it's a good thing for us.

[mikefennel]

well i never kept my self anonymous. i am using my name that i registered with on this forum so a quick google search will lead you to the mike fennel that works for a pub company and im sure Eric new exactly who i was from the start.

i agree that this forum is very powerful and wish that i had joined under better circumstances.

the one thing that bothers me is that Eric stated that i can create using their products as long as it belongs solely to me NOT THE COMPANY.
as an associate pointed out to me its companies like mine all over LA to NY and between that buy these software's and use them under their company name.

why would they put a spot for company name on their registration unless they anticipate that companies with in fact by their software....

again i think the lic needs to be tweaked and a pro lic needs to be in place for the enormous client base like mine...(even though im still using the lic under their terms) it would be nice for us to have just a little freedom.

a company has to buy these software's they have way to much to loose if they pirate the product both morally and financially.

[Duardo]

Second, the fact that Les pulled Mike's license so quickly before understanding the facts doesn't suggest he's super cool.

I think his reaction is understandable. If you read Mike's initial correspondence (which was posted later in the thread) I can see why Les would think that the software was installed on a rig at the company that any number of people might be using. It wasn't clear that Mike engineers all of the sessions done on that rig, as it is now.

why would they put a spot for company name on their registration unless they anticipate that companies with in fact by their software....

Probably because they are aware that many people do, in fact, work for and/or own companies.

[mikefennel]

Originally Posted by Duardo

Probably because they are aware that many people do, in fact, work for and/or own companies.

You don’t address the statement, “they don’t want to sell to companies...”
Grant it I understand he means individuals that have a company and they are the only one in that company as we have a global corp.

We would never just buy a single lic and allow the software to be distributed throughout....one software one room one engineer....that is an obvious proper use of the software.

[spectrum]

Originally Posted by mikefennel

Eric i have one thought about this statement. are you about to tell all your sellers that they cant sell your products to companies....

Absolutely. For many years we've been telling our dealers that when they sell a software box they are selling a single user license.

maybe this was a misstatement.

Not at all...you heard me correctly.

i could not imagine walking into West LA Music buying software and have the salesman say "mike, are you buying this for you or your company...as you know we cannot sell it to Universal"...

That's exactly what they should be doing. There's a great deal of education that's still needed about single user software licenses.

[spectrum]

Originally Posted by mikefennel

the one thing that bothers me is that Eric stated that i can create using their products as long as it belongs solely to me NOT THE COMPANY.

That is correct and has always been our single user policy.

as an associate pointed out to me its companies like mine all over LA to NY and between that buy these software's and use them under their company name.

Not Spectrasonics though. We go out of our way in our license FAQs to explain that we license exclusively to single users.

why would they put a spot for company name on their registration unless they anticipate that companies with in fact by their software....

The company name is optional, not required. (the name of the user is of course required) The company name is just helpful for our reference.

again i think the lic needs to be tweaked and a pro lic needs to be in place for the enormous client base like mine...(even though im still using the lic under their terms) it would be nice for us to have just a little freedom.

It's pretty simple actually and already works.

If another user there wants to do his owns stuff without you, have him buy a copy. Then he's got his own license to use wherever he works, for Universal or for anyone.

a company has to buy these software's they have way to much to loose if they pirate the product both morally and financially.

Actually, the company does need the software at all.

For example, Universal does not buy the trombone for the trombone player....he has his own instrument that brings to the gig when he plays for Universal projects.

Our virtual instruments work the same way, except we are way more generous in allowing people that are collaborating on the same project to use the same trombone. ;-)

[Dz7]

There are some companies who are renting their software licenses on a quarter or yearly basis. This might be a solution to this kind of issue for individuals that have a few more writers coming in for a short duration...

#thingstothinkabout
#ireallyhatetwitter

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by AbsoluteSpirit

well, I suppose you did wait till post #14 before you *really* started hinting it wasn't a tiny operation lol

I've got no issues with Omnisphere btw It'd be nice to think they'd jump as quickly for all their customers...

Well I've owned Spectrasonics products since before virtual instruments (CD Roms for samplers), and noted how they've treated me and other customers over the last ten years or more.
Eric's response in this thread is absolutely on par with his normal customer interactions.
I think Spectrasonics are one of the most successful music technology companies because they offer a high quality product, at a reasonable price, and treat their customers as if they are royalty.
Believe me I'm not a Spectrasonics fanboy, just an average customer.
And because i have music software in the market myself and experienced customer feedback and customer tech issues, I know from the inside how polite and hard working for his customers Eric is.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by spectrum

except we are way more generous in allowing people that are collaborating on the same project to use the same trombone. ;-)

As an ex-trombone player, I highly suggest that you ask them to bring their own mouthpiece though.......

[Nahuel]

There are several scenarios where that policy is very limitative: I went to a few rooms that have a few modules and synths to add last minute arrangements...guitars, basses, drums, pianos are pretty common aswell...These studios have an in house staff but also accept freelance engineers... With that policy your loosing sales with that type of rooms and there s probably a lot of misinformed studio owners breaking your rules without even knowing.

Originally Posted by spectrum

It's pretty simple actually and already works.

If another user there wants to do his owns stuff without you, have him buy a copy. Then he's got his own license to use wherever he works, for Universal or for anyone.


Actually, the company does need the software at all.

For example, Universal does not buy the trombone for the trombone player....he has his own instrument that brings to the gig when he plays for Universal projects.

Our virtual instruments work the same way, except we are way more generous in allowing people that are collaborating on the same project to use the same trombone. ;-)

Sent from my GT-I5800 using Gearslutz.com App

[mikefennel]

Eric,

i appreciate your standing by your word and your policy.

lets just say we agree to disagree.

that being said i will respect your guidelines and will stay true yo your licensing..

i have to say you do make the best software on the market. would love to see a little wiggle room....

will keep using your products and hope to see what comes next....

thank you
mike

[mikefennel]

Originally Posted by spectrum

If another user there wants to do his owns stuff without you, have him buy a copy. Then he's got his own license to use wherever he works, for Universal or for anyone.

most of the writers do have your software....they were the ones that told me they have it and love and we should have it there as well.

it works both ways... writers have me buy things that they have and advise us to purchase and we in turn may have things they dont have and they buy their own copy.

i just dont keep an excel sheet on who owns what...lol

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Nahuel

I went to a few rooms that have a few modules and synths to add last minute arrangements...guitars, basses, drums, pianos are pretty common aswell...These studios have an in house staff but also accept freelance engineers...

Omnisphere is around $479

In my opinion, anyone who is working in music can afford that. Anyone who is serious about music, staff members, freelance songwriters.
These are high quality tools of your trade and they cost less than five hundred bucks.
The studios that are offering synth modules, keyboards, guitars, basses, and drums, all those instruments cost way more than Omnisphere. You'd be lucky to find a basic synth module for $479, and guitars, basses and drums under $500 would be budget lines at best.
That is why virtual instruments have slightly restrictive licenses, because they are so powerful, but so cheap to buy.

[Nahuel]

I swear I dont want to bump that thread more than it should but I'm sorry, I have to disagree, when you buy a software instruments you are providing the hardware for it (computer, soundcard, converters), the reasons for the price difference is pretty obvious and 500 $ for a virtual instrument is not cheap, I understand that these have lots of gigs and are probably worth it, I bet it's the right price point that cover the developement and allow for some profits...But that price is not "cheap" and does not work as a justification for that policy, again my point was that it's not really helping the sales with some type of professionals that obviousely cant ask their clients to buy spectrasonics licenses before they book studio time.

Originally Posted by chrisso

Omnisphere is around $479

In my opinion, anyone who is working in music can afford that. Anyone who is serious about music, staff members, freelance songwriters.
These are high quality tools of your trade and they cost less than five hundred bucks.
The studios that are offering synth modules, keyboards, guitars, basses, and drums, all those instruments cost way more than Omnisphere. You'd be lucky to find a basic synth module for $479, and guitars, basses and drums under $500 would be budget lines at best.
That is why virtual instruments have slightly restrictive licenses, because they are so powerful, but so cheap to buy.

[drBill]

"Cheap" is all relative. It's certainly not "cheap" compared to free VSTi's or VSTi's that cost $79. BUT, it's VALUE is phenomenal. When I need to reach for a synth - and I have dozens ranging from vintage analog Prophet's, JP6's, Super Jup's, to D50's & DX7's to Virus's to boatloads of "virtual's" - the synth that I reach for, the one that almost always hits it out of the park is Omnisphere. It may be costly compared to it's software brethren, but it's value is severely under estimated by many and easily worth 5X's the price of admission. (Not that I hope they raise the price.....)

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Nahuel

I have to disagree, when you buy a software instruments you are providing the hardware for it (computer, soundcard, converters), the reasons for the price difference is pretty obvious

So you aren't using the computer, soundcard and converters for any other purpose then hosting Omnisphere?????

I remember a few years ago when digital recorded meant buying a couple of hundred thousand dollars worth of tape machine.

Omnisphere is extremely powerful, equivalent to several upscale synth modules.
If you are in this business, as a songwriter, or staff member of a music company, $500 should be an acceptable business expense.
I'm a professional drummer by the way, and the average cost of each snare drum alone exceeds $500. A quality professional drum kit is several thousand dollars.
A DSI Polyevolver is $2,750.

[Nahuel]

Dude you are totally missing the point, keep your facepalms, feel free to not list random products prices that are totally irrevelant to this conversation, read my posts, understand what I'm saying, then, once you get it, we might be able to have a talk that makes sense.

*let's rephrase: I'm not "hating" on your fav software, I'm not even criticizing its price point, all I'm saying is this darn policy is impossible to respect in a room for rental scenario, especially for studios that accept freelance engineers...

- freelance engineer: hi, I want to book 3 days in studio B for a client.
- studio owner: well ok but do you have your omnisphere, Trillian, VSL symphonic cube and NI Komplete licenses?
-I beg your pardon?
- Yes because we have all these intalled and I'm afraid that without you own licenses I cant let you use the computer.
- uhu... (cheking for another studio fone number)...of couse, I'll call you back later...


I m tired of bumping that thread...I v seen your answer. You still dont get it. Lets move on.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Nahuel

- freelance engineer: hi, I want to book 3 days in studio B for a client.
- studio owner: well ok but do you have your omnisphere, Trillian, VSL symphonic cube and NI Komplete licenses?
-I beg your pardon?
- Yes because we have all these intalled and I'm afraid that without you own licenses I cant let you use the computer.
- uhu... (cheking for another studio fone number)...of couse, I'll call you back later...

Well why not?
You don't need an external studio to use virtual instruments. You can program parts sitting in row 12 of a jumbo jet...... or of course in your home studio.
I'm not defending my 'favourite software' by the way. I'm defending the user license restrictions against charges of unreasonableness. Yeah, I understand it's a pain for hobbyists on a strict budget. But for professionals working in the industry, like staff composers, you should be able to afford your own copy of Omnisphere, or Kontakt, or FM8. If you can't, use other tools you do own.

[lagavulin16]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Well why not?
You don't need an external studio to use virtual instruments. You can program parts sitting in row 12 of a jumbo jet...... or of course in your home studio.
I'm not defending my 'favourite software' by the way. I'm defending the user license restrictions against charges of unreasonableness. Yeah, I understand it's a pain for hobbyists on a strict budget. But for professionals working in the industry, like staff composers, you should be able to afford your own copy of Omnisphere, or Kontakt, or FM8. If you can't, use other tools you do own.

His policies are unreasonable by any normal sense of property law. I suppose if a developer required that you sodomize them before reselling a license, you'd think that was within their rights?

Because I find the policies used by Spectrasonics to be equally reasonable. It would be like Roland selling a keyboard but saying only the person who bought it is allowed to play it.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

I suppose if a developer required that you sodomize them before reselling a license, you'd think that was within their rights?

Another one of your wild hypotheticals? Why am I not surprised.
In the end, you agree to the terms to use the product or you don't.
There are few people who describe Eric as unreasonable.

It would be like Roland selling a keyboard but saying only the person who bought it is allowed to play it.

As I said, and you obviously missed.
Find me a new Roland keyboard for under $500 with gigs of high quality onboard sounds, and that you can add gigs more, free of charge from Roland.
Make it Polyphonic, and multi-timbral up to several instances.
Here I'll give you a head start:
Roland Corporation Australia - Keys » Synths / Workstations

If Ominsphere cost anything between $1,499 and $4,999 I would agree, it should include a multi user license.

[lagavulin16]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Another one of your wild hypotheticals? Why am I not surprised.
In the end, you agree to the terms to use the product or you don't.
There are few people who describe Eric as unreasonable.



As I said, and you obviously missed.
Find me a new Roland keyboard for under $500 with gigs of high quality onboard sounds, and that you can add gigs more, free of charge from Roland.
Make it Polyphonic, and multi-timbral up to several instances.
Here I'll give you a head start:
Roland Corporation Australia - Keys » Synths / Workstations

If Ominsphere cost anything between $1,499 and $4,999 I would agree, it should include a multi user license.

So as soon as Roland can actually make a cheaper keyboard, you think they should only let the owner play it?

How about this: I buy software, or samples, or anything used to create/record music, and I get to use it like any other instrument, mic, drum, or anything else I own? I'm not saying I want to make copies and give it to all my friends. I just want one of my friends to be able to switch and play the keyboards while I embarrass myself on the drums for 20 minutes without getting sued.

Or is that just insane?

[Dz7]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

So as soon as Roland can actually make a cheaper keyboard, you think they should only let the owner play it?

How about this: I buy software, or samples, or anything used to create/record music, and I get to use it like any other instrument, mic, drum, or anything else I own? I'm not saying I want to make copies and give it to all my friends. I just want one of my friends to be able to switch and play the keyboards while I embarrass myself on the drums for 20 minutes without getting sued.

Or is that just insane?

You're insane...Omnisphere already has drum grooves.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by lagavulin16

So as soon as Roland can actually make a cheaper keyboard, you think they should only let the owner play it?

But they wont, because it costs a lot of money to create a sound library like the Omnisphere one, and that is why the equivalent Roland synths cost a minimum of $1499.
The problem with our on off relationship is you refuse to accept it costs a lot of money to record and edit huge sound libraries. You keep saying a killer one that costs nothing is about to come along, but it still hasn't, it never will.

I just want one of my friends to be able to switch and play the keyboards while I embarrass myself on the drums for 20 minutes without getting sued.

Or is that just insane?

Well you'd be insane, because the Omnisphere license doesn't stop you from doing that.
You can use the product even if you aren't the person playing the sound. You just can't buy it for a studio and let anyone and everyone use it while you are at home in bed.

[Nahuel]

Originally Posted by chrisso

You can use the product even if you aren't the person playing the sound. You just can't buy it for a studio and let anyone and everyone use it while you are at home in bed.

Last post on the topic really but that this is exactly where that stuff is a bit ridiculous...

If I'm the license owner I have to be involved in the project right?

so what degree is needed, let's say I played the guitar but went home while the pianoman layed down some omni parts, illegal?,

I'm not part of the project but I'm in the room, is it ok? Can I still take a shit? what's the right distance? if I pan the lead vocals to the center does it count as "involved in the project"?

If I give a phone call to the studio and my voice is recorded on the track I'm part of the project, can they open up a lil patch in there?

Can I rent a computer that has omni on it if my client swear on his life that he will not use omnisphere?

Seriousely they should consider selling a professional license at maybe twice the price of the regular one that let the studio owner install it on one single computer that can be rented just like any other peice of gear. End of the freaking story.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Nahuel

Seriousely they should consider selling a professional license at maybe twice the price of the regular one that let the studio owner install it on one single computer that can be rented just like any other peice of gear. End of the freaking story.

Maybe you should buy the company so you have a voice. Or better yet, start your own. Show us how it's done. Until then, either buy or don't. Lots of companies have similar licenses as has been pointed out. If you feel they oppressive, don't go there. Simple.