The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Waves permanently lowers prices? Dynamics Plugins
Old 5th January 2011
  #151
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtlejon View Post
i disagree with that leat post, too. waves is the only developer i use the products of that does not just keep free incremental upgrades going forever. every few months i get an email from izotope, or stillwell, or breverb, or... whomever, telling me there is a new free update waiting...
when everything started switching to intel, the only plugs that didn't just work on machine were waves...
thanks for clarification. So my "accusation" could be right. They simply should offer their plugin updates for free and whoever needs constant telephone support can buy it as "WUP". Then I would think about purchasing anything.
Old 5th January 2011
  #152
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
neither does Waves. Otherwise their SSL4000 compressor wouldn't cause so much aliasing. I am working in the hardware/signal processing field. From my observation, a lot of these developments are a sort of constant failure. A compressor is no more than an AGC. In my field (communications), an AGC is just one element in a system of much more complex blocks. And measuring impulse responses, well, it's not a date to reserve a street for a hollywood movie, don't you agree? You can do it even yourself, with today's freeware. Even at night.

To put some salt in the discussion:

the best way to make a plugin is to adapt some existing algos, add a new GUI, write some famous name on it and sell it for a high price. I know some sellers don't like what I am writing, I can understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
You call a plugin large code? Are you kidding me? Large code is application software, not a compressor plugin. There is the VST/AU standard and if you are am experienced programmer you will be able to write "reasonable code" fullfilling specs. Bad programmers are enough out there, I know.
I love the way you're arguing with someone who codes for a living about how the software industry works. Way to go...you don't look dumb at all.

As for the Waves SSL causing aliasing...erm, not sure how you're using it, and I'm not saying it's 100% of the hardware, but my copy of it doesn't cause aliasing.
Old 5th January 2011
  #153
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I love the way you're arguing with someone who codes for a living about how the software industry works. Way to go...you don't look dumb at all.

As for the Waves SSL causing aliasing...erm, not sure how you're using it, and I'm not saying it's 100% of the hardware, but my copy of it doesn't cause aliasing.
well I code for my life time, in a different field, MATLAB, VHDL, C, thinks look like that I am quite good actually. There is a famous German writer Kurt Tucholsky, who once said: experience is nothing, you can do your mistakes for 35 years! Regarding aliasing, take a look in the plugin analysis thread, Mr Psycho Monkey :D If someone is able to create something like The Glue as a single programmer, that should tell you something!
Old 5th January 2011
  #154
Gear Maniac
 
xgabrielx's Avatar
 

I love my waves plugins but these 2 points pisses me off:

1. 64bit support. Should be finished by now

2. There will be a version 8 with 64bit so I need to WUP 2 of my 3 bundles.

When I WUP my Platinum native and my SCC native waves want 260€ from me?!?!

If I WUP cla classic comp natve, platinum nav. and scc native they want 400€

I mean, they wrote that you dont need to pay more then 200€....
Old 5th January 2011
  #155
Quote:
Originally Posted by xgabrielx View Post
I love my waves plugins but these 2 points pisses me off:

1. 64bit support. Should be finished by now

2. There will be a version 8 with 64bit so I need to WUP 2 of my 3 bundles.

When I WUP my Platinum native and my SCC native waves want 260€ from me?!?!

If I WUP cla classic comp natve, platinum nav. and scc native they want 400€

I mean, they wrote that you dont need to pay more then 200€....
Something's wrong then. WUP should be a *maximum* of $200 per user.

Contact them and find out what's going on, maybe there's a glitch.
Old 5th January 2011
  #156
Lives for gear
 
dotl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
well I code for my life time, in a different field, MATLAB, VHDL, C, thinks look like that I am quite good actually. There is a famous German writer Kurt Tucholsky, who once said: experience is nothing, you can do your mistakes for 35 years! Regarding aliasing, take a look in the plugin analysis thread, Mr Psycho Monkey :D If someone is able to create something like The Glue as a single programmer, that should tell you something!
Touché!
Old 6th January 2011
  #157
What it tells you is that small amounts of code are a LOT easier than large amounts of code, which is kind of the whole point being made. The difference in complexity between a 10,000 lines of code product and a 500,000 lines of code large family of products is vastly larger than the ratio of lines of code between those two code bases. It's more like a multiplicative relationship than a linear one. It takes a whole other type of people herding infrastructure to manage than a single small product. This is a fact long since proven on the ground, and well documented over large numbers of real world projects if you care to actually go look into it yourself.

My own product is 800,000 lines of code. It's network distributed, mutli-process, multi-user, client-server, and covers a significant range of problem domains, and it's commercial quality, delivered code. So I'm fairly sure that I'm in a better position to comment on the complexities of large scale product development than someone who writes small math based programs.
Old 6th January 2011
  #158
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
i disagree with that leat post, too. waves is the only developer i use the products of that does not just keep free incremental upgrades going forever. every few months i get an email from izotope, or stillwell, or breverb, or... whomever, telling me there is a new free update waiting...
iZotope does charge for upgrades...looking at their website, if you want to upgrade to the current version of Ozone (v4) it's about 30% of the new price if you have v3, or 40% if you have v1 or v2. Which I don't think is unreasonable.

Personally, I think that if Waves dumped the "WUP" name and just called them upgrades then they'd get a lot less grief, but they obviously still carry the stigma from the initial program.

Quote:
When I WUP my Platinum native and my SCC native waves want 260€ from me?!?!

If I WUP cla classic comp natve, platinum nav. and scc native they want 400€

I mean, they wrote that you dont need to pay more then 200€....
If you're getting your quote online you probably didn't check the box that says that you'll be using all of the plugins on the same system. When you do that it should reduce the total to 200€.
Old 6th January 2011
  #159
Lives for gear
 
theothermarkwilliams's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
What you don't need is lots and lots of bugs. I'm sure that every developer in the industry is working just as fast as they can to create a stable 64 bit version of their products that won't orphan their users' valuable ongoing projects that were started using earlier versions.
Indeed, Bob. None of us wants bugs. I certainly want Waves (and other developers) to take the time they need to make this a successful and bug free transition.

What I'm not so sure of is that "every developer in the industry is working just as fast as they can to create a stable 64 bit version of their products".

I'm honestly not sure this is true. I have tried to get an answer on this from Abbey Roads for over a year now involving 7 separate emails, but they still haven't answered the question. When Waves released their statement re: 64-bit support, it honestly sounded like they did not understand why some users even need 64-bit support. They touted the fact that 64-bit versions would not sound better, for instance. When I emailed with support over the statement, they apologized, not wanting their statement to sound misleading. I've also exchanged a few emails with small developers who didn't seem to understand the importance of 64-bit support at all, even to the point of them admitting to me that at that point they really didn't plan on releasing 64-bit versions to work in a 64-bit DAW. I imagine those developers are beginning to understand the issues better now, but I honestly don't know whether they do or not.

I only said what I said in my earlier statement because of the guy I quoted in that post who claimed that 64-bit support was unnecessary right now, and really wouldn't become necessary for another couple years. Of course all of us want bug free software. And of course we want devs to take the time to ensure this. It's just that there still seems to be some misunderstanding regarding why the transition is needed, and why it is needed sooner, rather than later.

Cheers, Bob. I always, always appreciate your involvement in these forums, so thanks for your participation!
Old 6th January 2011
  #160
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
What it tells you is that small amounts of code are a LOT easier than large amounts of code, which is kind of the whole point being made. The difference in complexity between a 10,000 lines of code product and a 500,000 lines of code large family of products is vastly larger than the ratio of lines of code between those two code bases. It's more like a multiplicative relationship than a linear one. It takes a whole other type of people herding infrastructure to manage than a single small product. This is a fact long since proven on the ground, and well documented over large numbers of real world projects if you care to actually go look into it yourself.
I never claimed that complexity is simply the number of code lines.

I would say there are several factors:

- the algorithms themself

- the (number of) involved interfaces where the software interacts with the environment: data exchange functions (VST / AU), system functions, GUI, memory management etc.

- realtime restrictions, which should be defined by the VST / AU spec

Quote:
My own product is 800,000 lines of code. It's network distributed, mutli-process, multi-user, client-server, and covers a significant range of problem domains, and it's commercial quality, delivered code.
Nice, so your expertise well extends over the typical grade of complexity for a audio plugin.

Quote:
So I'm fairly sure that I'm in a better position to comment on the complexities of large scale product development than someone who writes small math based programs.
I have been working in Gigabit/s wireless transmission where a lot of signal processing tasks are involved, developing the concept, the model up to the digital implementation. In such a complex digital design, everything happens at the same time, sequential algorithms are just a subset of possible mechanisms. In addition, numerical precision is optimized for every node. Such simple thing like 32 bit float or 64 bit float arithmetic is not applied. That's a lot of work.

I think I can well predict the complexity of the algos of typical such plugins, except the GUI. A company like Waves will typically develop cores for typical functions like filtering, FFT, oversampling etc. This saves a lot of effort in developing products in parallel. Due to the modular approach of plugin technology, the main complexity lies on the side of the host software rather than on the plugin side. Since different plugins do not directly interfere with each other in the application, the problem of coexistence is alleviated. The number of interfaces is restricted. That makes it even possible for one-man companies to compete as practice shows. So after all, the developer can focus on the algorithms and GUI which depends on his skills in signal processing.
Old 6th January 2011
  #161
Lives for gear
 
AcoosticZoo's Avatar
In 2010 I mostly used

Renverb 150
Trueverb 150
S1 150
L2 250
L1 200
Deesser 100
Ren deesser 100
Waves tune LT 200
Supa tap 100
Mordorpher 100
Rbass 75

Buying them individually is just $1575
Waves diamond That I'm using cost 2500!

So With the current pricing I could have saved myself 925usd since I rarely use the other plugins in the diamond bundle.

Now if i were to factor in the plugins that I'd like to get from the Mercury bundle, I think I would save even more by buying individual plugins instead of the Merucry bundle. However, at the rate waves are modelling hardware I think getting the Mercury bundle will be the cheaper option 5 years from now (even factoring in WUP).

If waves releases sometime like the tape saturation, and/or even modelled vintage hardware reverbs, I think this would be a very convincing reason to justify moving up to Mercury.

Regards
Josef horhay
Mix engineer
Www.acoosticzoo.com
Old 6th January 2011
  #162
The kind of software you are doing bears almost zero relationship to what a company like Waves primarily does. Delivering code that is installed by non-technical end users, that runs inside another process that you don't control along with other third party code that you don't control, that has lots of fancy GUI functionality that has to be supported across multiple platforms, its only remotely similar to backend server or embedded signal processing projects. I don't think you have any idea what's involved, based on what you continue to say in this thread. But I think it's more driven by your desire to paint Waves in a particular color than with the realities of the situation anyway.

Quote:
Since different plugins do not directly interfere with each other in the application, the problem of coexistence is alleviated.
Again, this proves you don't understand the issues. For efficiency reasons they may well commonly try to share data and have various threading issues involved in the process of doing that, which are made more complex by the fact that threading is handled differently on different platforms and the VST standard, for instance, doesn't guarantee that your plugin will be called by the same thread all the time, which causes lots of extra complexities for certain types of plugins.

And of course you completely ignore the obvious issues that arrise from the development of a large body of shared code, which a whole other world of code builds on top of, used by people who didn't write the core layers. It comes at a price, particularly over time when you need to make fairly fundamental changes to that core layer, which is going to happen.

You sound like the guy who goes up to the whiteboard and draws a handful of conceptual boxes, draws some lines between them and says, this shouldn't be a big problem at all. Then a year later the half dead team drags themselves over the finish line after actually having to deal with the realities of what lies behind that pictures on the whiteboard.
Old 6th January 2011
  #163
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
The kind of software you are doing bears almost zero relationship to what a company like Waves primarily does. Delivering code that is installed by non-technical end users, that runs inside another process that you don't control along with other third party code that you don't control, that has lots of fancy GUI functionality that has to be supported across multiple platforms, its only remotely similar to backend server or embedded signal processing projects. I don't think you have any idea what's involved, based on what you continue to say in this thread. But I think it's more driven by your desire to paint Waves in a particular color than with the realities of the situation anyway.
There is a clear spec, VST, VST3, AU etc. You have to follow the spec and must be keen on system programming. If you follow it, your software should run properly. If not, then the host software itself has failed. Period.
The idea is that you don't have to control every other task, how could you? In addition, plugins are entirely different, they follow a signal flow architecture, so entirely different from your kind of problems having to deal with a million of exceptions! Don't you see that?

I don't want to paint anyone in any color. The main statement I made is: Taking into account the update policy, I would not buy any smaller bundles, because it will turn out to be too expensive. That's a simple calculation. Even if it much improved now, it was much worse before! If I own the SSL bundle, there will be with probability 99% no additional plugins coming into the bundle with the next update. That is different from NI, where I would get the newest synthesizers and an extended library, so I may want to upgrade on purpose, not because someone forces me to do so by (perhaps even intentionally, who knows) making it incompatible with OS future versions.
Old 6th January 2011
  #164
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
Again, this proves you don't understand the issues. For efficiency reasons they may well commonly try to share data and have various threading issues involved in the process of doing that, which are made more complex by the fact that threading is handled differently on different platforms and the VST standard, for instance, doesn't guarantee that your plugin will be called by the same thread all the time, which causes lots of extra complexities for certain types of plugins.
If they do such a stupid thing it's their own fault. As you should know that signal processing algos on that level hardly use a lot of memory. Ridiculous. And it's clearly against specs.
Old 6th January 2011
  #165
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
And of course you completely ignore the obvious issues that arrise from the development of a large body of shared code, which a whole other world of code builds on top of, used by people who didn't write the core layers. It comes at a price, particularly over time when you need to make fairly fundamental changes to that core layer, which is going to happen.
you describe the typical bad company, where modules are badly (insufficiently) characterized, not very professional at all. That is not proper software engineering.
Old 6th January 2011
  #166
Lives for gear
 



should have unsubscribed 3 pages ago...
Old 6th January 2011
  #167
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

What point are you guys trying to make with all this "programmer" and "coding" discussion?

It's like the debate to nowhere...
Old 6th January 2011
  #168
Lives for gear
Th hackers have become fast. Entire bundles out in a week after release. I've seen a lot of home studios with the entire bundle but the only people I see buying them are pro studios and older folks. Just my observation that plugs are as easily accessible as a mp3 these days and only leads the bedroom studio guys to lust over the actual hardware. I think it is a direct effect with the new pricing for sure.
Old 6th January 2011
  #169
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyBelmont View Post
What point are you guys trying to make with all this "programmer" and "coding" discussion?

It's like the debate to nowhere...
God bless you all guys, and Waves.

Let's finish.
Old 6th January 2011
  #170
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
There is a clear spec, VST, VST3, AU etc. You have to follow the spec and must be keen on system programming. If you follow it, your software should run properly. If not, then the host software itself has failed. Period...
Getting stuff to run properly with multiple hosts would be easy if all plug-in developers had to do was just follow the rules and then wag their fingers at the host developers telling them "shame on you!"

Don't forget that the established hosts all need to remain compatible with files from their older versions going back over a decade. Most of our recording projects are worth lots more money than any host is so backward compatibility is a very big deal to any professional or developer hoping to sell an upgrade to professionals.
Old 6th January 2011
  #171
Lives for gear
 

All sorts of file compatibility are a separate problem, I would say. How do you professionals store your old projects? I thought you would store the tracks only (maybe one track processed and another unprocessed), to be independent of any system change. Otherwise you would have to make sure that all the plugins are still there and the project file is still readable. At least with some semi-professional software like Cubase this would lead to big problems (don't know about Protools). (I store my old projects only as a bundle of raw tracks and can mix them in whatever environment years later).
Old 6th January 2011
  #172
Lives for gear
 
turtlejon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duardo View Post
iZotope does charge for upgrades...looking at their website, if you want to upgrade to the current version of Ozone (v4) it's about 30% of the new price if you have v3, or 40% if you have v1 or v2. Which I don't think is unreasonable.

Personally, I think that if Waves dumped the "WUP" name and just called them upgrades then they'd get a lot less grief, but they obviously still carry the stigma from the initial program.


If you're getting your quote online you probably didn't check the box that says that you'll be using all of the plugins on the same system. When you do that it should reduce the total to 200€.
izotope does not charge for incremental upgrades , i.e. from v4 to 4.1, 4.2 etc. when they overhaul the whole thing, and add several new features, and all, then they change the name to v5, or whatever, and then there is a charge (but usually way discounted.) but if it's the same plug doing the same things, they have given me all of those compatibility-type upgrades for free. have since ozone 3 came out, anyway. when i started with them...

waves even has a link on their support pages, " why does my wup cost more than 200$" and then they go into detail as to exactly how easy it is for them to charge you more than 200$. seems to happen often enough that they put it in their FAQ's.

right. if waves adds something to a plug or a bundle, it actually is an upgrade, and no-one really minds paying when you actually get something. it's the "compatibility" charges that bother me. when i switched to 10.6, every other app, plug, or anything else i had worked just fine. only waves makes you pay to move to a new os. even photoshop, final cut, office, etc. they all worked fine. it just seems a "cheap" policy for something that was so expensive. and i just figured waves was big enough at this point to not be so dang "cheap," but i guess being that "cheap" is what gets someone ahead in business, so it does seem to fit the capitalistic paradigm that multi national commerce has brought us to. from now on, i'm going to try to support other companies that don't feel as "cheap" to me.

i encourage everyone else out there to stop doing business with this "wal-mart" of plug ins, and move to some "mom an pop shop" type plugins.
it's not like the waves plugs are that much better than the others, that's for sure....
surely our spending will dictate the future!
Old 6th January 2011
  #173
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtlejon View Post
... if waves adds something to a plug or a bundle, it actually is an upgrade, and no-one really minds paying when you actually get something.
You generally do get additional plug-ins over the course of the year and credit toward purchasing an additional plug with WUP.
Old 6th January 2011
  #174
Gear Addict
 

Its been 2 years at least since anything was added to anything nut the Mercury and Horizon bundles. My Diamond bundle would love to see some new plugins this year. Especially now my WUP is still current
Old 6th January 2011
  #175
Lives for gear
 

This was under the radar, but they put Waves Center in Diamond now, so you can grab that one.

Also, it seems like less than 2 years ago they added V-Comp, and the Puigtec stuff as well (also in Platinum).

Also, I'm not sure about this, but they use to have a stipulation about Z-Noise being only in Diamond if you bought it brand new, not as part of upgrades. From what I can see, they removed that disclaimer, so that may be included now standard as well.
Old 6th January 2011
  #176
Gear Addict
 

Seems you are correct that it was november 2009 that they updated it with the V-comp etc. Still i suspect they will go to V8 for the 64 bit update and i expect that will bring some new toys to the bundles.
Old 6th January 2011
  #177
Lives for gear
 

To the person wondering how WUP could be more than $200, it has to do with having several bundles or plugs expiring at different times. In order to have everything combined into one WUP from here on out, you end up paying for more than a year, pro-rated, so that everything expires at the same time from then on out, and after that, it will truly be capped at $200 (I'm pretty sure). But you can also choose to WUP on only the thing that's expired if others are current. You just uncheck the boxes on what you don't want WUP'd.
Old 6th January 2011
  #178
Lives for gear
 

Exhile,

With the new prices, you might look into how much it would be to crossgrade to Horizon, since some plugs are shared. Maybe it wouldn't be that bad vs. WUP, and then you'd be up to date again. Although it might end up being called "Horizon plus Restoration".
Old 6th January 2011
  #179
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
This place is infested by Waves haters. Who, interestingly, don't seem to get the irony that their attitude towards Waves is the same attitude that they see in their own customers, who don't seem to understand what it takes to maintain a high quality, professional company and product. You see so many people complaining one day about people who won't spend a penny to get a well done recording made at a studio with real overhead and who instead go to a guy in his bedroom; and, the next day they are complaining about having to spend a penny to buy software and arguing that a couple guys in a bedroom is where they will take their business.
and then they complain that there is no market for their music ..lol ...
Old 6th January 2011
  #180
Gear Maniac
 
xgabrielx's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duardo View Post
iZotope does charge for upgrades...looking at their website, if you want to upgrade to the current version of Ozone (v4) it's about 30% of the new price if you have v3, or 40% if you have v1 or v2. Which I don't think is unreasonable.

Personally, I think that if Waves dumped the "WUP" name and just called them upgrades then they'd get a lot less grief, but they obviously still carry the stigma from the initial program.


If you're getting your quote online you probably didn't check the box that says that you'll be using all of the plugins on the same system. When you do that it should reduce the total to 200€.

Ahhh thanks alot!!!
But isnt that the reason to release native plugins with an ilok license key, so you are able to use your plugins everywhere?

I still want to use my plugins for mobile recording (cant live without rvox while vocal tracking) and want to use them @studio
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
everythinglouder / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
12
akjl4 / Music Computers
9
Alécio Costa / Music Computers
3

Forum Jump
Forum Jump