True, BUT - also pretty much defeats the purpose of buying pre-made sample libraries.

These "sample companies" are a minority here, so there is IMO no reason why their business tactic should be dictated to thousands of users. Just like how it is not only a problem for those who make sample translation software - it is a problem for those of us who use such software.

Speak for yourself! THAT is the very "lock-in" that some here are critical of. Sample libraries are expensive, and that investment keeps people stuck with using certain software. It is by design, very cynical, and does not help the user in any way. I wonder how many people who tend to use only one sampler do so BECAUSE their sample libraries are incompatible in the first place.

Seriously, telling people that a business practice that they are critical of is somehow not really a problem is really condescending. It is beneficial for users to be more critical and make their preferences known to companies, so I need to wonder why you appear so invested in getting people to quietly accept things as they are. If you think it's "no big deal" to even convert one old 650MB sample CD by hand, maybe we should send them to you to convert.

The only reason these publishers have gotten away with the practice is because pro audio is a small niche community who never spoke up with any solidarity. This BS would never fly if companies offered DVDs that worked with only their brand of players, appliances that work only with a proprietary wall socket, a car wheel that only uses one brands of tires. Because since the markets are larger, the customers voicing their outrage would be too difficult to ignore. Saying that our little club is so exclusive that we can afford to be uncritical is NOT something to be proud of.

 

in past vst format was shared....rewire was shared....today...................
i kno bad compare but anyway...

imagine vst without 3third party license....

 

How so? I thought the purpose of buying pre-made sample libraries is to be able to use the sounds that you hopefully demoed and liked. They don't prevent you from doing that, do they?

Software, in general, is expensive. There are people who keep their old pre-Intel Macs or even Atari machines just to be able to use the software they bought years ago - perhaps an application for transferring patches or samples to a hardware box, or a specific piece of software that's really obscure and no longer supported but essential for their workflow. That's how software works, it's harder to "keep forever".

That said, compatibility between hardware or software is not a default. It's not like compatibility is just there and some evil corporations decide to prevent people from using different stuff. In literally every case it requires either years of figuring out how to make sense of what others are doing, or everyone teaming up and coming up with a common way to do things. There's also the issue of feature differences. Sure, you could save your Kontakt libraries as SF2, but unless it's a 2 MB patch you made yourself (which, in that case, you can port yourself in literally a minute), it just won't work, won't sound the same, possibly have tons of bugs, no legato transitions and whatnot. You don't expect to load SP1200 samples in an MPC. You don't expect to load Motif patches on a Korg Kronos. It's not a God-given right to have compatibility. It's really a convenient luxury, so for stuff that's compatible, be glad it is because somebody likely worked their ass off to bring it to you.

It's not beneficial, but it's just not going to change. To keep a piece of software supported, you need hours of work done. This costs money, and no current user will pay for it. It's not quietly accepting, it's learning to live in the world we have and understanding its limitations, working around them.

Also - again, do you really need to convert? If it's such a big deal for you, do it as the pros do - keep a disk, or even a separate computer with the software. And whenever you need that one sound for whatever reason, just do it quickly on that other machine, bounce it to audio and put into your main workstation. If you're really picky, you could set up a networked system and have real-time streaming that way.

The problem is these are not just audio files. They need to be played in a very particular way with lots of coding to decide what to play, from what starting point etc. Think more like a car with factory GPS navigation system. You can't expect to install other GPS software on it. Nobody does. Same for TV software and whatnot. It's not just audio, it's code and should be treated as such.

Not to mention most libraries use Kontakt's built-in effects such as convolution reverb (commonly with their own impulse responses), but still - porting this to other samplers (not everyone has built-in FX) without sacrificing quality would mean they have to create their own plugin with a convolution reverb built-in. Now, this is WAY more costly than just updating the Kontakt version. Some people do it. See EastWest or Best Service. The results are mediocre at best, simply because more often than not the custom player plugins die as soon as people switch to 64-bit, Avid introduces AAX, VST3 gets mainstream, etc etc. So, really - SF2 is just not going to happen with the current, advanced sample libraries. It's fine for playing back General MIDI karaoke files. It doesn't work for strings with legato, multiple mic positions, and articulations. You know why everyone uses Kontakt? What alternatives they have? SampleTank which never took off and keeps being IK-only? Or to support 10+ DAW-specific samplers, most of which don't have the features they need? Kontakt is *the sampler* for a reason. There is simply nothing quite as full-featured. And paradoxically, contrary to your belief, this makes Kontakt a more future-proof and safe purchase for years to come. Because everyone uses it and it wouldn't make any sense for people to abandon it, at least not without serious new players shaking things up.

 

its ok to make a libary not compatibel at next update ?

 

Last edited: Nov 5, 2018

It was never compatible or supported, it's just that another company played around and discovered a trick that allows them to grab raw WAV samples from libraries. People who make Kontakt libraries would rather not have you taking samples and selling them in your next sample pack, so they obviously aren't pleased with the situation. Hence NI updated Kontakt to give them peace of mind and keep making money on licensing Kontakt to them.

 

will small devs be able to afford kontakt license in future ?
why we see no kontakt warez rls 's anymore like in past ?
sry my syntax
------------
forgive me but imho the customer is king and kontakt 6 should able to play all kontakt 5 libarys...
but who is main customer now for kontakt its hollywoods scorers....for mainstream movie sure you need fx sounds but mainly you need orchestra libary which are the biggest and most expensive ones...
so bla bla
----
i totally get youre point bout converting but anyway a lot of ppl would like to do it in ways we both have not in mind ...and i hate when old stuff get abandoned cause they can make no money with it anymore and partly old stuff was even better then new stuff is sometimes a reason..for many ppl its only 85% kontakt now ..sort of you get my point
------------
that companys want protect their samples is biggest argument but i guess its the start of more control which was main reason...again apple tactics...
with not really new updates...reaktor 6 kontakt 6 all of version r/k 5 based..
and why they come not with a new synth no they come with massive 3000 ultimate...but for this it would be the better name : reaktor6 as reaktor5 ultimate

their raising in controllers and hardware was clearly their main focus...would love to kno how much of all that many different names of coders which worked on every old project still work there ..

 

Last edited: Nov 5, 2018

They do that through forced-obsolescence. That's the "lock-in", your libraries are hostage because you need to either keep running your ancient system, or pay to update something that already worked.

That's precisely my point. Software is expensive, yet there is no market incentive to make it open and future-proof.

Talk of "evil" is distracting hyperbole. My point is that music software companies are a minority, and strategies they pursue for their own self-interests do not ultimately benefit their customers. They are engaging in security-through-obscurity. and it is deliberate. In this case it's a continuous process of winnowing down what you are able to do with samples you bought. NI is actively developing their product to be less compatible. It does not really take years of expense and difficult cooperation to simply publish an open specification to your file format. In such a case, the work has literally already been done. Also, hardware versus software is a false dichotomy.

No, because those features are not part of the sounds themselves, they are part of Kontakt. That's why I argue that it's about publishing rights and lock-down of sample libraries. Not that you should be able to use Kontakt presets in other software. All I am advocating for is the user's access to and continued use of sounds they already bought.

You seem to be speaking on behalf of others again. People do work because it is necessary. NI used to be rather innovative, and that's why people were happy to compensate them for that innovation. But this lock-in is the opposite, it's "rent-seeking", milking users for more money while bringing minimal new value. They are coasting on their older innovations.

In the US at least, that would technically be illegal under the DMCA, just like screen-capturing an encrypted blu-ray movie you bought. What's at issue is not that there is no way to possibly circumvent the problem, it's that companies expect to be compensated for deliberately inflicting inconvenience upon their customers. It's cynical and disrespectful to those who they hope will continue to support them.

Again, that is obscuring the distinction between audio and presets. I DO expect to be able to use my RIFF audio like WAV in anything that can read it. I DON'T expect to be able to use Kontakt presets in Bitwig, nor Serum presets in Absynth. You are partly correct - our sounds do need to be played in a very particular way, but it is WE who decide what the proper way is, because they are our sounds, they we ideally bought a license to use as we choose.

That's demonstrably untrue, Kontakt isn't used by "everybody". And what else people could use is an empty rhetorical question - do your own homework. You are all but explicitly conceding that their practices are non-competitive. But where you and others are mistaken is that there are no choices. People can and IMO should choose to pay today's innovator rather than yesterday's rent-seeker.

 

I know this thread is about NI's change in code access, but I find the righteous anger from Chicken Systems just a tiny bit precious. Honestly, has anyone been able to get any of Chicken Systems apps working properly, ever? I remember spending weeks retracing my workflow, rereading the manual, parsing unpublished error codes and never getting a proper translation of anything. Going to their forum, it's impossible to ignore the hundreds of angry messages, many from apparently well-informed users - many using words like "lying" and "scam". I gave up, and a don't give up easily. The best thing about Chicken Systems is the picture on the cover.

 

That's literally how every TV and phone works.

It doesn't help customers, yes. But at the same time it doesn't give the competitors an advantage, which is probably something NI is more concerned about.

Thing is, these days you couldn't do much with raw sounds anyway since it's often short snippets that need to be pieced together in a certain way to achieve the full sound.

This is actually very true, though it's definitely also the case for most audio software manufacturers. The market just got too crowded and too competitive, everyone these days makes SSL clones and whatnot, the game is now reputation/word of mouth and system lockdown, as the case with Komplete and NKS. Everyone is playing safe these days. Just look at iZotope, they've been selling the exact same Ozone and just slapping gimmicks and auto features targeted at beginners.

It's not. If it would, it would be illegal to use the software in any music. Licenses forbid many things, but literally every single one will permit using it in songs. You're not creating a melody and selling it as your sample library, you're just bouncing a melody down to audio. It's the same as if you used the software in your main DAW and freezed it.

Well. "RIFF audio like WAV" is a standard established back in 1991 between Microsoft and IBM. But they had to create something, just like ASCII encoding or HTML for websites. This is barebones functionality, just the essentials. We already have that for samples in the form of SF2.

Though you're completely wrong with the second part. You're definitely not in a position to decide what the proper way is, and it is not your sounds, really. Just as with software, you're buying a license to use the thing, not the thing itself.

Just consider the features and support. The first one is the reason Kontakt took off. You won't find the scripting capabilities, the extensive FX section, the ease of branding (yes it is a big deal for sample companies to be able to skin the UI for their products)... there's nothing quite as appealing as Kontakt, period. Like, really. Any full, big-budget string libraries for UVI Falcon? Thought so. HALion? Anyone making samples for that except Steinberg? Image-Line's DirectWave? It's literally non-existent in the sample library market. ESX24? Nobody makes big serious stuff with that.

Of course there are choices. It depends on what you need to do your thing. By all means, use raw WAVs and soundfonts if that works for you.

 

@Qrchack That's why I don't use Kontakt anymore, because i know that none of his libraries will ever be mine, and I can't afford it.
On the other hand, I can sell my music, when it's created on legal software.

 

really...com on

but not computers and their soft (in the good old past)

 

true but how u use it is yours... or less now...
-------
look to this cloudshit of other devs....now you rent youre samples and then they gone

 

In "the good old past" you would need to replace everything because suddenly you jumped to a whole new machine with a completely different operating system. Every 4-5 years there'd be a new machine which is not compatible with the previous one at all. It was Macintosh and IBM PC who brought the idea of compatibility.

 

thats post good old times....good old times 1992-2007 or so

qrchack i get all youre points but you dont want to get hours man...and no of them schicki micki lib devs had needed a lock in...period.

 

not addressed retoric...

alexa,rfid chip,no cash - only card,his freezer knows best what he wants to eat , he dont kno ...he even didnt buy the food... it comes per drone, its controlled by freezer...his whole paperwork is in the cloud...his car is driven by google he dont need a license and dont need to drive cause he can work 24/7 from home...

 

YES true that had been thinking a lot why we dont have a open source sampler like blender all the small studios are shifting to blender and if we get something like blender for audio Kontakts dooms day begins.

 

bad company, years ago I bought the Roland MV translator, it never worked properly for me and others. Support suxx as well