# Bye bye Kontakt, hello UVI Workstation/Falcon!



## Udo (Dec 24, 2015)

The thread title says it all.

Developers will start to embrace UVI more and more!


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Dec 24, 2015)

Ya think?


----------



## d.healey (Dec 24, 2015)

Not unless the scripting capabilities exceed Kontakt's - another possibility on the horizon is HISE.


----------



## Stiltzkin (Dec 24, 2015)

While a new engine would be great, and kontakt could definitely use some improvements, the hardest part about swapping from kontakt is convincing the users to also swap. People know kontakt and it would have to be an investment to move away from it, which is a harder sell right at the beginning.


----------



## artmuz (Dec 24, 2015)

Beside Kontakt I use Mach5. 
Does Falcon improves a lot compared to Mach5. At least UVI/Mach5 browsing facilities are non to less.


----------



## koolkeys (Dec 24, 2015)

UVI/Falcon is great. It is still missing some performance advantages that Kontakt has, and both definitely have their strengths. Why not use both? Incredible libraries are available for both, and most Kontakt devs probably aren't going to go away from the Kontakt ecosystem, considering so many people have it and you can get it fairly cheap several times each year. I say bring on whatever platform will suit each instrument that is released, and let's create some healthy competition. 

I think Falcon has the chance of being competition more than MachFive 3 was because I feel like UVI actually wants to update this one(even though I know they coded MachFive, MOTU just didn't seem very interested in improving the product after release). And competition is nothing but good for us in the end!

Brent


----------



## Mystic (Dec 24, 2015)

I'm hoping Falcon becomes the new king sampler but I'm not holding my breath. NI has been sitting on their thumbs for far too long on updating Kontakt with some much needed features but I believe a new version is on the way. Getting developers to switch would be a task. Falcon would have to be tested and prove itself before many would take that leap.

I do hope Falcon gets better and takes the #1 position. I have yet to pick it up because of the challenge UVI is going to have with it but I'm hopeful.


----------



## EvilDragon (Dec 24, 2015)

I don't see it happening. Different tools for different tasks. Also Kontakt is still a lot more optimized for large instruments, much more so. You will continue to see huge orchestral multi-mic libs for Kontakt only. Falcon, not supporting multicore processing, simply starts choking way too early. Kontakt just flies.


Kontakt has had several VERY important features added recently: snapshots, better temposync support via scripting, and swapping FX on the fly via scripting.

And there are some other very nifty things coming, but my lips are sealed


----------



## rgarber (Dec 24, 2015)

Udo said:


> The thread title says it all.
> 
> Developers will start to embrace UVI more and more!



Gee, I don't know because everything I got that works in UVI is iLok protected and just the mention of iLok brings out a lot of hostility here. Or used to anyway... I have a ton of stuff that uses UVI but honestly as just a user I can't tell the difference in the qualities of they libraries, most sound great.


----------



## d.healey (Dec 24, 2015)

EvilDragon said:


> and swapping FX on the fly via scripting.


This I did not know, sounds very useful


----------



## reddognoyz (Dec 24, 2015)

my sample workstations in order Emulator2, Akai s900-3200, Mach5, Gigastudio, Kontak2-5. I like the UVI stuff, I was a tester for Mach5 1 and 2 but progress was glacial. Kontakt is my go to for 95% of my vi's and I agree with Evil Dragon, I don't see it being replaced by Falcon at all, but Falcon skews towards synth stuff and may well do great for those sorts of sounds.


----------



## Vastman (Dec 24, 2015)

MachFive seems dead in the water... fortunately libraries work in Falcon...

Falcon is wonderful, as is Kontakt... we live in amazing times. Cherish them.

The ilok issue is a not really an issue anymore. People are just ignorant. 15 minutes to download, authorize and be playing Bohemian last night.


----------



## Saxer (Dec 24, 2015)

Sounds to me like "bye bye violins, hello horns". 
Composers will start to embrace brass more and more.

Make sense?


----------



## Udo (Dec 24, 2015)

Saxer said:


> Sounds to me like "bye bye violins, hello horns".
> Composers will start to embrace brass more and more.
> 
> Make sense?



No.

I'd call that a "fashion" statement.


----------



## paulmatthew (Dec 24, 2015)

Not sure if it's possible but I wish there was a batch resave function in Uvi / Falcon . Does anyone know if it's possible to do this to speed up load times?


----------



## dpasdernick (Dec 24, 2015)

I don't think that Falcon will replace Kontakt but I am happy that UVI created it. I was jazzed about MachFive 3 with all that it could do but sadly MOTU did not continue to develop it. Falcon is definitely the next gen of MachFive. I hope new and diverse developers embrace it.


----------



## Vastman (Dec 24, 2015)

dpasdernick said:


> I don't think that Falcon will replace Kontakt but I am happy that UVI created it. I was jazzed about MachFive 3 with all that it could do but sadly MOTU did not continue to develop it. Falcon is definitely the next gen of MachFive. I hope new and diverse developers embrace it.


look no further than the Bohemian Violin...it's priceless!!! it takes awhile but the wave is coming ashore...


----------



## EvilDragon (Dec 24, 2015)

paulmatthew said:


> Not sure if it's possible but I wish there was a batch resave function in Uvi / Falcon . Does anyone know if it's possible to do this to speed up load times?



Quite simply - no. Apples and oranges. The reason batch resave speeds up loading in Kontakt is related to the binary file format used for NKIs, which Falcon does not use (it has an open human readable format, which is good for devs but much slower to parse and load for the end user).


----------



## babylonwaves (Dec 25, 2015)

Udo said:


> Developers will start to embrace UVI more and more!


... why?


----------



## paulmatthew (Dec 25, 2015)

EvilDragon said:


> Quite simply - no. Apples and oranges. The reason batch resave speeds up loading in Kontakt is related to the binary file format used for NKIs, which Falcon does not use (it has an open human readable format, which is good for devs but much slower to parse and load for the end user).


Thanks for the info . I figured that was the case . I still love the player and the instruments from uvi. I don't mind waiting for the load time so much .


----------



## Wes Antczak (Dec 25, 2015)

There is room for both and both are fantastic tools with their own strengths. I am very happy to have both at my disposal.


----------



## synthpunk (Jul 30, 2017)

A year-and-a-half since its release and not a great impact yet for Falcon, will it ever be? It's still on my list but until I see a sale, and some more promise I keep on passing.



dpasdernick said:


> I don't think that Falcon will replace Kontakt but I am happy that UVI created it. I was jazzed about MachFive 3 with all that it could do but sadly MOTU did not continue to develop it. Falcon is definitely the next gen of MachFive. I hope new and diverse developers embrace it.


----------



## heisenberg (Jul 30, 2017)

Picked it up on an accidental sale where one of the resellers had put it on sale when it shouldn't have been.

I, like a few who have Falcon, was overwhelmed by its apparent complexity at first. It took a good six to nine months of going back to it every couple of months before I had an "a-ha" moment with it. Since then I have picked up a handful UVI libraries to use within it's boundaries. That was the point where I realized the power of it as a "platform". The signal processing that is contained within it that is first rate and fosters a workflow that is fast. It allows you to go down a sound design rabbit hole or simply do all your reverb, delay, compression and some IRCAMesque processing right within the bounds of Falcon.

I am confident if UVI lowered the price of Falcon or at least had frequent sales on it, that people who got into Falcon would end up buying lots of their libraries to feed it. That is in essence what I am doing and pretty sure lots of others would do the same.

I am still very much just scratching the surface with Falcon but even with my limited understanding of it, I have to say it is a delight to use with all the high quality signal processing right at your fingertips.


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 30, 2017)

I'm using UVI now because of Acoustisamples B5 vrs. 2.
I'm willing to try more instruments.
Impressed with B5.
I'm not fond of the Hammond B3 because it craps out where you need it the most on the highest Octaves. When you play B3 style tunes you're always holding a Root/Octave or 5th, and when you glide up it's suppose to be climatic and get louder. 
So right away I was not fond and also found the Scanner Vibrato adds far too much volume.
Not a great application of a chorale effect.
But then tried the 1963 C3 and was relieved somewhat but the 1969 C3 is fantastic.
Chorale still gets a little hot but I lowered the upper tonewheels volume in the nifty draw EQ style option and it's very close to perfection.
The new Rotary cabinet is damn good, mic placement like PianoTeq.
For 70s era tributes I leave my HX-3 Hammond Module and Lester K Pedal in a different rig.

So I'm pretty happy with UVI and AcousticsampleS.
I'm going to try some other stuff since I can only compare NI Vintage Organs from Kontakt.
I love Kontakt but NI Instruments are pretty lame on the most part.
I bought Scabbey Road Drums, Vintage Organs, Vintage Keys, Session Horns Pro.
Session Horns Pro was decent but the rest of the Dogs won't hunt.
I use Chris Hein and BBB.
I like fat stuff.

But sure would love AcousticsampleS to do an Ehru.
I've bought 3 so far and they all suck.
Thin razor-ish annoying scratchy ass chalkboard sounding crap.
But I'm not a quitter.
I keep falling for well done demos then cringe when I get them.

Charge me more damn it. I don't care, just make 'em Phat...


----------



## Vastman (Jul 30, 2017)

I too picked it up at intro. Bohemian Violin & Cello are the only truly amazing introductions since then and it is sad but those two alone are well worth the purchase.

Hard for any entry to "kompete" against Kontakt and the fact it's single core is frustrating. Generally don't care for uvi's offerings as they're not unique and I have them covered elsewhere.

Still hold out hope but...


----------



## elpedro (Jul 30, 2017)

artmuz said:


> Beside Kontakt I use Mach5.
> Does Falcon improves a lot compared to Mach5. At least UVI/Mach5 browsing facilities are non to less.


Mach5 is Falcon as sold by MOTU, it has not had any updates for at least a year (maybe there's a breakdown in relationship between the two companies?). Falcon has undergone various updates since then and has improved no end.I got a license for M5 on the cheap on ebay and just use the included libraries with Falcon.Falcon is a weapon!If forced (at gunpoint!) to relinquish all my other softsynths/samplers in favor of one, I would probably go with Falcon.(I own omnisphere and Kontakt and Halion6)..


----------



## robgb (Jul 31, 2017)

Udo said:


> The thread title says it all.
> 
> Developers will start to embrace UVI more and more!


Not sure why we have to say goodbye to any particular platform. There's room for them all.


----------



## d.healey (Jul 31, 2017)

robgb said:


> Not sure why we have to say goodbye to any particular platform. There's room for them all.


Hello Giga!


----------



## Quasar (Jul 31, 2017)

Vastman said:


> MachFive seems dead in the water... fortunately libraries work in Falcon...
> 
> Falcon is wonderful, as is Kontakt... we live in amazing times. Cherish them.
> 
> The ilok issue is a not really an issue anymore. People are just ignorant. 15 minutes to download, authorize and be playing Bohemian last night.


Count me among the ignorant. I woudn't consider the platform unless they lose the 3rd party CP.


----------



## bigcat1969 (Jul 31, 2017)

Kontakt seems to have survived the threat of Falcon much like the Patriots have survived the threat of the new Cleveland Browns. Let me know if Kontakt dies however I'll stop working on this freebie orchestra and the one I hope to start working on next year. We can all find those delightful 3rd party libraries for Falcon.


----------



## robgb (Jul 31, 2017)

d.healey said:


> Hello Giga!


Hey, I still have giga libraries that I used once in awhile...


----------



## robgb (Jul 31, 2017)

Quasar said:


> Count me among the ignorant. I woudn't consider the platform unless they lose the 3rd party CP.


The software version of iLok is painless. I will never, however, buy any software that requires a dongle. Been there, not doing it again.


----------



## rottoy (Jul 31, 2017)

I'm still waiting for HD-DVD to surpass Kontakt. Or even Betamax.


----------



## Sosimple88 (Aug 18, 2017)

rottoy said:


> I'm still waiting for HD-DVD to surpass Kontakt. Or even Betamax.


Betamax is still the king!


----------



## angelonyc (Oct 18, 2017)

I totally love Falcon.. You can get quite deep with it.. To me it has a better sound engine, than Kontakt.. Of course at this point, no one will be able to ever match the Kontakt libraries available.. I view it as a VI to use along with Kontakt. They each have their own strengths. Their tech support is excellent. Tried to use HALien but Steinberg was so poor with their tech support, I gave up.. Finally I got a message they knew HALien 6 did not work right on a Mac, but they left the demo up, anyways knowing it wasn't going to work..


----------



## synthnut1 (Sep 24, 2018)

There’s more and more great products using iLok....Someone please talk me into using the software version.....I’ve avoided iLok products like the plague over the years....I might have to set up a separate iLok computer to try out the software version.....????.....Jim


----------



## synthnut1 (Sep 24, 2018)

One of the best tips that I’ve gotten while using Kontakt came from Evil Dragon when he talked about shutting off the security software running in the background on sample drives to speed up loading... I can’t tell you how many times I did batch resaves in Kontakt and it never helped at all ..... Turning off the security on my sample drives was one of the most amazing things I’ve ever done when working with Kontakt....Does this same trick work with Falcon ?


----------



## Quasar (Sep 24, 2018)

synthnut1 said:


> There’s more and more great products using iLok....Someone please talk me into using the software version.....I’ve avoided iLok products like the plague over the years....I might have to set up a separate iLok computer to try out the software version.....????.....Jim



Stand your ground! The more people who avoid intrusive copy protection like the plague, the better the chance that it will go away.


----------



## MillsMixx (Sep 24, 2018)

A lot of the companies that use iLok are really great like Sound Toys, UVI, etc...but I've had more than my share of problems with it over the years and now I'm faced with another one. 

The motherboard on my new machine was faulty and had to be replaced. I got my PC back and all was good until I updated the iLok software and now it's showing 2 versions on my same PC being recognized. Now it won't let me deactivate and of my previously activated plugins and I literally have thousands of dollars invested in software being used in iLok.

That's one thing Kontakt Native Access has over iLok stuff. I'm sure I'll eventually figure it out with them but tech support hasn't been all that great.


----------



## Mystic (Sep 25, 2018)

Once iLok gets their cloud service available across the board, it will be a lot less of an issue for people. I've been pretty happy using dongles with no *knock on wood* major issues to speak of. These developers have the right and should be protecting their work so I'm fine with using it.


----------



## d.healey (Sep 25, 2018)

Mystic said:


> Once iLok gets their cloud service available across the board, it will be a lot less of an issue for people. I've been pretty happy using dongles with no *knock on wood* major issues to speak of. These developers have the right and should be protecting their work so I'm fine with using it.


A cloud service, that sounds horrible. Tell me more...


----------



## Mystic (Sep 25, 2018)

d.healey said:


> A cloud service, that sounds horrible. Tell me more...


Basically it would require your computer to be online and logged into their server pretty much like how Steam's DRM works. All your licenses would be on their server rather than a dongle or hosted on a computer itself. At this point, ProTools uses it as well as McDSP. I think a couple other companies might be using it as well. It'll be easier for most people as you never have to worry about losing a dongle or losing licenses due to a hardware issue with your computer. The only downside is that it will require to have the computer on the internet but let's face the facts: that is a very minor thing these days. If you configure your system properly, you won't have much to worry about as far as forced updates or a lot of background programs constantly connecting to servers.


----------



## d.healey (Sep 25, 2018)

Mystic said:


> The only downside is that it will require to have the computer on the internet but let's face the facts: that is a very minor thing these days. If you configure your system properly, you won't have much to worry about as far as forced updates or a lot of background programs constantly connecting to servers.


I'm glad my iLok is not compatible with my OS, this is awful. Every time you use a product with an iLok your computer will tell iLok's computer exactly what piece of software you are using and how long you used it for - and perhaps some other info (there is no way to know what data they will collect). And when iLok has a data breach your data will be at risk. When iLok's servers go down (they have in the past) you won't be able to do any work. Clouds, DRM, and dongles are words that put me off using certain software. If I have to tell somebody every time I want to run a program then I'm not going to use that program. This provides no benefit to users, it only has benefits for the developer.


----------



## X-Bassist (Sep 25, 2018)

MillsMixx said:


> A lot of the companies that use iLok are really great like Sound Toys, UVI, etc...but I've had more than my share of problems with it over the years and now I'm faced with another one.
> 
> The motherboard on my new machine was faulty and had to be replaced. I got my PC back and all was good until I updated the iLok software and now it's showing 2 versions on my same PC being recognized. Now it won't let me deactivate and of my previously activated plugins and I literally have thousands of dollars invested in software being used in iLok.
> 
> That's one thing Kontakt Native Access has over iLok stuff. I'm sure I'll eventually figure it out with them but tech support hasn't been all that great.



I did something similar a few years ago and did get it sorted out with them. The tech let me know they can restore all or your authorizations, but only once a year. I think that was 2014 and I haven’t had issues since. I own all three generations of iLok and the first one is admittedly sketchy, you could even see the electronics inside it and for me it was always a “connect it with everything off, de-static yourself, never touch it again” kind of device. But the 2nd genration really changed that and made it something more reliable, I felt fine carrying it around with me (even came with a cap). But this third generation is so small (the size of a usb connector), holds thousands of licenses, and is one piece of metal, seems indestructable. I’m not saying it you couldn’t still zap it if you’re not careful, but I have yet to hear of one going down (maybe someone here has a story). 2nd gen? Yes. But 3rd? Maybe they are finally realizing we need something a little more bullet-proof.

Now I was there at the beginning with all the sketchiness, so I understand those that have swore off it for life (there are still a few companies I won’t buy from either). But ilok has come into it’s own since that first generation, and today I feel more secure about choosing an iLok license than expecting my computer to never go down (I’ve had a couple of motherboards and a few system harddrives die in the past 2 decades). Do you think you’d get those licenses back? I’m not sure (depends on the company) but for something like Pro Tools, where you only have 1 license and that’s it, it can be a $300 mistake. Being able to pull my iLok, and stick it on a new computer without transferring 285 licenses is a big deal for me. That with a backup of my plugins has saved my butt before. That’s why installing licenses to your computer seems a bit daft, or do you think your computer is going to warn you before it goes down for good?

I’m just glad most companies give you more than 1 license. But many are still just 2 or 3. Doesn’t give you ton of room for error, but I suppose it’s fair (and many smaller companies will help you out with more if you contact them personally). Still, it makes me smile to see sample developers give you 7 or more downloads. At least they understand sh*t happens.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 25, 2018)

Mystic said:


> Once iLok gets their cloud service available across the board, it will be a lot less of an issue for people. I've been pretty happy using dongles with no *knock on wood* major issues to speak of. These developers have the right and should be protecting their work so I'm fine with using it.



Wrong. The developers do NOT have the right to "protect" their products at the expense of reliability, utility and convenience for the honest end-user. Every single nanosecond of lost time, every single joule of lost energy caused by intrusive CP is theft. These are corporate crimes. As such they should be condemned and boycotted, not excused.

There will be no digital-age software rights regarding autonomy & privacy until we demand them. The current status quo is nothing less than obscene. Power to the People and all of that...


----------



## Mystic (Sep 25, 2018)

Quasar said:


> Wrong. The developers do NOT have the right to "protect" their products at the expense of reliability, utility and convenience for the honest end-user. Every single nanosecond of lost time, every single joule of lost energy caused by intrusive CP is theft. These are corporate crimes. As such they should be condemned and boycotted, not excused.
> 
> There will be no digital-age software rights regarding autonomy & privacy until we demand them. The current status quo is nothing less than obscene. Power to the People and all of that...


I've never had a problem with iLok. Most people I know have never had a problem with their iLoks. If you're having a problem with your iLok, my guess would be that the problem lies between chair and keyboard rather than the iLok so this "theft" of time you talk about is complete horse dookie. Not saying that shit doesn't happen because there are things that are beyond the spectrum of black and white, but it's far more rare than some people would have you think.

That said, believe what you want. I'll continue to support companies that use these protection methods just like many others because they generally put out high quality products I actually want to use.


----------



## angelonyc (Sep 26, 2018)

I use Falcon and have 96% of all their libraries.. I love it. UVI makes a great product. Not being scientific, but I feel the UVI Falcon sound engine, is cleaner, that Kontakt. (not scientific). At this point, because of the huge amount of Kontakt libaries, they are a standard. 

I use Falcon's editing, but there is still an amount for me to learn there. I've had my share of problems with Ilok. truth used to I HATE it, but I understand it's necessity. Now only rarely does, it interfere with operations.

I have 'little snitch' on my computer, and it is disgusting how many software companies, neurotically need to 'phone home' all the time. Yes, and the limited number of authorizations, is a bit frightening. But on occasion I have had to contact software companies, and they re-up my authorization for a particular product.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2018)

angelonyc said:


> ... I've had my share of problems with Ilok. truth used to I HATE it, but I understand it's necessity. Now only rarely does, it interfere with operations...



Necessity? You may use anything you like, support anything you like, believe anything you like. But to call parasitically intrusive 3rd-party corporofascist CP a "necessity" is simply flat-out, objectively wrong.


----------



## Will Blackburn (Sep 26, 2018)

synthnut1 said:


> One of the best tips that I’ve gotten while using Kontakt came from Evil Dragon when he talked about shutting off the security software running in the background on sample drives to speed up loading... I can’t tell you how many times I did batch resaves in Kontakt and it never helped at all ..... Turning off the security on my sample drives was one of the most amazing things I’ve ever done when working with Kontakt....Does this same trick work with Falcon ?



What security software do you mean, the bloatware?


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 26, 2018)

Quasar said:


> Wrong. The developers do NOT have the right to "protect" their products at the expense of reliability, utility and convenience for the honest end-user. .



At the expense of reliability, no, they don't. At the expense of your convenience, yes, they do. Utility is somewhere in the grey zone.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> At the expense of reliability, no, they don't. At the expense of your convenience, yes, they do. Utility is somewhere in the grey zone.


Even if I grant your point (which I don't), then regardless of whatever extent iLok/PACE might be problem free "most" of the time for "most" people, an abundance of anecdotal evidence makes it crystal clear that at least some end-users are locked out of their paid-for products for at least some x% of time, so it can be conclusively asserted that iLok/PACE has an overall negative impact on software reliability.

And this determination can be made before even getting into the much darker issues of Orwellian intrusion into our God-given (or natural if you prefer) privacy rights.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 26, 2018)

Quasar said:


> Even if I grant your point (which I don't), then regardless of whatever extent iLok/PACE might be problem free "most" of the time for "most" people, an abundance of anecdotal evidence makes it crystal clear that at least some end-users are locked out of their paid-for products for at least some x% of time, so it can be conclusively asserted that iLok/PACE has an overall negative impact on software reliability.
> 
> And this determination can be made before even getting into the much darker issues of Orwellian intrusion into our God-given (or natural if you prefer) privacy rights.



Even if I get your point about the much darker issues of "Orwellian intrusion into our natural privacy rights" in every aspect of our lives, unless you are not ever going online to buy or to post, that ship sailed long ago.

I don't doubt that all copy protection schemes are problematic at times, although personally I have experienced little. But if I invest a lot of time and money into creating something, I am going to make damn sure that it is protected from thieves (and no, they are not just a handful, they are rampant) and if that inconveniences the honest ones, oh well, I am sorry, but we don't live in a perfect world, consumers or creators.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> Even if I get your point about the much darker issues of "Orwellian intrusion into our natural privacy rights" in every aspect of our lives, unless you are not ever going online to buy or to post, that ship sailed long ago.
> 
> I don't doubt that all copy protection schemes are problematic at times, although personally I have experienced little. But if I invest a lot of time and money into creating something, I am going to make damn sure that it is protected from thieves (and no, they are not just a handful, they are rampant) and if that inconveniences the honest ones, oh well, I am sorry, but we don't live in a perfect world, consumers or creators.



The computer I am typing on right now, yes, has surrendered any pretense of privacy. The ship of my DAW workstation, however, has not yet sailed, save for a very few minutes of being online to activate 3rd party libraries because Native Instruments went rogue, a few minutes that I still most bitterly resent and hope to never again repeat. I am still trying to wrap my brain around how to deal with that travesty long-term, and don't yet have an answer.

Is software theft rampant? It either is or it isn't. If it isn't, then the control-freak CP serves little purpose. If, as you say, it is, then it obviously isn't very effective, and thus still serves little purpose. Wasn't iLok cracked a couple of years ago? So I suppose they then make a new one. But locks will always be broken, and the beat goes on because - as you so aptly put it - we don't live in a perfect world.

This is sort of a variant on the old criminal justice question: Is it better to punish some of the innocent so as to catch all of the guilty? Or is it better to never punish the innocent even at the cost of some of the guilty going free? In the US at least, this question of jurisprudence was decided (in theory at least) long ago in favor of protecting the innocent.

In short, your perspective elevates profit above people, and mine elevates people above profit. And at any rate, I can't help but notice the large number of developers who by all appearances have become quite wealthy WITHOUT resorting to intrusive CP. Spectrasonics, for instance, has righteous CP, and seems to be thriving. Even Native Instruments only went over to the Dark Side AFTER becoming big and successful. They used to be cool, then chose, from a position of strength, not to be. I can only attribute this to having succumbed to a most wanton form of myopic greed.


----------



## Ashermusic (Sep 26, 2018)

Respectfully, Quasar, there are some gaping holes in your logic.

Can we agree on the following:
1. Most developers do not enjoy pissing off their clients.
2. Most developers can count and therefore see how often they were ripped off before they changed copy protection vs after.

If so, then:

"Elevating profit over people." Are developers not al,.so people? Their families that they have to feed, not people? Nowhere in a dictionary will you find that consumer is a synonym for people.

There is a rather big difference between sending someone to jail vs inconveniencing them.

Yes, copy protection will sometimes be broken but if a developer continues with their form of copy protection it is because they think largely it is working. They are not stupid.


----------



## X-Bassist (Sep 26, 2018)

I understand feelings on this subject run deep when you've lost work or money when something goes down. I've had an iLok go down, but as I stated, that was first generation, which at this point are useless for anything made in the last 15 years. So just as I don't judge kontakt based on version 1 (or 2 or 3), iLok has also gone through a lot of improvements. To the point I never have an issue with it and it works seemlessly, even when switching computers and yanking the dongle (which is now version 3, the size of a shift key).

Others here seem intent on speaking about privacy issues when dealing with pace software. Again, never had them take any serious info from me, and they pretty much remain in the background (getting paid by developers who want it, not from me directly). Yet there is no mention of all these other services (youtube, google, spotify, etc) that do the same thing, but to a greater degree. And yes your studio may be cut off from the outside world, but what does it really have? Your DAW, plugins, instruments, and use history? Is that really what anyone would care about? No, it's your computer with your emails, credit cards, and bank passwords that is more in danger, yet that one is hooked up 24/7. Brilliant.

Now if iLok goes only on the cloud that would be a bigger flag for me, but only at the thought of downtime with bad internet or their server. But let's be real, iLok only works when the app loads, it could be that the cloud only needs to access things during loading. We'll see. Ironically my hope is they will still let us keep our dongles, at least you can keep working when the outside world craps out.


----------



## Mystic (Sep 26, 2018)

X-Bassist said:


> Others here seem intent on speaking about privacy issues when dealing with pace software. Again, never had them take any serious info from me, and they pretty much remain in the background (getting paid by developers who want it, not from me directly). Yet there is no mention of all these other services (youtube, google, spotify, etc) that do the same thing, but to a greater degree. And yes your studio may be cut off from the outside world, but what does it really have? Your DAW, plugins, instruments, and use history? Is that really what anyone would care about? No, it's your computer with your emails, credit cards, and bank passwords that is more in danger, yet that one is hooked up 24/7. Brilliant.


This is the part that kind of had me laughing a bit. I get not wanting to have your computer online for resource reasons but realistically, processors and RAM are fast enough these days that most impact to system will be minimal to connect to a server and check version numbers for updates or ping authentications. It does sometimes (mostly on Windows) take some setup time but that's expected on a Windows machine designed for audio work anyway so the point is moot.

Here you have a guy posting on a public forum about "Orwellian" situations when Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc. are all collecting data on us all. It's hypocritical and makes the argument completely moot. Throw out your smartphone, don't use any modern banks, don't even log into a computer if that is your fear. Just pulling strings at this point looking for a way to complain about it.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> Can we agree on the following:
> 1. Most developers do not enjoy pissing off their clients.
> *2. Most developers can count and therefore see how often they were ripped off before they changed copy protection vs after.*



We agree on point 1, with caveats.

We do not agree on point 2, because no one can monitor global activity on the internet. What is happening is simply uncountable. Then there are the whole, too-often-discussed issues of speculative ratios between illegal downloads and real-world lost sales, teenage pirates who subsequently grow-up and become paying customers, people who might want uncrippled trials before they buy, studios who pay but prefer cracks because they're paranoid about CP failure and so prefer unlocked versions etc...

Since I'm just an amateur end-user, I admit to being biased in that direction. But I continue to believe that the overwhelming majority of real musicians, pro or hobbyist, would WANT to honestly acquire what they use. (If I were making music on stolen property, how could I even concentrate artistically on what I was doing? It would pollute the whole vibe.) 

Of course developers are people, but why can't they simply count sales as sales, and focus on those of us who are willing to pay instead of those who are not? If I were a businessman, once it became established that you were not interested in paying me money (for whatever reason), then I'd simply move on and concern myself with the people who might be interested in what I have to sell. Attempting to police people who are not my customers strikes me as a complete waste of time & energy. In the B&M hardware world, shoplifting costs money because it depletes stock. This is not true for software.

My caveat re point 1 is that in a global village (there have been studies about this) it has been demonstrated that sellers need only be concerned with not pissing-off people beyond a certain threshold, and that it's neither time nor cost efficient to try and keep everyone happy. This is qualitatively different than for local businesses in small towns, who have to worry about each & every customer lest word get around... For example, ED has as much as admitted that from NI's point of view, the number of people, like me, who cherish 100% offline workstations is too few to worry about, so it's entirely okay to betray us and piss us off. Since there's not enough of us, we simply don't matter to them.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 26, 2018)

Mystic said:


> Here you have a guy posting on a public forum about "Orwellian" situations when Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc. are all collecting data on us all. It's hypocritical and makes the argument completely moot. Throw out your smartphone, don't use any modern banks, don't even log into a computer if that is your fear. Just pulling strings at this point looking for a way to complain about it.



Your argument is entirely false. Yes, all of these entities are most assuredly collecting data on all of us. But they are NOT collecting data from my DAW workstation because it remains autonomous & offline.

So, unwittingly, you have only made a strong case for our right to unintrusive offline activation so that we may keep our creative lives isolated & protected from that whole data-mining interactive cesspool. Thank you!


----------



## Mystic (Sep 26, 2018)

Quasar said:


> Your argument is entirely false. Yes, all of these entities are most assuredly collecting data on all of us. But they are NOT collecting data from my DAW workstation because it remains autonomous & offline.
> 
> So, unwittingly, you have only made a strong case for our right to unintrusive offline activation so that we may keep our creative lives isolated & protected from that whole data-mining interactive cesspool. Thank you!


And why would anyone even want to collect information from your DAW other than maybe the makers of said DAW for diagnostics and crash reports? Better question: why would you even care? It's not like they would be downloading all your work. That's not how any of that works. The tin foil hate wearing is strong here and I thought I was hardcore on the privacy issues.

In any event, nothing either of us say is going to change the others minds on it. I'll continue doing what I do; you continue doing what you do, everyone is happy.


----------



## germancomponist (Sep 26, 2018)

The fakt is: Kontakt Sampler is so very good! I think that the most users do not know about its abilities!

Kontakt Sampler is also a very good synthesizer! I bet, 95% of the owners of this great tool do not know how to program it, do not know more than playing libraries with it. ... .
Many years ago, HZ told me: "Experiment, experiment and experiment!" I did it and also have found out what is makeable with Kontakt-Sampler.


----------



## Saxer (Sep 29, 2018)

germancomponist said:


> The fakt is: Kontakt Sampler is so very good! I think that the most users do not know about its abilities!


Sure. But Kontakt isn't the only one sampler with that range of functions.


----------



## Lindon (Oct 2, 2018)

Quasar said:


> {snip}
> 
> Since I'm just an amateur end-user, I admit to being biased in that direction. But I continue to believe that the overwhelming majority of real musicians, pro or hobbyist, would WANT to honestly acquire what they use. (If I were making music on stolen property, how could I even concentrate artistically on what I was doing? It would pollute the whole vibe.).....
> {snip}



Yes nice view-point, only one problem with it: As a developer of audio software my EXPERIENCE over 15 years of development work and hundreds of products is that this is entirely incorrect. EVERY single product I have been involved with that did not have some form of protection was pirated, and when I say "pirated" let me explain how this affected sales. Sales proceed reasonably for 1 to 2 months(at best) and then they appear on a pirate site and sales fall off a cliff. It really didn't matter how much profile the product/developer had or the price of the product this was a uniform curve. Whereas if the product had some form of protection then the product continued on its merry way in sales terms falling away (slowly) over 6-18 months, as might be expected and predicted. Sometimes the product was hacked and the protection was defeated, and sales "fall off a cliff" again. Perhaps my experience is unique, and with so many products across so many developments this would be a massive coincidence but hey it might be. Or possibly more likely (and sadly) the majority you speak of are more than willing to use stolen software.


----------



## tack (Oct 2, 2018)

@Lindon what was the criteria used to determine whether one of the products you worked on would have copy protection?

I'm just wondering if there's some other correlate here that's actually causal rather than copy protection. For example if higher profile, more expansive and sought-after products tended to have copy protection (because the investment was considered worth the hassle) and the others didn't, this factor could explain the sales curves.

This is the problem with anecdote vs data. Not meaning to dismiss your experience but controls and analysis are important to understanding real cause and effect. Otherwise confirmation biases will seep through however well meaning one's intentions.

It could well come down to copy protection being causal but we'll never _really _know for sure without controlled data.


----------



## Lindon (Oct 2, 2018)

tack said:


> @Lindon what was the criteria used to determine whether one of the products you worked on would have copy protection?
> 
> I'm just wondering if there's some other correlate here that's actually causal rather than copy protection. For example if higher profile, more expansive and sought-after products tended to have copy protection (because the investment was considered worth the hassle) and the others didn't, this factor could explain the sales curves.
> 
> ...


@tack you are right confirmation bias can be a part. But truth is that the product set has been wildly variable across price/product/vendor profile, but the results have been consistently similar. But you are right controlled data would give you an answer. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I might have such data available. I was (I hope) just outlining the posters "belief" vs my experience - YMMV

Perhaps some other developer here might offer an alternative view.


----------



## dcoscina (Oct 2, 2018)

I would jump ship too but every sample library I use is only Kontakt formatted so I have to stick with it. I hope Orchestral Tools comes out with their own player at some point.


----------



## Quasar (Oct 2, 2018)

Lindon said:


> Yes nice view-point, only one problem with it: As a developer of audio software my EXPERIENCE over 15 years of development work and hundreds of products is that this is entirely incorrect. EVERY single product I have been involved with that did not have some form of protection was pirated, and when I say "pirated" let me explain how this affected sales. Sales proceed reasonably for 1 to 2 months(at best) and then they appear on a pirate site and sales fall off a cliff. It really didn't matter how much profile the product/developer had or the price of the product this was a uniform curve. Whereas if the product had some form of protection then the product continued on its merry way in sales terms falling away (slowly) over 6-18 months, as might be expected and predicted. Sometimes the product was hacked and the protection was defeated, and sales "fall off a cliff" again. Perhaps my experience is unique, and with so many products across so many developments this would be a massive coincidence but hey it might be. Or possibly more likely (and sadly) the majority you speak of are more than willing to use stolen software.



Interesting, if (as mentioned above) anecdotal rather than empirically rigorous. Can't argue with your experience, but am curious as to what you mean by "protection", since AFAIK virtually all products that are not Open Source or freeware have some form of protection. And AFAIK most products are (or soon will be) available illicitly anyway...

Your experiential evidence seems to imply that _most_ end-users cynically pay for what they perceive they have to, and take the rest for free. This doesn't, intuitively at least, seem real to me. Nor does it explain why Spectrasonics, FabFilter, u-he and many, many other developers are by all appearances very successful despite having righteous CP. Native instruments may now have evil CP, but this change was recent, and they became quite large (and presumably profitable) before implementing their current draconian formula.

But your anecdotal evidence should be taken seriously. To whatever extent piracy truly does lead to _lost_ sales (as opposed to being merely non-sales) then I agree that this is a terrible problem.

If (as I tend to believe) pirated copies don't equate to lost sales at a very high ratio, I would assert that from a dev's POV it shouldn't matter. IOW if your goal is to sell 10,000 units to recoup costs and make a tidy profit, then as long as you do that you're fine, and there is no pragmatic reason to worry about non-customers who otherwise acquire your product, because they're non-customers whether they've downloaded an illegal copy or not. Ethical considerations notwithstanding, it still (under this scenario) makes no material difference, and the ethical problem is on them, not you.

If, however, it's true that sales "fall off a cliff" whenever an illegal copy becomes available, then the only viable solution would be to have extremely robust, crack-proof CP in place for all products - for at least as long as current capitalist models for disseminating resources remain intact - or to use protection that tackles the problem on the back-end instead from the front. Watermarks, for instance, are not at all intrusive, but could be effective at dissuading people from actually using stolen stuff in public arenas, and violators could be sent summons or whatever...

I'm neither a developer, a pirate, a businessman nor a capitalist, and thus don't pretend to have a competent perspective on what is occurring in the world of music software sales. But what I do know is that I do not purchase products from companies who have CP I dislike. In the last couple of years I have bought Omnisphere 2, Zebra/Dark Zebra, and recently broke-down and got FabFilter's Pro Q 2. If these developers didn't have righteous CP, they would not have made those sales. Developers who insist on using 3rd-party dongles & drivers, impose spyware on my offline machine or compel me to take it online get ZERO dollars from me, which is to say they get exactly the same revenue from me that they would get if I were a pirate. So from their business POV, why would it even matter?


----------



## Akarin (Oct 2, 2018)

dcoscina said:


> I would jump ship too but every sample library I use is only Kontakt formatted so I have to stick with it. I hope Orchestral Tools comes out with their own player at some point.



They "somehow" jumped ship when partnering with Steinberg and making Iconica for the HALion platform.


----------



## Lindon (Oct 4, 2018)

Quasar said:


> (lots of interesting balanced comments removed here...}
> 
> If, however, it's true that sales "fall off a cliff" whenever an illegal copy becomes available, then the only viable solution would be to have extremely robust, crack-proof CP in place for all products -
> 
> (and again..)



Not quite. An "extremely robust, crack-proof CP" is one road to go down. But each CP costs to build and implement, so its a matter of comparing revenue losses vs development costs for CP.

Here's my anecdotal view: MOST pirates are simply "kiddies" uploading products they have purchased to pirate-sites and basking in the Kudos of their peers. There are very very few "hard-core" code hackers at work - there are some for sure but not that many. 

These hard-core guys are mostly looking at getting Kudos for *their* peers - who are most definitely NOT the kiddies, so they aim (mostly) at those "evil-CP" systems as you call them, and leave the righteous stuff alone(too easy no challenge). 

So "limited-CP" seems to remove the kiddie "I know how to do an upload" problem, and flies under the radar of the "hard-core" guys. 

We use an authorisation system in our products - we send you a unique code - you enter the code into the product, the product writes this code into itself and the product starts to work. If you upload the (working) product to a pirate site, we download it - interrogate it for its authorisation code - and we uncover you....and start sending nasty lawyer letters. 

Is this "calling home"? No. 
Is this "collecting data on you"? Nope.
Is this "evil CP"? Your call, if you dont like it then (as you say) dont buy.
Is this system breakable?. Absolutely. A smart capable hacker should be able to break it in a reasonable amount of time.
Does it work? Absolutely. Many "kiddies" have posted pleading requests on pirate sites for "someone" to break it, no one seems to be interested in doing that.

Meanwhile back at this threads topic(slightly) I use Falcon, it has a dongle - which as far as I can tell its not using for anything other than authorisation, if its "calling home" then its doing it by magic as the machine its on has no internet access. So in the end if ours is "not evil" then I think by logic neither is UVI's.


----------



## EvilDragon (Oct 4, 2018)

Well, with the difference that iLok uses system resources and installs a background service for it to work, whereas your homebaked solution is not.


----------



## angelonyc (Oct 31, 2018)

I bought Falcon, a while ago, and own all the UVI Libraries.. To me, the Falcon's sound engine is clearer than Kontakt. I don't like ILOK, but it is a necessary evil I guess, and they've got the procedure down pretty well, You purchase your UVI library, taken to you UVI account, can register the library with Ilok, run Ilok manager to activate it. download library, put in your UVI folder, restart computer, and you can be using your new library with 10 minute of purchasing it.. 
Of course there are so many more Kontakt libraries, don't think UVI will catch up, but there are some very nice libraries available, and for the 1st month, and periodically they put up some libraries for a good discount. Most of these are moderately priced. I had the libraries, who decide they can charge you a fortune, too often i have bought them, and felt the price not worth it. 

There is a loth you can do with Falcon, I ave just barely scratched the surface with it, and it does require some serious studio to master all of it. 

I think the serious here will probably want both Kontakt and Falcon/UVI. At least UVI, is giving other libraries a run for their money, which ultimately benefits us, the users. 

You can get the free UVI workstation, but Falcon, really ups the game. You can do some serious modifications within it's innwards, if you have the patience to learn it


----------



## angelonyc (Oct 31, 2018)

Lindon said:


> Not quite. An "extremely robust, crack-proof CP" is one road to go down. But each CP costs to build and implement, so its a matter of comparing revenue losses vs development costs for CP.
> 
> Here's my anecdotal view: MOST pirates are simply "kiddies" uploading products they have purchased to pirate-sites and basking in the Kudos of their peers. There are very very few "hard-core" code hackers at work - there are some for sure but not that many.
> 
> ...


----------



## EvilDragon (Oct 31, 2018)

angelonyc said:


> To me, the Falcon's sound engine is clearer than Kontakt.



Raw sample playback is basically the same quality. UVI mentioned to me they're not doing anything special regarding interpolation or whatever. I managed to get Falcon and Kontakt to null down to noise floor when the same exact sample is gain staged properly between the two. Where Falcon does have the edge are the effects, the modulation, and good UI - which are definitely important things. It empowers sound design very much.

They're perfectly complementary.


----------



## Jaybee (Nov 1, 2018)

My only(and first) experience of the UVI sample player has been with the excellent Bohemian Violin/Cello from Virharmonic but I have to say, compared to Kontakt it's incredibly "laggy" and slow to load (yes I have everything on SSDs etc). More of an issue is it's general unresponsiveness and I find *closing* the UVI player window to take 10+ seconds here when either of those libs are loaded. Could be the libs I suppose but heavy libraries in Kontakt are not an issue.


----------



## Quasar (Nov 1, 2018)

Lindon said:


> ...We use an authorisation system in our products - we send you a unique code - you enter the code into the product, the product writes this code into itself and the product starts to work. If you upload the (working) product to a pirate site, we download it - interrogate it for its authorisation code - and we uncover you....and start sending nasty lawyer letters.



What you seem to be describing, a unique code that writes itself into the product enabling it to work, is traceable if pirated because it's unique but enables the honest end-user to simply install it, be done with it, and keep a copy of the code for future use when replacing a hard drive or whatever...

...If the code can activate the product offline, and a copy of the code can be kept so as to still work if the company goes out of business, then this is what I would call ideal CP, the kind I do support and continue to hope (no doubt in vain) becomes the norm.


----------



## Lindon (Nov 2, 2018)

Quasar said:


> What you seem to be describing, a unique code that writes itself into the product enabling it to work, is traceable if pirated because it's unique but enables the honest end-user to simply install it, be done with it, and keep a copy of the code for future use when replacing a hard drive or whatever...
> 
> ...If the code can activate the product offline, and a copy of the code can be kept so as to still work if the company goes out of business, then this is what I would call ideal CP, the kind I do support and continue to hope (no doubt in vain) becomes the norm.


Yep thats exactly what it is.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Nov 22, 2018)

I would put HALion into the mix as another useful complementary instrument to Kontakt. Very under-rated. Like Falcon, it's great at creating complex layers, using wavetable and granular synthesis as well as samples. Where it shines is in its flex-phraser arpeggiator and the tools for making your own instruments. It has a setup where you can play in notes and it names them and sets them up. And it has a built-in GUI maker (with drag and drop knobs and sliders) that is easy to use. Then you can sell or give your instruments away, as they can be played on the free Steinberg player.

Of course, it doesn't have many third party instruments, and probably won't ever have many. On the other hand, it's selling today for https://www.bestservice.com/deals/steinberg_halion_60_off.html (133 bucks).


----------



## arcy (Feb 27, 2019)

Now that Falcon is included in Pro Tools, maybe we will see a little bit more libraries development for the UVI engine.


----------

