# Xhail software:Is this a joke or what?



## Christof (Sep 30, 2014)

Take a look:

https://vimeo.com/104488077


----------



## IFM (Sep 30, 2014)

It seems too complete to be a joke. Well, all the projects that want to use 'free' music can buy this and then hire the rest of us when they want to step up to a real project.


----------



## Vlzmusic (Sep 30, 2014)

I have visited the site - looks like it suppose to be serious - but could be a prank of course 

If it is real - for true`s sake - that animation was scored exactly like many tracks being praised here at VI .

Kinda hope its real, if just for keep believing in genius minds out there.


----------



## musicformedia (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Its real - they're an Irish company close to where I live.

Its been created by Mick Kiely - AAA video game composer:

http://www.mickkiely.com/about.html


----------



## Christof (Sep 30, 2014)

Hey cool, that means I never again have to worry about lack of inspiration and ideas 

I simply copy and paste the instructions from the mail my director sent to me and boom, the cue is written and ready to bounce.


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

I look forward to seeing this on youtube productions.


----------



## murrthecat (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Planet Earth, 2214...

Once upon a time there was a job role called "the composer". Directors and producers were keen to use composers in their production to have an original musical footprint in their piece of work. Then, slowly, this role became obsolete, like court minstrels and trobadours, and music with the same sounds and souls started to be created by producers with the help of machines. The world became a less happy place to be, music sounded all the same, musicians were just begging for work in the streets, playing their dusty instruments in poverty...

...I am joking (I hope).

All the best,
Ale


----------



## Stephen Rees (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

The 'happy' music didn't sound happy to me.....


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 30, 2014)

Everything about the result sounded really generic to me, like band-in-a-box. If you are worried about your job, don't be generic.


----------



## Martin K (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Isn't this similar to Smart Sound that has been around for at least a decade? 
I wouldn't worry about this 

best,
Martin


----------



## simonmac (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Interesting and a tad worrying although an original approach nonetheless. A short review can be found here: http://en.audiofanzine.com/misc-mus...ic-interactive/xhail/news/a.play,n.18935.html. According to this, there are composers creating the stems used and they will be paid profits from sync and retain writers share.

Guess it'll depend on the licensing fees as to how much it affects potential work and it'll be interesting to see how they cope with potential plagiarism as someone pointed out. At precisely what point does the generated 'music ' become a work under copyright?


----------



## dinerdog (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

I don't think plagiarism will be an issue with such generic background music. I'm sure there will be something in the fine print when you use it that will indemnify and protect all the concerned parties. It's band in a box on steroids, and that's (unfortunately) good enough for many productions these days. VO is king anyway. It's not art, it's music by the pound.


----------



## Andrew Goodwin (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

That's quite interesting. 

Actually I've been working with a company(Featuring.Me) doing a similar thing, but more on the recorded radio side. It's essentially a store like iTunes, but you can make your own version of an artist's song. 

http://tomandhebron.featuring.me/album/zoyugo/muddy
http://awakeawake.featuring.me/album/healsingle/heal

I bring this up, because I've thought from the moment I met them that it could be helpful in getting more work licensed. The artist controls all the choices that are presented, not a computer.

also with these new ideas you have to remember that these companies have to be successful financially for them to make any kind of impact. xhail could tank by next year or maybe it will somehow be useful to composers for getting ideas who knows


----------



## Andrew Goodwin (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

ohh was a bit confused so it's an interactive music library, guessing you have to be admitted or hired by xhail to produce music


----------



## clarkus (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Does anyone know David Cope, a composer @ UC Santa Cruz? This is the more awe-inspiring version of the same phenomenon. Will we see more & more music written by computers that is more and more convincing? I don't doubt it. This is either alarming and despicable or a testament to how clever people & machines have become. Take your pick.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2009/09/ ... ntroversy/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqNcnIkYM4s


----------



## germancomponist (Sep 30, 2014)

Dragonwind @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> It seems too complete to be a joke. Well, all the projects that want to use 'free' music can buy this and then hire the rest of us when they want to step up to a real project.



Do not underestimate the stupidity of the audience! o/~


----------



## mverta (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Not my audience. Always go find your audience.


----------



## germancomponist (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



mverta @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> Not my audience. Always go find your audience.



Our Mike! o/~ 

Salut!


----------



## germancomponist (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Christof, I would exchange the headline here to invite more people to discuss this theme, a serious topic!!


----------



## SergeD (Sep 30, 2014)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> Everything about the result sounded really generic to me, like band-in-a-box. If you are worried about your job, don't be generic.



+1

Band-in-a-box 2.0. Though the software and GUI seem very attractive and intuitive it doesn't create anything new, but unfortunately endanger the future of some composers. 

On the other side, it may be great as a tool to stimulate explorations over the generic stuff.


----------



## Mahlon (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

I wonder if we're going to see another Craftsman movement in this century. Certainly seems ripe for it, doesn't it?

Mahlon


----------



## José Herring (Sep 30, 2014)

I don't know guys. I've seen at least a dozen of these types of products and programs and I always think the same thing. Anybody that would use this is probably a production that doesn't want to hire a composer anyway. 

I feel like the only people that should be worried are people that write the most generic music imaginable for libraries that nobody uses. There's just no feeling or emotion in these programs, even the loop based ones.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

What music plays when you type:

We're gonna need a bigger boat.

She's my sister AND my daughter. 

Don't cross the streams. 

Get the butter. or The horror...

?


----------



## maraskandi (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

That Chopin Mazurka ripoff is exactly that, it just takes sections of Chopin music and stitches it together somewhat coherently, but it is literally parts of his music chopped and changed, plagiarised. Ridiculous.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



Stephen Rees @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> The 'happy' music didn't sound happy to me.....



My thoughts too!

(I expected a Bossa Nova :idea: )


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



givemenoughrope @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> What music plays when you type:
> 
> We're gonna need a bigger boat.
> 
> ...



That's where the dev hid the easter eggs  Just like with Google


----------



## Greg (Sep 30, 2014)

Really a cringeworthy idea for so so many reasons. Im sorry but this guy is delusional.


----------



## clarkus (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



> That Chopin Mazurka ripoff is exactly that, it just takes sections of Chopin music and stitches it together somewhat coherently, but it is literally parts of his music chopped and changed, plagiarised.



Mmm... nope. That's not what you're hearing. Read the article on David Cope. Or any article on David Cope.

Computers are more than capable, when given parameters & data, of generating new material. And in recent years there's been considerable progress in teaching computers to get better at what they're asked to do. i.e. they can learn.

Don't shoot the messenger.

These compositions are original to the computer, based on the style of the composers they are given.

I am not here to tell you these pieces are "as good as" Mahler, Beethoven, Vivaldi, Bach. But they are not existing pieces stitched together. And anyone who says that this technology won't improve and be able, ultimately, to write scads of convincing music in a given style is, I think, putting themselves in a rather treacherous position, given what's happened with technology in the last few decades. What we decide our position in the world is or should be given all this is perhaps a better issue to mull over ... somewhat like the orchestra players who are certain people will continue to pay them for that vanishingly small amount of realism they provide. 

What I've been wondering lately is if all this might have a really positive effect, in that the race to write music that is more and more generic (like, say, the "Epic" action movie trailer) becomes more and more silly. This is exactly what can be mechanized effectively. 

If you listen to this software's emulation of a "Crime Drama" cue, it's actually pretty damn good. I don't think these fellows are wasting their time. Whether they have launched prematurely remains to be seen.

As others are inferring here, when a director needs to meet with a composer & talk about what he / she needs & engage in a collaboration, a human being will likely be the preferred talent for some time to come. But when someone needs a few dozen CSI cues for a low-budget reality TV series, and you can generate hundreds of convincing cues for next-to-nothing ...

Well, never mind ... I'm sure I must be wrong about that. Let's get back to whatever we were all doing.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



clarkus @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> Computers are more than capable, when given parameters & data, of generating new material. And in recent years there's been considerable progress in teaching computers to get better at what they're asked to do. i.e. they can learn.



Does this mean that BachRules was right?!!


----------



## clarkus (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Sorry, Clawson. Went right over my head. I Google "BachRules" & I get an elegantly dressed young man playing Bach on the guitar. Is he a robot?


----------



## MichaelL (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

http://www.xhail.com/about.html

They've invited composers to contribute "stems" to their library/database. At first I wondered how this could be done without violating the EULA of every sample library in existence. But, based on my reading of their website, it looks like they want "composers" to compose and record stems on their own instruments...non-sampled, I assume.

Then somehow, based upon the clients choice of mood/instrument tags the program spits out a composition. Never mind that pesky mixing and mastering process that studios now waste thousands of dollars and countless hours on.

No doubt, somebody somewhere will use this program. But the good news is that composers get to keep 100% of their writer's share and 50% of the sync fees. Of course if the machine spits out an orchestral cue, you may only get 1/60 of the writer's share assuming that there could be 60 stems by different performer / writers. Pity the poor guy who only wrote the cymbal part.

Just imagine, a cue sheet with 60 writers on it! :roll:


----------



## José Herring (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



clarkus @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> Computers are more than capable, when given parameters & data, of generating new material. And in recent years there's been considerable progress in teaching computers to get better at what they're asked to do. i.e. they can learn.



No they haven't. I've been hearing the same argument for over 20 years now. 20 years ago there was somebody working on a computer that could "sound just like Mozart". It couldn't. It stunk. Same with this Chopin example. No better than was accomplished 20 years ago. So where's the progress and learning? Sounds like a bunch of computer geeks trying to get grant money at a university to me.

The problem being is that you can build an algo covering parameters and probability, but you can never really teach it aesthetics. A computer will never understand what beauty is, will never be able to approximate it. 

So what you get is a computer that spits out 200 random compositions based on a particular set of parameters where 1 of them vaguely sounds like a classical piece. 

To call that "learning" is ridiculous. The "Chopin" example is a great example, besides it being poorly played which I'll cut the computer some slack on that, it only has a vague resemblance to Chopin. If this computer works anything like the chess algos, then they just take 1000's of games, feed it to the computer, program the rules and then when the computer plays it predicts based on probability the correct move. In chess, since your not dealing with aesthetic judgement and real emotions, it can do a great job playing chess. But in music, it will always be regurgitated, repetitive and lacking in originality. 

A computer can't think. It hasn't judgment. It can only follow the rules. Art that only follows the rules is boring.


----------



## SergeD (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



clarkus @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> And in recent years there's been considerable progress in teaching computers to get better at what they're asked to do. i.e. they can learn.



Yes it can learn from this marvel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTg1n95--KE
and reproduce something alike (as many musicians did in the last year), but it could not create that song.


----------



## mathis (Sep 30, 2014)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> Everything about the result sounded really generic to me, like band-in-a-box. If you are worried about your job, don't be generic.



That's it.


----------



## clarkus (Sep 30, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

Hi, Jose - You're pointing toward fundamental differences in the way we operate and the way computers operate, and well you should. 

Jaron Lannier ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaron_Lanier

... has pointed out that "Google Translate" is actually an amalgamation of many individual humans' translations, and that we are a long way from a point where a computer can grasp the subtleties of language and give a satisfactory real time translation of a sentence or paragraph.

With that said, there have been advances in what computers can do within the bounds of what computers can do. 

If you haven't read the essays on or interviews with David Cope, you might find them surprising. The creation of these pieces did not come about in the way you suggest i.e.
"spits out random compositions, of which 1 sounds vaguely like a piece by Chopin." I'm not going to get into the specifics, as others have done that for me, but the process represents a more nuanced investigation into this thing called music and - in my opinion - actually tells us some interesting things about what we are up to when we compose.

There's also an interview on Public Radio that's pretty cool.

http://www.radiolab.org/story/91515-musical-dna/

For another (arguably more useful) use of computers learning to get better at a complex process, there's this ...

http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2 ... ancer.html

This is all several levels of the game above the "Ex Hail" software, which as far as I can tell is "Snip and put stems together" software. No one is claiming in that case that the computer is doing anything as interesting as learning how to compose.


----------



## mathis (Oct 1, 2014)

It would be interesting to see what happens if one forcefully misleads EMI by mixing several composers. Isn't often the new 'personal' style an amalgamation of several influences?


----------



## Neifion (Oct 1, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

I think this is adding another tier to the current two-tiered system. The top tier will be the projects that can afford a composer and a live orchestra. The middle tier will be the projects that can afford a composer using samples. The bottom tier will be those that can't afford a composer at all, and have to resort to this.

So I believe there's no reason to fear; it might inevitably take a chunk out of composer work, but it will be of a lower quality than most professional composers can accomplish. In ways, I think it parallels what happened to musicians when samples hit the scene. Before samples, you had to hire live musicians for all non-electronic recordings. Nowadays, samples can suffice for some projects, but they don't replace musicians, they just fill out the current lower tier. Projects that can afford live musicians can and will pay for them because it's the premium.


----------



## murrthecat (Oct 1, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



germancomponist @ Tue Sep 30 said:


> Christof, I would exchange the headline here to invite more people to discuss this theme, a serious topic!!



Yes, I think so too.

And I ask one question: why do humans often use their creativity to find ways of paying less, even if this brings down the quality of the product? 

If I have to eat a tomato, I want it to taste like a tomato and I am not happy to have saved money for a tasteless food...

Best,
Alessandro


----------



## MichaelL (Oct 1, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



murrthecat @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> germancomponist @ Tue Sep 30 said:
> 
> 
> > Christof, I would exchange the headline here to invite more people to discuss this theme, a serious topic!!
> ...




For every industry there is always the type of buyer who is looking for cheaper, not better, either because they do not know the difference, or they do not care.
For those buyers, there is also someone who sees an opportunity to make money, who may also not know or care. 

The concept presents a legal quagmire. The stems that "composers" submit must be created by the composer playing a real, not virtual, instrument. To use virtual instruments would violate the EULA of most sample libraries, because Xhail is one big construction kit. It is a composing tool, not a library, which is forbidden by every EULA I've read.

So, unless I've read Xhail's website incorrectly, each composer submits a stem based upon some form of template / brief, e.g., "happy in the key of G at 120 bpm" Then Jose would compose and perform a happy clarinet stem. Christof would compose and perform a happy cello stem, Daryl would compose and perform a violin stem, etc. 
At the end of the day you have a bunch of random stems in the key of G at 120 bpm, which the computer then assembles into a "composition." I imagine it would be analogous to a conductor stepping in front of an orchestra and saying "put down the music. Everybody just play something happy in the key of G, whatever comes to mind, here's the tempo." 

The legal quagmire, however, is deeper. Each composer gets 100% of his, or her writer's share. That, of course, cannot be based upon the entire composition, but only upon the portion of the composition comprised of that writers stem. Therefore, if the composition is for orchestra and has 60 to 90 stems from different composer / instrumentalists, 100% of the writer's share would be divided 60 to 90 ways.
The accounting alone will be a nightmare (for the PROS). Moreover, one can easily imagine the epic battles between the "composers" of various stems over the accuracy of their percentages. 
Suppose one "composer" sneaks in a stem from a sample library. Is he the only one who gets sued? Not likely. If I was filing the suit, I'd go after everyone involved in the whole composition...more money on the table.

Adam asked in another thread "why do composers submit to Xhail." The obvious answer is because there are a lot of desperate composers, who think /hope that they will make money, get discovered etc. Recently a number of production music writers submitted copies of photo IDs, drivers licenses or passports, to a royalty free library in Central Europe. That library is now out of business. What became of those ID's? Huge risk....all in the hope of a few royalty free sales.

However, the question remains, will the "composers" actually make money? So far, this software is being marketed to game developers. Is there backend PRO money for music used in games? I don't think so. 
What is the likelihood that the producers of Castle are suddenly going to drop Robert Duncan of Xhail? Nil. What is the likelihood that reality TV producers are suddenly going to turn their editors into instant-composers, when they can call up well-produced cues with Soundminer and slice n' dice in an instant? Nil. Time is money. 
So...if there's no PRO money from games and TV producers don't use the product, the "composers" of the stems get zilch. 

Lets not even talk about the instant mixes, which might sound passable on laptop speakers and ear buds......
I think the only "composers" who should be concerned are those whose work this program most closely replicates...cut and paste loop based "composers," because this program is automated loop-based composing.

We should all worry less, and write more human-based music. The world will not end.


----------



## Musicologo (Oct 1, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

I already wrote extensively about this subject on other threads since this is my area of research in university. 

So I just leave two analogies:

1) Did Mac Donalds put "slow food" restaurants and gourmet chefs out of business? No.

2) Did Mac Donalds create new markets and opportunity of business in the sense that people who couldn't afford normal restaurants can afford this one and so they use it? Yes.

3) Is the taste of food in Mac Donalds appealing? To its clients yes (otherwise they wouldn't go there), to the large population seems yes as well, to chefs no.

4) Is the quality of food in Mac Donalds acceptable? To mostly anyone, no.

So in the end: in my view the mechanization of processes is a trend since XX century in many industries. It simply creates new markets and new opportunities for certain tiers of the population offering fast, sometimes appealing products, with low craftmanship and doubtful base material. I don't see as a threat for any professional, I see it as a way to amateurs or low budget people to also join the market and circulate within it. 

With these kind of programs perhaps a student film who would not pay anything at all now will spend 30 bucks... or so...


----------



## MichaelL (Oct 1, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

I agree with Musicologo.

One small point for professional composers who consider submitting, because they think they will get backend PRO royalties.

This product is a composition tool, an automated loop / phrase based construction kit. When a human composer uses loops or phrases to create a cue that he/she puts into a library, which then gets used on television, who gets the royalties, the sample library, or the person who created the new work using the loops and phrases?

Hint...it's not the sample library. Technically, the person using Xhail, who makes the aesthetic decisions, like less of this, more of that, trumpets here, but not there etc., is the creator of the new work, and owner of the copyright entitled to the royalties, unless they somehow sign away those rights as a condition of using the product.


----------



## murrthecat (Oct 2, 2014)

I think what scares me is not the threat to our profession, which might be non-existent, but the fact that a composer wants to submit music to this project, which would mean the end of his/her control over his/her composition, under all points of view, and maybe somewaht illegal if done with samples (as it has been pointed out).

There is this trend in the market, but I also see the other trend, in food for example, where more and more people are tired of eating vegetables without taste. 
I am based in North Italy, so I speak from a 'preferential' point of view in terms of food, but when I lived in Glendale, CA, I remember there was a weekly market with local vegetables and food every Sunday.

Is there such a trend in music, where we move back to a richer experience in music in terms of quality? Are we doing that?

I would be very much interested in this movement.


----------



## G.E. (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



Musicologo @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> I already wrote extensively about this subject on other threads since this is my area of research in university.
> 
> So I just leave two analogies:
> 
> ...


I think we could end the thread with this. To me this argument is so solid that there's no point in debating the subject any further.



> I think what scares me is not the threat to our profession, which might be non-existent, but the fact that a composer wants to submit music to this project, which would mean the end of his/her control over his/her composition, under all points of view, and maybe somewaht illegal if done with samples (as it has been pointed out).


If you were desperate for work and couldn't find it any other place, wouldn't you submit ?


----------



## MichaelL (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*

[quote="G.E. @ Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:55 am" 
If you were desperate for work and couldn't find it any other place, wouldn't you submit ?[/quote]


No, actually. If I was desperate for work I would get a non-composing job, as soon as possible, or go back to practicing law.

In my bohemian "artiste" days I worked as a bartender. It was a lot of fun an paid well...possibly more than you will get from submitting to a new library, and faster.


----------



## ed buller (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



Musicologo @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> I already wrote extensively about this subject on other threads since this is my area of research in university.
> 
> So I just leave two analogies:
> 
> ...




nailed it

e


----------



## murrthecat (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



MichaelL @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> [quote="G.E. @ Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:55 am"
> No, actually. If I was desperate for work I would get a non-composing job, as soon as possible, or go back to practicing law



Me neither. I wouldn't compromise music, I would continue writing and making music and I'd look for another (creative) way of making a living. Work is work, music is music. Sometimes they coincide, sometimes don't.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 2, 2014)

The McDonalds analogy is useful, and this ain't the first time it has applied, so put that perspective in your bag for the next time something like this comes down the pike.
GarageBand 1.0 was a WAY WAY worse threat than this piece of garbage.
May this thread not go to a third page.
Only meat left on this bone is the questionable concept of authorship that Michael brings up. And this is probably a function of the Xhail_Composer agreement, not whatever philosophies we might hash out here.


----------



## AlexandreSafi (Oct 2, 2014)

From a purely sociological & economical business point of view, yes, musicologo is absolutely right! From a philosophical, ethical and even artistic point of view, doing anything that increases more generic stuff on the market sends a message in that direction and encourages the already state of decline & desensitization which you can already see happening, 'till the point craftsmanship gets more & more ignored and worse case gets lost, whereby people not only don't know any better about excellence & quality, but also by their marvelous ability to adapt in any situations, they also won't be able even to tell how bad and how low it is getting once it's there, because that's all that there ever will be, shit here, and shit there... And then maybe finally comes back the big question: how did we get here and what's the point of living? 
Our thoughts & actions gravitate towards what we value the most... You either value surviving, or you value living & thriving for yourself and as a community...


----------



## SergeD (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



Musicologo @ Wed Oct 01 said:


> It simply creates new markets and new opportunities for certain tiers...



Is that scheme can be applied to recreational products?

Do you know that a mediocre apps free game will be preferred to any selling game no matter how good it is? 

Imagine Facebook putting a very small fee this next morning, the website will crash within a month. Of course it will create new markets and new opportunities, but as long as they are free.


----------



## MichaelL (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



murrthecat @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> MichaelL @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="G.E. @ Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:55 am"
> ...




I'm not so much concerned about "compromise"....that's a discussion for a completely different thread.

My point is that there are faster ways to make money than composing and submitting to ANY library.


----------



## MichaelL (Oct 2, 2014)

madbulk @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> The McDonalds analogy is useful, and this ain't the first time it has applied, so put that perspective in your bag for the next time something like this comes down the pike.
> GarageBand 1.0 was a WAY WAY worse threat than this piece of garbage.
> May this thread not go to a third page.
> Only meat left on this bone is the questionable concept of authorship that Michael brings up. And this is probably a function of the Xhail_Composer agreement, not whatever philosophies we might hash out here.




I agree totally with the MickeyD analogy. No worries. Water seeks its own level.

On the legal issue, I've engaged Mick, XHAIL's CEO, on another forum. Among other things, he clarified that the client / end user would be entitled to a writer's share in the new work that they generate. 
IMO, that may very well violate most VI EULA's. He doesn't think so. I'd rather hear that confirmed by Doug Rogers or Paul Thompson than just take someone's word for it.


----------



## Markus S (Oct 2, 2014)

MichaelL @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> On the legal issue, I've engaged Mick, XHAIL's CEO, on another forum. Among other things, he clarified that the client / end user would be entitled to a writer's share in the new work that they generate.
> IMO, that may very well violate most VI EULA's. He doesn't think so. I'd rather hear that confirmed by Doug Rogers or Paul Thompson than just take someone's word for it.



I'd be interested in that. I would assume such a product would only use custom samples and custom recording. Are commercial sample libraries used to create this tool?


----------



## MichaelL (Oct 2, 2014)

Markus S @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> MichaelL @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > On the legal issue, I've engaged Mick, XHAIL's CEO, on another forum. Among other things, he clarified that the client / end user would be entitled to a writer's share in the new work that they generate.
> ...




I would have assumed that too. But, no. XHail is looking for "stems," which could be individual instruments or full sections to be contributed by composers...like submitting to a music library.

At this time, XHail's CEO believes that the use of sampled instruments to create these "stems" would not violate the developer's EULA. My opinion (and I stress opinion), is that such a use may very well violate mots developers EULA's. It should be easy enough to find out. There are enough developers who read this forum. 

Here's why: XHail's premise is that it's users / clients are creating new and unique works from the stems submitted. According to XHail the creator of these new works would own a share in the copyright of the new work, and be entitled to PRO royalties. 

So, let's say you create a string section stem using East West's Hollywood Stings, and then XHail's client uses that stem to create new composition. In essence, XHail's client is composing with Hollywood strings, if even in a limited manner. Doing so may very well be a form of transfer or third party use, which would violate most developer's EULA's.

One might argue that what the software is doing is nothing more than selecting library cues and mixing them together. But, if that were the case, you would not register the "new and unique" work with a PRO, or the copyright office. For example the music editors who piece together 100 different cues during a half hour episode of reality TV do not claim to have created a new work from the cues. 

I don't think that you can have your cake and eat it too. It is either a compositional tool used to create new and unique works, or it is not. If not, it is a cue selection, editing and mixing tool, and you should not market it as creating "new unique works." 
I don't think that it can be both. Each scenario has different legal ramifications and different potential economic ramifications for both users and contributors.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 2, 2014)

*Re: Is this a joke or what?*



SergeD @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Musicologo @ Wed Oct 01 said:
> 
> 
> > It simply creates new markets and new opportunities for certain tiers...
> ...



+1


----------



## Markus S (Oct 3, 2014)

MichaelL @ Thu Oct 02 said:


> Markus S @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelL @ Thu Oct 02 said:
> ...



Yes, I have a similar understanding of the situation. It is probably a gray zone where developers of the used sample libraries have not forseen this type of product. My understanding is that is violates the license agreements, since the recordings of the sample libraries are used to derive a "product to make music". Whereas these sample libraries are created for composers to only make music themselves.

If the end user of Xhail is the composer then I think they have created some sort of sample library with other sample libraries. If the stem creator is the composer (and declared as, including royalties), then it would be OK (Xhail would be some sort of interactive music library).

It surprises me that the developer of Xhail didn't get in touch with the sample developers about this, or maybe he did?


----------

