# Has anyone successfully gotten a refund from Spitfire



## Greg (Jul 19, 2019)

Extremely disappointed with a purchase, any point in asking for a refund?


----------



## Clawrence (Jul 19, 2019)

I tried with BT Phobos.....soooo unhappy with that.....and literally when I saw orbis I said that looks like another Phobos. No luck on the refund though. If I remember right they gave me a %30 off code or something. I really like almost all of my spitfire stuff but thx for letting us know about orbis


----------



## AllanH (Jul 19, 2019)

Spitfire is rather explicit with their refund policy. I still think it's worth asking.


----------



## Garry (Jul 19, 2019)

Sorry, but *IF* this is true , then you really ought to pay a stupidity charge! Call it a Darwinian tax!

This library came out *yesterday*, and you went through this cycle in less than 24 hours: you bought it with almost zero research, and rejected it with almost zero playing. I'm afraid you can't cry that you want your money back when you look after it so badly yourself in the first place.

Pause on the 'add to cart' a little longer next time , and if not, give yourself a little more time to go through your purchase.


----------



## Quasar (Jul 19, 2019)




----------



## Geoff Grace (Jul 19, 2019)

Is it really necessary to add insult to injury? I know this is the Internet, but we don't have to behave like it is.

It is good advice, however, to take your time before purchasing; but now that you have the product, maybe there's also a way to make lemonade out of what you may feel is a lemon. Judging from the walkthrough video, there are a lot of ways to modify the sounds. Perhaps after putting in some time working with the instrument, you might create some sounds that you like?

Last but not least, I agree with *AllanH* that it doesn't hurt to ask. Even if you don't get what you want, there may be a consolation of sorts, as *Clawrence* mentioned.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## jtnyc (Jul 19, 2019)

Geoff Grace said:


> Is it really necessary to add insult to injury? I know this is the Internet, but we don't have to behave like it is.
> 
> It is good advice, however, to take your time before purchasing; but now that you have the product, maybe there's also a way to make lemonade out of what you may feel is a lemon. Judging from the walkthrough video, there are a lot of ways to modify the sounds. Perhaps after putting in some time working with the instrument, you might create some sounds that you like?
> 
> ...



I agree - the internet has become a place where some don't even hesitate to just call someone stupid, cry baby etc... 

You really have to wonder if these folks would speak like that if they had just met someone in a social situation. Would they really have the balls to just call someone stupid to their face? I doubt it. 

Sorry you made a bad purchase Greg. Spitfire will not refund your money. While it was a pass for me, the walkthrough did have some tasty sounding bits to my ears. I wasn't all that impressed with the playable instruments, but a lot of the loop/phrase stuff sounded quite good. Natural and legit (as in real ethnic performances) as opposed to so much loop content you hear these days. I think that's what sets it apart. I'd give it some time and see. There is a lot of content to dig through there. 

I'm sure I'll be looking at it again during future sales. Hey, how is the performance of the plugin? cpu hit etc?


----------



## Quasar (Jul 19, 2019)

I looked at the walkthrough and thought it interesting and kind of cool. It appears to have some very good and authentic organic sounds, earthy instead of synthy, but it's way, way too expensive for me right now.

But in general principle, I am always sympathetic towards and in favor of expressing these sorts of complaints for the simple reason that _no refund + no resale_ is unethical, extremely unfair and should be against consumer protection laws. If it was only one or the other one could argue that this would be reasonable, but having both together - leaving the end-user without any rights of redress whatsoever - crosses the line as a legitimate business practice IMHO.

I say this even though it doesn't much matter to me. There are too many other software usage rights abuses that I believe to be far more sinister and in dire need of revolutionary change. No refund/resale is trivial compared to CP that violates offline and privacy rights.


----------



## Random Guy (Jul 20, 2019)

I suspected that this would happen. Let's all cut the crap and just say it... the library is a miss.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jul 20, 2019)

Garry said:


> Sorry, but *IF* this is true , then you really ought to pay a stupidity charge! Call it a Darwinian tax!
> 
> This library came out *yesterday*, and you went through this cycle in less than 24 hours: you bought it with almost zero research, and rejected it with almost zero playing. I'm afraid you can't cry that you want your money back when you look after it so badly yourself in the first place.
> 
> Pause on the 'add to cart' a little longer next time , and if not, give yourself a little more time to go through your purchase.



Musicians patronizing musicians! /golfclap


----------



## Guido Negraszus (Jul 20, 2019)

I'm quite interested in this library since I produce a lot of world and ambient music. What is it you don't like? I thought that's what walk through videos are for.


----------



## rottoy (Jul 20, 2019)

Garry said:


> Sorry, but *IF* this is true , then you really ought to pay a stupidity charge! Call it a Darwinian tax!
> 
> This library came out *yesterday*, and you went through this cycle in less than 24 hours: you bought it with almost zero research, and rejected it with almost zero playing. I'm afraid you can't cry that you want your money back when you look after it so badly yourself in the first place.
> 
> Pause on the 'add to cart' a little longer next time , and if not, give yourself a little more time to go through your purchase.


Pause on the "Reply" a little longer next time , and if not, give yourself a little more time to go through your statement.


----------



## TrondB (Jul 20, 2019)

If you don't do your research and you are quite sure you need/want the product, the responsibility of buying it lies on you. You win some you lose some. These things are a risk, I know that going in.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Jul 20, 2019)

Sometimes GAS causes discomfort.


----------



## Uiroo (Jul 20, 2019)

Well, _somebody_ needs to buy it before there are any reviews, right? Could you tell us how it differs from what you expected?

But I still think it is a bit much to ask for a refund unless the product presentation is actually deceptive. Is it?


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 20, 2019)

I remember when I bought Metropolis Ark II. At first I was really disappointed, and would have loved to return it. But slowly it grew on me, and now I am quite the fan.

Hopefully you will come to appreciate Orbis in time.

As I already have Omnisphere, and am far more focussed on orchestral composition, Orbis never had any appeal for me from the second it was announced. But that doesn't make it a bad product - just one that's not for me.


----------



## Pablocrespo (Jul 20, 2019)

Uiroo said:


> But I still think it is a bit much to ask for a refund unless the product presentation is actually deceptive. Is it?


If they allowed resales that good be logical.


----------



## star.keys (Jul 20, 2019)

Thank you for saving my money...


----------



## vewilya (Jul 20, 2019)

It seems a bit early to judge Orbis IMHO. It sounds really intriguing to my ears to be honest and the new GUI for eDNA looks stunning. I will look into this for sure when I get back from my holidays. But it seems that working with this library will take some getting into i suppose...


----------



## axb312 (Jul 20, 2019)

Cheers Greg. I too wish Sample Lib devs would offer refunds. Or full feature trials.


----------



## robgb (Jul 20, 2019)

Greg said:


> Extremely disappointed with Orbis, any point in asking for a refund?


Wish I could get a refund for Albion One.


----------



## robgb (Jul 20, 2019)

Since Spitfire now utilizes their own player, I don't see why they can't set it to time out after, say, 24-hours, and the only way to unlock it is to pay for a license. They could use their player for ALL demos but also make Kontakt versions available for purchase.


----------



## Banquet (Jul 20, 2019)

I received a refund from Spitfire a little while ago. I bought a library but hadn't realised it didn't work on Kontakt player. I was reading the manual while downloading when I noticed it needed Kontakt full. The download was half done but I cancelled it immediately and contacted Spitfire, asking for a refund. They did refund me but stated they were only able to do it because the download hadn't completed. 

I know from previous correspondence with them that, once one of their libraries is installed in Kontakt they have no way knowing if people are using it or way to stop them using it (hence they don't offer a rent to buy scheme, which had been my suggestion)

Contrast that with my experience yesterday. I planned to buy a Moog DFAM from a local music shop but at the last moment decided to get the Grandmother instead. I hadn't even tested it and there was no time to try at the shop because they were closing, so, based on all the good feedback I'd heard, I went ahead and bought it. I said to the shop assistant that I must be mad to buy it without having tried it at all. He told me that was no problem, I could play with it at home for a couple of weeks and return it if I didn't like it. If only software could be the same! As it turns out, in the case of the Grandmother, it's absolutely gorgeous and won't be going anywhere! 

Luckily, most of the sample libraries I've bought I'm very happy with. One I would return, if I could, would be EDNA Earth though, which is why I steered clear of Orbis.


----------



## Polkasound (Jul 20, 2019)

Several months ago I bought a set of relatively expensive libraries from a certain developer, thinking they would fill a much-needed gap in the VI world. The libraries sounded very nice (not perfect) in the demos, so I bought them figuring I'd be able to tweak them to make them perfect.

Long story short, the way the legatos work is by crossfading from one note to the other, and that creates a pseudo room reflection sound. Even after going under the hood and tweaking the crossfades, there's no way to get acceptable legato transitions without that reflection sound.

The developer does not offer refunds, but I thought about asking for one anyway, because I knew I wouldn't be getting any use out of the libraries. But then I thought to myself... would such a refund even be justifiable? I made an assumption that I would be able to get the libraries sounding drier than the demos. I came to the conclusion that the developer owed me nothing, because they sold me exactly what their demos demonstrated.

I would like Greg to ask himself, after trying Orbis for a while, if he feels Spitfire truly owes him anything. No one likes being disappointed after purchasing a library, but it's important and fair to identify and acknowledge the root of that disappointment.


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 20, 2019)

Orbis is a niche library. What is it about the walk-through that made you want to buy it, and why do you now don't want it?


----------



## d.healey (Jul 20, 2019)

Polkasound said:


> Long story short, the way the legatos work is by crossfading from one note to the other,


All legatos work like that, unless something has happened that no-one has told me about.


----------



## Uiroo (Jul 20, 2019)

d.healey said:


> All legatos work like that, unless something has happened that no-one has told me about.


I thought some legatos use an extra recording of note transitions that gets scriptet in, so that it is not only a crossfade between two sustained notes.


----------



## lpuser (Jul 20, 2019)

Guys, I don´t understand all the "if you have bought it, then it´s your fault" stories.

I have been throught this myself a few times already and the problem is, that many demos and walkthroughs are optimized in order to show the best possible side of a product (for which you cannot blame anyone, of course).

But the real problem is, that we cannot PLAY something unless we are buying it. On more than one occasion, I was very enthusiastic about what I´ve head online and after doing more research, I bought the library. And the result was not even close. It turned out, that there was a lot of "fiddling" involved in getting the demos to sound like they did (and of course, midi files etc. were not available to learn what these guys did). Second, some sounds were loops which was not highlighted anywhere, but made it impossible to play what I had in mind ...

Long story short: Even with the best research, we can all make mistakes. And not having the opportunity to actually play an instrument before we buy is not great.

Cheers
Tom


----------



## d.healey (Jul 20, 2019)

Uiroo said:


> I thought some legatos use an extra recording of note transitions that gets scriptet in, so that it is not only a crossfade between two sustained notes.


Yeah they do... I thought that's what you meant.  I see now you meant it was crossfading between the first and second sample without a transition sample in between.


----------



## kitekrazy (Jul 20, 2019)

I tend to shy away from these products because of price. With the endless amount of Kontakt libraries and softsynths I probably have close to the equivalent.


----------



## CT (Jul 20, 2019)

I don't know about all this. It's reasonable to argue for better demo/resale/refund policies from developers, but for the most part, that isn't reality right now, so I think we do have a decent amount of responsibility as consumers, whether or not we should.

I have a couple things from various developers that I'd love to return, but can't. I don't hold the developers responsible for my predicament. Again, better policies would be great, but that's not how things are, so I accept that it falls to me to be extremely careful about what I buy. I never checkout until I've given it *at least* several days of consideration. 

Sometimes I still end up misjudging things, or I'm not as patient as I should be in the first place and make a rush decision. I don't see that as anyone's fault but my own, regardless of policy changes I'd like to see in the future.


----------



## Polkasound (Jul 20, 2019)

d.healey said:


> Yeah they do... I thought that's what you meant.  I see now you meant it was crossfading between the first and second sample without a transition sample in between.



If I remember correctly, it was a transition between the original sustained note and another specially-created sustained note without a transition sample. Regardless, the way it sounded was like the first note was reflecting off a wall while the second note started playing. Fiddling around with the crossfades helped but it didn't make for a very natural-sounding legato for that particular instrument.

In retrospect, I wish I hadn't bought the libraries. If I could have demoed them before buying them, I would have discovered that the root of the problem was not satisfactorily fixable. But I bought the libraries anyway, and that's on me, because I _can_ recreate what I heard in the demos.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 20, 2019)

There's a lot of libraries I'd like to return after buying. But I get why they don't allow it. And? I heard the walkthrough and immediately said no to this library. Nothing wrong with it, but I already have a bunch of similar stuff I never use. Same reason why Edna Earth has been on my wishlist yet I never can bring myself to buy it. It's also what's making me pause before buying Swing More, which part of me really wants, but I rarely use the Symphobias I have, so I worry it will be the same. On a positive note, you can resell Project Sam stuff.


----------



## Holden Sandman (Jul 20, 2019)

If you feel that the product is significantly not as described or doesn't live up to sales hype then contact your credit card company or bank and issue a chargeback on that basis AFTER contacting Spitfire and asking for a refund if it is declined. If you used Paypal then begin a dispute with Paypal.

The tactic of Spitfire and similar companies of not offering refunds on products that don't live up to the sales hype is illegal in Australia and subject to consumer law. Many other countries have similar laws. However the credit card companies definitely will process a charge back for "significantly not as described".

Ignore the advice of others in this thread, fight tooth and nail for a refund if you need to. The days of selling digital products without a free preview or demo period should be well over.


----------



## dpasdernick (Jul 20, 2019)

When Albion came out I bought it and there were severe tuning issues in the brass. I asked for a refund and was denied. Since then I've only purchased 2 other spitfire instruments, BDT and BH Toolkit (and also upgraded Albion). I've spent thousands on other developers. I tread very carefully when it comes to Spitfire.


----------



## Polkasound (Jul 20, 2019)

Holden Sandman said:


> Ignore the advice of others in this thread



Not cool.

Greg did not say why he was disappointed in the library. We don't know if he reacted too quickly and misjudged/misunderstood what was being sold, or if the product advertising was misleading. That automatically makes your advice no more applicable than anyone else's.


----------



## eph221 (Jul 20, 2019)

I felt a little ripped off by Iceni and it has made me more likely to thoroughly read reviews on the net. Iceni was $449. Ouch!


----------



## Holden Sandman (Jul 21, 2019)

Polkasound said:


> Not cool.
> 
> Greg did not say why he was disappointed in the library. We don't know if he reacted too quickly and misjudged/misunderstood what was being sold, or if the product advertising was misleading. That automatically makes your advice no more applicable than anyone else's.



I could have phrased that better, apologies.


----------



## Uiroo (Jul 21, 2019)

Holden Sandman said:


> The tactic of Spitfire and similar companies of not offering refunds on products that don't live up to the sales hype is illegal in Australia and subject to consumer law. Many other countries have similar laws.



For software too? I thought the reason why they usually don't offer refunds is because of piracy issues?




Holden Sandman said:


> The days of selling digital products without a free preview or demo period should be well over.


Well, they have like 50 minutes of walkthrough material on their site. And the whole preset list. That's fine for me.

Just curious: Has anyone who is truly disappointed with Orbis watched all of it?


----------



## Christof (Jul 21, 2019)

I bought Orbis straight away and used it in two or three cues already, it adds some nice organic touch as overlay.
I am not super excited about it, but I only scratched the surface of the whole concept behind, so there is a lot of potential.
Don't expect any Omnisphere competition!
This is a totally different approach, and I think any composer can use it somehow.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Jul 21, 2019)

Uiroo said:


> Well, they have like 50 minutes of walkthrough material on their site. And the whole preset list. That's fine for me.


Fine by me too.
Unless it’s a technical turd, disappointment in a library is almost always a mismatch between expectation and what the library actually does. How that expectation is managed by developers is the real issue.

On the subject of demos, some reasons why they perhaps don’t happen:

Server costs. Spitfire for example uses Amazon Cloudfront and S3 to distribute audio files. Amazon charges for data transfer. So, if hundreds (thousands?) of users are suddenly downloading gigs of free demos, watch that Amazon invoice go right up. Tellingly, NI offer download demos of their synths, but not sample content libraries.
The cost of supporting users who have issues with the free content.
Piracy!
Personally, I think a happy medium would be a compete playthrough of the patch list. A single YouTube video. Spitfire did just that with eDNA earth.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 21, 2019)

eph221 said:


> I felt a little ripped off by Iceni and it has indeed made me more likely to thoroughly read reviews on the net. Iceni was $449. Ouch!



Just shows how diverse the music world is and our uses of these applications.
I bought Iceni on release, it's one of the few libs I'd buy again if I had to. Love it.

Not a day passes that I don't regret Solo Strings


----------



## Robert_G (Jul 21, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Piracy!




Ok....then what about Eastwest. I have every library on my cc+ subscription. All the samples and programming are on my computer. When the subscription runs out, it wouldnt take much in the way of hacking to keep using those libraries....but they dont seem to care.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 21, 2019)

EW needs an iLok to run and they use their own engine. I guess you could hack the samples but then you'd have to build an instrument to use them. Seems like a lot of work for something that is on sale all the time.


----------



## Uiroo (Jul 21, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> ....but they dont seem to care.


Well, you could write them an e-mail and ask, maybe they do.


----------



## Robert_G (Jul 21, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> EW needs an iLok to run and they use their own engine. I guess you could hack the samples but then you'd have to build an instrument to use them. Seems like a lot of work for something that is on sale all the time.


 Isnt play 6 free now?


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 21, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Isnt play 6 free now?


Not sure. I'm talking about the actual libraries. All the ones I have are on my iLok. Though I think you can do a soft iLok. I'm guessing until it makes you phone home, or unless they put a date on it, which is more likely, it will work. On my ProTools subscription, it has a date. I do have a perpetual license, so that shows up as well. But after the date runs out, that license won't work.


----------



## Rick McGuire (Jul 21, 2019)

I’m sorry you’re stuck with a library you’re disappointed with. I don’t think I’d get orbis as it seems pretty niche and the price just doesn’t do it for me. I’ve felt dissatisfied with spitfire products in the past. I wasn’t a fan of symphonic brass for the longest time, but the more I’ve spent writing and programming the more I’ve moved passed that disappointment. Not saying that’s the case for everyone for every library, but taking the time to experiment and write more might ease your dissatisfaction


----------



## Rick McGuire (Jul 21, 2019)

And just to add, I think it’s also about your expectations with different libraries. Orbis to me just seems like more pads, which spitfire is fantastic at judging by some of their previous libraries, but yeah I think I’d be disappointed too if I dropped a couple hundred for some pads lol


----------



## robgb (Jul 21, 2019)

If you go to Kontakt Hub, you can find some very low cost Kontakt instruments that do have wonderful organic sound design capabilities. Honestly, I'd look there for a variety of things before I'd buy something like this from Spitfire. Just my opinion. Yours may vary.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 22, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Ok....then what about Eastwest. I have every library on my cc+ subscription. All the samples and programming are on my computer. When the subscription runs out, it wouldnt take much in the way of hacking to keep using those libraries....but they dont seem to care.



They probably don't care because I doubt it's that easy to hack.


----------



## Greg (Jul 22, 2019)

I assumed there would be way more useful sounds than there was by a long shot. I went through everything and picked out a handful of things I liked and was a bit shocked that that was almost nothing at the end. 

I don't blame Spitfire for ANYTHING but not offering refunds. It's a creative product and there is always bound to be someone that thought it would be useful but really wasn't once they go through everything in the context of their own work. I don't understand what the risk is to refund a user that has purchased tons of Spitfire libraries in the past and would gladly take store credit...


----------



## Greg (Jul 22, 2019)

Garry said:


> Sorry, but *IF* this is true , then you really ought to pay a stupidity charge! Call it a Darwinian tax!
> 
> This library came out *yesterday*, and you went through this cycle in less than 24 hours: you bought it with almost zero research, and rejected it with almost zero playing. I'm afraid you can't cry that you want your money back when you look after it so badly yourself in the first place.
> 
> Pause on the 'add to cart' a little longer next time , and if not, give yourself a little more time to go through your purchase.



24 hours is a long time when you don't waste half of it being an asshole to strangers on the internet.


----------



## N.Caffrey (Jul 22, 2019)

Greg said:


> 24 hours is a long time when you don't waste half of it being an asshole to strangers on the internet.



I blocked him a long time ago


----------



## fakemaxwell (Jul 22, 2019)

axb312 said:


> Cheers Greg. I too wish Sample Lib devs would offer refunds. Or full feature trials.



It's ridiculous that this is somehow still legal. "Here, spend a large chunk of money on this car. You can't test drive it, but we did make a video that shows what it would be like to drive it. Also, once you give us money you can't return the car or give it to anyone else, ever. And if you bring this up online you'll be told it's your fault for ever considering buying this car."

Ridiculous.


----------



## Dr.Quest (Jul 22, 2019)

rapscallione said:


> It's ridiculous that this is somehow still legal. "Here, spend a large chunk of money on this car. You can't test drive it, but we did make a video that shows what it would be like to drive it. Also, once you give us money you can't return the car or give it to anyone else, ever. And if you bring this up online you'll be told it's your fault for ever considering buying this car."
> 
> Ridiculous.


Sorry, this is a ridiculous analogy. Libraries are software that remain on your computer. A car is a physical thing that can be returned, test driven, etc. If you got a refund for the car you wouldn't still have the car in your driveway.


----------



## fakemaxwell (Jul 22, 2019)

If I sell my Pianoteq license (which was fully able to be test driven before purchase), I don't have access to Pianoteq anymore, just like a car. How exactly is that not applicable to other libraries, which for Kontakt already have DRM through Native Access?


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 22, 2019)

Not all of Spitfire's libraries have DRM through NA. Is this one even a Kontakt library?

I do wish more libraries had trial versions though.


----------



## fakemaxwell (Jul 22, 2019)

This one isn't, no. Pianoteq and u-he, both of which have their own software, have full featured demos. Why doesn't Spitfire?


----------



## EgM (Jul 22, 2019)

rapscallione said:


> If I sell my Pianoteq license (which was fully able to be test driven before purchase), I don't have access to Pianoteq anymore, just like a car. How exactly is that not applicable to other libraries, which for Kontakt already have DRM through Native Access?



Kontakt libraries are pirated all over the net, this is bad flaw from Native Instruments which they have to take care of and soon. Not saying this is the same for Pianoteq nor Spitfire with their new engine, but I can understand why a sound library developer would be reluctant to give a refund.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 23, 2019)

But on Steam you can buy a game, have it for up to 14 days, play it up to 2hrs and get a refund.

It exists because we allow it.


----------



## lokotus (Jul 24, 2019)

EgM said:


> Kontakt libraries are pirated all over the net, this is bad flaw from Native Instruments which they have to take care of and soon. Not saying this is the same for Pianoteq nor Spitfire with their new engine, but I can understand why a sound library developer would be reluctant to give a refund.



as sons as companys will move their samples out of kontakt those problems won't exist any longer. Orchestral Tools, East West, Spitfire, Überschall etc... use more and more their own sample player...


----------



## erica-grace (Jul 24, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> Isnt play 6 free now?



PLAY has always been free. But that has nothing to do with hacking and needing an iLok to run EW libraries.


----------



## Uiroo (Jul 24, 2019)

James H said:


> But on Steam you can buy a game, have it for up to 14 days, play it up to 2hrs and get a refund.
> 
> It exists because we allow it.



And it f***s the developers. Steam just goes to them like "well I guess they didn't like your game, we don't care they'll spend it on another game on our platform"

I'm not convinced that this is positive at all.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jul 24, 2019)

Demos are a big challenge for sample libraries for many reasons, not the least of which is bandwidth costs. Bandwidth might be cheap but it's not free. For a large library, it might cost us $2 per download. Plugins that don't involve large sample sets don't have this problem.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 24, 2019)

zircon_st said:


> Demos are a big challenge for sample libraries for many reasons, not the least of which is bandwidth costs. Bandwidth might be cheap but it's not free. For a large library, it might cost us $2 per download. Plugins that don't involve large sample sets don't have this problem.


Maybe we need a pay to try and get that amount discounted if you buy, since you won't have to redownload it?


----------



## Robert_G (Jul 24, 2019)

I would happily pay 5$ to test out a 400$ lib to cover bandwidth costs.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jul 24, 2019)

You might, but I sincerely doubt the majority of people would. "Free" and "costs money" (any amount) are two very different things. There are quite a few other challenges to offering demos in addition to the bandwidth requirement.

One that you might not think of is customer support for demos. No matter how good your documentation, people can and will have problems at every stage of the process in downloading, installing, and using a library. Thousands more people getting demos = orders of magnitude greater burden on tech support = far greater costs.

Then there's the technical hurdle of actually making something for Kontakt that works with the current registration scheme. If the library is Kontakt Player-based, there simply isn't a way to offer a KP demo. We pay per serial for any KP-encoded instruments, so it's a huge loss even making an edited version to offer as a demo. If it's a full Kontakt library, then obviously you have no copy protection at all.

Making a modified or edited version of a full instrument is its own problem and set of costs. How do you make a demo that isn't too restrictive? Do you limit the range? Articulations? Dynamics? Any limitations you impose will color someone's impression of the library. We actually did this with our Shreddage 3 Stratus FREE instrument and on this very forum someone was publicly complaining about it - we've seen it elsewhere too - presumably because they didn't understand the ways in which it was limited from the full version.

It's way, way, WAY easier to do a demo for a plugin where bandwidth isn't an issue and you can simply set a timeout on usage. That isn't possible for Kontakt at all and so it's a massive challenge.


----------



## MartinH. (Jul 24, 2019)

zircon_st said:


> Demos are a big challenge for sample libraries for many reasons, not the least of which is bandwidth costs. Bandwidth might be cheap but it's not free. For a large library, it might cost us $2 per download. Plugins that don't involve large sample sets don't have this problem.



Wow, I didn't know bandwidth is still that expensive.
In that price range it would be worth it to me to pay for trial versions, but I totally understand all your other concerns. I likely wouldn't offer demos in your place either.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 24, 2019)

erica-grace said:


> PLAY has always been free. But that has nothing to do with hacking and needing an iLok to run EW libraries.



They were actually charging $30 for Play 6 until recently.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 24, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> They were actually charging $30 for Play 6 until recently.


It comes free with a new library but you have to pay if you have older libraries. At least that is what I found. I bought something after it came out, so it was free for me. Any purchase will get it for you.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> It comes free with a new library but you have to pay if you have older libraries. At least that is what I found. I bought something after it came out, so it was free for me. Any purchase will get it for you.



Correct. I should have aded in my post that they were charging $30 for Play 6, and then made it available free for customers about six months ago.


----------



## Denkii (Jul 25, 2019)

Greg said:


> 24 hours is a long time when you don't waste half of it being an asshole to strangers on the internet.


This made me smile.
Thanks for this reply


----------



## Pablocrespo (Jul 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> It comes free with a new library but you have to pay if you have older libraries. At least that is what I found. I bought something after it came out, so it was free for me. Any purchase will get it for you.



I think it is free now, I have downloaded it and haven’t bought anything new in ages. 

I think it should be possible to resell you libraries to cut the loses, like a guitar or pedal. In this day and age it shouldn’t be that difficult to implement


----------



## EgM (Jul 25, 2019)

Pablocrespo said:


> I think it should be possible to resell you libraries to cut the loses, like a guitar or pedal. In this day and age it shouldn’t be that difficult to implement



More difficult than you might think. What if the seller keeps using the library after selling it? Especially with kontakt libraries.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 25, 2019)

EgM said:


> More difficult than you might think. What if the seller keeps using the library after selling it? Especially with kontakt libraries.



They can't, the serial number gets cancelled and NI issues a new one to the buyer.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 25, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> They can't, the serial number gets cancelled and NI issues a new one to the buyer.


Only if it is an NI library. If it is, you should be able to sell.


----------



## EgM (Jul 25, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> They can't, the serial number gets cancelled and NI issues a new one to the buyer.



Haha, if it were that easy.


----------



## Harzmusic (Jul 25, 2019)

EgM said:


> More difficult than you might think. What if the seller keeps using the library after selling it? Especially with kontakt libraries.


Also what if the seller keeps profiting off the music he produced using the instrument in the meantime?
It seems to me that many people don't get that if you buy a library you buy the license to use and redistribute the *recordings*, the samples, commercially in a musical context. That's another point where they differ from plugins.
You don't pay for the fact that they are on your hard drive and you can play them, you pay for the right to use them, publish what you made with them and earn money from it.
First and foremost these are professional tools for people who make money from music. The fact that the consumer market has opened up and hobbyists can afford them doesn't change their purpose.

It is very hard to know if someone who used a sample library in a published piece holds a valid license to use it. It gets even harder and invites abuse of this policy if you allow unconditional refunds and resales.
If someone resells the library, the music containing the samples with it is still there to earn royalties from.

Its like buying a fancy dress, wearing it for a paid performance and returning it the next day.

People do it, but you need a special business model, a high volume of sales and/or a very loyal customer base to compensate.
The Composer Cloud is an example for an alternative business model which seems to work fine - but probably only because of their vast catalogue and the huge existing user base.

Doesn't mean that offering refunds is necessarily the wrong move, but I get that there are many things to consider, even aside from the technical hurdles.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 25, 2019)

Unless the paid performance was televised and replayed, the dress analogy doesn't really work. It would be the same as buying a flute, using it for a few performances and selling it later. But I do agree, if you continue to make money from sounds used where you paid a license to use them, you shouldn't be able to return or resell the product without pulling those products from the market. 

However, there are us hobbyists who never make any money from our stuff. And having a two tiered system can be difficult to police. They kind of do it with the educational discounts. But that is about it.


----------



## Harzmusic (Jul 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> Unless the paid performance was televised and replayed, the dress analogy doesn't really work.


You are absolutely right, the analogy doesn't hold up.
Just wanted to communicate the mindset, that can be inspired by unconditional refunds and resell policies. You could have three people using a single license, passing it around everytime they happen to need that particular sound, and so on. Physical goods wear out and lose value over time, software stays pretty much the same no matter how often it has been used and how many hands it has passed through.



dzilizzi said:


> However, there are us hobbyists who never make any money from our stuff. And having a two tiered system can be difficult to police.


Yeah, I guess so, thats hard to enforce. How can you tell if someone uses a non-commercial license commercially? Who really upgrades to a commercial license when they decide to go pro? Or if you wrote a track just for fun, but it would end up earning money - would you really go and upgrade all your licenses? Pretty high price for honesty, and it would not feel remotely as shady as pirating the library. It's very easy to just "forget" upgrading.

I could imagine offering a partial refund based on the time that has passed after the sale. This way estimating the amount of "use" the individual could have gotten out of it.


----------



## JohnG (Jul 25, 2019)

erica-grace said:


> PLAY has always been free. But that has nothing to do with hacking and needing an iLok to run EW libraries.



Actually, PLAY and iLok have a lot to do with hacking, or avoiding hacking. As far as I know, PLAY libraries have not been hacked to the extent Kontakt has. I'm sure there are torrent downloads out there claiming to offer EW libraries but I doubt they are fully functional.

GigaStudio, which used to be in every professional or would-be professional studio, went out of business because of hacking; it's still an enormous problem.


----------



## JohnG (Jul 25, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> However, there are us hobbyists who never make any money from our stuff. And having a two tiered system can be difficult to police. They kind of do it with the educational discounts. But that is about it.



For some in that category of course there are academic discounts, which are often quite substantial.


----------



## Denkii (Jul 25, 2019)

Harzmusic said:


> Also what if the seller keeps profiting off the music he produced using the instrument in the meantime?
> It seems to me that many people don't get that if you buy a library you buy the license to use and redistribute the *recordings*, the samples, commercially in a musical context. That's another point where they differ from plugins..


This statement is close to a logic where I would also not be allowed to sell a physical instrument either if I used it for a recording. I highly disagree. If I bought Photoshop back when it was still on premise and non cloud, I could sell that software to anyone and still profit from the photos I edited with it back when it was mine.

This whole "it's not possible" debate is solemnly forced onto the customers by companies because customers allow it to happen. Every private reselling means you're one conversion short as the developer. It's simple as that. There would be ways to make it work but they are uncomfortable and cut profit, that's why it's not done.


----------



## Harzmusic (Jul 25, 2019)

Denkii said:


> This statement is close to a logic where I would also not be allowed to sell a physical instrument either if I used it for a recording.


The licenses for audio recordings (or even partial musical performances) work differently than those for software. That is just how the law is set up.

Also I just want to point out that there are quite a few developers that allow resale and offer refunds under special circumstances. It's not some conspiracy that every developer is part of.
It's just that you do not have an inherent right to resell or return all software licenses the way you would with physical products. And there are good economic and systemic reasons for that.
It is up to the company issuing the license if they will allow it. It has upsides and downsides. Some decide to do it, others don't.


----------



## jtnyc (Jul 25, 2019)

Harzmusic said:


> Also what if the seller keeps profiting off the music he produced using the instrument in the meantime?
> It seems to me that many people don't get that if you buy a library you buy the license to use and redistribute the *recordings*, the samples, commercially in a musical context. That's another point where they differ from plugins.
> You don't pay for the fact that they are on your hard drive and you can play them, you pay for the right to use them, publish what you made with them and earn money from it.
> First and foremost these are professional tools for people who make money from music. The fact that the consumer market has opened up and hobbyists can afford them doesn't change their purpose.
> ...



Where does it ever say that the purpose of these products are for people to earn money with them? If only people who earned a living from them purchased them, developers would be earning significantly less money. Plenty of sales are to hobbyists, amateurs, and young musicians.

The idea that one can earn money off of recordings after the product is sold applies to any musical instrument. I can buy a guitar, record a bunch of music with it, sell that music and then sell the guitar. 

Some developers do allow transfers. Soniccouture, Output, NI and Embertone to name a few, so it's not impossible as some developers say. Spitfire does not. That's their choice. 

In this day and age there should to be a way, a system for a developer to verify that after a license has been transferred, the original is deactivated and unusable. I realize it might be complicated, but surely not impossible. I can see why many developers don't want this, but I believe customers do. It may take awhile, but I think things will develop/change on this front.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 25, 2019)

Denkii said:


> This statement is close to a logic where I would also not be allowed to sell a physical instrument either if I used it for a recording. I highly disagree. If I bought Photoshop back when it was still on premise and non cloud, I could sell that software to anyone and still profit from the photos I edited with it back when it was mine.
> 
> This whole "it's not possible" debate is solemnly forced onto the customers by companies because customers allow it to happen. Every private reselling means you're one conversion short as the developer. It's simple as that. There would be ways to make it work but they are uncomfortable and cut profit, that's why it's not done.



So let's say I have a feature length film coming up, and I really need to use a certain library to achieve a desired sound; and my payment for the film is $10,000. I buy the library for $600, deliver the cues three weeks later, then get a refund for the library because I will personally never use it again. Is THAT fair? 

I agree that some libraries are total flops, but they are far and few between. It's not like we're shelling out $5000 for a pro-level string library. I'd say the average cost is $300-$600. At the end of the day, it's not like someone has lost their shirt....I mean, they were willing to spend the money anyways. And to blindly buy a library is just crazy, there are ample demos and walkthroughs out there. Fair enough, some more scarce than others, but the developers aren't going to please everyone. I would love to get a refund for the 8Dio Adagio bundle that paid hundreds for years ago, but it's water under the bridge, and I've learned to use it in a creative way.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 25, 2019)

jtnyc said:


> In this day and age there should to be a way, a system for a developer to verify that after a license has been transferred, the original is deactivated and unusable



From what I understand, a new serial number is issued to the person the library is transferred to. At least this is what happens with Project SAM; they take care of the transfer details.

And Spitfire does offer a refund....but only BEFORE you download the library. So if you have buyers remorse after paying, you can still get your money back.


----------



## Denkii (Jul 25, 2019)

Why couldn't it be handled similar to how offline functions of streaming services do where you're able to download libraries and use them offline but once every X days, your machine has to go online once to verify that you're still the owner of that license and your period gets renewed.

One of probably many possible ideas.

If the problem is that everything is client sided, implement a server sided check and you're done. Obviously that comes with new problems like "I don't want to have to go online with my rig." or "what happens when I'm on the go and I need to go online but can't" and so on...but it's an idea.

Edit: blockchain license handling could also be a thing.


----------



## Denkii (Jul 25, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> So let's say I have a feature length film coming up, and I really need to use a certain library to achieve a desired sound; and my payment for the film is $10,000. I buy the library for $600, deliver the cues three weeks later, then get a refund for the library because I will personally never use it again. Is THAT fair?
> 
> I agree that some libraries are total flops, but they are far and few between. It's not like we're shelling out $5000 for a pro-level string library. I'd say the average cost is $300-$600. At the end of the day, it's not like someone has lost their shirt....I mean, they were willing to spend the money anyways. And to blindly buy a library is just crazy, there are ample demos and walkthroughs out there. Fair enough, some more scarce than others, but the developers aren't going to please everyone. I would love to get a refund for the 8Dio Adagio bundle that paid hundreds for years ago, but it's water under the bridge, and I've learned to use it in a creative way.


Those are two seperate things though. I was talking about reselling to another person. You're talking about a refund. I totally agree with you that this would not be fair and it can't be how it's meant to be handled.


----------



## Denkii (Jul 25, 2019)

Also: rent is a concept.
I mean you can rent machines, build houses with those machines, return them and sell the house. No hard feelings there. Why is it any different?
I believe it's not as different in nature as we believe.

Edit: a better example is when you don't sell the house but actually rent it out. That's closer to what royalties are.

Edit 2: now that I think of it, that's probably why EW doesn't get this kind of flack (admittedly I don't know if you can resell their libraries). People don't have to buy the whole thing, they could get the cloud, try it out and then decide whether they are willing to pay for an on premise solution. Probably helps acceptance a lot.
This also covers up for bandwidth cost.


----------



## Holden Sandman (Jul 25, 2019)

Denkii said:


> now that I think of it, that's probably why EW doesn't get this kind of flack (admittedly I don't know if you can resell their libraries). People don't have to buy the whole thing, they could get the cloud, try it out and then decide whether they are willing to pay for an on premise solution. Probably helps acceptance a lot. This also covers up for bandwidth cost.



East West and their subscription business model is great. Subscribe once and get every new update, product and feature automatically. Subscriptions are also easily tax deductible for working musicians so it's a win-win from my point of view.


----------



## EgM (Jul 25, 2019)

I think with East West Cloud, it's very different because they've had years to accumulate income from many successful products through the years that they sold for more than a thousand $ for just one library, I think they also rent out their studio for movie recordings? I could be wrong though.

But for a starter company who hired many musicians to record a kontakt string library for example, it's very damaging to your business model if you ask for a refund or worse, people copying the files around to be used in a compromised version of kontakt.


----------



## Mike Greene (Jul 26, 2019)

Analogies between sample libraries and physical objects like dresses or hammers are not valid, because when you purchase a sample library, you are purchasing a license, not a "product" per se. A more appropriate analogy would be a music for media license. Or a stock photo license.


----------



## erica-grace (Jul 26, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Actually, PLAY and iLok have a lot to do with hacking, or avoiding hacking.



Correct, but that is not what I was saying


----------



## Denkii (Jul 26, 2019)

Mike Greene said:


> Analogies between sample libraries and physical objects like dresses or hammers are not valid, because when you purchase a sample library, you are purchasing a license, not a "product" per se. A more appropriate analogy would be a music for media license. Or a stock photo license.


In the EU this topic is not really settled.
We have something called first sale doctrine or exhaustion rule for copyright and trademark law (also applying to software licenses and applying to data licenses as in digital music). This states that once the work is lawfully sold or even transferred gratuitously, the copyright owner's interest in the material object in which the copyrighted work is embodied is exhausted. The owner of the material object can then dispose of it as he sees fit. This freedom can't be restricted by licensing statements. It's called exhaustion rule because the owner of the material (first buyer) who then decides to sell it needs to destroy their original data and can't use it any more. Funny enough there are other laws that would still allow this person to further use copies of the original data if those copies were solemnly made for private use.

There are people saying that exhaustion rule doesn't apply to data because its stated earlier that it's referring to a material object in this specific paragraph. Then again in the overarching paragraph its stated that this also applies to immaterial goods such as data. That's why it's "not settled" depending on your point of view.

So you're free to sell software and also the intent was also to allow to sell licensed data but they done goofed up on that very paragraph and we have to wait for a lawsuit that settles it. Looking at the direction the EU judges are going though, it's a only a matter of time until you will be allowed to sell this kind of data for sure if it was disposed to you as a EU citizen.


----------



## Desire Inspires (Jul 26, 2019)

How come they just can’t give away free copies of full versions of sample libraries to people with no restrictions? Albion One should be free for all!


----------



## Robert_G (Jul 26, 2019)

At the end of the day how a sampling company allows a buyer to access their product determines whether I buy the library or not. There are *3 RED FLAGS* that will keep me from purchasing a library. However all a company has to do is *REMOVE 1 RED FLAG* and they may have a sale.

The *RED FLAGS* are:

1. The library is very expensive.
2. Their is no way to demo the product.
3. There is no resale allowed on the product.

Again....remove 1 of these *RED FLAGS*, and you might get a sale. If all 3 of these remain...99% chance...no sale.

*Example....Afflatus Chapter I Strings..*.
Seems to be an awesome library. The demos are great, the interface and patches...very good....overall sounds fantastic....but it has *ALL 3 RED FLAGS.*

1. Almost $900
2. No way to demo
3. No resales allowed.

Now, the $900 isn't a deal breaker. In fact $900 with no demo isn't a deal breaker. $900 with no resale is not a deal breaker. No demo with no resale is not a deal breaker.....etc...etc. The deal breaker is because it has *ALL 3 RED FLAGS.* No way am I spending $900 on lib that I can't demo or resell.

$900 isn't too terrible if I can demo it first. If I love it to pieces....I'll spend $900 on it. If I don't...I won't buy it.
$900 isn't too terrible if I can sell it because I bought it and don't like it (because I couldn't demo it first)
$900 is a disaster if I buy it sight unseen with no recourse if it sucks. That's the reality.

*Take 8dio for example.* Limited demo and no resell, but their flash sales are so good that *RED FLAG #1 is removed.* If I pick up a $500 library that I'm interested in for $100, and I don't really like it, it's not the end of the world that I bought it sight unseen and can't resell.

*Take Soundiron Olympus for example.* No demo, not cheap, but you can resell. So if I pay $549 for it and don't like it (I do love it to pieces though), because I couldn't demo it, I can at least resell it and recoup some losses. Even better I can buy the Micro or Elements for cheap to get the idea of how the library works and get FULL credit towards the full upgrade version. Again....* RED FLAG #3 REMOVED* and a* partial RED FLAG #2* removed makes a better chance at a sale.

*Take Pianoteq for example.* I can try it out and if I don't like it, I don't have to buy it. Or I can buy it and resell it if I get bored of it. *2 RED FLAGS REMOVED.* Makes the buy even more appealing.

At the end of the day, its the sample companies that are going to win or lose, because we can judge with our wallets. The most expensive library that I paid full price for with all 3 RED FLAGS was CSS at $400....but make no mistake....that was only and I repeat...ONLY because of the almost unanimous love for the library on this forum. Negative reviews on that library are almost non existent, so I took the plunge and risk....and wasn't disappointed....but their product is the exception and not the rule.

Cinematic Studios *having all 3 RED FLAGS* is saved by their immaculate quality, but Spitfire, Cinesamples, OT, and Audiobro, etc, etc have disappointed some buyers with some of their libraries...and because those companies sell product under the *ALL 3 RED FLAGS umbrella*, I think it hurts them. At the end of the day.....we choose who we want to support and give our money too.


----------



## EgM (Jul 26, 2019)

I think most people in this thread are oblivious to the fact that any pirate can pay for the library, ask for a refund and just torrent it, copy it to a friend or just keep it.

Library developers pay performers, a recording venue and rent tons of equipment for many thousands of dollars to record those annoying takes.

The idea that some people here have that once you de-register a library from Native Access or any other engine will render that library unusable is laughable.

Developers are protecting themselves and what they have invested into their libraries, it's super simple to understand, they have a company to run, employees to pay, feed their families from their income.

It is that simple.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Jul 27, 2019)

EgM said:


> Developers are protecting themselves and what they have invested into their libraries, it's super simple to understand, they have a company to run, employees to pay, feed their families from their income.
> 
> It is that simple.


Yep I agree. Once again, entitlement rears it’s ugly head. No developer is setting out to be “evil” or disadvantage customers. They’re protecting a business. Real world stuff.


----------



## EgM (Jul 27, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Yep I agree. Once again, entitlement rears it’s ugly head. No developer is setting out to be “evil” or disadvantage customers. They’re protecting a business. Real world stuff.



Exactly.

Furthermore, some developers that some here resent so much are using copy protection such as iLok or eLicenser to sustain their business models. Both of which have much success, except a few icks along the road which I will not discuss, but are more successful than the others.

To better explain without going too deep into piracy, the way things are currently, there is no acceptable way to actually "Demo" a library without a developer giving a freebie to a potential pirate, except a remote play session such as Try-sound from bestservice or audition credits from VSL.

That is what it is. People have to take their time, watch reviews of the libraries, and make careful decisions before making impulse purchases.

Our good friends, the developers have paid their performers, the venue and their rig, I doubt they'll ever be able to ask for a refund to them.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 27, 2019)

How is allowing someone to sell the library on got anything to do with piracy? They even make $30 - $75 in the process.
I agree a company needs to protect itself, but they also need to protect their customers to a degree. Otherwise, they'll happily trot along to Dev B with their cash. So who lucks out... Dev A.

The problem with this model is you have zero options after the sale, except to archive it. When so many other devs allow at least 1 option I fail to see any argument to a dev with over 80 premium priced products.
Let's cut to the chase, has this model stopped piracy for them? No. But I bet it has had an impact on this latest release of theirs 100%. So I don't buy the piracy card.

Customers also need to run their home, feed their family, and invest for the future. Works both ways.

btw, I'm just playing devils advocate. As I rarely sell anything on as I'm way too lazy and like archiving things


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jul 27, 2019)

It's obviously a complex topic with several relevant perspectives. But it's really goofy and weird how some people are laying this guilt trip on everybody and basically chide them for wishing they could refund or demo a product. Developer lives matter!

I bet those are exactly the types who get stuff for free or contact devs to see if they could work out some special deal.


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

Robert_G said:


> At the end of the day how a sampling company allows a buyer to access their product determines whether I buy the library or not. There are *3 RED FLAGS* that will keep me from purchasing a library. However all a company has to do is *REMOVE 1 RED FLAG* and they may have a sale.
> 
> The *RED FLAGS* are:
> 
> ...



Thanks for this, I really hope devs read it. For me it’s completely unbelievable that Spitfire, East West et al have managed to get away with it for so long now. It’s something to do with the deep psychology of shopping, unboxing, the unattainable. It’s a strange form of pornography. 
It’s got nothing to do with a developer having to feed his children!


----------



## Alex Fraser (Jul 27, 2019)

Hmmn. The "3 red flags" system doesn't work when if you want a library badly enough, you're willing to break the rules.. 

We've already listed the numerous technical and logistical decisions that govern demos, refunds and re-sales. In the case of Spitfire, there are also musician royalties to consider. Would you pay them a second royalty on a resale? How would you logistically manage it?

You are of course entitled to vote with your wallet if you disagree, but to paint developers as unscrupulous and unethical is grossly unfair and displays a wilful ignorance as to how all this actually works in the real word, not from an ivory tower on an internet forum.

Can we not just be big boys/girls and accept that where refunds and demos aren't available, there actually might be some valid reasons why? That's all I really ask.


----------



## Denkii (Jul 27, 2019)

I don't think that putting everyone under universal suspicion because there's always the possibility to pirate something is more fair than expecting a way of resell/refund/deregister from a normal customer's point of view.

I'm with you and believe that developers have the right to protect their product, securing their income in the process. I don't believe the correct way to do this is to enforce that through restricting all possibilities of honest customers.

This is why I don't buy digital games for example. If you buy it in it's material form, you can choose to sell it whenever you want. If you buy it digitally it's linked to your account and you have to keep it (not speaking of the two hour grace period that steam offers which I also dislike because it can fuck with devs).

I don't think "entitled" is a fair word in this case. I understand both sides and all I'm saying is I am eager for a better solution. General suspicion can't be the answer.


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> Hmmn. The "3 red flags" system doesn't work when if you want a library badly enough, you're willing to break the rules..
> 
> 
> Can we not just be big boys/girls and accept that where refunds and demos aren't available, there actually might be some valid reasons why?



Ha yes I agree about breaking the rules..

However to paint people who have their suspicions about the motivations of the 'no demo-no refund-no resale' way of selling as immature? Not sure about that.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Jul 27, 2019)

pinki said:


> Ha yes I agree about breaking the rules..
> 
> However to paint people who have their suspicions about the motivations of the 'no demo-no refund-no resale' way of selling as immature? Not sure about that.


I'd never describe someone as immature! It's just that the internet has a way of pushing people to the extreme ends of the argument and the detail in the middle, or the "why" is often lost.

Kind of like politics really, but there's no way I'm going there..


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

Alex Fraser said:


> I'd never describe someone as immature! It's just that the internet has a way of pushing people to the extreme ends of the argument and the detail in the middle, or the "why" is often lost.
> 
> Kind of like politics really, but there's no way I'm going there..



Sure I agree with what you're saying about the politics. I think we have to agree to disagree on the central tenet though...for me they have got away with a draconian policy for waaay too long and it's time for things to change: Here is my slogan for the revolution: 
"NO DEMO+NO REFUND+NO RESALE = NOSALE"


----------



## Desire Inspires (Jul 27, 2019)

I see nothing wrong with having the right to do whatever I want with a music sample library or software I paid for. 

I am entitled to use it or resell it or get a refund once I pay my money. The problem here is greed, plain and simple. My money gets taken and I get left with a bricked product? No way! 

I have rights, inalienable rights as a customer and these companies just write some simple code, record some sounds, sell for hundreds of dollars and we can’t even get any money from the product if it doesn’t fit our needs? That is terrifying!


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 27, 2019)

It's funny that one of the most 'enlightened' developers comes in for the most hammer on these forums.

I've just bought my very first VSL library - I bought the new Sychronised Special Editions Bundle, and I'm pretty likely to buy the Vol 5 Dimension Strings by the end of the month too. ( I have had VEpro for ages though)

VSL allow resale, and they offer a 30 day refund if you buy from them. The only downside is their dongle policy where you pay 70 euros to 'insure' your dongle for two years.

I really umm'ed and ahh'ed over whether to spend money with VSL with their somewhat draconian dongle damage/loss policy, but when I thought about it - 35 euros a year pales into insignificance compared to the money I have wasted on libraries I don't think I'll ever use in anger (or even mild annoyance for that matter).

What is clear is that no-one will likely change their resale/refund policy until absolutely forced to do so - if that ever happens....


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

My view on resales and refunds is that it isn't really reasonable to offer it.
I'm actually surprised that ANY developers allow resale. 
There is no way of knowing if the person selling the library will keep using it without cumbersome investigations. 
Same view on refunds. It makes sense to say - when you have finished the download we can't refund you. I've also seen that from other developers. 

Sure there are other ways to pirate libraries (not always though - and pirated stuff can be outdated and super slow to download) but there is no need for labels to make it even easier by putting a easily abused resale/refund norm in place.

There could be ways to script libraries/software in a way to make resales/transfers and refunds safer for developers. But I don't think they "have to" make that effort.

As long as they aren't truly deceptive in walkthrough's and descriptions + state it in the terms that they don't do refunds it's all pretty fine IMO.


----------



## avocado89 (Jul 27, 2019)

While I understand the idea behind the policy of no refunds for fear of pirating. I am not sure if it holds much weight. Whether you offer refunds or not it seems like piracy is still alive and well. I could also see not offering refunds backfiring in this way. Customer buys library, library doesn’t hold up to demos and walkthroughs, customers requests refund, company says no, customer gets pissed off, uploads their library to a pirate site. Obviously that is a really shitty thing to do, but I am sure it happens. No refunds does not necessarily equal no piracy. I think for companies like Spitfire - who seem to be doing pretty well (haven’t seen their financial statements though) - they should have some return policy or customer satisfaction guarantee. They seem to be a very customer centric company so it seems odd to me they don’t offer anything like this.


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

Michael Antrum said:


> It's funny that one of the most 'enlightened' developers comes in for the most hammer on these forums.
> 
> I've just bought my very first VSL library - I bought the new Sychronised Special Editions Bundle, and I'm pretty likely to buy the Vol 5 Dimension Strings by the end of the month too. ( I have had VEpro for ages though)
> 
> ...



You know this exactly the same place I have got to recently. I abandoned all my VSL stuff years ago because I was really not OK with losing that dongle and losing all my investment. The policy back then was..get insurance. But it was very difficult to insure a dongle, actually impossible for me. So when VSL introduced the €35 per year insurance policy (I know it pissed a lot of people off) I was really prepared to go back to them. . I missed so many of their instruments. And then.. the Synchronised SE came out and WOWOWOW! am I glad to be back in VSL land once more. And yes they do Resales and Returns. Big thumbs up.


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> My view on resales and refunds is that it isn't really reasonable to offer it.
> I'm actually surprised that ANY developers allow resale.
> There is no way of knowing if the person selling the library will keep using it without cumbersome investigations.
> Same view on refunds. It makes sense to say - when you have finished the download we can't refund you. I've also seen that from other developers.
> ...



Sorry I just not like that for me. It's only when I actually play a VI that it shows what it is.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

avocado89 said:


> While I understand the idea behind the policy of no refunds for fear of pirating. I am not sure if it holds much weight. Whether you offer refunds or not it seems like piracy is still alive and well. I could also see not offering refunds backfiring in this way. Customer buys library, library doesn’t hold up to demos and walkthroughs, customers requests refund, company says no, customer gets pissed off, uploads their library to a pirate site. Obviously that is a really shitty thing to do, but I am sure it happens. No refunds does not necessarily equal no piracy. I think for companies like Spitfire - who seem to be doing pretty well (haven’t seen their financial statements though) - they should have some return policy or customer satisfaction guarantee. They seem to be a very customer centric company so it seems odd to me they don’t offer anything like this.


You are refuting things noone has said.
Noone thinks that not offering refunds means to piracy.
The only point is that there is no need to pave an easy way for theft to happen. If you can just go to a label and get the library for free due to the refund policy it's extremely likely it will be abused often.
I mean... do you really think your idea with the pissed customer uploading a library to a pirate page for revenge holds water? I bet that happens... maybe twice a year? Or even... 5 times?? 
Most normal customers will have zero idea on how to upload something to a pirate site, even if they wanted to (which probably also happens rarely - cumbersome + fear of water marks etc). 
I don't think your scenario will happen anywhere near as much as abuse of refund and resale, since the latter is much more easy and the benefiting party is you! So it's not somethng that has much weight in that discussion.
It's like saying there should be no police in a village because some people may feel the urge to provoke them and that will increase crime. Well, I bet that happens, but I think the police are doing more to decrease crime than this scenario does to increase it haha.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> I don't think your scenario will happen anywhere near as much as abuse of refund and resale, since the latter is much more easy and the benefiting party is you!



How would the user benefit?


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

pinki said:


> Sorry I just not like that for me. It's only when I actually play a VI that it shows what it is.


You certainly can't get a 100% clear idea, but as long as the sounds they show are simply the unprocessed sounds from the library, you're gonna get exactly that. There may be limitations they have no touched upon, but I also wouldn't buy a library based on what I think it could possibly do, without having explicitly heard that. (And if I do so I'd accept it as my risk. Like 8dio's Century Strings - I want to buy them at some point despite a lot of what I heard not being to my taste because I think I can make it work for me - but it would be my personal fault if it doesn't work)
I have never understood how you can be so utterly disappointed by a library if you go by that "all the library is, is what you heard" mentality. 
I personally never made a truly regrettable purchase when approaching so meticulously.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

James H said:


> How would the user benefit?


From abuse of the refund/resale policy (comfortably getting a library for free if you desire), but not from uploading the library to pirate pages (others will benefit), which is one of the reasons this abuse will probably happen much more often than the revenge scenario. As I wrote.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> From abuse of the refund/resale policy (comfortably getting a library for free if you desire), but not from uploading the library to pirate pages (others will benefit), which is one of the reasons this abuse will probably happen much more often than the revenge scenario. As I wrote.



So how would they use the library when the serial has been deactivated? After the refund/resale


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

James H said:


> So how would they use the library when the serial has been deactivated? After the refund/resale


I think for many Kontakt libraries this is easily possible, unless they are registered libraries (and thus also work in Kontakt Player).
Such libraries (like 8dio's) don't have a serial in Kontakt. And as we know, there are many libraries that are not registered like that.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> I think for many Kontakt libraries this is easily possible, unless they are registered libraries (and thus also work in Kontakt Player).
> Such libraries (like 8dio's) don't have a serial in Kontakt.



That's my point, they couldn't (genuine users) if they are registered... most of SA are. 
Users of warez are not gonna go through the bother of refunds when the products are already 'up there', it's simply not going to happen. They'd have it installed before they got an email reply!

8Dio offer no refunds, because of the lack of serial.

I don't think OP is a risk of 'refund abuse' when asking for a refund within 24hrs of purchase.


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> I think for many Kontakt libraries this is easily possible, unless they are registered libraries (and thus also work in Kontakt Player).
> Such libraries (like 8dio's) don't have a serial in Kontakt. And as we know, there are many libraries that are not registered like that.



Firstly you express a completely personal opinion about playability. I'm afraid you have a very different approach than me and I think you should accept that for some the playability is more important than the sound.

Regarding Kontak and resales: you are wrong, it is not like that any more in Kontakt. They have made it much more difficult..though not impossible..to retain a sold library. Eventually if you want to carry on using Kontakt, it becomes un-useable.

And iLok. It provides a perfect solution to a developer to protect their work and offer resale?

Anyhow you clearly have a very strong opinion that all is good and that's OK for you. Others clearly do not feel the same way however. Such is life!

Why do you suppose some companies _do_ offer a Demo/Refund/Resale and others do not?
And, further, if a demo was available, would you use it? Or just plunge straight in there without trying it first?


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

James H said:


> That's my point, they couldn't (genuine users) if they are registered... most of SA are.
> Users of warez are not gonna go through the bother of refunds when the products are already 'up there', it's simply not going to happen. They'd have it installed before they got an email reply!
> 
> 8Dio offer no refunds, because of the lack of serial.
> ...


I was more talking generally about the refund/resale case, like others - not just focused on Spitfire.

But when we're focused on labels with serials - are you sure the libraries really stop working when the serial is disabled? I'm not sure that's possible in Kontakt once they are registered. But if it is then it would be good to have such refund/resale policies indeed.
But even more specifically - Orbis. It is not a Kontakt library. So, from what I have seen these Spitfire plugin libraries also don't have serials. You buy, you download and there you have it. I don't think they have such a system in place.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

pinki said:


> Firstly you express a completely personal opinion about playability. I'm afraid you have a very different approach than me and I think you should accept that for some the playability is more important than the sound.
> 
> Regarding Kontak and resales: you are wrong, it is not like that any more in Kontakt. They have made it much more difficult..though not impossible..to retain a sold library. Eventually if you want to carry on using Kontakt, it becomes un-useable.
> 
> ...


Well, the library should be considered as playable as demonstrated. No more, no less. If they were honest in showing it off, then that's what you are going to get. I wouldn't expect to be able to play in a way that was no demonstrated. 

If Kontakt has indeed made hard enough to retain such a library then it would be fine. But you cannot generalize it since many libraries are no registered with NI and thus also cannot be disabled with any serial. For many libraries you just download the library, load it via the browser and that's it. Only NI registered labels would be affected by that, so it wouldn't be a general case.

And well, also regarding iLOK. Libraries that work via iLOK may also be fine. As I said - I'm fine with resale/refund pressure if the library can indeed be disabled.

I don't know why some companies offer refunds. I'm not one of them and I wouldn't offer it.
Demos make sense and I'd of course use them. But I think to a company it only makes sense if they are very limited, because as far as I know you cannot make libraries time out in Kontakt, unless perhaps they are NI registered (or doesn't even that work? Maybe a Kontakt scripter can clarify). Which, again - would be a case limited to only 'some' companies then.


----------



## avocado89 (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> You are refuting things noone has said.
> Noone thinks that not offering refunds means to piracy.
> The only point is that there is no need to pave an easy way for theft to happen. If you can just go to a label and get the library for free due to the refund policy it's extremely likely it will be abused often.
> I mean... do you really think your idea with the pissed customer uploading a library to a pirate page for revenge holds water? I bet that happens... maybe twice a year? Or even... 5 times??
> ...


Your probably right. It wouldn’t happen very often, but humans are a fickle bunch. A company is gonna do what it has to to protect it’s lively hoody - I completely get that. Don’t get me wrong, I am not speaking for myself, I have been lucky enough to purchase libraries that I actually love and use - Spitfire’s included. They do a great job, and are very generous with their LABS offerings - I always come back to the soft piano, it’s my go to. However, I think moving towards a pay as you go/subscription model like Output would be a great idea. Obviously this wouldn’t work with kontakt libraries, but with their own player libraries. Basically you pay $10 a month, you get it, you try it, if you don’t like it you cancel your subscription and you are only out $10 bucks not $500. Seems like a win-win for both parties. This could have easily been done for Orbis.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

avocado89 said:


> Your probably right. It wouldn’t happen very often, but humans are a fickle bunch. A company is gonna do what it has to to protect it’s lively hoody - I completely get that. Don’t get me wrong, I am not speaking for myself, I have been lucky enough to purchase libraries that I actually love and use - Spitfire’s included. They do a great job, and are very generous with their LABS offerings - I always come back to the soft piano, it’s my go to. However, I think moving towards a pay as you go/subscription model like Output would be a great idea. Obviously this wouldn’t work with kontakt libraries, but with their own player libraries. Basically you pay $10 a month, you get it, you try it, if you don’t like it you cancel your subscription and you are only out $10 bucks not $500. Seems like a win-win for both parties. This could have easily been done for Orbis.


That would be great! Especially since they will probably be doing more libraries in their own player moving forward. But I think for that they'd have to put a complex licensing system like iLOK in place.
Not sure they can do this already. (making libraries time limited and possibly disabling the license, temporarily or permanently)


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 27, 2019)

DarkestShadow said:


> I don't know why some companies offer refunds. I'm not one of them and I wouldn't offer it.
> Demos make sense and I'd of course use them.



It's a minefield and I can understand the reluctance to offer refunds/resale. The admin alone must be a nightmare.
I'm with you on research etc, even though I'm spouting all this crap. If there's no resale then i watch/read everything from users I feel have the same approach/application as me. The official videos hold no interest to me other than listening to patches etc.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 27, 2019)

I have to say, I would have less problems with a live type run through of the presets on a library like Daniel James has done, when there are no demos or refunds. With companies like Spitfire and 8dio, they can show only the good stuff and you don’t know how much massaging they are doing to get that sound. If they make it sound perfect, I’m going to expect perfect without a lot of work. And I’m usually disappointed.


----------



## jbuhler (Jul 27, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I have to say, I would have less problems with a live type run through of the presets on a library like Daniel James has done, when there are no demos or refunds. With companies like Spitfire and 8dio, they can show only the good stuff and you don’t know how much massaging they are doing to get that sound. If they make it sound perfect, I’m going to expect perfect without a lot of work. And I’m usually disappointed.


Paul’s walkthroughs for Spitfire often don’t do the library credit so there’s that. But, no, you can’t count on the library doing anything more than is demonstrated and if they systematically avoid demonstrating something in the walkthrough there’s likely a reason for the omission.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Jul 27, 2019)

A company as big as Spitfire offering refunds would surely open the floodgates to all sorts of illegitimate refund requests that are impossible to verify. There's no distinguishable line between "i bought this product by mistake" and "I'm not very good at using your product". "This product was misrepresented" VS "I didn't watch the whole walkthrough video or read the entire product page". The "yeah i only really needed that library for this short film i'm currently working on. I'm done with it now. Thanks" refund.


Scenario: I made a purchase based on some marketing material, but the product doesn't feel as good to play as I was hoping. I am unhappy with the product now.

Are there legitimately two minds about who is at fault here?


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> With companies like Spitfire and 8dio, they can show only the good stuff and you don’t know how much massaging they are doing to get that sound. If they make it sound perfect, I’m going to expect perfect without a lot of work. And I’m usually disappointed.



Exactly this.


----------



## Zero&One (Jul 27, 2019)

Jdiggity1 said:


> There's no distinguishable line between "i bought this product by mistake" and "I'm not very good at using your product". "This product was misrepresented" VS "I didn't watch the whole walkthrough video or read the entire product page".



Checking a users account. If this is the only purchase then... nope.
But a user with several purchases and a loyalty to the company holds a different view in my opinion. VSL helped me out using this very approach, kudos to them btw.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 27, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Paul’s walkthroughs for Spitfire often don’t do the library credit so there’s that. But, no, you can’t count on the library doing anything more than is demonstrated and if they systematically avoid demonstrating something in the walkthrough there’s likely a reason for the omission.


Well, if I could get it to sound like Paul does by just playing it, that would be great. I just don't have the experience to make it sound that good. And really, I know a lot of my issues are lack of experience/knowledge of how to make these things work. Which is why I don't usually complain or talk about getting a refund on things. 

But I do see other's perspectives on this. If you do know how to massage and make stuff work and it still doesn't work the way the walk throughs showed, that is a problem. And a good walk through should show enough to make a purchaser happy. I'm curious to if the OP actually watched a walk through before buying.


----------



## Heledir (Jul 27, 2019)

Yes, twice. But that's because I'm a dumbass who bought the wrong product twice during Black Friday.

In 2017, I moved too fast and accidentally put Albion into my shopping cart instead of Tundra, and you'd think one might notice this at any of the points where your product is displayed, but nope. Then in 2018 I did the same with Skalia Harp instead of Harp Swarm.

I fully expect to be a running joke in the Spitfire building by now.


----------



## Greg (Jul 27, 2019)

James H said:


> Checking a users account. If this is the only purchase then... nope.
> But a user with several purchases and a loyalty to the company holds a different view in my opinion. VSL helped me out using this very approach, kudos to them btw.




My thoughts exactly. Spitfire has a hard line drawn in the sand of no refunds, ever, for any reason after download is complete. That policy is a terrible way to treat loyal customers imo. They should allow 1-2 exceptions over a lifetime. Or buy 10-15 products and you unlock 1 refund if you're not happy with something. Simplify it even more and only allow it within 24 hours of completing the download.


----------



## pinki (Jul 27, 2019)

Greg said:


> My thoughts exactly. Spitfire has a hard line drawn in the sand of no refunds, ever, for any reason after download is complete. That policy is a terrible way to treat loyal customers imo. They should allow 1-2 exceptions over a lifetime. Or buy 10-15 products and you unlock 1 refund if you're not happy with something. Simplify it even more and only allow it within 24 hours of completing the download.



Now why would Spitfire want to do that? They've proven that treating customers like they do works perfectly well already. They outdo East West at their worst period. Even East West eventually got with the programme and introduced the cancellable subscription. My respect for them went up a lot when they did that.


----------



## synthetic (Jul 27, 2019)

This has been the policy for almost all software since the 1970s. You break the seal, you own it. It's because piracy is so bad – there are many pirated copies for every legit copy. If you want to blame someone, blame the software crackers.


----------



## robgb (Jul 27, 2019)

zircon_st said:


> Demos are a big challenge for sample libraries for many reasons, not the least of which is bandwidth costs. Bandwidth might be cheap but it's not free. For a large library, it might cost us $2 per download. Plugins that don't involve large sample sets don't have this problem.


Then the answer is clearly to create a return policy. Not happy with it after, say, ten days, return for a refund minus maybe a small downloading fee, if you don't want to handle the cost.


----------



## robgb (Jul 27, 2019)

synthetic said:


> This has been the policy for almost all software since the 1970s. You break the seal, you own it. It's because piracy is so bad – there are many pirated copies for every legit copy. If you want to blame someone, blame the software crackers.


Offering no returns or refunds does nothing to prevent piracy, but okay. But sample libraries are not quite the same as other types of software. We're not talking about word processors.


----------



## robgb (Jul 27, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I buy the library for $600, deliver the cues three weeks later, then get a refund for the library because I will personally never use it again. Is THAT fair?


No, it's not. But I find it disconcerting that a library developer would assume that you or any of us would be that kind of asshole. Companies with GOOD customer service offer refunds with no questions asked.



EgM said:


> Developers are protecting themselves


Refusing refunds to customers does nothing to protect them. Libraries are still pirated every day. So why not treat their customers with respect and give them good customer service?


----------



## robgb (Jul 27, 2019)

One solution that many software developers have used over the years is to offer a "lite" version of the software. Pianoteq offers a terrific demo of their library that's missing sound on a few keys. But you're able to demo the thing indefinitely as long as you don't use it in commercial work. I don't really see this having an affect on piracy or their bottom line.


----------



## markleake (Jul 27, 2019)

One word for the above: unrealistic expectations. Okay, two words. 

There's developer comments in this tread who explained in detail why the above ideas don't work.


----------



## robgb (Jul 27, 2019)

markleake said:


> One word for the above: unrealistic expectations. Okay, two words.
> 
> There's developer comments in this tread who explained in detail why the above ideas don't work.


To be quite honest I'm loath to take a developers word for anything. For them the no refund situation is a win-win no matter what excuse they use to justify it.


----------



## jtnyc (Jul 27, 2019)

Also, if it's been explained why it doesn't work, how come Soniccouture, Output, Embertone and others have been allowing transfers for ages and are thriving? It seems to work for them. Ok, those companies register with NI and do Player libraries, but many other developers that do Player libraries don't allow license transfers or refunds, and their reason is what, piracy? I'm not sure I buy that. Output allows returns as well, not sure about the others.

I would be happy if they just allowed transfers so I could at least recoup some of the money.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 27, 2019)

robgb said:


> No, it's not. But I find it disconcerting that a library developer would assume that you or any of us would be that kind of asshole. Companies with GOOD customer service offer refunds with no questions asked.
> 
> 
> Refusing refunds to customers does nothing to protect them. Libraries are still pirated every day. So why not treat their customers with respect and give them good customer service?


This is very invalid reasoning. Just because something still happens despite a policy doesn't mean the policy is useless. A diminishment of piracy would be an unrealistic goal, but a "reduction" certainly makes sense. 
An increase of course does not. An I can only see being able to get libraries basically for free due to such policies as having a lot of potential for that. Too much, I would think as a developer.
And - since I would (hopefully) have a lot of customers - yea, I would have to assume that some of them are assholes. I cannot check everyone who buys personally and then decide that 'you' are not and put some exception in place. 
Perhaps putting such an exception in place when the person has bought a significant amount of products in the past would be good though. 


jtnyc said:


> Also, if it's been explained why it doesn't work, how come Soniccouture, Output, Embertone and others have been allowing transfers for ages and are Thriving? It seems to work for them. Ok, those companies register with NI and do Player libraries, but many other developers that do Player libraries don't allow license transfers or refunds, and their reason is what, piracy? I'm not sure I buy that. Output allows returns as well, not sure about the others.
> 
> I would be happy if they just allowed transfers so I could at least recoup some of the money.


I'm sure no label is afraid that they are being decimated when they allow resales/refunds. But paving an easy for theft, not decimating but reducing your income and supporting piracy by ease of access to the libraries is not desirable regardless.


----------



## Jaap (Jul 27, 2019)

I am just a starting and small developer, but my business grew enough that I can actually completely sustain myself from my company (my income from music not taken into that account).

That said, as a small developer piracy has a big impact (and most of my products are pirated), however I consider my clients and customers more valuable then letting me being scared by the impact of piracy. I try to look at the business from both sides as I also know how it is to be a customer and therefore it is important to create a system where both the business as well as the customer is protected in some way.

I do provide refunds and allow reselling.
The first I do because no matter how well I do my demo's, offer freebies in some occassions and make complete walkthrough, things can always turn out problematic for a customer. Whether he/she find the library/sounds not as usable as it was expected or that for some reason there are technical issues etc etc.
In these cases I find it only fair that within a 30 day period one can request a refund.
However, I had only once in the last 2 years upon thousands of sales, that I had a request and granted a refund.
The second one, reselling, I allow because it can happen that a library/soundset outlived it's life or usefullness. The main reason I do this is because I love to make sounds and that they can be usefull and therefore they should be offered a second home if one does not use them anymore. For the record, I never had anyone who wanted to resell

And yes, there are likely people who will abuse this system and keep using the libraries and sounds after the refund/reselling, but call me naive, I still believe this is only a very very small percentage and as customer I would not like to suffer from a minority and so do I not want that my customers are.

I can't speak for the bigger companies, but I do hope there will be a good balance in protecting a business and also protecting a customer.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Jul 28, 2019)

It's a fair point to say that customers should not be suffering from a minority abusing the system. I'd just say there it shouldn't be seen as an obligation to have such policies due to the possible abuse and the obligation of the customer to be informed about what they buy. 

I guess when there are actually crippling technical issues or parts of the library are really broken (HZ Strings legato cough cough) a refund makes sense when that can be demonstrated. But being so unhappy as to actually want a refund after buying despite a honest walkthrough is kind of a tough pill for me to chew haha. I just find that bizarre. 

I could imagine it's actually worse for bigger developers than for smaller ones, because despite making more money they also spend more money (bigger productions) and there is much more interest in stealing their stuff.


----------



## Diablo IV (Jul 28, 2019)

At the end of the day, people vote with their actions/wallet (on anything): everybody buys Spitfire's stuff, hence they are agreeing fully to no refunds nor resells.

You don't agree? Don't buy anything from them. IF the balance after a period of time because 
people not buying after not agreeing with their terms changes towards the customer side, then perhaps
they will change their terms.

Otherwise keep on dreaming they will change.

But I can see you "all" already on Black Friday and Xmas and New Year's and Aprils Fools' and Summer Sale salivating for the discounts and buying loads of stuff... again! lol


----------



## pinki (Jul 28, 2019)

Jaap said:


> I am just a starting and small developer, but my business grew enough that I can actually completely sustain myself from my company (my income from music not taken into that account).
> 
> That said, as a small developer piracy has a big impact (and most of my products are pirated), however I consider my clients and customers more valuable then letting me being scared by the impact of piracy. I try to look at the business from both sides as I also know how it is to be a customer and therefore it is important to create a system where both the business as well as the customer is protected in some way.
> 
> ...




And what you say here immediately will make me go to your website and if I like what I hear I will buy!
I have not bought a single Spitfire library since Albion.
Darkest Shadow you have repeated the same point again and again (demos/refunds encourage piracy) but it's just not holding up when small devs are refuting it.. as well as many many customers. There has to be a balance and a Youtube Video combined with NoRefund/NoResale/NoDemo is er..not balance.
Many many developers do not go down this route and are hugely successful (er Native Instruments..they were small once you know).


----------



## AllanH (Jul 28, 2019)

Diablo3 said:


> At the end of the day, people vote with their actions/wallet (on anything): everybody buys Spitfire's stuff, hence they are agreeing fully to no refunds nor resells. [...]



For me, this is not really the case. I have bought instruments from vendors where shortly after the purchase realized I'd made a mistake. I now hesitate far more regarding their new releases. I make fewer mistakes now, but I still get "fooled" by the demos or "wishful thinking" at times. 

A e.g. 24 hour refund window seems fair and I think I would be far more open to spending with the developer moving forward.


----------



## AllanH (Jul 28, 2019)

On a business note: if it was fiscally beneficial for a developer to allow refunds and/or resell, they would do so. To me, this means that e.g. Spitfire receives most of their revenues from new customers.


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 28, 2019)

AllanH said:


> On a business note: if it was fiscally beneficial for a developer to allow refunds and/or resell, they would do so. To me, this means that e.g. Spitfire receives most of their revenues from new customers.


To me it means that most of their business is repeat customers, but hardly anyone would ever ask for a refund...


----------



## jeremiahpena (Jul 28, 2019)

Jaap said:


> I am just a starting and small developer, but my business grew enough that I can actually completely sustain myself from my company (my income from music not taken into that account).
> 
> That said, as a small developer piracy has a big impact (and most of my products are pirated), however I consider my clients and customers more valuable then letting me being scared by the impact of piracy. I try to look at the business from both sides as I also know how it is to be a customer and therefore it is important to create a system where both the business as well as the customer is protected in some way.
> 
> ...



As another small developer this is pretty much my view as well. While I haven't explicitly had a refund policy in place, I've given refunds to those who asked. Has it been taken advantage of? Probably, but I'd rather err on the side of those who are honest. Because of this thread I decided to add a 30 day refund policy to my site.

I understand why developers don't allow refunds, especially in the case of non Kontakt Player libraries where there is no license key involved and no way to verify if someone actually deletes the library from their hard drive. But when there is a system in place where keys can be transferred or revoked I think developers should support it. Subscription services where you can try out libraries for a low price like East West are also a good alternative.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jul 28, 2019)

To me the subscription model is inevitable. This NFR thing.... does it really make good business sense?


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jul 29, 2019)

My last bum out purchase (Spitfire Studio Brass Pro) really got me thinking about the NFR thing. 

One of the best things about buying from Best Service is not just how great their support can be, but that there isn't NFR on their products. I usually don't have to sell the many things I have of theirs, but when I have they were super friendly and it was no big deal at all. From now I get a LOT less enthusiastic about NFR companies like SA and OT, as much as I love their best stuff.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jul 29, 2019)

Parsifal666 said:


> My last bum out purchase (Spitfire Studio Brass Pro) really got me thinking about the NFR thing.
> 
> One of the best things about buying from Best Service is not just how great their support can be, but that there isn't NFR on their products. I usually don't have to sell the many things I have of theirs, but when I have they were super friendly and it was no big deal at all. From now I get a LOT less enthusiastic about NFR companies like SA and OT, as much as I love their best stuff.


I'm the same. I'm starting to be a little more careful of what I buy if I can't resell it. As in I will buy Project Sam stuff without as much research as I would spend on say Broadway Lites. Chances are, I won't resell the PS stuff, even if I don't like it, just because it is a lot of work to sell, and I buy everything on sale anyway. But the option is there.


----------



## synthetic (Jul 29, 2019)

Software pirates would buy the software, crack it, then return it. 



robgb said:


> One solution that many software developers have used over the years is to offer a "lite" version of the software.



Spitfire has loads of free software, the Labs series.


----------



## robgb (Jul 29, 2019)

synthetic said:


> Software pirates would buy the software, crack it, then return it.
> 
> 
> 
> Spitfire has loads of free software, the Labs series.


Yes, and I applaud them for that. But they don't have actual DEMOS of the products they sell. And since they have their own player now, it would be a very easy thing to accomplish. The Labs instruments are great, but they really don't tell you anything about the libraries for sale.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Jul 29, 2019)

A walkthrough's never quite the same as giving it a test drive yourself, but I gotta hand it to Spitfire. They probably produce more walkthroughs, demos, and in-action videos than almost anyone else. Not to mention how long and detailed their product pages and descriptions are.
If you're willing to take the time to watch and listen to all of the material they release, there's not a lot of surprises left.


----------



## markleake (Jul 29, 2019)

robgb said:


> To be quite honest I'm loath to take a developers word for anything. For them the no refund situation is a win-win no matter what excuse they use to justify it.


I can't disagree. And I totally understand the sentiment. Where I live it is illegal to not offer a refund, or to even _say_ you don't offer refunds. We are the whole reason why Steam now has to offer refunds on games, due to our good consumer laws.

But I also understand it's more complicated than it initially sounds. We as consumers often don't understand or we underestimate the complexities with services/products. And I think there are big differences between the developers/vendors based on size, market position, type of offerings, differences in law, resourcing costs, contractuals, etc. which explain a lot about why some developers are more adverse to this than others.

If you know much about business, I don't think you'd call it an "excuse". It's more like an aversion to unnecessary headaches & avoiding reaching into the too-hard basket.

That's why I don't think things will change. This will still be the status quo years from now.


----------



## markleake (Jul 29, 2019)

Jdiggity1 said:


> A walkthrough's never quite the same as giving it a test drive yourself, but I gotta hand it to Spitfire. They probably produce more walkthroughs, demos, and in-action videos than almost anyone else. Not to mention how long and detailed their product pages and descriptions are.
> If you're willing to take the time to watch and listen to all of the material they release, there's not a lot of surprises left.


I do find it ironic that this entire thread is under a heading about Spitfire. Long & multiple walkthroughs, good descriptions of the patches, etc., they always describe and demonstrate their products well. Even HZ Strings, dare I say it. 

Spitfire is one of the few companies I've never had problems with. Never been surprised by them.

Sure, they are good at the marketing speak, but as adults we all know how that works.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Jul 29, 2019)

markleake said:


> Sure, they are good at the marketing speak, but as adults we all know how that works.


Or so we thought....


----------



## robgb (Jul 29, 2019)

markleake said:


> Long & multiple walkthroughs, good descriptions of the patches, etc., they always describe and demonstrate their products well. Even HZ Strings, dare I say it.


Watching someone else drive a car is not quite the same as driving it yourself.


----------



## synthetic (Jul 29, 2019)

robgb said:


> Yes, and I applaud them for that. But they don't have actual DEMOS of the products they sell. And since they have their own player now, it would be a very easy thing to accomplish. The Labs instruments are great, but they really don't tell you anything about the libraries for sale.



They have extensive demos and walkthroughs. More than most developers, if not all. I’m not even a Spitfire fanboy but I have no idea what you’re talking about. They are one of the most customer-focused developers. Christian’s vlog alone, holy crap. I’m not replying anymore because I’ve given this thread too much oxygen. I’m sorry you had a bad experience, live and learn.


----------



## Polkasound (Jul 29, 2019)

synthetic said:


> I have no idea what you’re talking about.



By DEMOS, he means limited versions of the actual libraries that you can download and install. Instead of only watching other people use the libraries on a video, you can literally try it for yourself before you buy it.


----------



## robgb (Jul 29, 2019)

synthetic said:


> They have extensive demos and walkthroughs. More than most developers, if not all. I’m not even a Spitfire fanboy but I have no idea what you’re talking about. They are one of the most customer-focused developers. Christian’s vlog alone, holy crap. I’m not replying anymore because I’ve given this thread too much oxygen. I’m sorry you had a bad experience, live and learn.


As I said, watching someone else drive isn't the same as driving yourself. Watching someone else go through a library is enormously useful, yes, but it doesn't tell me how the library FEELS under my fingertips. It doesn't tell me how it responds to the mod wheel and expression controls in MY studio.

A user DEMO would allow me to see if the fit is right for me. Otherwise I'm spending a lot of money and praying I'll like the library. Fortunately, Spitfire seems to hit more than it misses, but if it's a miss (Albion One for me), it's a very expensive miss for the consumer that can't be remedied. And this is true of any library developer that doesn't allow returns/refunds/resales.


----------



## Crowe (Jul 29, 2019)

I can rarely justify making any purchase above 100,- if I cannot test or return the product. To me, it's completely senseless to put that much money (500,- libraries) to chance.

So while reading through this thread I realized that for me to ever buy Spitfire products, I'd have to pirate them first to test them.

I've been giggling ever since.


----------



## markleake (Jul 29, 2019)

robgb said:


> Fortunately, Spitfire seems to hit more than it misses, but if it's a miss (Albion One for me), it's a very expensive miss for the consumer that can't be remedied.


Albion One is an interesting example. I don't find it behaves any different to other Spitfire products, so I'd be interested to know why Albion is a miss for you?


----------



## gussunkri (Jul 30, 2019)

robgb said:


> Yes, and I applaud them for that. But they don't have actual DEMOS of the products they sell. And since they have their own player now, it would be a very easy thing to accomplish. The Labs instruments are great, but they really don't tell you anything about the libraries for sale.


It seems like for two of their most recent libraries (Kepler and Haushka) they did offer limited demos so perhaps this is a new strategy for Spitfire going forward.


----------



## robgb (Jul 30, 2019)

markleake said:


> Albion One is an interesting example. I don't find it behaves any different to other Spitfire products, so I'd be interested to know why Albion is a miss for you?


A multitude of reasons (the amount of wetness, the lackluster legato patches, etc.). I can see why some people would love it, it's just not for me. And this is not something I was able to determine by watching the walkthrough videos. But that's not really the point. I was UNHAPPY with a very expensive purchase and feel I should be able to return it for a refund. I took a chance and regret it.

That said, I recently took a chance and bought Studio Strings and think it's a wonderful library. These are, however, expensive gambles.

I mean, let's face it. Crippled software is not a new concept. The practice has been in use for decades. So there really is no excuse for developers not to be able to create user Demo versions that can be fully unlocked upon purchase. I know that Kontakt doesn't allow for this, but it's ridiculous to think that NI couldn't add that functionality to the software.

But apparently they won't. Or perhaps developer demand hasn't been high enough. I wonder why?


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jul 30, 2019)

jtnyc said:


> Some developers do allow transfers. Soniccouture, *Output,* NI and Embertone to name a few, so it's not impossible as some developers say. Spitfire does not. That's their choice.




I have read that Output allows resales enough here that I've written them about it. Their customer service people have always been great, but they ignored my email. Maybe because their licensing agreement is so clear?
*
This license is nontransferable and expressly forbids resale or lease of the product.

This license also expressly forbids any inclusion of content contained within this library, or any other Output library, into any other virtual instrument or library of any kind, without our express written consent. This license forbids any re-distribution method of this product, or its sounds, through any means, including but not limited to, re-sampling, mixing, processing, isolating, or embedding into software or hardware of any kind, for the purpose of re-recording or reproduction as part of any free or commercial library of musical and/or sound effect samples and/or articulations, or any form of musical sample or sound effect sample playback system or device or on a stand alone basis.
*
So If somebody has received permission to resell their Output libraries, I'd sure like to hear about it.
They used to offer a refund for a limited period of time, maybe they still do. Certainly their installer can make sure I'd have no use of the library after I sold it.


----------



## neblix (Jul 30, 2019)

robgb said:


> I mean, let's face it. Crippled software is not a new concept. The practice has been in use for decades. So there really is no excuse for developers not to be able to create user Demo versions that can be fully unlocked upon purchase. I know that Kontakt doesn't allow for this, but it's ridiculous to think that NI couldn't add that functionality to the software.
> 
> But apparently they won't. Or perhaps developer demand hasn't been high enough. I wonder why?



You just said “there is no excuse for developers to not do this” and then provided the exact legitimate barrier to doing it right after. Um...?

As for “why? ”, timed demos would be horrible for piracy. Now everyone has the full library, and the only thing standing in their way is some flimsy DRM.



robgb said:


> Watching someone else drive a car is not quite the same as driving it yourself.



Car feel can not be captured on video and transmitted. The sound of a library very easily does. That’s because we’re talking about sounds, not cars. I can not believe you cite “wetness” as something you were blindsided with. They literally go through each mic position in the walkthroughs to show the exact level of hall sound in each one.


----------



## Crowe (Jul 30, 2019)

robgb said:


> I mean, let's face it. Crippled software is not a new concept. The practice has been in use for decades. So there really is no excuse for developers not to be able to create user Demo versions that can be fully unlocked upon purchase. I know that Kontakt doesn't allow for this, but it's ridiculous to think that NI couldn't add that functionality to the software.
> 
> But apparently they won't. Or perhaps developer demand hasn't been high enough. I wonder why?



Basically all 'crippled version' software is easily hackable (FL studio, for example), so I fully understand not taking that route.

What I do not understand is that, if you really want to pirate something, you're going to get it. Be it through Usenet, weird torrent sites of what have you. Stuff is out there for the enterprising pirate to grab.

I know for a *fact* that most "piracy" really isn't caused by people returning their product because they don't like it, but then keep using it anyway. No, most piracy comes basically from a single unit of software that's been stripped from it's protections and let into the great wild yonder.

In the case of Kontakt, NI Access would actually force the software out of being enabled when returned or sold. To top it off, you'd have your license to use the sounds revoked so you can't actually make commercial music with it anymore.

So yeah, you're basically just screwing your customers for an imagined reason.


----------



## robgb (Jul 30, 2019)

neblix said:


> Car feel can not be captured on video and transmitted. The sound of a library very easily does. That’s because we’re talking about sounds, not cars. I can not believe you cite “wetness” as something you were blindsided with. They literally go through each mic position in the walkthroughs to show the exact level of hall sound in each one.


The SOUND of a library can be transmitted via video, but the FEEL of that library can't be. A video can't reveal how the scripting feels.

For example, there is a big difference between the FEEL of piano libraries. Some feel clunky, others (like Pianoteq) play like butter. It's only when you have that library under your own fingertips that you can know if it's right for you. And Pianoteq, for example, offers a crippled demo for that very purpose.



neblix said:


> I can not believe you cite “wetness” as something you were blindsided with.



I didn't say I was blindsided by it. I said it's one of the things I don't like about Albion One. I knew going in that it was wet and was willing to accept that, but once I had it under my fingertips, that and a multitude of other reasons made it not work for ME.

But again, that's not the point. If I'm unhappy for ANY reason, there should be a reasonable amount of time for me to return the product for a refund (and, yes, my license to use it in commercial work should be revoked in that case). The software industry has us conditioned to believe that this is an unreasonable request. And it's not.

As for NI preventing timed demos—it's true. That does hamper developers. But it doesn't prevent them from creating demos that are limited in other ways. Missing notes, etc. Red Room has managed to do a good job of it with their demo patch.


----------



## jtnyc (Jul 30, 2019)

------


TigerTheFrog said:


> I have read that Output allows resales enough here that I've written them about it. Their customer service people have always been great, but they ignored my email. Maybe because their licensing agreement is so clear?
> 
> *This license is nontransferable and expressly forbids resale or lease of the product.
> 
> ...


I’ve resold licenses for products from Output, Soniccouture and N.I and purchased a second hand license for a prouduct from Embertone. Maybe Output has changed their policy, or that’s just the written policy but they still do allow it. I don’t really know, but they had no problem allowing me to resell Rev last year. They were very friendly and helpful, as was Soniccouture. Also Project Sam and Toontrack allow transfers as well.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Jul 30, 2019)

Thread of people who want to test drive sample libraries...

...please meet the massive thread of people who are against copy protection.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (Jul 30, 2019)

robgb said:


> If I'm unhappy for ANY reason, there should be a reasonable amount of time for me to return the product for a refund (and, yes, my license to use it in commercial work should be revoked in that case). The software industry has us conditioned to believe that this is an unreasonable request. And it's not.



No. It's not the software _industry_--it's some companies. I have received refunds. I have received refunds just for asking if I could resell a product I was unhappy with. The developer didn't want me to be unhappy.

Lots of Kontakt developers offer refunds and allow resales. (I have heard of a company called Realitone that refunds within a month.)

Every company that allows resales has to deal with the same world of piracy as everybody else. They just choose to do business in a way that puts customers first. 
It's our responsibility to know each developer's resale policies before we give them any money. We should act on it by giving as much business as possible to the companies who do it. Not just to reward them for treating their customers well, but because it gives their products added value.


----------



## robgb (Jul 30, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> It's not the software _industry_--it's some companies.


Point taken. Which, of course, means if SOME can do it, they all can.


----------



## Mike Fox (Jul 30, 2019)

I'm not gonna lie, I'd probably return half of my library purchases if i could.


----------



## richardt4520 (Jul 30, 2019)

TigerTheFrog said:


> I have read that Output allows resales enough here that I've written them about it. Their customer service people have always been great, but they ignored my email. Maybe because their licensing agreement is so clear?
> 
> *This license is nontransferable and expressly forbids resale or lease of the product.
> 
> ...



I wanted to resell REV. I tried to like it and even bought the expansions trying to find a use for it and never could after a good while of owning it. They wouldn't let me resell since it had been over a year but they did let me trade it towards Analog Brass and Winds which I really wanted and love. I would've bought ABW eventually anyway so that worked for me. Most companies I've had issue with for expensive libraries I've purchased and disliked certainly don't even go that far-not that Output's libraries are that expensive in comparison to some.


----------



## richardt4520 (Jul 30, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> I'm not gonna lie, I'd probably return half of my library purchases if i could.


+1


----------



## mc_deli (Jul 30, 2019)

After selling so many high priced libs, Spitfire can't change their resale policy any time soon.
If they suddenly allowed resale of their back catalogue the 2nd hand market would be flooded and cripple sales of the back catalogue.

(I'm trying to imagine how many gazzillions of squids' worth of unused SA libs there are lying around on the hard drives of wealthy aspiring digital composers around the world and it's making me dizzy. Would anyone buy Mandolin swarm from the SA shop ever again?).

Personally (along with non-user changable batteries) I think that it should be illegal and regulations should protect buyers of software more and enable resale.

In all this, any idea that it's technically impossible is laughable. Software companies build complex systems for delivery whatever features they end up with. If you plan well and plan the "right" features, then you plan well and plan the right features. Toontrack is awesome.


----------



## mc_deli (Jul 30, 2019)

Mike Fox said:


> I'm not gonna lie, I'd probably return half of my library purchases if i could.


I'd flog least half of my SA libs if it were possible.


----------



## Desire Inspires (Jul 30, 2019)

mc_deli said:


> (I'm trying to imagine how many gazzillions of squids' worth of unused SA libs there are lying around on the hard drives of wealthy aspiring digital composers around the world and it's making me dizzy. Would anyone buy Mandolin swarm from the SA shop ever again?).



Count me as one. 

I bought Albion One during the recent sale when it was half off. I finally downloaded it a few weeks ago, but haven’t done squat with it. 

Low on creative juices, as I am learning to code. Maybe I’ll do something with it once I get stuck on some coding problems. Just don’t have the motivation to do music right now.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jul 30, 2019)

> In all this, any idea that it's technically impossible is laughable. Software companies build complex systems for delivery whatever features they end up with. If you plan well and plan the "right" features, then you plan well and plan the right features. Toontrack is awesome.



When you're not in charge of the platform you're developing for (Kontakt) that changes things.


----------



## avocado89 (Jul 30, 2019)

I find it interesting that there are quite a few people who are against companies giving refunds. I understand the argument of "Piracy" and "Developers work hard" and "Think before you buy" - but don't we as the composers work just as hard? I know personally before I buy a sample library I spend countless hours listening to demos, watching videos, reviews, going on to forums like this, to best make an informed decision before I pull the trigger. Even then though, sometimes you get a dud because the advertising was misleading or they didn't really give you a good enough look "under the hood". You expected to be able to drive the car off the lot and go on a marvellous adventure but you soon realised that the car needed a bunch of work to even get it roadworthy. Now maybe this is a stupid analogy (I've never really been good at them) but the point is developers and composers/buyers of the libraries need to meet somewhere in the middle. We as composers work hard for our money, for the gig, we work hard to find the right tool to make sure that gig isn't the last one. Just like the developers work hard, spend lots of money to bring us amazing sample libraries, but when they aren't or it just didn't work out for us the way we expected it to - the devs should do the honourable thing and give a refund, or let you resell. I've worked in customer service for 12 years and I know the mark of a great company is one that goes above and beyond for its customers. This usually means giving a refund no questions asked - and no the company I work for isn't a huge corporation it is a small privately-owned company that knows it's customers are EVERYTHING.


----------



## markleake (Jul 30, 2019)

avocado89 said:


> I find it interesting that there are quite a few people who are against companies giving refunds.


To be fair, I don't think anyone is saying that. Maybe it's what people who want refunds _hear_ though.

Also, the only example given here in this tread (Albion One) still seems an odd one to me.


----------



## markleake (Jul 30, 2019)

robgb said:


> If I'm unhappy for ANY reason, there should be a reasonable amount of time for me to return the product for a refund


I mean no disrespect Rob, but I think this comment just makes it clear to me that this is a different discussion altogether, not about actual product deficiencies or unexpected issues that you might expect a refund for.

The Albion One example you give reinforces that for me. It just looks like you missed some product details.


----------



## robgb (Jul 30, 2019)

markleake said:


> I mean no disrespect Rob, but I think this comment just makes it clear to me that this is a different discussion altogether, not about actual product deficiencies or unexpected issues that you might expect a refund for.
> 
> The Albion One example you give reinforces that for me. It just looks like you missed some product details.


Discussions like this always stray. But I don't think this particular turn is that far off the mark.

When I buy something, if I'm not happy with it, I return it. Most stores don't ask why you're returning, except maybe to find out if it's defective in some way. But I'm rarely asked why I'm returning the merchandise. They simply thank me and give me a refund.

Good customer service dictates that you make the customer happy. Now, unless he or she has trashed the merchandise in some way, that would mean accepting a return for any reason.

We've already established that a) some developers allow returns and offer refunds; b) that returns and refund really have no affect on piracy; c) the companies that do offer returns/refunds seem to be doing fine, business-wise.

As for Albion One, it doesn't matter if I missed product details. I could have gotten every product detail available and still have been unhappy with the purchase. I believed the hype and thought I was buying something terrific. If I'd been able to demo the product, I would have known immediately that it was not for me.

This, by the way, made me hesitant to buy another Spitfire product, but when they had their sale recently, I bit back my trepidation and purchased Studio Strings. Turns out I got lucky this time. It's a truly terrific library. I do know, however, that at least one buyer is unhappy with it and has said so elsewhere on this forum because it lacks staccato articulations. So is it the buyer's fault because he missed that little detail amidst all the hype?

I mean no disrespect, either, but I have to believe that you understand my point. No one will successfully get a refund from Spitfire until they change their policy. I do appreciate that they have extensive video walkthroughs, but let's not forget that these are also sales tools designed to get you to buy. The people who do them are very engaging and, I believe, sincere people. But they are also sales people and will always present the product in its best light. So it would be nice if they would give us an actual hands-on demo as well.

Anyway, I keep repeating myself. Hopefully my point is clear now.


----------



## robgb (Jul 30, 2019)

zircon_st said:


> When you're not in charge of the platform you're developing for (Kontakt) that changes things.


You could create a limited version like Red Room did of their Palette libraries.


----------



## markleake (Jul 30, 2019)

robgb said:


> Anyway, I keep repeating myself. Hopefully my point is clear now.


Well, at least you admit it. 

Personally I don't believe the hype argument one bit. It's like saying peer pressure forces you to smoke cigarettes - it's a way of diffusing blame onto other people. Like I said before, we're all adults (or pretending to be ) who know how marketing works.

You've got to take some responsibility for what you spend your money on, especially when you already know a vendor doesn't give refunds. I doubt that vendors like Spitfire are impacted by this.


----------



## Crowe (Jul 30, 2019)

markleake said:


> Well, at least you admit it.
> 
> Personally I don't believe the hype argument one bit. It's like saying peer pressure forces you to smoke cigarettes - it's a way of diffusing blame onto other people. Like I said before, we're all adults (or pretending to be ) who know how marketing works.
> 
> You've got to take some responsibility for what you spend your money on, especially when you already know a vendor doesn't give refunds. I doubt that vendors like Spitfire are impacted by this.



Knowing how something works does *not* make you immune to it. This skirts dangerously close to victim blaming.


----------



## markleake (Jul 30, 2019)

Shiirai said:


> victim blaming


What the? We're still talking about buying VIs here right?
I'm not a big fan of people trivializing victims of violience and such, so this comment seems a little offensive to me.

Also, is saying people should be at least a bit responsible for what they buy somehow taboo?

Edit: and on that note, I think I may bow out of this conversation, seems like it's not a nice place. :(


----------



## Denkii (Jul 31, 2019)

markleake said:


> Personally I don't believe the hype argument one bit. It's like saying peer pressure forces you to smoke cigarettes - it's a way of diffusing blame onto other people. Like I said before, we're all adults (or pretending to be ) who know how marketing works.


Ladies and gentlemen: humanity found it's first true homo economicus over here.

Jokes aside: having the right to get a refund is not really a fairytale, at least in Germany. Specifically for goods that have not been bought in person. You can request a refund for 14 days without stating why. So generally speaking I'm with Rob, mostly because I'm used to that circumstance.

On the other hand: hearing something à la "customer is king" always makes me cringe if it's sounding like it's mandatory. I mean I get the idea and it would be wise for companies to care well for their customers...but every king needs to know how to behave if they want to stay king.
If you approach people - even when they are working for a business - with coming from a position where you feel superior and like it was your right to do whatever you want just because you're a customer, no wonder they might give you a hard time. I've gotten refunds for things where there supposedly was no refund available. But that's off topic.

The question whether customers are responsible for their purchases can be answered easily with "they are responsible to the extent that the applicable law in that place makes them". And that's a difference when you're comparing US and EU. So no wonder there are people here who meet with different expectations (not even solemnly based on their personal opinion about this topic but rather about what they are used to).


----------



## Crowe (Jul 31, 2019)

markleake said:


> What the? We're still talking about buying VIs here right?
> I'm not a big fan of people trivializing victims of violience and such, so this comment seems a little offensive to me.
> 
> Also, is saying people should be at least a bit responsible for what they buy somehow taboo?
> ...



You may note that I did not mention violence so I don't see why you'd need to be offended. You can be a victim of theft, confidence schemes, addiction-inducing business practices, false marketing, the list goes on.

Don't make the world smaller than it is.

Also, I do believe that the entire point of this discussion is because a person *cannot be responsible* for a purchase if you cannot actually test the product. That's like buying a car without being allowed to test-drive and then being told "well, that's your responsibility". Which it is slightly, in that you shouldn't have bought anything at all from a company that doesn't allow you to test or return a product.

Yet this does not excuse a company from having consumer-unfriendly business practices. Which I do feel these are.

EDIT: Also.



markleake said:


> Personally I don't believe the hype argument one bit. It's like saying peer pressure forces you to smoke cigarettes - it's a way of diffusing blame onto other people. Like I said before, we're all adults (or pretending to be ) who know how marketing works.



So basically, you don't know how marketing works. Or the human psyche. Of course someone is responsible for smoking cigarettes. That does not mean peer pressure is not a real thing and not the biggest reason people start smoking. Or that tobacco companies don't count on that fact. And you also don't think Hype is a marketing tool? Wtf.

Ok, so you're right. This is not a nice place. As a marketing grad, I get really, really angry when I see this kind of apologist naivety. Companies are *not* your friend. You are their target. Always. Just sometimes, the folks in charge are nice about it. And as charismatic and likable the folks from spitfire are, *some of their* businessmodel is decidedly not.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 31, 2019)

robgb said:


> I believed the hype and thought I was buying something terrific



Shamefully, I have fallen prey to this marketing tactic too many times with VI purchases . Most of these purchases I've come to appreciate over time, but the reality is that it was my own fault for pressing the "buy button".


----------



## Crowe (Jul 31, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Shamefully, I have fallen prey to this marketing tactic too many times with VI purchases . Most of these purchases I've come to appreciate over time, but the reality is that it was my own fault for pressing the "buy button".



I find that odd. What was this hype caused by? I mean, if you bought without checking *anything* then yes, it seems to be your fault for buying. But if you were given wrongful impressions by a publisher I'd call that misrepresentation.

Which is exactly why expositional videos on sample libraries are woefully inadequate to make a purchasing decision on.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 31, 2019)

Shiirai said:


> I find that odd. What was this hype caused by? I mean, if you bought without checking *anything* then yes, it seems to be your fault for buying. But if you were given wrongful impressions by a publisher I'd call that misrepresentation.
> 
> Which is exactly why expositional videos on sample libraries are woefully inadequate to make a purchasing decision on.



I was well informed based on videos, etc, but it was the "urgency" of not missing out on the sale prices that helped encourage me (Spitfire's Wishlist is one culprit ). Like I said, they have a place in my workflow, but these were more of a GAS purchase. There's nothing wrong with the VI's, they all work as expected (and portrayed), and for that reason I feel I am not entitled to a refund based on my own impulses. I suspect most of us having fallen into this trap at some point...with any type of product.


----------



## Crowe (Jul 31, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I was well informed based on videos, etc, but it was the "urgency" of not missing out on the sale prices that helped encourage me (Spitfire's Wishlist is one culprit ). Like I said, they have a place in my workflow, but these were more of a GAS purchase. There's nothing wrong with the VI's, they all work as expected (and portrayed), and for that reason I feel I am not entitled to a refund based on my own impulses. I suspect most of us having fallen into this trap at some point...with any type of product.



Oh yeah. I had that when I was just starting out. I've since learned that everything that goes on sale will go on sale again


----------



## Greg (Jul 31, 2019)

Just wanted to add that Spitfire was very empathetic and amended the situation best they could without breaking their strict policy.


----------



## Denkii (Aug 1, 2019)

Can you share what that means?
I invested enough energy into this thread to be curious enough :D


----------

