# Subscription Software: Nope



## Nick Batzdorf (May 27, 2022)

We asked for opinions at Synth and Software, and the results are in.









Subscription Software: Nope


You hate it, you really hate it The results are in. We didn’t get a single yes to May’s cover question – “Subscription Software – Yes or No?“ Not a single one of many dozens of responses, either in messages to us, on our Facebook page, or people stopping us on the street (okay, that […]




synthandsoftware.com





Yes, it is a little bit of a shocker to me.


----------



## EgM (May 27, 2022)

I actually like them, as long as the option to pay the license outright is kept. I'm pretty much an indie videogame music composer but I can still rake in enough so that I can run a little business off it and write it off as an expense.

For sure though, you can't subscribe to them all so you have to choose one or two that you would actually use.

As for not being able to recall your projects in a few years, for sure that's a problem but also a problem is that developers tend to update their products and chances are your old project wouldn't even load because of software changes anyway. (MacOS even worse for this)


----------



## NuNativs (May 27, 2022)

Hate Adobe for that reason, but a necessary EVIL. Samples are weird in the sense that if you don't pay you can't listen or work on past projects. Rubs me the wrong way.


----------



## cedricm (May 28, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> We asked for opinions at Synth and Software, and the results are in.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have nothing against subscriptions as long as there's value for money and there's choice between it and permanent license purchase.

Example: Office 365 Family for up to 6 people up to 5 devices per people + 1 tb of cloud storage per person for $99 per year - and in fact much less.

Counterexample Adobe creative suite.

I'm paying about €11-13 a month for EW Composer: a bargain.


----------



## LearningToCompose:) (May 28, 2022)

I'm waiting for the sample library subscription that gives you credits.
Say, spent $200 a year on a subsription and get like 70% back to spent on their store.
That would probably get me to subscribe. 
I would get something permantly for 70% of my money and pay 30% for the convinience of lending their libraries.


----------



## TomislavEP (May 28, 2022)

I was never keen on subscription models. As I'm making ends meet with music for many years now, there are way too many recurring payments to be dealt with not to include music software as well if there is any other way. And fortunately, there is, at least for me.

For example, although I'm finding my current DAW (REAPER) to be feature-wise superior to PT, it was the introduction of yearly subscriptions that drove me away after nearly ten years of use. Also, as a NI Komplete owner, I'm relieved that non-subscription-based packages are here to stay.

Of course, this is just my perspective. There are certainly some benefits to subscriptions as it's mentioned in the article above.


----------



## Crowe (May 28, 2022)

I hate subscription-models that do not end with outright ownership with a passion. No exceptions.


----------



## RSK (May 28, 2022)

Given the hate that subscription services get in various threads on here, this should come as no surprise.


----------



## Technostica (May 28, 2022)

cedricm said:


> I have nothing against subscriptions as long as there's value for money and there's choice between it and permanent license purchase.
> 
> Example: Office 365 Family for up to 6 people up to 5 devices per people + 1 tb of cloud storage per person for $99 per year - and in fact much less.
> 
> ...


Office 365 Family is an exception for me.
I buy it when it’s frequently on offer and pay about £30 per year.
It’s worth that just for myself for office.
One Drive is a great tool to have and I have over a terabyte of archived data.
Plus I give accounts to family and friends out of the 6 you get.

Not sure what a music software equivalent would be?
Maybe Komplete 13 standard edition for the same price, that can be shared between 6 NI accounts!
Not many people would complain about that.


----------



## kitekrazy (May 28, 2022)

If death were the other option I would go with EW and PA subs. I think because it works for Adobe doesn't meam it works for eveyone. People use their phones for cameras and will edit them with Adobe. For the average consumer Adobe is not expensive. Some companies fail to see that. 
Sub models have failed like with Cakewalk. I think the same thing will happen with Reason. Many developers offer subs but they don't ram it down your throat. 
The only ones I took advantage of is when Groove 3 and MVP offered a continuing sub which is rare.


----------



## Release (May 28, 2022)

I don't have a problem with certain subscriptions but I think the problem music companies doing it is that there are a lot more hobbyists out there than there are people making a living from it. I'm a graphic designer and I subscribe the the Adobe Creative Suite... but I bill enough every year to cover the cost, so for me, the cost is justified because I'm making money from their sub. 

For music though, I just do it for myself and I might go weeks playing guitar and not even opening any music software. So a sub just isn't something I can justify. It''s really a case of "want" vs. "need".


----------



## rgames (May 28, 2022)

As has been discussed elsewhere, subscription software is the norm in pretty much every profession OTHER THAN music. It used to be that way in photo/video world, too, until Adobe went to subs.

Adobe seems to be doing just fine despite the massive online protests. (Is it possible that what's voiced in online forums is not an accurate reflection of reality? Nah.)

While I'm certainly not in favor of subscriptions the truth is I don't think it's going to make much difference. Yeah my expenses will go up a couple hundred bucks a year but that's nothing compared to how much prices have been going up due to other factors. So, to me, it seems like much ado about nothing. Just like it was with Adobe.

Just roll the price hike into your fees. Your clients won't even notice. Just like Adobe...

And for amateurs, well, if you believe the forums there's a ripe market out there for an enterprising individual. Hooray capitalism!

rgames


----------



## Crowe (May 28, 2022)

Actually, while Adobe still makes money and has a pretty vast professional userbase, the reason for this is mostly twofold: because their tools integrate with each other somewhat well and because users just don't want to switch and learn another tool. There are many tools that could easily replace Adobe but professionals would, understandably, not invest the time to switch. There's also the idea that 'it's the standard' but I really don't think that should be a valid reason, as most graphics programs can open PSD files.

If you're an amateur however, there's really no reason not to use Affinity Photo/Designer or Davinci's Resolve and many 'amateurs' or starters go this (much more sane) route. I dropped Adobe in favor of these tools and don't regret a second of it.


----------



## el-bo (May 28, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> We asked for opinions at Synth and Software, and the results are in.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would have said yes. 

Nobody's losing their right to buy, either now, nor (if companies are sensible) in the future, but I think the knee-jerk hatred expressed every time it's mentioned is because of a fear that that's what will happen.

So far, it seems that there are a few companies offering all-in subs (EastWest, UVI etc.), while others are going the 'curated'/limited-catalogue route (NI, Cinesamples/MUSIO). I suspect if Spitfire and OT enter the arena, it'll be via the curated route. Why? Because I reckon that they reckon that eventually people will audit their yearly spending with these companies, and work out just how much better off they'll be if taking out a yearly sub, and so they'd be guarding against huge losses


----------



## Crowe (May 28, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Nobody's losing their right to buy, either now, nor (if companies are sensible) in the future, but I think the knee-jerk hatred expressed every time it's mentioned is because of a fear that that's what will happen.


That's not what it's about at all. It's about the continuous push by businesses to shift into a cultural climate where it's normal to not own things you pay for.


----------



## PaulieDC (May 28, 2022)

At first I hated the thought of Adobe going to the subscription model, but since I own a side photography business I then realized I can get everything they own for 50 bucks a month and it’s an easy write off for my photo business. The full master collection used to cost $2500 and then have $1000 upgrade every 18 months. Plus you have to depreciate software on your taxes and all that so for a business, the Adobe subscription is super great. Especially since you can actually start earning money with photography pretty quick, one area is real estate photography which is put a new HVAC unit on my roof amongst other things. For the hobbiest, a sub wouldn’t be so great, you want to buy and own something, I get that.

As far as Microsoft office goes that used to be $400 and there was no upgrade so every few years you paid four hundred dollars for two installs for ONE USER. Now for $99 a year you get at least five installs and everybody gets a terabyte of OneDrive space plus you get office for your iPad and your iPhone or android. That is an absolute no-brainer. You pay monthly for your cell phone, 99 bucks a year for Microsoft office, no brainer for anyone. Your entire house is covered. 😀

Sample libraries: I’m glad there is the east west composer cloud so someone starting out can actually try a lot of different things, but ultimately we are passionate about our libraries and we want them to own them, hands-down. The subscription model just doesn’t work, even mentally and emotionally as weird as that sounds. I’ve invested in my libraries and they are as dear to me as my Taylor acoustic guitar and my studio logic controller and I don’t wanna ever part with them. Boy, are we weird or what??

Hey sample library creators, if you wanna mess around with the licensing, skip the subscription model, just give us a return policy like VSL!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 28, 2022)

el-bo said:


> I would have said yes.
> 
> Nobody's losing their right to buy, either now, nor (if companies are sensible) in the future, but I think the knee-jerk hatred expressed every time it's mentioned is because of a fear that that's what will happen.



The hatred is not the least bit knee-jerk, el-bo. People have entirely valid reasons, i.e. the fear is totally rational.

And having a permanent license option is a totally different case.

I wrote all the pros and cons I could think of in the article this one follows up:









Subscription Software – Yes or No?


Or maybe? We have our opinions, but we’re also interested in yours. Like it or not, a lot of the music software we rely on is being licensed by subscription rather than permanently. Of course we around here have our own opinions about that, but we’re also very interested to hear yours. Please...




synthandsoftware.com





The timing coinciding with Avid changing Pro Tools to subscription exclusively was entirely coincidental, by the way. I'd already written the article when they announced it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 28, 2022)

rgames said:


> As has been discussed elsewhere, subscription software is the norm in pretty much every profession OTHER THAN music. It used to be that way in photo/video world, too, until Adobe went to subs.
> 
> Adobe seems to be doing just fine despite the massive online protests. (Is it possible that what's voiced in online forums is not an accurate reflection of reality? Nah.)


Affinity Photo (and Designer and Publisher), which are alternatives with permanent licenses, are also doing fine. No, I don't think it's an inaccurate reflection of reality at all, certainly not in our world.

And whether or not Adobe is hurt by it is a separate question. We're just asking how people feel about it, and 
as I wrote, the response was 100% against subscription software. Not 99.99999%, I mean we didn't receive a single reply in favor of subscription software.




rgames said:


> While I'm certainly not in favor of subscriptions the truth is I don't think it's going to make much difference. Yeah my expenses will go up a couple hundred bucks a year but that's nothing compared to how much prices have been going up due to other factors. So, to me, it seems like much ado about nothing. Just like it was with Adobe.


The problem is what happens when you can't continue the sub for whatever reason.

It's not much ado about nothing to a lot of people, me included!



rgames said:


> Just roll the price hike into your fees. Your clients won't even notice. Just like Adobe...
> 
> And for amateurs, well, if you believe the forums there's a ripe market out there for an enterprising individual. Hooray capitalism!
> 
> rgames


I listed all of these in the original story, but never mind the cost, what if you no longer use the software regularly enough to justify a subscription but need to open an old project?

It is a serious issue. And I'm not saying there aren't pros as well - which I also listed in the story.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 28, 2022)

LearningToCompose:) said:


> I'm waiting for the sample library subscription that gives you credits.
> Say, spent $200 a year on a subscription and get like 70% back to spent on their store.
> That would probably get me to subscribe.
> I would get something permanently for 70% of my money and pay 30% for the convenience of lending their libraries.


This actually exists at Plugin Alliance, except that you get 100% back rather than 70%.

EDIT: But that's plugins rather than sample libraries.


----------



## ThatAdamGuy (May 28, 2022)

I love subscriptions when they provide reasonable value AND where I have the opportunity to purchase one or more things from the subscription if and when I choose.

HAPPY EXAMPLES:
- *EastWest: *Though I ended up canceling my CC sub because I got frustrated with their libraries, I think most people would agree that the base CC membership is a dang awesome value, especially for amateur / hobbyist composers!
- *YouTube Premium:* I'm biased as a Googler, but $18/month for an entire household to have unlimited access to a celestial jukebox + ad-free YouTube... strikes me as an incredible bargain. I would go broke if I actually purchased all the music I enjoy sampling / regularly listening to, etc.
*- StudioOne:* Their Sphere service seemed pretty darn awesome and reasonably priced. I canceled it only when I decided to move over to Logic.

UNHAPPY EXAMPLES:
- *Adobe:* Ugh, particularly if you need/want extra storage and just want to use Lightroom.
*- Automated mastering services:* Really? I mean, what's really being improved month-to-month, much less day-to-day?

ZOMG TAKE MY MONEY EXAMPLES:
- *Spitfire:* I would absolutely pay $20, probably $30 a month to have access to Everything Spitfire. Just the idea of paying, hell, even a one-time $50 to trial any and all of their libraries for a month, just shut up and take my money.
- *MegaSuperDream:* If there was some combined-indie option to pay, say, $25/month and get access to the awesome but not-famous-like-Spitfire-and-VSL tier of libraries, I'd totally go for this!

*Why am I so excited about VI library subscriptions?*
- I'm sad about having forked over money for some libraries -- yes, even after watching playthroughs! -- and finding that I just don't like them. Looking at you, Symphonic Motions :(.
- As a hobbyist musician, my tastes / interests / free time changes from month to month, so libraries I may use the heck out of at one time just sit unused later on.
- A lot of GAS involves the excitement of trying new libraries, but for various reasons, that excitement might wane. Imagine always have fresh libraries to try (at no additional cost) every month or even week!


----------



## DCPImages (May 28, 2022)

So here is the problem with PreSonus subscription. I already own Studio One and Notion. I don’t need to pay for the software again in a subscription. But I keep on seeing subscribers getting the software plus added benefits for subscribing. I don’t think this is a good approach for long-standing customers who bought into the ecosystem before there was a subscription. Brand loyalty didn’t seem to count for anything. As a result, I recently changed to Cubase.


----------



## ThatAdamGuy (May 28, 2022)

Oh, that's a situation I hadn't considered, and I see your point. 

You know how Spitfire discounts bundles and sometimes even similar libraries based on what you've bought from them in the past?
Would you feel better about PreSonus if they, say, reduced subscription prices based upon previous purchases? e.g., for those that already own Studio One, the subscription price for 'everything else' would be, say, $7/month?

In one way, this sort of tact might be awesome both for users and companies... in that, say, Presonus could occasionally encourage extra purchases of StudioOne and other items even to current or future subscribers by promising cheaper personalized subscription packages. e.g., "Hey loyal subscriber! You're paying $20/month; how'd you like to pay just $7 a month?! Well, if you buy StudioOne -- on sale today for 20% off! -- you can!"


----------



## DCPImages (May 28, 2022)

ThatAdamGuy said:


> Oh, that's a situation I hadn't considered, and I see your point.
> 
> You know how Spitfire discounts bundles and sometimes even similar libraries based on what you've bought from them in the past?
> Would you feel better about PreSonus if they, say, reduced subscription prices based upon previous purchases? e.g., for those that already own Studio One, the subscription price for 'everything else' would be, say, $7/month?
> ...


Cubase had a special offer, so I saw an opportunity. I probably ended up paying more, but the subscription plus a few other changes at Presonus, made me think the time had come.


----------



## Tronam (May 28, 2022)

The most recent one I feel mixed on is UAD Spark. Native processing without latency and no longer needing a $600-1000+ piece of hardware with individual $100-300 plugin purchases is appealing to me, but the collection is still so limited. If they build that out and add more instruments like the lovely Ravel piano, I would consider subbing.


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2022)

Crowe said:


> That's not what it's about at all. It's about the continuous push by businesses to shift into a cultural climate where it's normal to not own things you pay for.


Not sure what you mean by "at all". Maybe you're just referring to your own position? But if you check every time the topic of subscriptions come up in threads, it seems (And I'm guessing here) that the majority of the posts echo the sentiment that people are fine with subscriptions being offered, as long as it's not in lieu of the option to own.

As for shifting cultural climate to not own things? Depends. It doesn't appear to be the same for all industries. There is a huge difference between companies such as Avid, Adobe, whose wares are considered such necessities as to be able to force subscription, and Spitfire or OT, neither of whom have such monopolistic grasps on the sample-library industry. 

But it's also clearly different when distinguishing between creation and consumption, with the consumption marketplace seeming to much prefer (Again, I'm just guessing) renting to owning. For most, having to buy the box-set for every series binged via Netflix is not the preferable option...understandably. And for many, evidently, having access to more music than one could hope to listen to, in many lifetimes (Plus the added benefits that centralised digital media can bring), is preferable to buying a couple of CD's a month. But even in this case, as far as I'm aware, people can buy the music they love.

So I don't see a seeming cultural shift in how people consume media having any bearing on how people create media. Of course, there are products like Output's 'Arcade'. But in this case, it only ever was sub-based. So it's a case of not being able to miss what 'we' never had. Loopmasters, however, offer both sub and outright ownership. So, again, not seeing a cultural shift when it comes to the market for software and sounds.


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> The hatred is not the least bit knee-jerk, el-bo. People have entirely valid reasons, i.e. the fear is totally rational.
> 
> And having a permanent license option is a totally different case.
> 
> ...


To clarify: I understand all the reasons why some prefer ownership, and agree that they're valid (most anyway). By knee-jerk, I referred to the seeming need to post the same thing i.e "I'm happy for subscriptions to exist, as long as I still have the option to buy outright", at the mere mention of subscriptions...even if the thread generally isn't about subscriptions.

I understand it. And if it were even only 2 years ago, I'd suggest it a good idea for people to voice such an opinion each time the opportunity presented itself.
However, at this point we've seen enough companies offer subscription options to know that they are being offered alongside, and not in lieu of, the option to buy outright. More than that, for certain companies, it seems they're not slightly interested in offering their oeuvre for the monthly price of a semi-decent meal. Curated collections e.g the offerings from Cinesamples and NI, are likely the route the bigger library companies would take.

Again, I understand the desire to own. However I don't think, given how things have been unfolding, think that the fear is justified. I think that the fear and contempt, within the VI world at least, has been so obvious, for so long, that Spitfire, OT et al would be insane to go sub-only.

Edited, to remove unnecessarily inflammatory comment.


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> The problem is what happens when you can't continue the sub for whatever reason.


Perhaps be more specific. For what reasons?


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2022)

PaulieDC said:


> [...]but ultimately we are passionate about our libraries and we want them to own them, hands-down.


Some do. not all of us 



PaulieDC said:


> Hey sample library creators, if you wanna mess around with the licensing, skip the subscription model, just give us a return policy like VSL!


That seems to presume that the only valid reason for a sub is for demo purposes.


----------



## Crowe (May 29, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Again, I understand the desire to own. However I don't think, given how things have been unfolding, think that the fear is justified. I think that the fear and contempt, within the VI world at least, has been so obvious, for so long, that Spitfire, OT et al would be insane to go sub-only.


You're picking and choosing. Sure, UVI and others haven't gone subscription only, but Reason *has.* (I was wrong) But that's not even the point. The fact that now every larger company and their mothers are pushing for subscription services indicates a wish for recurring revenue *where it doesn't belong. *I've had to hear my CEO push for subscription-based services on software where the idea is laughable and the shareholders were _eating it up_. It's disgusting and untenable.

Not only that, but you're ignoring entire marketplaces where subscription is now becoming the norm instead of a sideshow. Xbox Series has only a fraction of its games on physical media due to its subscription focus, which means it's borderline impossible for me to buy for.



> And for many, evidently, having access to more music than one could hope to listen to, in many lifetimes (Plus the added benefits that centralised digital media can bring), is preferable to buying a couple of CD's a month. But even in this case, as far as I'm aware, people can buy the music they love.


And this is the crux. This is the normalization. It's now normal to not own the music you listen to, but instead subscribe so you can hear it. What people prefer is _irrelevant,_ I'm talking about cultural shifts and normalization. We are being pushed into a mindset where we _prefer to not own our purchases._


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What if you no longer use the software regularly enough to justify a subscription but need to open an old project?


I'm sure those that end up using occasional subs would incorporate different methods of archiving such material, in a manner that accounted for various eventualities. An example might be to export both effected and non-FX versions of stems. In the eventuality that a client needs certain tracks remixed i.e for sound (Volume, pan, reverb amount etc.), this could be done from an audio stem.

If, on the other hand, a client wants a part re-written then...well, I'd presume that such a request would come from a client who was either paying for new work to be done, or who had paid enough the first time around to be able to make such demands. In either case, dropping $30 for that extra month is hardly prohibitive. And you get the bonus of another month of playing with all the new stuff


----------



## Technostica (May 29, 2022)

Subscriptions for Spotify and Netflix are not comparable to software subscriptions.

Reason isn't subscription only.


----------



## PaulieDC (May 29, 2022)

el-bo said:


> That seems to presume that the only valid reason for a sub is for demo purposes.


Oooo, you're right! 

Axctually I was pointlessly slipping in a jab for a totally unrelated thingy.


----------



## tmhuud (May 29, 2022)

When companies feel subs are not as profitable and ownership was more lucrative then they’ll choose ownership. If sub is making them a lot more money then that’s where were at. It’s simple economics.


----------



## rrichard63 (May 29, 2022)

DCPImages said:


> the subscription plus a few other changes at Presonus, made me think the time had come.


What other changes at Presonus?


----------



## el-bo (May 29, 2022)

Crowe said:


> The fact that now every larger company and their mothers are pushing for subscription services indicates a wish for recurring revenue *where it doesn't belong*


Whether a subscription does or does not "belong" will be decided by the market and the bottom line.



Crowe said:


> I've had to hear my CEO push for subscription-based services on software where the idea is laughable and the shareholders were _eating it up_. It's disgusting and untenable.


Maybe subscriptions actually would be a "disgusting" prospect in whatever industry you're in. But unless your CEO was talking about offering subscription as an alternative option, then I'm not sure how it relates to the current trend within our industry.

We all seem to agree that a subs-only model in our market would likely be untenable.



Crowe said:


> Not only that, but you're ignoring entire marketplaces where subscription is now becoming the norm instead of a sideshow. Xbox Series has only a fraction of its games on physical media due to its subscription focus, which means it's borderline impossible for me to buy for.


I'm trying to ignore them as I don't think they have any bearing on 'our' market. But ok.

What's interesting with the above situation is that even the most die-hard anti-creative-subs-only- models folk, there is a general acceptance that it's a model that works well for media consumption. And that's even taking into consideration that an avid tv-watcher might have Netflix and HBO as a bare minimum, so costs start easily mounting up. 

In the case of XBOX, there is only one subscription, right? Not so sure how it works with the newer-gen stuff. 

And personally I'm all for physical media being phased out. Especially in the case of console games, in which the physical disc serves as nothing more than a dongle, with the bulk of the data needing to be downloaded.





Crowe said:


> And this is the crux. This is the normalization. It's now normal to not own the music you listen to, but instead subscribe so you can hear it. What people prefer is _irrelevant,_ I'm talking about cultural shifts and normalization. We are being pushed into a mindset where we _prefer to not own our purchases._


Cultural shifts and normalisation often happen when something comes along which improves somehow on that which preceded it. That's not always the case, however. But for you to make a convincing case that it isn't the preference of the majority to have huge swathes of the entirety of recorded music, accessible from their mobile devices, for a low fee every month; rather, it's that they've unconsciously been swept up in a huge cultural shift, and are powerless to do anything BUT subscribe...I'd like to see some data.


----------



## DCPImages (May 29, 2022)

F


rrichard63 said:


> What other changes at Presonus?


Mainly subscription but also no substantial updates to Notion for a very long time and the company was sold. DAWs take a lot of work to get the workflow right and you need to feel that the ecosystem is dependable.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 29, 2022)

ThatAdamGuy said:


> I love subscriptions when they provide reasonable value AND where I have the opportunity to purchase one or more things from the subscription if and when I choose.


The AND changes everything, of course. Trial subscriptions are not at all the same thing as only being able to subscribe.

I think EastWest's model is absolutely fine. It's when you can only subscribe that I - and I think most people - balk.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 29, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Perhaps be more specific. For what reasons?


The most obvious one is when you can't afford it. Those of us who lost our livelihoods - temporarily in my case, thank goodness - during the Great Recession are likely to be very wary of ongoing bills that they may not be able to pay.

Or maybe you just don't use a product enough to justify an ongoing subscription, and then you want to get at an old project that used it. If you can, fine, but that's not a given.

Whatever the reason, the idea of tools and instruments you rely on not being available is unappealing.



> > What's interesting with the above situation is that even the most die-hard anti-creative-subs-only- models folk, there is a general acceptance that it's a model that works well for media consumption. And that's even taking into consideration that an avid tv-watcher might have Netflix and HBO as a bare minimum, so costs start easily mounting up. {/quote]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## rgames (May 29, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> the idea of tools and instruments you rely on not being available is unappealing


Yeah but is that any different than how it has always been? How many old projects can you actually load up and play regardless of subscriptions? For me the answer is almost none. So, for me and most people I know, the problem you describe is independent of whether any piece of software is subscription or not.

One thing that makes the music biz very different than the photo/video biz is that there are many more players. In the photo/video world you can make a living just fine with a single $50/month payment to Adobe then another $100/month or so for other plugins/services you use. But the average composer/producer probably uses products from at least 20 different developers (DAW, libraries, plug-ins, etc.). If those average $25/month then that expense becomes $500/month.

Probably not a showstopper for anyone doing it for a living (but certainly a factor) but the hobbyist market is not going to shell out that kind of money. The Adobe switch is still in reach for a lot of hobbyists, so they didn't lose all of that market. I think the situation is very different in the music world and that's why the subscription model is still the exception there. Adobe can make the switch and gain revenue and cashflow security. I don't think that'll happen in the music biz.

rgames


----------



## Saxer (May 29, 2022)

The danger in subscription models is the lost of control.

150,- $£€ per year is not a problem at all. But 150 for 8dio, Spitfire, Cinesamples, CinematicStudio, OrchestralTools, EastWest, Eventide, Izotope, Fabfilter, SoundToys, Cubase, Logic, Dorico, Ableton etc is already more than 2000,- Worth every single subscription? Probably yes. But especially in a system like music production where a single song file depends on so many different developers just to open one project is a trap.

Writers block? Illness? Non musical time consuming duties? Clock is running and puts more stress on you than you already have. And if a developer goes out of business their sample content on your drive is dead.

Next subscription model will probably be a software that offers a service of cancelling or reactivating your subscriptions based on statistical use of your software depending on the project: "Opening song XY from may 2022 needs 12 subscriptions. 3 of them announced a sale for subscribers. Waiting until July to open that song will save you 200,-"


----------



## Thundercat (May 29, 2022)

Crowe said:


> Actually, while Adobe still makes money and has a pretty vast professional userbase, the reason for this is mostly twofold: because their tools integrate with each other somewhat well and because users just don't want to switch and learn another tool. There are many tools that could easily replace Adobe but professionals would, understandably, not invest the time to switch. There's also the idea that 'it's the standard' but I really don't think that should be a valid reason, as most graphics programs can open PSD files.
> 
> If you're an amateur however, there's really no reason not to use Affinity Photo/Designer or Davinci's Resolve and many 'amateurs' or starters go this (much more sane) route. I dropped Adobe in favor of these tools and don't regret a second of it.


I bought the full Affinity suite about a year ago but can't get on with it yet. I sometimes "borrow" other people's adobe ID's for a few months (with their permission) so this has kept me from having to really learn Affinity. It looks neat.


----------



## LatinXCombo (May 29, 2022)

PaulieDC said:


> As far as Microsoft office goes that used to be $400 and there was no upgrade so every few years you paid four hundred dollars for two installs for ONE USER. Now for $99 a year you get at least five installs and everybody gets a terabyte of OneDrive space plus you get office for your iPad and your iPhone or android. That is an absolute no-brainer. You pay monthly for your cell phone, 99 bucks a year for Microsoft office, no brainer for anyone. Your entire house is covered. 😀


Instead of paying $400 every 4 years to Microsoft, you'd rather pay $99 every year for 4 years? There's a marginal time-value-of-money thing going on there... (I'll grant you that maybe with inflation the way it is this year it does work out better....) But at the end of 4 years in the first case, you still have the software that can run on something if you need it to. In the second, you've got nothing.

Depending on your hardware and specific use case, you might not need to upgrade for more than 4 years. Plenty of people and businesses were using Windows 7 and Office 2010 right until the cusp of 2021. Now, all of a sudden, it's not an option.

The extra licenses are fine, but realistically they could have either supplied additional licenses as part of a one-shot fee...or you could have tried to extend your time horizon with licenses.

For important infrastructure assets (hardware or software) i'd rather buy it straight out and amortize the payment over as many years as possible as opposed to just renting. Monthly payments for something vital can be a financial trap.

That said, I'm much more open to monthly payments from smaller businesses to help keep them around (like VI makers) than corporations with monopoly power like Microsoft. Especially when it gives me the opportunity try something out...but if it's good, I'll make a point of paying for the full license if I can.

Your mileage may vary, as always.


----------



## PaulieDC (May 29, 2022)

LatinXCombo said:


> Instead of paying $400 every 4 years to Microsoft, you'd rather pay $99 every year for 4 years? There's a marginal time-value-of-money thing going on there... (I'll grant you that maybe with inflation the way it is this year it does work out better....) But at the end of 4 years in the first case, you still have the software that can run on something if you need it to. In the second, you've got nothing.
> 
> Depending on your hardware and specific use case, you might not need to upgrade for more than 4 years. Plenty of people and businesses were using Windows 7 and Office 2010 right until the cusp of 2021. Now, all of a sudden, it's not an option.
> 
> ...


For $400 you got one license you could use on two computers but never at the same time and only one person. Now for $99 a year you get five full installs on anybody’s computer you hand it out to in your family or even friends, and they all get 1TB of OneDrive space. That alone is $120 a year if you go to Dropbox or anywhere else. And I’m always on the latest version, plus I’m a Microsoft developer so I’m going to have Internet access or there’s no pasta on the table, lol. So given all of the installs and the very cloud service I want to use, for me personally it’s a no-brainer. My friend who is a pastor has three kids in or near college who need Office and cloud space. All he has to do is assign it to their Microsoft ID, done. Seems like utilities are a better choice for a sub, not so sure about music creation tools. Everyone has different needs.


----------



## Crowe (May 29, 2022)

The interesting part about that is that Libre Office is really good and Onenote is free, so MS Office is more or less superfluous.


----------



## Technostica (May 30, 2022)

Crowe said:


> The interesting part about that is that Libre Office is really good and Onenote is free, so MS Office is more or less superfluous.


Less for me as I use Outlook, Access and Onedrive and require 100% compatibility and decent performance. 

For many though, the free tools are just fine.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 30, 2022)

rgames said:


> Yeah but is that any different than how it has always been? How many old projects can you actually load up and play regardless of subscriptions? For me the answer is almost none. So, for me and most people I know, the problem you describe is independent of whether any piece of software is subscription or not.



I want to get at old files quite often, in fact I keep old computers for that reason.

And it's different because you can't do that! Again, that's only one issue of several, most of them related to this.

Without wanting to be a gross clickbaiter, you might want to read my original article. I really did go through all the arguments on both sides that I could think of.

The rest of what you say about Adobe is probably true - it's different in our industry. But it's also different in any industry for people like me who despise ongoing bills in the first place, let alone time-bombed software in general.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 30, 2022)

Crowe said:


> That's not what it's about at all. It's about the continuous push by businesses to shift into a cultural climate where it's normal to not own things you pay for.


I feel the same way, and that may be the psychological difference between people who have been around a few decades and those who haven't.

It has nothing to do with age per se, it has to do with having experienced instability in the world.

Also, economists talk about "rents," and it's not really a compliment.


----------



## Thundercat (May 30, 2022)

Adding to this, everything seems to be going towards "You will own nothing and you will be happy!".

Perpetual renting of absolutely everything...


----------



## rgames (May 30, 2022)

Thundercat said:


> Adding to this, everything seems to be going towards "You will own nothing and you will be happy!".
> 
> Perpetual renting of absolutely everything...


I don't think any consumer software has ever been "owned" by the consumer. You get a license to use it. The topic being discussed here is how often you renew that license. At no point do you "own" it, even if it's not subscription. You own a car or a TV or a couch but not software (or,. on the consumer side, music).

If you hire someone to create a DAW/library/plug-in for you then you can require that you own it as part of the deal. But I don't think you'll like the price tag 

rgames


----------



## rrichard63 (May 30, 2022)

rgames said:


> I don't think any consumer software has ever been "owned" by the consumer. You get a license to use it. The topic being discussed here is how often you renew that license. At no point do you "own" it, even if it's not subscription. You own a car or a TV or a couch but not software (or,. on the consumer side, music).
> 
> If you hire someone to create a DAW/library/plug-in for you then you can require that you own it as part of the deal. But I don't think you'll like the price tag
> 
> rgames


Completely correct, but this doesn't make a permanent license any less permanent. Well, unless you violate the terms of the license and the developer revokes it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 30, 2022)

rrichard63 said:


> Completely correct, but this doesn't make a permanent license any less permanent. Well, unless you violate the terms of the license and the developer revokes it.


Exactly. You own the license to use it on all of your projects until the sun burns out and turns into a red giant.


----------



## EgM (May 30, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Exactly. You own the license to use it on all of your projects until the sun burns out and turns into a red giant.


Or until the company dies and can't auth your software.

Or until the Player is not supported on MacOS (Less common in Windows and less applicable for Kontakt)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 30, 2022)

EgM said:


> Or until the company dies and can't auth your software.
> 
> Or until the Player is not supported on MacOS (Less common in Windows and less applicable for Kontakt)


You can keep old computers for that, as I said - here and in my original article.

I'm certainly not pshawing your point, but it's different if the software just stops working. New machines and OS updates break things all the time, but at least you still own the license.


----------



## EgM (May 30, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> You can keep old computers for that, as I said - here and in my original article.
> 
> I'm certainly not pshawing your point, but it's different if the software just stops working. New machines and OS updates break things all the time, but at least you still own the license.


No worries man  Was just voicing an opinion


----------



## chocobitz825 (May 30, 2022)

DCPImages said:


> So here is the problem with PreSonus subscription. I already own Studio One and Notion. I don’t need to pay for the software again in a subscription. But I keep on seeing subscribers getting the software plus added benefits for subscribing. I don’t think this is a good approach for long-standing customers who bought into the ecosystem before there was a subscription. Brand loyalty didn’t seem to count for anything. As a result, I recently changed to Cubase.


I don't really understand this part...

as someone who bought the studio one 5 upgrade, and subscribed to sphere, I don't see where the loss is. This haves and have-nots logic seems a bit petty to me. If you bought studio one, you have a fully functioning DAW with nothing cut off. Studio one hasn't cut anyone off from key features based on the subscription tier. The only thing Sphere members get is access to the online service. Other than that subscription users get access to all of the plugins and loops that anyone can straight out buy if they choose. I still have yet to see any way in which PreSonus has given some kind of priority to sphere users. 

As for the subscription discussion, on the whole, my only concern is the quality of the service. Adobe, is terrible. Pro Tools, is terrible. Most others have been pretty reasonable and show benefits for people who are trying to simplify their options. Hell, it even eliminates GAS. Maybe its just because I'm a mac user and I'm used to losing software because companies stop updating them, but whether it's a perpetual license or not, there is inevitable end-of-life for these products. Even some of the software killed off on mac, that I can still run on a virtual windows desktop are so obviously outdated and troublesome, it makes me wonder if I'm just wasting my time delaying the inevitable better solution of finding something modern and currently supported instead. 

The other thing about subscriptions, particularly the ones that give you everything, is they really help you identify how much of the shiny new stuff you actually need, and use. Eventually, I'll cancel my subscriptions and buy only the things I actually use. Overall seems like a pretty good system.


----------



## TonalDynamics (May 30, 2022)

LearningToCompose:) said:


> I'm waiting for the sample library subscription that gives you credits.
> Say, spent $200 a year on a subsription and get like 70% back to spent on their store.
> That would probably get me to subscribe.
> I would get something permantly for 70% of my money and pay 30% for the convinience of lending their libraries.


This, credits would be nice but even more compelling would be the rent-to-own approach like Splice.

Sub model with rent-to-own/credits, WITHOUT getting rid of option to outright buy each library.

Only way it would work for me.


----------



## el-bo (May 31, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> The most obvious one is when you can't afford it. Those of us who lost our livelihoods - temporarily in my case, thank goodness - during the Great Recession are likely to be very wary of ongoing bills that they may not be able to pay.


The thing is that there're a lot of people who spend thousands per-year on sample-libraries, a certain proportion of which will be instant-regrets and instant financial-losses, never to be used again (or even once). And of those that aren't mistakes, how many are totally necessary? 

If we're to consider shoring-up our financial defences against possible future unemployment, then perhaps the money saved from not having spent (in many cases, wasted) thousands on libraries, that may or may not be that vital to our work, is a good place to start building that safety-net.

Either way, not sure why the dichotomy. I'm certainly not suggesting that one need be either subscription-based or permanent-license based (...and never the twain shall meet). Certainly, if one makes a living out of composing it would make sense to own a core set of libraries, with which one can conceivably cover all bases. 

From there, it's possible to add little bits here and there from the various subscription options that are inevitably going to increase. So when a client requests a specific type of nose-flute that's only found in UVI's World Suite, you only need pay $24 for the month


----------



## Thundercat (May 31, 2022)

rgames said:


> I don't think any consumer software has ever been "owned" by the consumer. You get a license to use it. The topic being discussed here is how often you renew that license. At no point do you "own" it, even if it's not subscription. You own a car or a TV or a couch but not software (or,. on the consumer side, music).
> 
> If you hire someone to create a DAW/library/plug-in for you then you can require that you own it as part of the deal. But I don't think you'll like the price tag
> 
> rgames


That is interesting, but that was not my point.

If I outright buy software then yes, I still only have a license to use it - I do not technically own it - but I will never be asked to pay for it again.

Renting means a monthly or yearly bill. Perpetual licenses do not continue to eat.

To widen this discussion a little, what does it even mean to "own" something?


----------



## chocobitz825 (May 31, 2022)

Thundercat said:


> That is interesting, but that was not my point.
> 
> If I outright buy software then yes, I still only have a license to use it - I do not technically own it - but I will never be asked to pay for it again.
> 
> ...


By this flow, you only own the license of the current version of the software. While not universal, in most cases you eventually pay again for an upgrade…..


----------



## Reid Rosefelt (May 31, 2022)

I always see it as a big positive when a subscription is added along to a traditional purchase option—ie the EastWest model.

I purchased a month of EastWest on sale. I found two things I really wanted to buy, and then a long list of things that were forever taken off my list. I could have—and probably would have—spent some real money on these things, and wouldn‘t have liked them at all. Money out the window. And I still love the two I bought. I might do the same experiment again someday, as there wasn’t time to explore everything.

I used to use Reason for years and years, but stopped updating when I got into the world of Kontakt instruments. But I was intrigued by their new instruments, effects, and utilities. Would I have updated eventually? Very likely. I got a three month subscription for $3. Money saved! Not getting it.

For numerous reasons, I’ve purchased very little from Spitfire for many years. I know they are a terrific company, but I just haven’t. The thought that I could try out all the Spitfire libraries for something like $30 would be unbelievable. I’m sure it would result in my buying more stuff.

This UVI thing is great. The more the merrier, I say.

And if somebody finds the option of a subscription to work for them—what’s wrong with that? The people in this forum have unique needs. It might work really well for a noob or a student.

For the record, I have some old projects that don’t open anymore. There are no guarantees even when you “own” stuff.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 31, 2022)

el-bo said:


> The thing is that there're a lot of people who spend thousands per-year on sample-libraries, a certain proportion of which will be instant-regrets and instant financial-losses, never to be used again (or even once). And of those that aren't mistakes, how many are totally necessary?


Again, this is all in my original article.

What I wrote (under the cons section - this was one of the arguments I listed, a sub-bullet point):

– “Only fifty dollars down, fifty dollars a month, for fifty years.” (Was that Firesign Theater?)

Yes, a recurring bill is very different from a one-time purchase made while your treasury is flush. Again, every free-lance musician can relate to this one!


----------



## Saxer (May 31, 2022)

I don't think I'd have a problem with a prepaid lifetime subscription if I trust in the developer. Like paying 5000,- for the deal that they never drop the access to the sample pool and that they drop their copy protection for the current products if they go out of business or get eaten by an investor.


----------



## el-bo (May 31, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Again, this is all in my original article.
> 
> What I wrote (under the cons section - this was one of the arguments I listed, a sub-bullet point):
> 
> ...


Not sure how you managed to completely miss the main points of my post (Despite quoting a pertinent section), only to suggest I (re)read your article, that I might understand that ongoing subscriptions are a lot of money when there's no work around. I thought I made it clear that I understand that point-of-view, before offering a different possible perspective.

There're going to be various people whose experience will align with any of the various possible outcomes, including possibly those who'll sign up for EWCC as a student, and then go on to having enough financial success, from nothing more than that 200$ pa investment, to be able to carry them through decades of continued subscription, during possible economic downtime.

They will own nothing, but be quite happy


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 1, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Not sure how you managed to completely miss the main points of my post (Despite quoting a pertinent section), only to suggest I (re)read your article, that I might understand that ongoing subscriptions are a lot of money when there's no work around. I thought I made it clear that I understand that point-of-view, before offering a different possible perspective.
> 
> There're going to be various people whose experience will align with any of the various possible outcomes, including possibly those who'll sign up for EWCC as a student, and then go on to having enough financial success, from nothing more than that 200$ pa investment, to be able to carry them through decades of continued subscription, during possible economic downtime.
> 
> They will own nothing, but be quite happy



If you didn't read the article then you don't get to say that I've missed the main points of your post - because not only do I address them, I answered them in my post with that single snippet!

But the main takeaway is this: we got dozens of responses from people saying they don't like subscription software and zero naught nil not a single one from anyone in favor of it.

Arguing with the psychology of people - me included - who don't like it is not going to go very far. It would be one thing if it were irrational, but that's not the case. There are rational arguments both ways.


----------



## sean8877 (Jun 1, 2022)

chocobitz825 said:


> Eventually, I'll cancel my subscriptions and buy only the things I actually use. Overall seems like a pretty good system.


If a company is subscription only then you don't have any option to "buy only things you use". You will need to keep renting forever or else lose access to the things you like. If you like Adobe products in the video world you can't buy them, you will have to continue to rent them.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Jun 1, 2022)

sean8877 said:


> If a company is subscription only then you don't have any option to "buy only things you use". You will need to keep renting forever or else lose access to the things you like. If you like Adobe products in the video world you can't buy them, you will have to continue to rent them.


Defending the concepts of subscriptions is not a defense of every subscription. Adobe and pro tools in my mind are the worst offenders. Not only are their plans poor, but so is their service. For people who use their subscriptions, more power to them, but I won’t because of how they treat their customers with their service overall.

I’m in quite a few subscriptions now and dropping a few that I don’t use so much. Roland cloud, plugin alliance, east west composer cloud, and presonus sphere are all services that made me feel I got my money’s worth and have left me feeling that after canceling I would buy at least a few of the products they offered because I thoroughly felt the value of them. I can’t think of a single subscription-only service I’ve chosen to use, and that’s often because regardless of how commonly used their software may be, the arrogance that led to them making subscription-only, is also the arrogance that makes their products regularly frustrating to use anyway.


----------



## el-bo (Jun 3, 2022)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> If you didn't read the article then you don't get to say that I've missed the main points of your post - because not only do I address them, I answered them in my post with that single snippet!
> 
> But the main takeaway is this: we got dozens of responses from people saying they don't like subscription software and zero naught nil not a single one from anyone in favor of it.
> 
> Arguing with the psychology of people - me included - who don't like it is not going to go very far. It would be one thing if it were irrational, but that's not the case. There are rational arguments both ways.


How many times would I need to read either of your articles before you understand my main position?

That's a rhetorical question. You'll find my answer in paragraph 3 of this post:





__





Subscription Software: Nope


Actually, while Adobe still makes money and has a pretty vast professional userbase, the reason for this is mostly twofold: because their tools integrate with each other somewhat well and because users just don't want to switch and learn another tool. There are many tools that could easily...




vi-control.net





There is no dichotomy! You might've received dozens of responses from people who don't like them, but that likely would've been different had you asked if people had a problem with them existing alongside 'permanent' offerings, or had you made it clear that the availability of sub licenses would work as a way to demo libraries...or to rent that one thing, for one month, that you'd never need again just to complete one cue. And then there're all the recommendations for amateurs, newbies, hobbyists and students to start out with EWCC...from the same people who likely prefer to own their software

From what I can tell, most people seem to be overwhelmingly on the side of the availability of both being a good thing. And sure! There're those like Crowe who are 'over my dead body' opposed, on principle. But they seem to be in the minority.

I am curious, though. You open the original article with this:



> Like it or not, a lot of the music software we rely on is being licensed by subscription rather than permanently.


Perhaps I'm missing something (or a lot of somethings), but what do you mean by "a lot of the music software" not being offered on permanent license?


----------



## Tronam (Jun 3, 2022)

It's easy to dunk on Adobe, but their $10/mo photography plan has been worthwhile for me and is the closest they've come to a good value sweet spot. Both Lightroom and Photoshop have gotten regular, excellent updates that in some cases have totally transformed the way I approach raw editing. They've been retroactively good too letting me get even better results out of very old raw files. While I prefer to purchase perpetual licenses, in some cases I've been quite pleased with a few of the subscriptions on offer. I'm currently evaluating UAD Spark and it doesn't feel like a good value yet, but it has the potential to be if they keep expanding its library. I'd love it if more sample developers offered an EastWest type of plan to at least get a chance to better evaluate their libraries. It's probably a bit tricky though when we're talking about countless terabytes of samples, especially for those of us with less than stellar internet connections and being tied to a 3rd party plugin like Kontakt.


----------

