# A Friendly Rant to Sample Library Developers (aka Advice You Didn't Ask For)



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

I'm a novelist by profession and have been published by several major publishers over the last twelve years. There has been a huge shift in our industry thanks to the Kindle, and the Big 5 publishers, fearing loss of paper sales, have chosen to raise the price of ebooks astronomically. The average ebook now costs $14.99 and the average hardcover is edging toward $30. For people who consume books on a regular basis, their lives get very pricey, very quickly. And ebook sales have tanked for those publishers.

Please bear with me. I'm heading toward my point.

During that shift in the industry, many independent authors have sprung up and have discovered that the best way to compete is to only charge $3.99 to $5.99 for an ebook. And what those independent authors discovered is that readers are HUNGRY for low cost novels. Many of these authors, like myself, once published with the major houses but found that we make CONSIDERABLY more money publishing independently. Authors who once had to have a day job (because of the poor royalty situation) are now working full time at their craft and earning a very comfortable living (six figures), despite having to foot the costs of production and publication.

So, now to my point. Why on earth do you developers like Spitfire and Orchestral Tools charge such astronomical prices for your soundware? I understand that production is not cheap. That some of you pay royalties to your players and hiring them and running recording seasons costs a considerable amount of time and money.

BUT, by pricing so high, you may succeed in attracting the professionals in the client base who can afford such prices and/or consider it a business expense, but you're losing out on the hobbyists and the up and comers and the wannabes who struggle to pay the rent, let alone buy sample libraries. There is no doubt in my mind that by lowering your prices you could expand your marketplace considerably.

In my opinion, you're stuck in the mindset that the major publishers are stuck in—that lower prices devalue the product, or that lower prices means less profit—but I believe that this mindset is woefully short sighted. When a major company comes out with a repackaged Symphonic "Orchestra" sans percussion and people are flabbergasted by the low price of $1699, that tells me that your regular prices are outrageously overblown and the average aspiring composer would have to take a second mortgage to afford them.

8Dio recently started a 70% off holiday sale. That they continue to keep that sale going, despite the holidays being over tells me that they're gaining a LOT of new customers—including me. I could be wrong about that, but suspect that I'm not. I've done the exact same thing with ebooks and gained thousands of new readers. After pricing one of my books at a low $2.99 per copy, I sold well over 100,000 copies of it—which is pretty damn good, since the average mainstream published novel sells only 5,000 copies (yes, it's true).

I get that you need to feed the bottom line. But it seems to me you're going about it the wrong way. You don't make NEW customers by charging such high prices. And sooner or later you're going to run out of your current customers—especially if all you're doing is repacking old libraries.

My two cents.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2017)

You make some great points, which could (arguably) be countered by noting the relatively small niche that exists for sample libraries. Despite all of the hand-wringing "Why Johnny Can't Read" news filler stuff, the fact remains that many, many more millions of people read books than ever open an instance of Kontakt 5 on a computer. To the extent that this is true, a developer cannot simply lower the price and make up for it via sales volume...

... But I'm just playing devil's advocate, and largely intuitively agree with you, with the qualifier that I'm neither an economist nor privvy to the actual financial universe of the big developers who make the expensive stuff. But I am one of the people who now have some 8Dio strings, libraries that I never would have considered without the 70% deal. And it appears obvious that I'm not alone, that 8Dio did strike gold on this, given that they've now had TWO "end of life" announcement dates they've chosen to ignore, presumably because the money continues to roll in.

One problem is that dramatically lowering one's price is a one-way street, and there is no turning back once they do. If Spitfire or Orchestral Tools ever, even once, engaged in one of those 3rd-party boutique flash sales (_SCS, normally $689, for $79.99 THREE DAYS ONLY!!!!_), they would no doubt rake in a bunch of $$$$ short-term, but at a cost of irrevocably altering their brand image in ways I don't imagine they wish to contemplate. Not to mention that while many home hobbyists like me would be happy, it would also tend to alienate the high-end professionals who already invested at the higher price point. Human psychology is funny that way.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Tugboat said:


> it would also tend to alienate the high-end professionals who already invested at the higher price point. Human psychology is funny that way.


I think those high-end professionals would get over it. Especially when it started to affect THEIR bottom line. Frankly, I think a lot of those high-end professionals only care about what it sounds like, not what it costs (low or high or free). And while we could get into the number of people who read books (the average reader reads four books a year, and most of them are women), we're also talking considerably lower prices, even at the higher price point.

If I could buy a Spitfire library for a couple hundred bucks, I would probably own them all. The same is true for many of the other high priced libraries. And I have no doubt that I'm not in the minority. One of the keys to good business is to EXPAND your customer base. And there are millions of musicians and composers out there who are being cut out of the market.


----------



## tack (Jan 14, 2017)

Could the matter of royalties alone explain the higher costs?

Another slippery aspect is that lowering the price point to attract a wider audience will necessarily increase the support burden -- probably nonlinearly because that end of the market likely needs more handholding -- and so there will be increased costs for support that may not be immediately offset by the increased sales. Also, there is some intangible business value in having a product that's perceived as premium.

It's an interesting aspect of the business though. I'd love to be a fly on the wall during the business strategy discussions for some of these companies.


----------



## muk (Jan 14, 2017)

Not to mention that the hobbyist market can get the whole Hollywood Orchestra for a reasonable price already, so even at a much lower pricepoint there is pro quality competition. Thats the advantage Eastwest has over the newer developers, they already redeemed the investment. And when they did they lowered the prices if I'm no mistaken. Some of their previous customers were a bit salty. But obviously you can't bind companies to product prices.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

If we go by the standard of the publishing industry (it's the only one I know), the royalties are probably incredibly low. We're talking about six percent of the sales price (and I won't even get into the unfairness of that). Publishers make billions while the vast majority of their authors make pennies.

I understand the "premium" aspect. But I also understand the value of lower cost. For example, I drive a BMW, which is a costly car but seems worth it because it drives like a dream. My son, however, drives a Ford Focus, which, to my surprise, also drives like a dream—in fact, the drive is equivalent to my BMW. I can't be sure, but I suspect that Ford sells a lot more cars than BMW, since it's about a third of the price.

There is value to being the "elite" product. But at some point, unless you can come up with something REALLY new (instead of rehashing old libraries), you are pricing yourself out of the market and start to decline. Ask Apple about that. They're the king of "elite" computers/phones/tablets and because they've failed to innovate in recent years, are losing ground.

Adobe solved this problem by coming up with a subscription model. East West seems to have done the same. And Avid, too? That may well be the wave of the future that puts instruments in the hands of anyone who can afford the monthly fee.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2017)

tack said:


> ...necessarily increase the support burden -- *probably nonlinearly because that end of the market likely needs more handholding* -- and so there will be increased costs for support that may not be immediately offset by the increased sales. Also, there is some intangible business value in having a product that's perceived as premium.
> 
> It's an interesting aspect of the business though. I'd love to be a fly on the wall during the business strategy discussions for some of these companies.



The nonlinear aspect of the increased burden doesn't ring true to me. I'm a pretty low-end consumer, and virtually never bother customer support about anything. And at some _extreme_ adolescent low-end, where kids might buy a reduced price string library because it's "cool" and don't know a legato from a pizzicato, they are quite unlikely to pester support about features they may not even know exist. And wouldn't pro studio people be more inclined to ask for consults if, say, there were minor panning or gain-staging difficulties with a library that an amateur wouldn't notice?

I fully agree with you about the "premium" image perception though. I am sure this is considered a highly treasured asset by the developers who possess it.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Tugboat said:


> The nonlinear aspect of the increased burden doesn't ring true to me. I'm a pretty low-end consumer, and virtually never bother customer support about anything. And at some _extreme_ adolescent low-end, where kids might buy a reduced price string library because it's "cool" and don't know a legato from a pizzicato, they are quite unlikely to pester support about features they may not even know exist..


Then there are the companies, like Sonivox, that don't bother to respond to numerous inquiries at all...


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2017)

robgb said:


> ...Adobe solved this problem by coming up with a subscription model. East West seems to have done the same. And Avid, too? That may well be the wave of the future that puts instruments in the hands of anyone who can afford the monthly fee.



My DAW is offline, and the ONLY thing a subscription model does for me (if it's not merely one choice among others) is solve the problem of having to ask myself if I will ever buy anything from that company again.

One reality that may make your book analogy more and more appropriate as time goes on is that VIs and sample libraries continue to become more mainstream. Compared to even 5 or 6 years ago, many more working or amateur musicians are aware of these digital-age tools and want to use them, and of course children and younger people coming of age today will take them for granted. Prices should fall as more companies open shop to provide for this demand. Additionally, if sample modeling ever reaches the next sonic plateau, all of these current $1700 100+GB libraries may end up in the $5 bargain bin at Guitar Center. The tech changes so fast...


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2017)

robgb said:


> Then there are the companies, like Sonivox, that don't bother to respond to numerous inquiries at all...


LOL! There ya go. Problem solved!


----------



## tack (Jan 14, 2017)

Tugboat said:


> The nonlinear aspect of the increased burden doesn't ring true to me. I'm a pretty low-end consumer, and virtually never bother customer support about anything.


I think most of us who frequent this forum are exceptional cases. I maintain that lowering the price point to attract more hobbyists -- and less serious hobbyists -- will increase the support burden. That does feel like common sense to me, but it's also based on my own experiences with the company I work for, which previously produced high margin, enterprise-oriented products, and began its foray into the consumer market with low-margin high-volume products.


----------



## tack (Jan 14, 2017)

Tugboat said:


> Additionally, if sample modeling ever reaches the next sonic plateau


There's every reason to believe that's possible, but I think it will take 20, maybe 30 years. By then, whether modeling breakthroughs or an evolution of sampling, the current crop of products will be worthless anyway.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Tugboat said:


> Prices should fall as more companies open shop to provide for this demand. Additionally, if sample modeling ever reaches the next sonic plateau, all of these current $1700 100+GB libraries may end up in the $5 bargain bin at Guitar Center. The tech changes so fast...


This is a good point. And, frankly, with smaller companies putting out better and better product, how long will it be before the big boys are forced to lower their prices to compete.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

tack said:


> There's every reason to believe that's possible, but I think it will take 20, maybe 30 years. By then, whether modeling breakthroughs or an evolution of sampling, the current crop of products will be worthless anyway.


If that's the case, I'm unlikely to be around to enjoy it...


----------



## Confuzzly (Jan 14, 2017)

I can't help but be curious as to why you single out Spitfire and OT. Yes, they are the most pricey, but what is considered "too expensive"? Is there a specific threshold that once a price goes over, then it is too much? Or are we considering the value of a product?

Ignoring subjective things like sound, playability, and scripting, lets take a look at some string libraries:

Cinematic Studio Strings: $400 - About 12 articulations, 3 mic positions
8dio Anthology: $700 - About 15 articulations + Arcs and some divisi, 2 mic positions
LASS Full: $800 - About 15 articulations + Divisi + First chair, One mic position
Spitfire Symphonic Strings: $750 - About 40 articulations, 3 mic positions
Berlin Strings: ~$900 - About 35 articulations, 4 mic position

Looks quite fair to me. Spitfire and OT have "premium" prices, but also offer "premium" (it terms of quantity) content. Seems a bit unfair to me to single them out as if they are overpriced.
The only outlier I can think of off the top of my head is Hollywood Strings Diamond at the low price of $300 for quite a bit of content. As we've seen in the past though, East West's business model is somewhat controversial.


As a more general thought, pricing of digital good is quite complex. Sure, it can be simplified into [(# of buyers) x (Price) = $$$], but the amount of variables and data involved is fairly large. Big companies have entire divisions dedicated to maximizing this equation using analytics and other fancy business things. Sample developers don't have that luxury. Their prices seem to be mainly determined by a combination of developer estimation, beta tester feedback, and the competition's pricing. Assuming the industry continues to grow over time, the latter will most likely become the driving force of lower prices. Unfortunately for us, the industry is still quite young, so prices are still quite high.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2017)

tack said:


> ...and began its foray into the consumer market with low-margin high-volume products.



Yeah, I suppose at some tipping point, when you start broaching on grocery store levels with that, the floodgates would open and you'd start getting all sorts of random, often irrational requests. When you are dealing with "the public" at large, that's just the nature of it.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2017)

Confuzzly said:


> I can't help but be curious as to why you single out Spitfire and OT. Yes, they are the most pricey, but what is considered "too expensive"? Is there a specific threshold that once a price goes over, then it is too much? Or are we considering the value of a product?
> 
> Ignoring subjective things like sound, playability, and scripting, lets take a look at some string libraries:
> 
> ...



Reasonable points, and I don't believe the purpose of this thread was to single out anyone or "attack" any developer for being overpriced, but more about the possibilities of the proverbial "win-win" were prices to come down and the customer base subsequently expand.

Speaking only for myself, I mentioned SA and OT only because they are prime examples of developers who offer full orchestral pallets at high-end premium price points and have virtually unanimous approval ratings here, and never have "deep" sales, group buys or that sort of thing... But they're just examples, not case studies or object lessons.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Confuzzly said:


> I can't help but be curious as to why you single out Spitfire and OT.


Only because they're among the most expensive. There are, of course, several others.



Confuzzly said:


> Looks quite fair to me. Spitfire and OT have "premium" prices, but also offer "premium" (it terms of quantity) content. Seems a bit unfair to me to single them out as if they are overpriced.


Your definition of fair is obviously different than mine. All of these are overpriced in my opinion, especially for the average aspiring composer.

Fair to me are the current prices 8dio is charging for Adagietto and Agitato. Those are reasonable costs for a string library for the average musician.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 14, 2017)

There is no such thing as fair or unfair pricing. The marketplace decides.

Selling libraries is not a "serving societal good" endeavor, it is a for profit business.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Ashermusic said:


> Selling libraries is not a "serving societal good" endeavor, it is a for profit business.


Absolutely, which is part of my point. More customers usually equals more profit.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 14, 2017)

robgb said:


> Absolutely, which is part of my point. More customers usually equals more profit.



But they are far better qualified to assess the best way to maximize profits than you are.

I saw this all the time when I worked for EW. People here would tell me all the time everything Doug was doing wrong and all that happened was that EW continued to prosper.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Ashermusic said:


> But they are far better qualified to assess the best way to maximize profits than you are.


Well, I don't think you know me well enough to say that. I run my own business. But maybe I'm doing it wrong...


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 14, 2017)

robgb said:


> Well, I don't think you know me well enough to say that. I run my own business. But maybe I'm doing it wrong...



Good for you but you don't know as much about the sample library business as they do and if you think you do, that is hubris.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

I've deleted my previous comment because it just wasn't necessary. All I've made in this thread is a simple suggestion that might benefit both the sample libraries and their customers. I've made no claims that I know their business. And no hubris intended.


----------



## Arbee (Jan 14, 2017)

The best price is that which delivers the best profit, simple. Twice the customers at half the price (plus overhead for each sale) is debatable and does certainly devalue the product (often referred to as "a race to the bottom"). In fact any and every art form that becomes digitised also becomes devalued, in the minds of consumers.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

Arbee said:


> The best price is that which delivers the best profit, simple. Twice the customers at half the price (plus overhead for each sale) is debatable and does certainly devalue the product (often referred to as "a race to the bottom"). In fact any and every art form that becomes digitised also becomes devalued, in the minds of consumers.


I heard the "race to the bottom" argument many times from big publishers when authors started bypassing them and putting out their own books. We were all amused because that so-called race to the bottom was giving us incomes we never got when we published with them. There was no race to the bottom. Readers got what they wanted most—great stories at affordable prices—and we, in turn, tripled our readership and got rich. Win win.


----------



## robgb (Jan 14, 2017)

By the way, that race to the bottom argument is usually made by the people who are losing the money they once made because they didn't see the trend coming and adjust accordingly.


----------



## Arbee (Jan 15, 2017)

robgb said:


> I heard the "race to the bottom" argument many times from big publishers when authors started bypassing them and putting out their own books. We were all amused because that so-called race to the bottom was giving us incomes we never got when we published with them. There was no race to the bottom. Readers got what they wanted most—great stories at affordable prices—and we, in turn, tripled our readership and got rich. Win win.


I suggest that's good for you and for those like you with an entrepreneurial spirit, but some novelists are both highly talented and very introspective. For them (and the readership) it's perhaps a lose lose?


----------



## robgb (Jan 15, 2017)

Arbee said:


> I suggest that's good for you and for those like you with an entrepreneurial spirit, but some novelists are both highly talented and very introspective. For them (and the readership) it's perhaps a lose lose?


I know many, many novelists. We're all introspective to some degree. But believe it or not, publishing a book does not take a lot of effort, which is why most of my friends have abandoned their publishers and do it themselves. Publishers take the lion's share of the book sales pie while doing the minimum amount of work. And instead of reacting to the indie author phenomenon by offering higher royalties and making traditional publishing more enticing, they instead LOWERED royalties and advances, and are locking authors into handing over lifetime rights to their work. So, no, it isn't a lose lose to go it alone.

I could go on about this for pages, so be careful...


----------



## mc_deli (Jan 15, 2017)

robgb said:


> I could go on about this for pages, so be careful...



This is an interesting area. In my day job I work with various different products and services and see different pricing models.
I think you should consider the target audience. My guess is that the books of which you speak are very accessible. You've sold 100k partly because almost anyone CAN read it. SA and OT have a far, far, far more restricted potential target audience. Their tools are essentially useless, and actually incredibly frustrating, unless they are in the hands of experts. Are EW's products more accessible, with more appeal to a long tail of consumers...? - arguably - but probably more in the marketing, OK, and in the pricing, than in the design.

SA and OT, like VSL before (I have to presume that their sales must have peaked a long time ago), -edit: and like EW now - have found very good price points for their model, their marketing, their design and their users. Can they sustain it? SA's model is based on a lot of high end releases, a high frequency of releases, yes? EW didn't sustain that, did they?. After HWO the model moved to less releases, lower prices, longer tail, just about? Can SA and OT keep going... SA have already shown they are willing to do weird and wonderful stuff and continue to innovate... for OT, with presumably less resources, it must be tough, I hope they have something up their sleeves after BB and MArk2.


----------



## robgb (Jan 15, 2017)

mc_deli said:


> This is an interesting area. In my day job I work with various different products and services and see different pricing models.
> I think you should consider the target audience.


Of course. But I think with the right campaign, their target audience can be expanded. I know musicians who are wildly talented but know nothing about sample libraries. It hasn't even hit their radar. Imagine what a sample producer could do if he were able to tap into that audience. Obviously, in some cases, the musician wouldn't be interested. But in others, they might discover a whole new world. But I believe this can only happen if the prices are targeted at them. A guy who has already spent two grand on a guitar or keyboard may not be ready to jump into buying a $1700 library. He'll go to the budget producers. 

But, of course, this is all speculation. It just makes sense to me, especially after seeing 8dio lowering their prices as a seasonal deal only to keep them low despite twice saying the prices were going away. They may have inadvertently stumbled into exactly what I'm suggesting... Or not.


----------



## Arbee (Jan 15, 2017)

Probably time to spin off into another thread but it's an interesting conversation. I've had a music publishing deal or two in my life, and a record deal, been a software developer (not in music though) and worked as a senior Asia Pacific IT exec for a major book publisher for 10 recent years. I did this partly to give me insight into whether publishing in general deserves it's harsh reputation as greedy and lazy. What I observed is the complex task of making publishing (essentially a gambling industry) into a reliable business model is not for the faint hearted. In short, yes it's greedy, but it's not so lazy. Publishing companies are full of some very capable, dedicated and hard working creative folk. I was also quite amazed at the contribution a great editor can make to turn a good book into a great book (not dissimilar perhaps to what a great producer can do for a good artist).

My current advice to anyone, based on very real and personal experience, is to start as an independent but find a great publicist and a distributor who can get you into the major retail space. Once you've made your own success you can dictate terms much more favourably and get others to work for you so you can focus on what you do best.

I don't agree though that cheaper automatically equals better, it's not that simple once you start to consider all the longer term consequences at an industry level.


----------



## robgb (Jan 15, 2017)

I've never said cheaper automatically equals better. Pricing has nothing to do with quality. A high priced library is not necessarily better than a low cost one and vice versa. But I do believe that lower costs draw in more customers. It certainly happened for me with books (and for many with 8dios continuing sale). That's my only real point.


----------



## Arbee (Jan 15, 2017)

Lower prices certainly attract more customers, no argument. I've seen what happens with that philosophy in the supermarket industry, i.e. the supermarkets just beat the farmers and other suppliers into poverty to keep reducing their costs and therefore prices to customers. Perhaps sample libraries and creative pursuits are different, but there is no such thing as "cheap enough" once you get consumers into that mindset.


----------



## robgb (Jan 15, 2017)

Well, of course, consumers want bargains. But it isn't a slippery slope. I honestly think that those charging ultra high prices for their libraries do it simply because they can and have no real interest in catering to anything other than the Cadillac crowd. We'll see how that works out for them in the end. 

But, hey, as Jay Asher very magnanimously said, I'm not qualified to speak about the sample library business...


----------



## erica-grace (Jan 15, 2017)

robgb said:


> I do believe that lower costs draw in more customers.



It probably does, but that does not necessarily equate to more money, and I think that's what you don't get. You seem to think that lower pricing = more sales = more money. But the more likely scenario is lower pricing = more sales = less money.

Think about it. Say you are a developer that releases a library at a $250 price point, but someone on an internet forum thinks that the library is way overpriced, and should be at the $100 price point. Well, had you done that, you would have had to sell 150% more copies to just equal the amount of revenue at the higher price point. 100 copies sold? No - you would need to sell *250* copies to make _the same money_. Is that going to happen? Maybe. Maybe not. Honestly, I am 100% certain neither of us is in the proper position to make that judgement. But I think an experienced developer is.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 15, 2017)

There are a few goodwill and marketing components to all of this.

Personally, I tend to be grateful to smaller developers who offer me low prices and don't over-hype me. These businesses are likely to get repeat business from me-a result of the combination of affordable prices and good vibes.

The advantages of goodwill may not be immediately (one product based) tangible, but in the long run I believe they can be significant.

That said, the counterpoint to all of that is that some people like velvet ropes and "members only" clubs. They want to feel they're part of something elite and exclusive, and they're willing to pay a much higher price for the privilege.

I'm in the first camp.


----------



## Arbee (Jan 15, 2017)

robgb said:


> I've never said cheaper automatically equals better. Pricing has nothing to do with quality. A high priced library is not necessarily better than a low cost one and vice versa. But I do believe that lower costs draw in more customers. It certainly happened for me with books (and for many with 8dios continuing sale). That's my only real point.


Sorry, I didn't mean "better" in terms of quality, I meant it in regard to a "better outcome" for all parties. I think there is a parallel universe though between sample libraries and general business software. Once you've recouped your setup costs and R&D, price reductions tend to follow naturally due to competitive pressures as your product becomes "less special".


----------



## MA-Simon (Jan 16, 2017)

But isn't there a difference?
Sample Libraries are a work product, maybe even comparable to cars or jobs: If everyone drives the same brand, or has the same job it is no longer interesting or productive and people would need to look somewhere different for more exclusivity.
But with novels... if everyone reads your novel, then it's just everyone reading you novel, because they either like you or want to know what it is all about. No harm done. At that point you could actually rise your price again. That does not work for the other stuff.


----------



## Jaap (Jan 16, 2017)

Started out in the gaming industry and thus working with samples around 2007 and prices where much steeper then they are nowadays. Of course they are still "high" when you are a hobbyist, but I think they got more reasonable in the last 5 years anyway. The libraries also got bigger and far more complex with gigabytes and gigabytes of samples which require god knows how many manhours, let alone the time spend recording etc etc. Personally I think we reached a fair point price/quality wise.


----------



## synthetic (Jan 16, 2017)

These are all small companies. As a small company, would you rather have a few high-end customers or lots and lots of entry-level customers? 

There are low-priced options out there, but hiring the LSO and Air studios ain't cheap.


----------



## markleake (Jan 17, 2017)

I get what you are saying @robgb. I think this is a better considered and better articulated thread (dare I say it, compared to a certain other thread which I had the misfortune of commenting in recently ) and I like your thoughts. I would like to think there's room in the market for what you say, but I speak from a fairly uninformed position. There're some developers currently that do this. Their quality can sometimes suffer a bit, but not always. These companies can be great alternatives. Companies like Embertone or Auddict are good examples.

Spitfire's prices have actually come down significantly with their repackaging excercise. I think there are multiple market tiers in terms of price, and Spitfire seem to have deliberately stepped down into a lower tier. From what I observe, they have reaped the benefits.

I don't think Spitfire will follow what EW have done with their orchestral libraries. The EW libraries are effectively at the end of their life despite having some great content, whereas you can see Spitfire making effort to improve and add to their existing orchestral line. EW have made it clear they are just milking their libraries and are not interested in that part of the market anymore. That's why they are the main outlier in price.

8dio is interesting, in that some parts of their 70% off products seem like very good deals whereas others less so. Even at 70% off, some of the products still seem similar in price to the more premium products for the content that you get. Like you, I suspect they've made a killing on their 70% off products though.

I work in the software consulting business, and some of our services are certainly premium. But companies are more than willing to pay for the services. And to be honest despite the cost, they often get very good value. It's basically just market fundamentals, a company is there to make money and will inevitably charge what it's specific market will bear.

I think @Confuzzly's list is pretty indicative of why the costs vary also. I've previously done a similar analysis before and it does actually make a lot of sense when you analyse the products like that.


----------



## markleake (Jan 17, 2017)

synthetic said:


> There are low-priced options out there, but hiring the LSO and Air studios ain't cheap.


But isn't there a point in time where they have recouped those costs and can start broadening their market by lowering the price of their product?


----------

