# My proposition which no one will take seriously



## Phryq (Jul 1, 2017)

Instead of paying for software, let's start a global composer's union, which will include an income tax on any profits made by union members (e.g. 10% of income).

The taxes will pay for Kontakt development (which will move into an open source project) as well as pay companies like Embertone, Spitfire, VSL, Chris Hein to continue developing software, which will now be free for everyone.

As soon as new software comes out, we can download it through torrents; no need to think twice about whether you need it.

PROs, like ASCAP will be relegated to charging taxes (union fees).


----------



## mac (Jul 1, 2017)

So if I'm only earning £1 per year but I'm a union member, I get free software? I'm in!


----------



## d.healey (Jul 1, 2017)

Phryq said:


> Instead of paying for software, let's start a global composer's union, which will include an income tax on any profits made by union members (e.g. 10% of income).
> 
> The taxes will pay for Kontakt development (which will move into an open source project) as well as pay companies like Embertone, Spitfire, VSL, Chris Hein to continue developing software, which will now be free for everyone.
> 
> ...


Well you might like my latest project
http://www.thesoundboard.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1950


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

mac said:


> So if I'm only earning £1 per year but I'm a union member, I get free software? I'm in!



What if I earn £0 a year...? Still all the free software I want...?


----------



## mac (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> What if I earn £0 a year...? Still all the free software I want...?



Freeloader.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 1, 2017)

Property is theft.....

More free stuff.

It's almost like politics today.

Tell me, what happens when the 5 % who are supposed to pay for everything decide that hard work is boring and decide to sit on their arses too...


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Basically asking working composers to subsidise the hobbys of tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of people.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Also, I don't think the op really understands what a union is and what it's function is...


----------



## paoling (Jul 1, 2017)

Also: 
Who decides which developers are part of this network?

What prevents developers to produce crappy libraries, since now they have a reliable source of income with no effort? I think that the economical risk we put in developing tools that costs us thousands of $ is the best way to ensure that we try to provide the best possible content to our customers.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

I spend a weekend banging my garage door with a rock to make a trailer hit instrument, do I get the same as spitfire audio...?


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> I spend a weekend banging my garage door with a rock to make a trailer hit instrument, do I get the same as spitfire audio...?



Looking at the music charts today, quite possibly....


----------



## mac (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> I spend a weekend banging my garage door with a rock to make a trailer hit instrument, do I get the same as spitfire audio...?



What's the RR amount? Is it kontakt player compatible? I was thinking of buying spitfires BH, but this sounds interesting.


----------



## Fab (Jul 1, 2017)

burn him, hes a witch...


----------



## Astronaut FX (Jul 1, 2017)

Well, he was right about one thing. No one took it seriously.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Basically asking working composers to subsidise the hobbys of tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of people.



Well, that would be quite the reversal wouldn't it? I wonder just how many hardware and software manufacturers would go belly up without the inflows of hobbyists' dollars.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Astronaut FX said:


> Well, that would be quite the reversal wouldn't it? I wonder just how many hardware and software manufacturers would go belly up without the inflows of hobbyists' dollars.



Don't see how making composers pay for hobbyists sample libraries is a reversal of this...?


----------



## Astronaut FX (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Don't see how making composers pay for hobbyists sample libraries is a reversal of this...?



It's a reversal in the sense that hobbyists' dollars, today, help keep many companies in business. This in turn helps ensure the products remain available, and perhaps even at a much cheaper cost to everyone, including working composers.

I'm quite convinced that if hobbyists' dollars suddenly vanished, you'd see many companies fold, and for those that remain, you'd likely see more expensive products. I may even go so far as to say that it's at least in part, hobbyists' dollars that help keep the music industry from completely cannibalizing itself. 

[Edit: So that there is no misinterpretation, I have no expectations of anyone subsidizing my gear, software or otherwise. I'm happy to pay for what I use.]


----------



## Paul Grymaud (Jul 1, 2017)

Phryq said:


> let's start a global composer's union



Let's sit down around the table and talk about it




If You ever need a President, I'm yours...


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

I agree that hobbyists are keeping the music tech industry afloat (at least in its current manifestation) and that working composers benefit from the cheaper libraries and variety that this large market provides. 

However, it's not the working composers the hobbyists are keeping in business so it's not really a reversal if they subsidised everyone else's equipment.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> I agree that hobbyists are keeping the music tech industry afloat (at least in its current manifestation) and that working composers benefit from the cheaper libraries and variety that this large market provides.
> 
> However, it's not the working composers the hobbyists are keeping in business so it's not really a reversal if they subsidised everyone else's equipment.



I'll have to disagree. If hobbyists are helping to keep your tools available and affordable, then in my mind one would be in denial to not see that connection, at least indirectly.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

If you applied the same logic to another industry it would soon become apparent that it's flawed.

Private individuals keep the car industry afloat which in turn benefits taxi drivers and helps them earn a living. But it's hardly a counterbalance to say everyone gets a free car and taxi drivers have to pay for it through a new tax on their earnings.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> If you applied the same logic to another industry it would soon become apparent that it's flawed.
> 
> Private individuals keep the car industry afloat which in turn benefits taxi drivers and helps them earn a living. But it's hardly a counterbalance to say everyone gets a free car and taxi drivers have to pay for it through a new tax on their earnings.



I'm not at all in agreement with what was suggested in the OP with respect to making tools free. I'm perfectly willing to pay for what I use. 

But today, hobbyists are indeed subsidizing many industries, this one included. The silly premise of the OP would reverse this. Again, I don't support it, I simply find it an amusing observation.

And the car analogy doesn't really translate. For most private individuals, a car is a necessary item. I don't consider myself a hobbyists taxi driver. I need a car. I could live without gear (but wouldn't really want to).


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Don't know if I would call a car an necessity. More like a first world convenience (plenty of people in the world go their entire lives without owning one). 

Same for sample libraries for that matter. Composers could work with paper, pen and a piano.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Or just paper and pen for that matter...


----------



## bigcat1969 (Jul 1, 2017)

I've given away millions of free instruments and I don't think I've hurt the business at all. I'm well aware, painfully aware after blissfully listening to 25 minutes of the Berlin samplecast, that my instruments are intro level. If paid developers can't do better than me with limited knowledge and public domain samples than they don't deserve the sales.

The difference in tone and programming will always drive customers up the ladder of quality. For instance I'm loving Rinascimento from a certain developer on this thread. The legato is brilliant and completely beyond my ability, the interface is professional, the mic positioning is well executed and the tone is great. None of that is matched or approached by any freebie. As mentioned I've been examining Inspire and freeware or any varient isn't going to match that tone in my lifetime.


----------



## Phryq (Jul 1, 2017)

John Williams already has more money than he'll ever need - he keeps making scores because he loves it.

If that's not true of some rich composer, he can composing. New cooler composers (like me) will take her place.

Embertone etc. (I'm assuming) love making samples. Of course, they need money, and they'd receive it. If their samples really started sucking, the Union would boot them and move the money toward Chris Hein, or whoever is making cool stuff.

If you make $0 a year composing, fine. Your use of samples isn't stopping others from using the samples. People who want to be leaches are already downloading the samples for free.

A spectre is haunting V.I. control.


----------



## JonSolo (Jul 1, 2017)

Musical communism ha ha ha.


----------



## d.healey (Jul 1, 2017)

Phryq said:


> John Williams already has more money than he'll ever need - he keeps making scores because he loves it.
> If that's not true of some rich composer, he can composing. New cooler composers (like me) will take her place.


Are you saying you're cooler than John Williams????? 



> Embertone etc. (I'm assuming) love making samples. Of course, they need money, and they'd receive it. If their samples really started sucking, the Union would boot them and move the money toward Chris Hein, or whoever is making cool stuff.


And who decides if a sample library sucks?


----------



## nordicguy (Jul 1, 2017)

d.healey said:


> And who decides if a sample library sucks?


Here's rabbit hole.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Jul 1, 2017)

The current system is fine - companies are able to set higher price points and profit more from making better products, so they want to make the best product possible. 

Though I'm sure your idea had good intent, it would devolve into a huge mess of freeloaders. Plus, developers are perfectly happy with the money they take in now. Why risk bringing in much less?


----------



## guydoingmusic (Jul 1, 2017)

smh
*facepalm
Oy Vey!


----------



## bigcat1969 (Jul 1, 2017)

Actually as a comparison many authors are unhappy with their results in Amazon's pay 10 bucks and read all you want program and various other free with Prime incentives for books. I have a short story up so I get the newsletter and some of the inside dope. Selling books individually is apparently a better way for the authors than being a part of a pool and being paid based on downloads. Shoot you can put all my instruments in your pool, I make nothing now what can I loose. However Spitfire and OT don't really want to share the pool with me and I cannot blame them.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Spotify. That's really working well for artists isn't it...


----------



## Dear Villain (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Spotify. That's really working well for artists isn't it...



It is for me. I've generated well over $1.50 with four albums in the past year. I'm going to treat myself to a drink at McDonalds with their Dollar Days special, and I'll still have 50 cents left to reinvest in my music business. Dream big, guys...dream big. You too can have what I have if you put the work in


----------



## Zhao Shen (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Spotify. That's really working well for artists isn't it...



Maybe not, but it works _extremely _well for listeners.


----------



## AlexRuger (Jul 1, 2017)

Phryq said:


> Instead of paying for software, let's start a global composer's union, which will include an income tax on any profits made by union members (e.g. 10% of income).
> 
> The taxes will pay for Kontakt development (which will move into an open source project) as well as pay companies like Embertone, Spitfire, VSL, Chris Hein to continue developing software, which will now be free for everyone.
> 
> ...



How about we swap out "sample libraries" with "health care" and "sane working conditions?"


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> Maybe not, but it works _extremely _well for listeners.




I'm sure it does. I'm sure also that giving away all sample libraries and making high earners pay for it, will work out extremely well for all the music hobbyists too.


----------



## Karl Feuerstake (Jul 1, 2017)

Why is this even being discussed? Is this some kind of bizarre fantasy that someone wants us to critique? I don't find myself comfortable with entertaining the idea of this, but.. well.. here goes.

Communism results in a universally degraded quality of life and the destruction of the 'middle' class, resulting in a grossly oversized 'lower class' and an incredibly small group of 'elites'. I can't see applying communism to a commercial enterprise as being intelligent. In the case of the scenario provided, there would be countless members who pay little or nothing, piggybacking on the members who actually are contributing. Additionally, sample quality would diminish greatly as library developers would universally produce products at a much cheaper quality level - so that they could walk away with the largest amount of a leftover budget. Since they don't have to strive for a large sales figure and try to retail their product to be successful, all they have to do is take the budget they're receiving, and use it as sparingly as possible while still avoiding being kicked from the Union.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

Hmmm, your description of communism pretty accurately describes the effects of neoliberal capitalism on developed western countries. 

Eradication of middle classes? Check 

Oversized and suppressed lower classes? Check

Small group of elites with all the money and power? Check


----------



## d.healey (Jul 1, 2017)

Karl Feuerstake said:


> Communism results in a universally degraded quality of life and the destruction of the 'middle' class, resulting in a grossly oversized 'lower class' and an incredibly small group of 'elites'.


This is how app stores function isn't it...


----------



## Zhao Shen (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> I'm sure it does. I'm sure also that giving away all sample libraries and making high earners pay for it, will work out extremely well for all the music hobbyists too.



I was talking about Spotify in the context of ways of listening to music - this thread's idea is way too idealistic to ever work.

But yeah, looking at things from the listener's point of view, Spotify is awesome. Why the hell would I pay $10 for an album when I can pay $5 a month and get tens of thousands of new songs per day? Not to mention the access to millions of playlists and Spotify's algorithms (which get better as they collect more data).


----------



## nordicguy (Jul 1, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> Why the hell would I pay $10 for an album when I can pay $5 a month and get tens of thousands of new songs per day?


To support artists?


Zhao Shen said:


> Not to mention the access to millions of playlists and Spotify's algorithms (which get better as they collect more data).


They like your data way more then you'll ever like them algorithms.


----------



## Dear Villain (Jul 1, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> I was talking about Spotify in the context of ways of listening to music - this thread's idea is way too idealistic to ever work.
> 
> But yeah, looking at things from the listener's point of view, Spotify is awesome. Why the hell would I pay $10 for an album when I can pay $5 a month and get tens of thousands of new songs per day? Not to mention the access to millions of playlists and Spotify's algorithms (which get better as they collect more data).



You also told me that watermarking my music is a bad idea, but what perplexes me is how do you only see things from the listeners perspective when you are a music creator? Do you earn the majority of your income from other, non music related sources?


----------



## Raphioli (Jul 1, 2017)

I think asking something for free, even as a hobbyist is going too far.
But it would be nice to have a hobbyist pricing like an educational pricing though lol
But it would be impossible to verify if one is really a hobbyist or not, because you wouldn't have something like a "students ID" for hobbyists. So thats a no go.

As for the car example someone brought up, I think MODing cars fits more well.
Car is a necessary item for most people, but how about MODing cars. I'm talking about cars like in the film Fast and the Furious. There are people who MOD cars as a hobby. Those hobbyists are paying a lot to buy various parts.
The pro car racers aren't paying it for them.



nordicguy said:


> To support artists?


In reality, majority of consumers priority would be how cheap it is for them, rather than, if it supports the artist or not.

Thats why we have huge sales like Black Friday for various products.
People wouldn't avoid Black Friday sales just to pay full price for a product to support the manufacturers.
If something is available for a cheap price, they'll choose the cheapest price available.


----------



## nordicguy (Jul 1, 2017)

Raphioli said:


> People wouldn't avoid Black Friday sales just to pay full price for a product to support the manufacturers.


Well, if you see artists as "manufacturers".


----------



## Raphioli (Jul 1, 2017)

nordicguy said:


> Well, if you see artists as "manufacturers".


When you consider how a generic/normal consumer would think,
yes, wether its the music industry, game industry, film industry, automobile industry, etc etc.,
people will look at them as the seller/manufacturer etc.
Theres only a small amount of people who really think about the artists/product manufacturers etc.
Thats why we have Spotify/Netflix etc. for multimedia(supply and demand).


----------



## nordicguy (Jul 1, 2017)

Hopefully there's few people around the world at different moments of time that would think otherwise.
They made the "generic/normal" ones having a better place to live in.


----------



## Zhao Shen (Jul 1, 2017)

nordicguy said:


> To support artists?



The people motivated by that are in the vast minority. And using streaming services doesn't stop you from doing anything else. I'll buy albums from my favorite artists to show them support - but my favorite artists aren't the only ones I listen to.



nordicguy said:


> They like your data way more then you'll ever like them algorithms.



It's not really a competition. Google got where they are today off of our data - it's not like I'm going to stop using their services just because they get more out of it.



Dear Villain said:


> You also told me that watermarking my music is a bad idea, but what perplexes me is how do you only see things from the listeners perspective when you are a music creator? Do you earn the majority of your income from other, non music related sources?



As a creator and a listener, I can see things from both perspectives. Maybe I'm cynical. But I mean, as a creator you have absolute freedom in regards to streaming. No one can force you into it.

On the topic of watermarking it's pretty common to go along with platform standards. Depending on how much of your income is licensing and what platforms you sell through, there are varying answers.


----------



## imagegod (Jul 1, 2017)

Raphioli said:


> I think...it would be nice to have a hobbyist pricing like an educational pricing though lol
> But it would be impossible to verify if one is really a hobbyist or not, because you wouldn't have something like a "students ID" for hobbyists. So thats a no go.



I disagree...luckily, so does the owner/developer of Reaper.

I quote: "(You can obtain a $165 discount off the professional price, if)...you are an individual, and REAPER is only for your personal use."

Do I need to prove that? Certainly not to Reaper. Will there be individuals who take advantage of this option? Almost certainly.

But his trust can (and has) done a great deal of good (IMHO).

Is this ideal for every developer? Probably not...but it can be a benefit to some developers, and potentially useful to many consumers (hobbyists included).


----------



## bigcat1969 (Jul 1, 2017)

Not that it will ever happen, but there would actually be incentive to have the best known / most highly regard instrument of a certain type in the pot. No one is going to choose my Iowa Brass over Berlin Brass given the two options at the same price. Only at free versus $1000 dollars is that anything more than a silly question. And its not really Communism. If anything Spotify, Amazon and the other things mentioned here are showing how advanced capitalism works with the money being funneled upwards to the big companies while exploiting the desperate work of all the artists as only the top artists do get rich and that is the carrot of capitalism. But most musicians reading this forum aren't going to make as much money off of music as Fredrick does. Sell the picks and shovels to the gold miners, don't go mining!


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Hmmm, your description of communism pretty accurately describes the effects of neoliberal capitalism on developed western countries.
> 
> Eradication of middle classes? Check
> 
> ...



I was recently in Cuba. It's rather different than what we have in the UK & US.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 1, 2017)

I'm sure it is, but that's still a very accurate description of the effects of free market economics on the developed world...


----------



## Kyle Preston (Jul 1, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> Why the hell would I pay $10 for an album when I can pay $5 a month and get tens of thousands of new songs per day? Not to mention the access to millions of playlists and Spotify's algorithms (which get better as they collect more data).



This is the bet that Spotify and other streaming services make bank on. It's happened in so many other industries. And yes, low cost and convenience are strong incentives for consumers. It's a bet based in pure cynicism. It teaches listeners to value recorded music less (at least financially). Why would you? Because artists need to eat. Because you value their work. Because you'd like to hear more of their work in the future. 

But that said, the streaming service model is an answer to 'piracy', not downloads or physical sales. Which is why I support streaming and want it to succeed (I still buy Vinyl and high-quality WAVS of my favs though). But if Spotify, Apple, Amazon, etc.. don't make it work, Pirate Bay *will *(leaving artists nothing). It's cynical and it sucks, but it's the reality. It's a consequence of technology. And personally, I hate that it's come to this, that even composers now ask _why the hell would I pay for music?
_


----------



## Zhao Shen (Jul 1, 2017)

Kyle Preston said:


> This is the bet that Spotify and other streaming services make bank on. It's happened in so many other industries. And yes, low cost and convenience are strong incentives for consumers. It's a bet based in pure cynicism. It teaches listeners to value recorded music less (at least financially). Why would you? Because artists need to eat. Because you value their work. Because you'd like to hear more of their work in the future.
> 
> But that said, the streaming service model is an answer to 'piracy', not downloads or physical sales. Which is why I support streaming and want it to succeed (I still buy Vinyl and high-quality WAVS of my favs though). But if Spotify, Apple, Amazon, etc.. don't make it work, Pirate Bay *will *(leaving artists nothing). It's cynical and it sucks, but it's the reality. It's a consequence of technology. And personally, I hate that it's come to this, that even composers now ask _why the hell would I pay for music?_



Agreed. Pure cynicism, but sadly that models the world much more accurately than idealism. As I mentioned previously, I also support my favorite artists with digital and physical purchases. But I'm someone who likes to listen to a lot of everything and discover new music frequently, so streaming is a staple of my listening habits.


----------



## Arbee (Jul 1, 2017)

Ironically, in practice the free market and communism suffer from exactly the same disease - insatiable narcissists who feel entitled to "work the system". Sorry, not even sure why I read this thread through....


----------



## markleake (Jul 1, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> I'm sure it is, but that's still a very accurate description of the effects of free market economics on the developed world...


I think that has more to do with the politics of how the free market ideas are implemented, not so much liberalism. Really, individualism and capitalistic ideas have been the bedrock of western society for a long time now (longer than you might think), and have worked wonderfully well compared to many other social constructs/agreements. They just don't work so well for the individual when taken too far, like you could argue is the case in the US.

OK, not sure why I'm commenting here on such an idea either. The OP's idea is neither a real union nor a co-op, it's just open slather for people to get something for nothing.


----------



## NoamL (Jul 2, 2017)

Astronaut FX said:


> I'm quite convinced that if hobbyists' dollars suddenly vanished, you'd see many companies fold, and for those that remain, you'd likely see more expensive products.



Indeed, it would just be "turning back time"...

There used to be few publicly available libraries. Many of the best libraries were private and based on subscription or invitation. In effect they were financed by and for working composers. It was EastWest that put up a huge, risky investment to prove the existence of a market among _*aspiring*_ composers. After EastWest lots of other companies jumped into the pool. I think many people still don't fully appreciate what a capital intensive business sampling is, as you have to put up the business's entire cost before making a single sale.

So there you have the essence of market capitalism, both its cons and pros. The VI market was slow to start up because of low market information, but once the demand was proven we got a flourishing, full-spectrum market of products at a lot of different price points and feature sets.

If you want to find the *WORST* thing about composing to critique in terms of market capitalism, then look no further than all the dodgy pamphlets, e-textbooks and webinars/"masterclasses" trying to chip away at your wallet by promising you a 30 page PDF will teach you to write exactly like John Williams or Hans Zimmer. It's just like the Gold Rush - where infamously, the people who got richest were not the miners, but the people who came to California to set up a business _selling to_ the miners everything from pickaxes to denim to fresh eggs. In other words, *"mining the miners." *The hobby music world is INFESTED with people trying to mine the miners. That's not to say some masterclasses aren't really good (Alain Mayrand and Mike Verta are both excellent!) but the whole hobby is infused with this idea of "buying the expertise" when in reality you'd probably be best served by buying some SCORES by a composer you love and doing diligent self study to try to figure out how their music ticks.


----------



## Phryq (Jul 2, 2017)

d.healey said:


> And who decides if a sample library sucks?



*Stalin!!
*
I mean, it would come down to a union vote.



AlexRuger said:


> How about we swap out "sample libraries" with "health care" and "sane working conditions?"



Then you'd have Canada!! Honestly, I can't wait 'till I finish my overseas contract so I can go home and see a doctor.



mikeybabes said:


> I was recently in Cuba. It's rather different than what we have in the UK & US.


 I was recently in Haiti; they also had sucky healthcare. Let's not put our music on any islands.

Btw y'all, even though I made the spectre joke, what I'm proposing is not communism. Here's a 101 on the subject


----------



## LFO (Jul 2, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Don't know if I would call a car an necessity. More like a first world convenience (plenty of people in the world go their entire lives without owning one).
> 
> Same for sample libraries for that matter. Composers could work with paper, pen and a piano.


You must not live in the USA. A car is, in most places here, a necessity not a convenience. Unfortunately.


----------



## IoannisGutevas (Jul 2, 2017)

Hobbyists will never make an industry great cause they need idols to.. idolize. 

I was a hobbyist and trying to make it into a profession and no matter how much i scream that Orchestral Tools or Cinematic Studio Series make great libraries noone will take me seriously. You know why? Cause im was a hobbyist. Cause i havent actually proven to anyone that i knew what i was talking about. 

Hans Zimmer goes and tells that Cubase is a great DAW and 90% of the people agree with him almost no questions asked. You know why? Cause he worked his ass off last 40 years in composing music, learning the craft and dealing with all kinds of headaches to reach the level of proficiency he is currently at.

So from that 90% a large portion that agree with Hans Zimmer but pay no mind to me are guess.. hobbyists. So all the cheering for a product didnt come of from 100000 people who are lazy to test every single thing of the product and come up with a solid opinion, it came for 1 guy who WORKED for decades and earned the respect and the right to trust his opinion on the matters of music.

So no hobbyists can support any industry without the hard working people who are on top of their game.

Even if you had all the libraries in the world it wouldnt make you better. It would make you worse actually cause you wouldnt know where to begin and in the end with all that confusion you would most likely drop it cause you wouldnt take it seriously anyway. 

The system works like this: You work -> you get better -> you get stuff. You are lazy -> you get nowhere -> you dont get stuff. Easy, simple and most importantly FAIR.

The ideology "I exist so you owe me stuff" never made any community prosper and never will.

You are right though, noone took your seriously and noone should.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 2, 2017)

Phryq said:


> *Stalin!!
> *
> I mean, it would come down to a union vote.
> 
> ...




And yet tractor production is way higher than was specified in the five year plan. Keep forging ahead comrades - more orchestral libraries for La Rodina !


----------



## bigcat1969 (Jul 2, 2017)

You have a good point about the acquisition of VSTs versus the use. I've heard some nice things made using just the VSCO2 Community stuff I'm involved with. If you are a good composer others can at least hear your quality even if your tools aren't top level.
I'm actually trying to learn to compose and arrange now. I've picked up some composition courses and am taking them. My plan is to use nothing but Berlin Inspire for quite some time. Just one pack that does inspire me with its sound and just use those instruments to create. No searching for instruments or messing around with 20 pianos. If I want piano, flute, string section, etc... it will be the one in the Inspire box. And I think we can all agree if I can't learn to make something basic that sounds nice with this then I just can't write and compose.
So maybe we don't need more or even freeierer instruments but the discipline to learn our craft?


----------



## Dear Villain (Jul 2, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> Agreed. Pure cynicism, but sadly that models the world much more accurately than idealism.



T


bigcat1969 said:


> You have a good point about the acquisition of VSTs versus the use. I've heard some nice things made using just the VSCO2 Community stuff I'm involved with. If you are a good composer others can at least hear your quality even if your tools aren't top level.
> I'm actually trying to learn to compose and arrange now. I've picked up some composition courses and am taking them. My plan is to use nothing but Berlin Inspire for quite some time. Just one pack that does inspire me with its sound and just use those instruments to create. No searching for instruments or messing around with 20 pianos. If I want piano, flute, string section, etc... it will be the one in the Inspire box. And I think we can all agree if I can't learn to make something basic that sounds nice with this then I just can't write and compose.
> So maybe we don't need more or even freeierer instruments but the discipline to learn our craft?


W

I'm completely satisfied to have my one main VSL library and score my pieces in Finale with Garritan sounds. I value composing far above producing, even though in the end, for listeners to appreciate music, it has to sound its best.


----------



## mikehamm123 (Jul 2, 2017)

Karl Feuerstake said:


> Communism results in a universally degraded quality of life and the destruction of the 'middle' class, resulting in a grossly oversized 'lower class' and an incredibly small group of 'elites'.



Wow, exactly the same thing that has happened in the good ol' capitalist USA


----------



## jononotbono (Jul 2, 2017)

Zhao Shen said:


> The current system is fine



Yeah. Just buy them or don't.


----------



## lp59burst (Jul 2, 2017)

mikehamm123 said:


> Wow, exactly the same thing that has happened in the good ol' capitalist USA


And the system you would offer as being superior would be...?


----------



## dtcomposer (Jul 2, 2017)

d.healey said:


> And who decides if a sample library sucks?


Pretty sure the correct answer to this is @re-peat


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 3, 2017)

lp59burst said:


> And the system you would offer as being superior would be...?



Keynesian economics was a step in right direction. 

Anyway, once automation has decimated the job market, western civilisation will be forced to adopt a new economic model (capitalism and communism both rely on the value of human labour). One most likely based around universal basic income coupled with masssive deflation.


----------



## ghandizilla (Jul 3, 2017)

What free software taught us is that people can do something with great endeavour because they need it and not because they want some income. Plus the new paradigm of AI is likely *not *to be "compensable" by a keynesian revival (which would theoretically open new tertiary sector developments as in Trente Glorieuses economics), because it would be replacing the algorithms (that replaced humans in the first place, like in the "replaced" sense, not in the Schumpeter "extending productivity" sense) by humans, and it makes sense only if it's concerned citizens and not salaried men which take over the algorithms that rule smart cities and smart neighborhoods. So, it's all about creating a new paradigm of economics, with the disparition of time-valued labour*, likely with universal income (but which form of universal income? by non-wage labour costs? by state costs?), likely generalizing intermittent jobs and auto-didacticism services, likely seeking after a distinguo between what would be ruled by algorithms and what would be decided by citizens. In the end, it's all very difficult to predict. What is certain is that there will be a big paradigm-shift in the development of softwares, including virtual instruments. The current model is already obsolete.

* Everybody works. Doing chores is already work. It all depends upon what you recognize as "work" in the GDP. The non-wage labour cost system in France was a way to recognize non-merchant works such as free health and education in the GDP.


----------



## bigcat1969 (Jul 3, 2017)

We are in a transition state. The question is to what. What current principles will hold and which will fade away like the Feudal systems of Lord and Serf? Those were God ordained at the time and the great chain of being was immutable. Yeah right. Capitalism, Socialism and other isms may look just as archaic in the future. Music will remain, but in what form?


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 3, 2017)

The music business is one of the industries under threat from automation. People are already developing algorithms to create original tracks from start to finish. 

As to feudal system, I don't think we've ever left it. We just replaced the international monarchy that arose out of the medieval warrior caste, with a different international monarchy that arose out of the renaissance merchant caste. Instead of land owners and serfs we have company owners and employees. Instead of ordained by god, we have by the will of market forces.


----------



## dpasdernick (Jul 3, 2017)

Phryq said:


> John Williams already has more money than he'll ever need - he keeps making scores because he loves it.
> 
> If that's not true of some rich composer, he can composing. New cooler composers (like me) will take her place.
> 
> ...




What makes you think you are entitled to John Williams' money? Mr Williams worked his butt off and learned his craft. You can do the same. Then if you decide to give the rest of us free sample libraries that would be very kind of you.


----------



## lp59burst (Jul 3, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Keynesian economics was a step in right direction.
> 
> Anyway, once automation has decimated the job market, western civilisation will be forced to adopt a new economic model (capitalism and communism both rely on the value of human labour). One most likely based around universal basic income coupled with masssive deflation.



So... extensive government control of the economy with heavy taxation and wealth redistribution "ordained" by governmental bureaucrat elites to spend however they see fit... sounds much better.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 3, 2017)

lp59burst said:


> So... extensive government control of the economy with heavy taxation and wealth redistribution "ordained" by governmental bureaucrat elites to spend however they see fit... sounds much better.



Civilisation can be controlled by elected governments who answer to the people or unelected capitalists whose only priority is to make a profit and who only answer to their shareholders. 

I know which I would prefer. 

But again, as I mentioned before, everything will radically change once you remove human labour from the equation. Capitilasm will collapse (whether that's Keynesian capitalism or free market capitalism) as it's very foundations rely on the value (or more precisely "undervalue") of human labour.


----------



## lp59burst (Jul 3, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Civilisation can be controlled by elected governments who answer to the people or unelected capitalists whose only priority is to make a profit and who only answer to their shareholders.
> 
> I know which I would prefer.
> 
> But again, as I mentioned before, everything will radically change once you remove human labour from the equation. Capitilasm will collapse (whether that's Keynesian capitalism or free market capitalism) as it's very foundations rely on the value (or more precisely "undervalue") of human labour.


I'd say that your close... Civilization can be controlled by elected governments who answer to the people that work for large special interest groups who make large donations and/or work for PACs.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 3, 2017)

A corrupt democracy is still preferable to no democracy at all (which is the direction free market economics is taking us).


----------



## lp59burst (Jul 3, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> A corrupt democracy is still preferable to no democracy at all (which is the direction free market economics is taking us).


Ok you win... we're doomed...


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 3, 2017)

We're not doomed. Like I said a change is coming when automation takes hold.


----------



## Kyle Preston (Jul 3, 2017)

dpasdernick said:


> What makes you think you are entitled to John Williams' money? Mr Williams worked his butt off and learned his craft. You can do the same. Then if you decide to give the rest of us free sample libraries that would be very kind of you.



Why do people _constantly_ assume hard work guarantees a higher income? It doesn't. It never has.

We don't live in a meritocracy (wish we did). John Williams is an exception, not the rule. Of course he works his ass off. Of course his talent is unmatched. None of this means the free market owes him loads of money.


----------



## mikehamm123 (Jul 3, 2017)

Automation is likely to increase wealth and power among the elites... seems naive to think they will just *share* with the rest of us


----------



## Chandler (Jul 3, 2017)

The initial idea in the thread isn't actially socialist, its a co-op. Something like that could work, but you'd need restrictions on the membership or a flat fee so that everyone payed the same amount. The idea isn't impossible, but I doubt many people would see much use in it.

Also most co-ops involve producing something instead of consuming. Perhaps a better idea would be to have composers come together and each person agrees to play their repective instruments for others projects. That way a composer could get real instrument sounds for his projects for free. If you wanted to make it more fair have a point system and thise that afe playing on lots of projects get reduced membership fees.


----------



## NoamL (Jul 3, 2017)

There's a reason LA musicians have a union, a very good union in fact. Being a session player is A LOT more challenging than ordinary people think. Being a half decent composer is at least somewhat less of a challenge than ordinary people think. (while also being probably an order of magnitude more WORK than ordinary people think...) Just the facts.


----------



## Quasar (Jul 3, 2017)

Phryq said:


> Instead of paying for software, let's start a global composer's union, which will include an income tax on any profits made by union members (e.g. 10% of income).
> 
> The taxes will pay for Kontakt development (which will move into an open source project) as well as pay companies like Embertone, Spitfire, VSL, Chris Hein to continue developing software, which will now be free for everyone.
> 
> ...



This specific idea is obviously not going to be taken seriously, much less implemented, and has multiple problems associated with it, many of which have already been pointed out. But much of what has been criticized as untenable isn't the fault of your idea, but an unfortunate byproduct of the simple fact that it's almost impossible to create and maintain alternative resource sharing subsystems in an environment dominated by the decrepit, morally bankrupt and ecologically catastrophic market capitalism that has a stranglehold over the world today.

I really like the spirit of your suggestion. We need new paradigms, new ways of thinking... Marx was quite right regarding his assertion that capitalism will eventually devour itself. And for better or worse, we're living in a time where we're witnessing the unfolding of exactly that, in incremental stages...


----------



## NoamL (Jul 3, 2017)

Ever notice that Christian end-timers always predict the end of the universe to be in their lifetimes? The older they get, the sooner it's coming. I'm not aware of any guy who crunched the Bible numerology and announced "Good news everyone! Jesus is coming back... in 400 years!"

Well, Marxists are the same with the Death Of Capitalism.


----------



## dpasdernick (Jul 3, 2017)

Kyle Preston said:


> Why do people _constantly_ assume hard work guarantees a higher income? It doesn't. It never has.
> 
> We don't live in a meritocracy (wish we did). John Williams is an exception, not the rule. Of course he works his ass off. Of course his talent is unmatched. None of this means the free market owes him loads of money.



Kyle,

I agree 100%. What I was trying to convey was the original posters statement that Williams has enough money. I disagree with that. Williams can have as much money as he wants and as much as the 'market will bear'. Hard work doesn't guarantee success but it doesn't hurt...


----------



## Quasar (Jul 3, 2017)

NoamL said:


> Ever notice that Christian end-timers always predict the end of the universe to be in their lifetimes? The older they get, the sooner it's coming. I'm not aware of any guy who crunched the Bible numerology and announced "Good news everyone! Jesus is coming back... in 400 years!"
> 
> Well, Marxists are the same with the Death Of Capitalism.


LOL. Pretty witty. But a great many religious traditions have had and do have codified belief systems involving calendars that predict both end-times and recurring cycles of ends & beginnings over spans of centuries, millennia and even aeons beyond that... including the Sumerians, the Maya, some Hindu branches... Interestingly, (and ironically in terms of your comment) orthodox institutional Christianity specifically does not do this, and formally holds that "the day and the hour is unknown." (A gap in the explanatory metaphysics which may well have to do with inspiring freelance wannabe numerologists et al to fill the void).

And to say "Marxists are the same with the..." (besides its implied ad hominem aspect) is to paint an already loaded term with a rather broad, monolithic brush stroke, don't you think? Although I am not a Marxist (I'm not a philosophical materialist at all), his observations on the nature of capital, and what tends to happen to societies who become servile to its dictates are quite profound, which should be obvious to anyone who is able to read him with an open mind liberated from Cold War-era propaganda and all of that...


----------



## Kyle Preston (Jul 3, 2017)

dpasdernick said:


> Kyle,
> Hard work doesn't guarantee success but it doesn't hurt...



Agreed @dpasdernick : )


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 4, 2017)

mikehamm123 said:


> Automation is likely to increase wealth and power among the elites... seems naive to think they will just *share* with the rest of us



That exactly why they're pursuing it.

But as i mentioned before the very foundation of capitalism (and socialism for that matter) relies on the value (undervalue) of human labour.

Remove human labour from the equation and the whole system collapses. A new system has to emerge and the so called "elites" will welcome it. After all, if no one has any money, how will they buy the things that make the elites wealthy...?


----------



## Phryq (Jul 4, 2017)

Does Williams deserve $x.xx ?

Do I deserve do drink coffee every day? There are Syrians who work a lot harder than I do, and who are smarter than I am.

And in 100 years, technology will be at a state that even the laziest, stupidest people will have it better than any of us.

Talking about what we 'deserve' is impossible; it's an ill-defined construct. Let's talk about what's practical in bettering our lives.



NoamL said:


> There's a reason LA musicians have a union, a very good union in fact. Being a session player is A LOT more challenging than ordinary people think. Being a half decent composer is at least somewhat less of a challenge than ordinary people think. (while also being probably an order of magnitude more WORK than ordinary people think...) Just the facts.



Can you say more about the L.A. Union?


----------



## Phryq (Jul 4, 2017)

mikeybabes said:


> And yet tractor production is way higher than was specified in the five year plan. Keep forging ahead comrades - more orchestral libraries for La Rodina !



The U.S.S.R. made technological and economic progress far beyond any society ever has.

That said; they weren't communist and Stalin was an ass.


----------



## NoamL (Jul 4, 2017)

Phryq said:


> Can you say more about the L.A. Union?



AFM Local 47 - http://www.afm47.org/

Again it's not for composers, it's for musicians.


----------



## markleake (Jul 4, 2017)

Phryq said:


> The U.S.S.R. made technological and economic progress far beyond any society ever has.


Agriculture is a great example of that, right? (For those who are unaware of that part of history, the answer is a big fat NO.)


----------



## mikehamm123 (Jul 4, 2017)

i'm impressed, nobody has brought up Hitler yet


----------



## Phryq (Jul 4, 2017)

The video I linked talks about Hitler.

And no, co-ops aren't a gateway to gassing Semites, just as deliberately starving Ukrainians isn't an example of slow technological innovation.


----------



## mikehamm123 (Jul 4, 2017)

Its clear to me, looking at wealth equality, access to healthcare, social mobility, quality of life indexes--Europe has done a better job of managing an equitable and humane system than the US has. America certainly has been impressive in innovation and wealth creation, but 'more capitalism' is hardly the answer to what ails us.

The commons is very tricky to manage, but has its benefits. Ultra capitalist cheerleaders rely on the denial of externalities. 

That said, I am also very concerned about the effects of automation--meanwhile I am busy building a sample library


----------



## Phryq (Jul 4, 2017)

Canada may soon have guaranteed income - which will translate into guaranteed VSTi for me.

Please robots, take our jobs.


----------



## d.healey (Jul 4, 2017)

Phryq said:


> The video I linked talks about Hitler.


Perfect demonstration of Godwin's law.


----------



## Quasar (Jul 4, 2017)

mikehamm123 said:


> i'm impressed, nobody has brought up Hitler yet


LOL.

But it is lamentable IMHO that the so-called Godwin-Hitlerwin idea has permeated the internet to the point where neither can be brought up in any context without inciting an immediate reaction that typically ignores what is actually being said, essentially rendering those topics verboten.


----------



## Phryq (Jul 4, 2017)

Hitler was a vegan = vegan-ism is bad.
USSR was socialist = socialism is bad.
Anarchists have long noses = anarchism is bad.

All I'm saying in this thread is, we could all use a few more velocity layers; Williams has too many.

Come and defend yourself John Williams!


----------



## d.healey (Jul 4, 2017)

Phryq said:


> Anarchists have long noses = anarchism is bad.


This doesn't follow the pattern, surely long noses are bad...


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jul 4, 2017)

Yes - and people are also all too quick to ignore Mussolini's contribution to public transport policy.


----------



## Karl Feuerstake (Jul 4, 2017)

Phryq said:


> Hitler was a vegan = vegan-ism is bad.
> USSR was socialist = socialism is bad.
> Anarchists have long noses = anarchism is bad.
> 
> ...



I don't think I'm following a clear-cut train of thought here.

Hitler was a socialist. A national socialist. Socialism = bad. But they also employed fascist policies. Fascism also = bad.

USSR is what the communist revolution created. If it isn't communism, then it serves as (yet another) example of what communism inevitably becomes, and is therefore communist. Also bad.

Anarchists believe in the destruction of society. Destruction of society = bad.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jul 4, 2017)

Don't want to get into this debate (especially with Americans who seem adamant about this) but just because the nazis used the word socialist in their name, doesn't make them socialist. 

Socialism is an ideology which the nazis did not embody...


----------



## Phryq (Jul 5, 2017)

Karl Feuerstake, you should really watch that video.

Russia never became communist; Anarchists don't advocate for the destruction of society.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism


----------



## d.healey (Jul 5, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Don't want to get into this debate (especially with Americans who seem adamant about this) but just because the nazis used the word socialist in their name, doesn't make them socialist.


Like the democratic republic of congo or the democratic people's republic of North Korea


----------



## Phryq (Jul 6, 2017)

d.healey said:


> Like the democratic republic of congo or the democratic people's republic of North Korea



Just one more example of what happens to People's Republics.


----------

