Spitfire bringing out libraries fast but ignoring problems in the ones that are already out

Ezzy

New Member
It is okay no? But staying private is no altruistic decision but a business one? For there are private investors in this many million pound company. And that is great, a good business man above all else. Updates are a business model too, and that is okay too but to say otherwise some people wonder why to. That pretend email of marketing ago as example, it was not nice, the actions are different to the words sometimes
 

redlester

Senior Member
I have a couple of additions to make if that is OK. What your post didn't mention is time. Making samples is not like making music because it needs extensive development time. Our work truly starts when the recording stops. So issues in something we released a few months ago wouldn't have been fixed had we not done this next Albion because we were recording that Albion a year ago. You can see how long for example the massive Hans Zimmer strings update took because I clearly logged the beginning of the "pickup" sessions well over a year ago in my vlog?
Indeed, and am well aware you do regular updates, all extremely appreciated. But one request I would make, if possible, is if we could have the information within the downloader app to tell us what issues are addressed in each update. Occasionally we do get this, but usually not.

This evening I've just logged in and downloaded an update to Solo Strings, which did state what the change was, and also one for HZ Piano, which didn't state what has been updated!
 

giwro

Member
Thanks Guy, whilst I know you wrote that for the community not in support of us, you make a very solid case for what is indeed the real life scenario for us.

I have a couple of additions to make if that is OK. What your post didn't mention is time. Making samples is not like making music because it needs extensive development time. Our work truly starts when the recording stops....

C.
And, I'm gonna weigh in here, too.

If you've never edited samples and tried to make them into something that resembles a good product, you have no idea what goes into it... My niche is sampling pipe organs, and it's infinitely less complicated than orchestral stuff. A typical stop of 61 notes takes me 1-2 hours to prepare (assuming there are no gnarly issues to fix)... de-noising without damaging the character of the stop, cutting up samples, setting release points, looping perfectly... (add that amount again for every mic perspective) and then once all the stops are done, writing the code and getting a functional (and hopefully beautiful) GUI. Then, it must be flogged and tested, because after spending hundreds of hours editing the bloody samples, you're too close to it, and you've missed bad loops, misplaced releases, weird spurious noises.

Then, after a period of time, you release it... believing you've got the issues licked....

And, what would you know... some savant customer with far too much time on their hands listens to every note of every stop, and proceeds to give you a long laundry list of all the things you MUST fix NOW...

I get it. We want perfection. But, for example, I currently have 2 sample sets in various stages of development, with 3 more on the books for recording - I'm ALWAYS working on something. And, to complicate matters, last year I absorbed the products of a fellow developer... and they're not up to my standards. So, while doing all of the normal stuff, I'm going back to the raw recordings of his content and redoing everything from scratch. At least in this case, I don't have to re-do the code and GUI - just the content. I've completed one of the instruments so far - it took me 3 months, and I found over 3000 items that needed fixing...

And guess what... someone emailed me the other day with an issue I missed.

Now, in my case, this is a side business - I have a regular job that pays the bills and furnishes the benefits/health coverage... so consequently I can't go at it as fast as a regular company.

I can't even imagine the complexity of a large pool of products like Spitfire, and how to prioritize regular updates/fixes while still creating new revenue streams. My hat's off to you guys, @christianhenson !
 
Last edited:

ridgero

Active Member
I really love and own alot of your libraries, although I’m not a professional at all. Just a hobby musician.

I have one wish: Can you please work on a HZ Brass library :D
 

jononotbono

Luke Johnson
Some people are so obsessed with subscription models. Please NEVER make Spitfire libraries a Subscription service.

Yes Redlester, these are all features we're concentrating on. Ezzy wow, what a memory! It was meant as a bit of fun from us. As I think I said at the time, but reaction was bad which is why we haven't done it again.... that was maybe 3 years ago? We listen.
Yes. How dare you have fun. Disgusting.
 

filipjonathan

Literally The Best Member
Some people are so obsessed with subscription models. Please NEVER make Spitfire libraries a Subscription service.
I actually don't see anything wrong with them adding a subscription for those who want it. That would be perfect in cases where you need a certain library for a single project and you don't wanna spend hundreds of $$. But again, how would they 'lock' the libraries once the subscription is canceled?! Sorry, I'm just thinking out loud.
 

christianhenson

Senior Member
I don't want to derail this thread but do we not fear subscription models as working composers. An example I would cite would be someone like Charlie Clouser who has been working on the SAW franchise for over a decade now. An editor finds a piece of temp from one of the older shows that in the director's mind fits perfectly that temp love is formed and she or he wants it peppered over the entire show. BUT the key sound that this cue uses is from a subscription service that has expired or been retired or repackaged and no longer is available. Is not actually OWNING a perpetual license to the sounds a risk to us? This is certainly what puts PT and I off the idea as composers.
 

Drundfunk

Active Member
I don't want to derail this thread but do we not fear subscription models as working composers. An example I would cite would be someone like Charlie Clouser who has been working on the SAW franchise for over a decade now. An editor finds a piece of temp from one of the older shows that in the director's mind fits perfectly that temp love is formed and she or he wants it peppered over the entire show. BUT the key sound that this cue uses is from a subscription service that has expired or been retired or repackaged and no longer is available. Is not actually OWNING a perpetual license to the sounds a risk to us? This is certainly what puts PT and I off the idea as composers.
To hell with subscription services. I completely agree with you here Christian. What I rather want to see from developers are demo patches (The Kepler ones were quite cool and it's the only reason it's on my wishlist). I'd even pay for a stripped down version of a library with limited content being able to upgrade to a full version later (Embertone did it recently with their Joshua Bell violin. Also Audio Imperia with Nucleus yesterday. Soundiron did it with their string library etc.). It's a really good way to try out a library without paying hundreds of dollars (the stripped down versions I mentioned are all below $100 I think) and those who like it or need the additional content can upgrade while those who don't like it didn't spend a fortune, which in my view would stop buyer's remorse for the most parts. Sure, on the other hand you developers might lose some money from those who don't like this basic core version, but who would have bought the full version if this was the only option available to them (but that would most likely mean buyer's remorse). At the same time more people might buy this stripped down core version in contrary to the full fleshed out library. Also it's great to see you guys so active here engaging with the community. Please don't be discouraged by the criticism you guys are experiencing once in a while. I think in the end we all have the same goal, to have the best tools available to compose great music.
 
Last edited:

Alex Fraser

Senior Member
I don't want to derail this thread but do we not fear subscription models as working composers. An example I would cite would be someone like Charlie Clouser who has been working on the SAW franchise for over a decade now. An editor finds a piece of temp from one of the older shows that in the director's mind fits perfectly that temp love is formed and she or he wants it peppered over the entire show. BUT the key sound that this cue uses is from a subscription service that has expired or been retired or repackaged and no longer is available. Is not actually OWNING a perpetual license to the sounds a risk to us? This is certainly what puts PT and I off the idea as composers.
Totally agree. I still use sounds released over a decade ago and it would be galling to still be paying for them.

Also, the Spitfire Amazon S3 bill would go up somewhat if you went sub.. 😅
 

Levon

Member
I don't want to derail this thread but do we not fear subscription models as working composers. An example I would cite would be someone like Charlie Clouser who has been working on the SAW franchise for over a decade now. An editor finds a piece of temp from one of the older shows that in the director's mind fits perfectly that temp love is formed and she or he wants it peppered over the entire show. BUT the key sound that this cue uses is from a subscription service that has expired or been retired or repackaged and no longer is available. Is not actually OWNING a perpetual license to the sounds a risk to us? This is certainly what puts PT and I off the idea as composers.
Not a fan of subscription software. How about a system that allows for timed licenses of your products so that people can demo your products? Companies like Flexera can facilitate that sort of thing by integrating with your application to manage licenses: https://www.flexera.com/products/spend-optimization/software-asset-management.html
 

MartinH.

Senior Member
I don't want to derail this thread but do we not fear subscription models as working composers. An example I would cite would be someone like Charlie Clouser who has been working on the SAW franchise for over a decade now. An editor finds a piece of temp from one of the older shows that in the director's mind fits perfectly that temp love is formed and she or he wants it peppered over the entire show. BUT the key sound that this cue uses is from a subscription service that has expired or been retired or repackaged and no longer is available. Is not actually OWNING a perpetual license to the sounds a risk to us? This is certainly what puts PT and I off the idea as composers.
1000% correct! Subscriptions are madness in terms of longterm risk.


I think another thing we don't sing and dance about is that PT and I have committed to keeping Spitfire private. So no massive floatation no exit, which means we get to do stuff that companies with shareholders don't get to do, Composer Magazine, Pianobook, weird walks in parks and over bridges, SA Recordings, LABS
I think that's very commendable and a good decision.
 

Mornats

Senior Member
Speaking as a hobbyist with a rather expensive hobby here! The model I like is what Drundfunk mentioned above, a cut down version.

For example, my most recent Spitfire purchase is the studio orchestra core. Core is great for me as the extra mics will be wasted on me. I'm not sure if even use all of the articulations in core although a proper composer would.

If I didn't own Albion One and Tundra I'd be all over the £29 epic strings, woods and brass and they'd be my staple.

I wish I was starting this composing journey now and not a few years ago as there's a lot more in the "starter" category now than there was a few years ago and it's quality stuff. Spitfire have contributed a lot to this as have others. Audio Imperia's announcement of a cut down Nucleus yesterday was good news for people like me (although late for me as I've grabbed a lot of quality libraries over the years).

I don't think a subscription would work for me as some months my musical output is low, as it's just a hobby. With perpetual licences I can dip in and out as I desire without feeling I've wasted money that month. So cut down cheaper versions (with a decent upgrade option) appeal massively.