What's new

Waiting for Spitfire Audio subscription service

Are you waiting for Spitfire Audio subscription service?

  • More than anything

    Votes: 13 6.9%
  • Yes I am

    Votes: 20 10.6%
  • No, I'll pass

    Votes: 142 75.1%
  • What's the hype anyway?

    Votes: 14 7.4%

  • Total voters
    189
OP
stfciu

stfciu

Active Member
76% of us say no.
Well, it looks more than significant, which I must say suprised me a little bit at first but after reading all the comments and arguments the result has a lot of sense.

A rent-to-own indeed could be a balance point option.
 

Cinebient

Active Member
While there is a significant cost to produce a sample library it's not fair to compare physical objects like cars to software until you can duplicate cars by hitting copy + paste. Or to put it another way, once you've developed some software if costs almost nothing to create and distribute a copy of it, the same is not true for a car.
Mmhhh yep, but a new car i buy costs just a fraction to be build as what i have to pay. It‘s exact the other way with sample libraries i pay „just“ a few 100s but i think the costs to produce it is more than a car. :)
However, no subscription for me!
 

Mike Fox

Senior Member
Are there other sample library subscription services besides EW? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Besides all the issues brought up by others (Kontakt libraries vs. EW being totally in control of their iLok protected sample player being the biggest), I think EW's situation is quite different from companies like Spitfire Audio, 8Dio, etc. From what I can tell, EW has essentially gone dormant as far as new library production is concerned. The last thing I bought from them was the Hollywood Choirs library, which to be honest, was a lot like the previous choirs library, once things are in a big mix. We're not seeing a steady stream of major, attention getting new products from EW as we are from other developers.

From EW's perspective, the subscription service probably makes sense. They've got a large stack of aging libraries that are unlikely to have any new huge waves of buying interest, so the subscription service is a way for them to harvest more revenue from the products they have. It would be interesting to know what's going on at EW these days. I also wonder if the subscription service was kind of a last-ditch experiment for them, but something they couldn't undo once it was up and running. If it was wildly successful (a HUGE volume of subscribers), maybe a lot more libraries would be in the works. Like any company, I'm sure EW has to sit down and assess how profitable releasing new libraries could be. The market has really heated up. There are a LOT of new products constantly coming out, and there are a LOT of big sales. I would also imagine that East West being in LA is a big factor. Lots of talent there, but it has to be the most expensive place in the world to get a sample library produced. And maybe the founders are just tired of it, and they haven't groomed replacements to continue the creative energy (I'm beginning to wonder if that isn't happening at VSL these days, too). I do think we've arrived at the point where a lot of developers are scratching their heads trying to think of what they could do next that would make a big splash, and generate a lot of sales. The bread and butter stuff has all really been covered (although I'm still hoping for 8Dio to release a 76 Trombones library). ;)
Some great points here.

EW has been releasing smaller libs on the side, but I do think their glory days are over. Hollywood Choirs was their last big library, and I guess it was intentionally more of a passion project than a large scale money maker? A subscription service probably does make the most sense for them at this point.

I think what makes more sense than a sub service are try packs. I would definitely like to see more developers make them available.
 

jononotbono

Luke Johnson
While there is a significant cost to produce a sample library it's not fair to compare physical objects like cars to software until you can duplicate cars by hitting copy + paste. Or to put it another way, once you've developed some software if costs almost nothing to create and distribute a copy of it, the same is not true for a car.
You have missed my point. The point is, people want the best stuff for minimal investment.
 

ptram

Senior Member
I'm still using CS6 and have been making a fulltime living doing so for many years.
Another CS6 user here. And one that doesn't find anything useful in CC, and even dislikes dark UIs.

In the meantime, Affinity's suite is growing well (Publisher beta is already very capable), and I've long switched to Apple for video editing.

Paolo
 

MartinH.

Senior Member
A rent-to-own indeed could be a balance point option.
It's a relatively sane and lower risk option, but it would likely a) only ever be offered with the kinds of DRM that make me avoid a product entirely, b) make people realize they don't really need a library that they're "test driving", all current buyers remorse would bring only a fraction of the income for the developers, c) be much harder to get crazy sale euphoria and impulse buys going, which I wouldn't be surprised half the industry is reliant on financially at this point.



Another CS6 user here. And one that doesn't find anything useful in CC, and even dislikes dark UIs.

In the meantime, Affinity's suite is growing well (Publisher beta is already very capable), and I've long switched to Apple for video editing.
CS6 is still many years ahead of what anyone else can offer in the areas that I need (last I checked), but I've bought one of the Affinity tools regardless to support them. I do really hope they become a true alternative in 5 to 10 years and don't let themselves be bought by Adobe or Autodesk.
 

pinki

Active Member
I would personally never expect professional tools, some of the best out there, for such little commitment. I would like a Ferrari to drive around in. Can I rent one for £30 a month? No.

Sorry to sound so blunt but I think it’s a self entitled shit idea and if I want something, I’ll save money and buy it. Call me old school and unentitled I guess. haha!
I don't think it's got anything to do with "self entitlement" at all. Are adobe subscribers self entitled?

You don't actually own your libraries anyway, you have a license to use them from a publisher..that's why they can stop you reselling them.

I understand that some people have invested thousands, tens of thousands of pounds on "acquiring" these libraries under the old model and they are understandably miffed that someone can then come along under the new model and have all of those libraries under their fingertips for $30... with time being the only limiting factor. It's crazy.

The problem with the subscription model is the number of subscriptions that might be needed..6 x $30 per month is suddenly a problem..for the publishers too. And that is where Spitfire are in a really strong position if they chhose it. One subscription to rule them all!
 

Land of Missing Parts

flibbertigibbet
I still like Adobe Creative Cloud, but recently cut the cord and got Affinity's apps on a BF sale. There's no alternative to After Effects, unfortunately, and I still think Adobe's products are more feature rich than Affinity.

If Spitfire did a cloud subscription, I'd likely try it out. Sometimes I wonder if Garage Band will eventually come with Orchestral Tool's Inspire as a stock library, or more likely, Sonuscore's The Orchestra.
 

MartinH.

Senior Member
I don't think it's got anything to do with "self entitlement" at all. Are adobe subscribers self entitled?
Pretty much all the fulltime freelancers are paying more with the subscription than they used to do in the past with buying only the creative suite updates that added features that they needed. Financially they all got tricked big time. Subs only make sense for big companies with strongly fluctuating numbers of required per-seat licenses imho.

If Spitfire did a cloud subscription, I'd likely try it out. Sometimes I wonder if Garage Band will eventually come with Orchestral Tool's Inspire as a stock library, or more likely, Sonuscore's The Orchestra.
That's the kind of "lowering of barriers to entry" that could expand a market. I don't think it's an unrealistic scenario to see something along those lines.
 

storyteller

Senior Member
Nothing drove me away from any piece of software faster than Adobe's subscription service.
I'm a happy Affinity Designer/Photo user now.

Then I thought Digidesign/Avid had their subscription/maintenance concept figured out for Pro Tools since it was more like a "maintenance plan." Nope. They have failed majorly and I have chosen to move away from Pro Tools completely even though I own the software outright.

Admittedly, EW probably found a niche to introduce users to its libraries, though I am not a user of composer cloud. The idea of not owning the sounds to a song I wrote when I return to it would drive me bonkers. The same would be the case with plugin/fx subscription services.

The ONLY subscription service model I have ever liked was istockphoto's take on it... but you OWN the license to anything you downloaded during that subscription... so it really isn't a traditional subscription model. It was more like a "bulk purchase certificate" for each month you pay.
 

dpasdernick

Senior Member
I personally hate the subscription model. I deal with Adobe and Autodesk with my day job as they have cornered the market for 2D and 3D content. I wish there was an alternative to these companies.

With that said I do subscribe to the Roland Cloud mostly because it has allowed me to sell off a lot of my hardware. Roland also allows you to “own” two synths a year even if you drop the subscription. I basically paid 120 bucks for the D-50 and the JV-1080,

I like EW’s model of subscribing or purchasing. Any company that goes 10O% subscription will not be on my list and I will look to alternatives if there is that option.

Make a good product at a fair price and allow me to resell it if it is not working for me. That’s the sweet spot for me.
 

Audio Birdi

Active Member
I would say Splice's Rent to Own model works best. you pay bit by bit until you pay off the total amount, keep the library or plugin forever, just pay in installments :)

Something like this for instrument libraries would work well I feel! So you would only pay up to the full price of the library!
 
I too abandoned Adobe software the moment that they went the subscription route, in favor of Affinity Photo/Designer. I won't deal with EW for the same reason (well, that plus I think Play is abhorrent on several levels). If (God forbid) Spitfire were to go subscription, I'd abandon making any further purchases from them as well ... it is as simple as that. I loathe subscription plans ... a curse upon them, and upon all of their progeny!
 

Mike Fox

Senior Member
It's interesting to see the conflicting opinions here. On one hand, there's valid complaints regarding Adobe's cloud service. On the other hand, EW's cloud service is generally praised and recommended on this forum. Seems like there's a right, and a wrong way to do this, no?
 

jbuhler

Senior Member
It's interesting to see the conflicting opinions here. On one hand, there's valid complaints regarding Adobe's cloud service. On the other hand, EW's cloud service is generally praised and recommended on this forum. Seems like there's a right, and a wrong way to do this, no?
Or perhaps the difference between more or less holding a monopoly position or not.
 
I would say Splice's Rent to Own model works best. you pay bit by bit until you pay off the total amount, keep the library or plugin forever, just pay in installments :)

Something like this for instrument libraries would work well I feel! So you would only pay up to the full price of the library!
I used Splice's Rent to Own plan to buy Serum and it was perfect.

The problem with applying this to Sample Libraries is that just about all of them go on massive sales a few times a year. Serum did not go on sale once since I started my rent to own.

Waves has a rent to own program through their website, but given their never ending sales , you would be paying more for each plug-in than the typical sale price. Instead, you could very easily buy one plug-in on sale per month at just slightly more than the rent to own monthly fee, and save money in the long term.

I love the rent to own idea, but sample libraries would either have to stop with the mega sales or would have to price the rent to own total costs near their sale price for it to work.
 

Shiirai

Avian Member
I would say Splice's Rent to Own model works best. you pay bit by bit until you pay off the total amount, keep the library or plugin forever, just pay in installments :)

Something like this for instrument libraries would work well I feel! So you would only pay up to the full price of the library!
I didn't know this was a thing. That's brilliant. Guess I'll be getting Serum in the near future.
 

James H

01001000 01101001
I didn't know this was a thing. That's brilliant. Guess I'll be getting Serum in the near future.
It's good. Even if you have a hard few months, you can cancel. Then when you start again it picks up from where you left off
 

MA-Simon

Senior Member
No.

I would be quite miffed if just any twink could use those libraries. That is what makes a brand imho. If it would be a cheap sub, the products would feel... used and unworthy to me? The magic is gone.
Probably a lot of projection by myself on brands, the air of ... greatness?

For me sample libraries are like collectors items i can enjoy playing arround with. Something not everybody can do.
To me the Hollywood series is like a... dumpstersale library. It might be very good and usable "work product", but i would not get joy out of using them, because it is for work? If that makes sense?

I get enjoyment out of shopping.
 
Top Bottom