Waiting for Spitfire Audio subscription service

Are you waiting for Spitfire Audio subscription service?

  • More than anything

    Votes: 14 7.4%
  • Yes I am

    Votes: 20 10.5%
  • No, I'll pass

    Votes: 142 74.7%
  • What's the hype anyway?

    Votes: 14 7.4%

  • Total voters
    190

ironbut

Active Member
IMHO Subscription services are here to stay but I'm happy that, with a few exceptions, they are usually available side by side with conventional perpetual licenses.
Subscriptions are great for large companies and institutions with multiple users and perpetual licensing are great for smaller operations like many of us freelancers.
Folks like Adobe and Avid made some great decisions in the early days when they invested in educational resources making them the de-facto platforms taught in higher education.
They also offer complete "solutions" for large multi-media companies like Bad Robot where Avid not only supplies the software but also the hardware to control it (as in the college I went to).
I think that Avid thought about making Pro Tools and Media Composer subscription only but the blow-back made them offer them either way.
The same happened with Slate Digital. It looked like they were going to go all in with subscriptions but changed their mind.
It is unfortunate that Adobe is subscription only. I'd like to use Audition as an editor but not at the price of the Creative Cloud or whatever it's called.
Adobe is kind of an exception I think. I used to live in San Jose and the overhead of their campus there must require a big, steady stream of income to keep the lights on.
 
Last edited:

Manuel Stumpf

Active 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?
Well EW has both. They give you the choice.
You can go on subscription or buy their products. Everyone can decide what is best for her/him. This let's you try out products before you buy them. This is an absolut fair deal :).
Other companies products most often cannot be tested before buying (and the fact they don't want allow you to resell it worsens the problem even more).
[Sidenote: Any software license sold in the EU can by european law be resold. And the vendor cannot remove this right.]
Depending on usage both a buy and a subscription model can have advantages.

Companies forcing you into subscription because they leave you no other option is bad. Very bad.
a) If the developer decides to improve, change, discontinue a product, bad luck. It is just gone at any point in time. Literally they can just do what they want. If you have done a lot of work with the product suddenly you find yourself in a dependency you cannot easily let go (which is what the vendors want).
b) For longtime use it is much cheaper to get the product and then use it 5 years, instead of paying subscription for 5 years which is much more expensive. Except maybe you use every product in the portfolio once or twice, then buying makes no sense and subscribing can indeed be cheaper. Or you want to use it only a very short time.

Conclusion from my point of view:
Fair Subscription model: Let's you choose between subscribing and buying.
Unfair Subscription model: Gives you no choice. Tries to bring you in a dependency you cannot let go.

I avoid any vendor that forces me into subscription.
 

Forecheck

New Member
Hate the notion of subscription based. Will use my personally owned copy of Adobe Lightroom as long as I can, and will find a non subscription based replacement if I ever have to. Adobe, or any company, has no right to get their digs in me in perpetuity. Free market will solve this - use what you have or wait for alternatives if there are none on the market.

I would have been OK with it if Abobe had offered a choice. If you are a pro who uses every working day a subscription may work for you. In my case my photography is seasonally driven, there are months when my subject is just not around so I dont shoot much. I don't want to pay during those periods and I don't like the subscription being the only option solely for the benefit of the vendor. At least with a vehicle I can choose to lease or buy...
 

ptram

Senior Member
I used to live in San Jose and the overhead of their campus there must require a big, steady stream of income to keep the lights on.
I think they moved to Utah a few years ago. Maybe Spitfire Audio could move to some lonely lighthouse island in the Hebrides?

Paolo
 

ironbut

Active Member
I too hate subscription services for myself but to be fair to Adobe, it is in a different league than the rest of the software companies we are talking about here. And Wall St has a big say in the direction it moves in.
I doubt if many of the big audio software companies employ more than a few hundred people. Adobe has over 15,000. They probably have more employees than Spitfire has customers.
They made their decision and unfortunately, their stocks rose as a result.
 

ironbut

Active Member
I think they moved to Utah a few years ago. Maybe Spitfire Audio could move to some lonely lighthouse island in the Hebrides?

Paolo
AFAK Adobe's world headquarters are still in San Jose. In fact, they are supposed to break ground on a 4th building this year making the campus over a million sq feet.
 

Wunderhorn

Active Member
AFAK Adobe's world headquarters are still in San Jose. In fact, they are supposed to break ground on a 4th building this year making the campus over a million sq feet.
I am almost certain that this 4th building isn't gonna be the new bug fixing department.
 

JamieLang

Active Member
I just bought East West's Spaces2. Because a primary ambience I want to use in my DAW, I need full time. I debated renting it for a month for this round of mixes, but...honestly...as picky as I am about this kind of reverb, I also wanted to make sure I locked that shit down, so to speak. Most IRs don't "work the way I want" (some come "close enough", but)...S2 did. Anyway--is anyone debating going sub ONLY? That's a different discussion.

If I could try before I bought, I'd probably have bought fewer VIs that I own. Just saying...that's a knife that cuts both ways--it WILL force a dev to make their instruments "play" better than they often do...but, it will mean fewer sales, I'd bet. When I've shown people VSL's VIPro2 (which I love)--they freak out at the complexity...they were wanting to buy based on my RESULTS...they see that? Instant pass. I think they thought I just played a piano part and out pops a chamber section.
 

Mike Fox

Senior Member
Well EW has both. They give you the choice.
You can go on subscription or buy their products. Everyone can decide what is best for her/him. This let's you try out products before you buy them. This is an absolut fair deal :).
Other companies products most often cannot be tested before buying (and the fact they don't want allow you to resell it worsens the problem even more).
[Sidenote: Any software license sold in the EU can by european law be resold. And the vendor cannot remove this right.]
Depending on usage both a buy and a subscription model can have advantages.

Companies forcing you into subscription because they leave you no other option is bad. Very bad.
a) If the developer decides to improve, change, discontinue a product, bad luck. It is just gone at any point in time. Literally they can just do what they want. If you have done a lot of work with the product suddenly you find yourself in a dependency you cannot easily let go (which is what the vendors want).
b) For longtime use it is much cheaper to get the product and then use it 5 years, instead of paying subscription for 5 years which is much more expensive. Except maybe you use every product in the portfolio once or twice, then buying makes no sense and subscribing can indeed be cheaper. Or you want to use it only a very short time.

Conclusion from my point of view:
Fair Subscription model: Let's you choose between subscribing and buying.
Unfair Subscription model: Gives you no choice. Tries to bring you in a dependency you cannot let go.

I avoid any vendor that forces me into subscription.
Precisely. EW offers both, while other companies only offer a subscription service, which is where the concern is. Seems like an unbalanced comparison though, since it's safe to assume that SF would offer both if they started a subscription service.

Since EW has already proven that a sub service can work just fine in the sample world, I find the Adobe comparison interesting, but it is something worth taking into consideration.