Wow, how much interest! 2011/4/2 Hector Centeno <hcen...@gmail.com>
> Congratulations! I was looking forward to this release after trying > the online conversion. Any chance there will be a non-commercial price > (I'm a sound artist, not a commercial producer)? It feels a bit unfair > to me that something like this gets focused only on main stream > commercial production when it could be a great tool for artists. > Paying for this plugin would be way more than what I paid for my DAW > (Reaper) and my b-format mic (custom made) all together. Or maybe a > pricing Reaper style where you pay according to how much your yearly > revenue is? Just a thought. > > Reaper is shareware. I tried that model once, in 1989. It was exciting for me as a young boy to receive checks and warm greetings from far-away lands, and thanks to a nice bank teller who took pity on me and forfeited the bank fees (which would otherwise render the checks worthless), I made enough money to buy a new game for my computer. Very nice, but not a way to make a living, unfortunately. It might work if you, like reaper, ship millions of copies. > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Trond Lossius <trond.loss...@bek.no> > wrote: > I'm working at BEK, a media lab for artists in Bergen (NO). We have a > SoundField mic and it's getting increasingly popular among local artists. > Depending on the project they often get to borrow it and the hard disc > recorder for free (or almost free). For many of them it will be interesting > to be able to use Harpex for decoding later on. While BEK itself can and > probably will get a plug-in license, I'm less sure how many of the artists > we work with that will be able to afford it. On the other hand it might well > be that they can do decoding when required at the BEK studio, and thus won't > depend on having their own license. > Maybe a time-limited license (software as a service) would be useful for such projects? 2011/4/2 Marc Lavallée <m...@hacklava.net> > Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:50:46 +0200, > Jörn Nettingsmeier <netti...@stackingdwarves.net> wrote : > > > Regarding the Linux version, what interfaces does it have ? > > > Will it output to Jack ? To any of the 24..64 ch soundcards > > > I use ? > > > > svein, will there be a linux version? > > if so, i might have a customer for you. > > my attempts at running the beta version under wine were unsuccessful, > > but then i really don't know anything about wine... > > My personalized demo works in Linux with jackd when using the > dssi-vst host. And it works very well. > > Congrats! I tried to compile vst/wine support into ardour, but after a couple of hours of messing about, gave up on it (couldn't start ardour after recompilation). I've also tried to understand lv2, but haven't found any finite and sufficient source of information about it. However, that's probably just a matter of spending enough time trawling the internet for the required pieces of information. It didn't get very high priority because I've never heard about anyone actually paying hard currency for a plugin on linux. That renders any time spent on a commercial linux plugin wasted. BUT, if Jörn tells us that there actually exist such people in this universe, then that might change things. One paying customer is not enough, but if I get four firm orders for an lv2 version, I'll make it. However, not all linux users may want lv2. Fons has previously asked for a jack-enabled stand-alone application instead. That would mean a third product in addition to the plugin and player, which is a bit of a support nightmare. If the current player supports jack, that is entirely unintended. It is intended as a player, i.e. an application which sends sound to a soundcard. It supports ALSA and OSS, I think. 2011/4/2 Marc Lavallée <m...@hacklava.net> > > But it works as long as I am connected to the Internet; it > sends a long and unique identification message to > http://harpex.net/license.php, and the immediate response alloys > the plugin to work after displaying the amount of time left in demo > mode. Since this mechanism is not explained (appart from a vague > reference to "activation" in the license), the demo I installed is > technically a sneakyware... > > That depends on your technical definition of "sneakyware". It seems to me that most programs these days call home for one reason or another. The reason it requires a network connection during the trial period is obviously to prevent indefinite "trials". Once you activate your copy, it stops calling home. I will see if I can find a suitable place to inform user about this, so it isn't perceived as "sneaky". 2011/4/1 Richard G Elen <re...@brideswell.com> > Hi guys, > > Congratulations on doing this, first of all. > > I probably have very much more "traditional" setups than most people here, > so I doubt the sort of configurations I require are the same as most other > people. > > I've only played with the player so far, and only briefly. So some quick > notes: > * Look and feel are excellent, very impressed. > * The ITU 5.1 layout seems extraordinarily uncommon in real life, most real > environments appear to be based on rectangles, but as the speakers in the > player are movable, even if they don't stay there, I presume that in the > future additional custom layouts will be possible? > Custom layouts is one of the features you have to pay for... > * If so, may I place a request for 4.x rectangular arrays from > 2:1->1:1->1:2? > That's not entirely unreasonable. > > Brilliant stuff, I hope it does well for you. > > On the plugin pricing, I would think that being competitive with other > decode-type plugins for the platform would be a good starting point. I'm > more interested in Ambisonic mixing than SFM applications, but as a decoder > this should be quite useful. > For B-format I am only aware of two previous plugin prices: 0 and GBP 495. Dave > >> On 1. april. 2011, at 12:45, John Leonard wrote: >> >> Perhaps one answer to this is to offer academic pricing? This is what >>> Soundfield does with the main SurroundZone plug-in, as far as I remember. >> >> >>> On 01/04/2011 12:20, Svein Berge wrote: > That makes sense. > > Svein > 2011/4/1 Dave Malham <dave.mal...@york.ac.uk> Certainly does (speaking with academic hat on)! > Maybe also student pricing at an even lower point but just for one > year/duration of course, like Max/MSP? > > That's a sleek marketing ploy. I like it! ;-) 2011/4/1 Danny McCarty <d...@monolithmedia.net> > I was wondering why Digital Performer wasn't included in your Plug-in list? > Nobody has reported testing it yet. If you have Digital Performer, let me know how it works, and I'll add it to the list. Svein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110402/4c7403f7/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
