Yamaha have still taken alot of time and spent alot of money to sample the sounds from an acoustic instrument.

They have created a digital sample of this instrument to sell in their keyboards...

Lionstracs have gone and sampled Yamahas work and basically cut out all the labor and legal crap that Yamaha have had to do.

I believe they should do what Yamaha have done and create the samples themselves... not wait for a manufacturer like Yamaha or Roland to do all the work and then just take it from them.

Genesys, OK, let's take the money out of it, like you want. Yeah right, how can you do that? IF you created a sample set, hired a drummer with a fantastic kit, expensive mikes, preamps, digital recording equipment, and created a sample set of drums to sell, wouldn't you hope to sell a few copies of it? Well, let's say you sell it for $200. I am one of your first customers, and I just take it and decide I'm going to copy it and sell it for $50. Actually, why copy it? Why not just frickin sell it as is for $50, I mean, if I can pirate the sounds, I surely should be able to pirate the programming without you having a fit. Right? So now I sell it at $50 on my site, and it's your work. Great idea eh?

soundwaves are as free as the sun!!

i think what you will find IS copyrighted is the rom chips (which are proprietary) not the sound waves coming out the speaker

yeh no worries... so you can go and record 20 songs - Michael jackson, Elvis presely etc etc from your speaker output, put them into a nice looking CD and sell thousands of copies and make a shit load of profit...

and thats not illegal?? just because u recorded 'sound waves' ?? what a load of absolute CRAP



[This message has been edited by Nick G (edited 07-03-2007).]

@abacus,
thank you bill for pointing out some things for me. i DO like the concept, and i believe this might be the future way to go (i say might, because if roland for instance - a closed system - comes up with huge rom memory, great sounds and great tools to edit and save user's sounds, style, etc. i don't see why i would absolutelly need more and more and more new sounds or features as an open-system would offer me.)

@discussion,
i wonder doesn't yamaha, korg, roland etc. pay some money to the right companies/people/manufacturers in order to sample their sounds/instruments? do they?
and about the particular case in discussion, why doesn't roland or yamaha do anything about it? maybe they DO benefit somehow...?

Uh, Nick...you might want to reread this. ;p



[This message has been edited by Taike (edited 07-04-2007).]

keep your shirt on nick, i was only making a comment re the sound of a single instrument not a complete song recording, in the same way i made a comment ages ago on this topic, about the recording of a gibson guitar sound, others have made similar comparisons with a steinway piano, and NO they are not ALL modelled as others have claimed some are samples too, so should someone using a sample of a steinway pay a fee to the steinway company in new york for using it???..man you gotta chill...i am all for the protection of copyright, but some of this thread including your comments are just going way over...

to the genesys .

I feel like slapping my head off a wall after reading your reply. I mentioned you didn't understand the difference, and you couldn't have proven my point better.

Your unable to see the difference completely from sampling a real instrument VS sampling someone else's recordings.

One is wrong. But to you they are both the same.

Regards.
James.

exactly james...and this is my position as well..anyone is quite entitled to use a sample of any instrument made by themselves..BUT if someone else has sampled the sound, be it the twang of an elastic band or a full grand piano, then that person is entitled to compensation, and at the very least the person using the sample should ask for permission...using a third party sample is akin to using a third party song file.
dennis