I put this in the middle of another thread, but think it maybe deserves discussion on it's own thread...
------------------------------------------------

The sad fact is, IMO, that so few of us realize just HOW proficient as a keyboardist AND a programmer you need to be to be able to make styles that rival the ROM ones. Until you try, whereupon intense disappointment and disillusion sets in. It's kind of like handing a pro garage's set of tools to a person that bought a car to drive to work and play, in the expectation that perhaps they could fix the car themselves! What percentage of car drivers are mechanics?

Add to that you are not really expecting them to FIX their car, you are expecting them to virtually build a new one!

I've listened to interminable arranger demos, and the one thing that they all seem to point to is how few have the skills to even put up a decent RH part against the arranger, yet alone to be able to program convincing drums, funky bass lines, horny horns , groovy percussion, etc., etc..

Basically, if you can't sequence something that sounds like the real thing, you are in no position to program a style, which, IMO, takes even MORE skill and experience than a sequence. Cut and pasting between ROM styles is the only way I have heard for regular players to stand a chance at equaling the ROM quality, and that really doesn't qualify as style CREATION, does it?

I think that the manufacturers are well aware of this fact, too... Despite adding the style creation tools as a marketing ploy (so few use them, it's not like they would actually be missed at the bottom line), the main makers tend to hoard the good styles VERY tightly, offering just a few as a bonus to their existing customers, but keeping the vast majority to use as ROM styles on the NEXT model they try to sell us. And we generally go and buy those arrangers not necessarily for the new OS features, but simply for those styles.

If this weren't the case, one would expect a LOT more new features and sounds in most model releases...

Primarily, I believe the problem has come because the manufacturers have made NO effort to 'protect' the style ROM and RAM. It must be tough for any of the skilled programmers to get a decent return on their investment in time and effort, when it is a simple thing to trade around these styles like bubblegum cards as soon as they are released.

The recording industry has learned how to protect MP3's and AAC's, to the point where the iTunes store is making millions, if not billions, from SELLING something that a few years ago we all traded around for free. It is LONG past time that the arranger industry provided a secure data area and an individual ID per arranger, that would allow style creators to guarantee that their work was being used by ONLY the person who paid for it.

THEN, the style creators could drop their prices almost to iTunes Store levels... $1 a style, $2 a style, prices like that for QUALITY styles, in the knowledge that EVERYONE who used the style had payed for it. They would make a LOT more money, which would make them make more styles, and we wouldn't be sitting around having this discussion about how difficult it is for normal arranger players (who don't tend to be the great players in the first place!) to make their own styles
------------------------------------------------

What do you guys think..? Is it time to go back to the ROM styles that couldn't be copied, and add a mechanism for extra style content to be delivered in a PROTECTED format that would incentivize new style development?

Diki that aint gonna happen ever again... you know that & so do I .....but Creating YOUR OWN STYLES VERY EASILIY in the keyboard or on a Computer that [b[sound good[/b] is NEEDED ASAP!!

How do you get around the fact that to create a great drum part, you need to be a great drum programmer..? Or to create a great bass line, you need to be a great bass programmer, or to make great horn parts, you need to be a great horn playing emulator?

Computer assembly tools (though they would be welcome) can do nothing to improve your own chops. The best factory ROM styles have a level of playing on them that few on this forum have EVER demonstrated themselves capable of performing.

The dearth of QUALITY user styles (on a par with the ROM) seems to bear this out, IMO.

I posted this on Roland-arranger today. I think it explains how something like this could be an enormous benefit to a company. Whether Roland does this or someone else beats them to the punch, I don't know, but imagine the style makers' response to this technology being available, and especially to the FIRST one to implement it...
-------------------------------------------------
quote; (or, if you prefer, read the whole section of the thread about it from here: http://www.roland-arranger.com/smf/index.php?topic=936.msg5640#msg5640 )

Why an alliance...?

Surely if Roland adopted this for ONLY their keyboards, the first thing that would happen would be every single talented style house would immediately place making Roland styles as it's #1 priority.

The hell with anyone else! Let them put their OWN houses in order...

Right now, the style makers try to make cross-platform styles (mostly unsuccessfully, IMO) because this is the only way to maximize profits to the point where it is economically viable. But if EVERY style sold to a Roland owner was protected, and the rest weren't, I know what I would do as a style maker... DROP ALL THE OTHERS. At least until they adopted the same system.

That alone would surely benefit Roland without adding a single sound or OS improvement. Styles, styles, styles drives the market. A lesser arranger with a greater choice of ROM quality styles would dominate the market, IMO. And one with a continually evolving choice of styles (I believe that, with work, styles that rival WS arps and loops could easily be developed if the money to make the work worthwhile were available to the younger programmer) would be groundbreaking.

I know it's outside the box, but things like this could regain Roland's position, without the slightest cooperation from any other manufacturer.
-------------------------------------------------

What I'd like to know, Donny, is how could this HURT a manufacturer that adopted it? I am not talking about removing style creation tools, for those that want to use them. And I am not talking about the ability to share USER created content. But a way for the professional style creator to protect their work is essential if we want to avoid HAVING to buy a new arranger, just to get the new styles (or wait for inferior conversions for legacy models), and have a never ending supply of styles at affordable prices that rival the ROM ones.

I think it is the only thing that could possibly change the status quo, and few are happy with THAT, IMO...

Diki (or anyone) Is it possible to develope a technology (or does it exist) that would allow on on line purchase (from a seller/style maker) that was only downloadable one time to your keyboard (Roland, Korg, Ketron etc.) and unable to be extracted? Therefore making it difficult to copy?

Wow Diki!! .................I'm glad you aren't running for president on that campaign. Sony spent millions on DVD protection years ago, and some smart ass told the world how to beat it within a week of its implementation. Limewire and other sites online offer anything you want for free or little money, if you don't care about copyright. You can't teach and preach integrity. I sometimes think the challenge of cracking something forbidden or copyrighted is what drives these hackers. Last year I paid $400 for my own real licensed copy of Vista. It was the first time I ever paid money for an operating system. I always "found" copys of previous OS's. At first I felt good about having an authentic version, then I felt screwed about having the worst operating system I ever had. It cost a lot more to get the better hardware and software to get it to run its best. And my favorite soundblaster card I loved are junk now. Vista will never allow them.............. Of course I'm rambling now, but just remember..........Be careful in what you ask for. You may just get it! -charley

Well, Apple have managed it... It keys off the unique identifier of each individual computer. A chip on the motherboard of an arranger with a unique ID# would perhaps do the same thing. Then ethernet or USB direct internet connection could provide a secure delivery into a protected area of RAM, that the OS does NOT allow the file transfer system to read... A bit like IDC, but with protection, I would imagine.

I am not geek enough to flesh it out (I leave that to the company), and I have no guarantee that it couldn't be cracked, with sufficient determination. But despite the fact that DRM can be bypassed with great skill and effort, it hasn't stopped the iTunes store from turning around a planet's wholesale thievery of copyrighted music, and providing a simple interface and a reasonable pricing structure so those that DO want to play by the rules can do so, which has benefited both the customer, AND the industry that provides the content.

I imagine this would not stop the most determined from making MIDI files from the styles, and reassembling the style from the export. But this would take considerable effort, time and skill, which probably wouldn't be even attempted if the style, to purchase, was a buck or so...

This is how Apple have managed it. It's easy and cheap to get what you want legally (which it wasn't during the Napster heyday), so a vast number have chosen to use it.

I don't see why this couldn't work for the arranger...

Rattley....

We are a TINY, tiny number of users, of mostly non-technical, computer-cracking illiterates

Why would anyone even BOTHER with cracking this, if the styles (the content) were so valueless to all but those with the arranger in the first place..? This isn't the trillion dollar movie industry. This is a few thousand users of a unique product. The trick is to make the bother of cracking it more expensive (in terms of hours of work) than the value of the downloadable product. Hardware keyed products are the toughest nut to crack.

My UAD-1 cards have been out for years, with all fully functional demos downloadable from the start, of quite expensive plug-ins. But they are keyed to the card itself. And as of yet, despite tens of thousands having been sold, no-one has cracked it yet. Some hacker kid in a bedroom in China (or Burbank!) is NOT going to bother trying to crack a protection system for a product he doesn't even have...

Audio computer software, especially the PC versions, are hacked almost as fast as they come out. But the UAD-1 card has remained untouched for many years now, despite it's VERY high value and quality, because of the hardware key.

THAT'S how it can be done...

All Microsoft OS from XP are linked to the hardware in the computer to prevent implementation on other computers, however unlike Apple with its limited, extortionate expensive upgrades, you can stick anything YOU (Not what Apple says you should have) want into a PC, which means it has to be more flexible.

Regarding DRM, have a look around, as manufactures and distributors are dropping it at an ever increasing pace.

Regarding Styles, unless you prevent the arranger engine from being able to output them, (Great for open keyboards as everything is loaded internally, but for 90% of players a complete No No) protection would not be possible. (Users already complain that some keyboards are difficult to use external software/hardware with the style engine)

Bill

Bill, re-read my post...

How can you explain the UAD-1 software NEVER being cracked?

And look, if the style is keyed to the arranger, the only person that could laboriously reassemble the style from MIDI would be the person that had actually bought it in the first place. Why would he even bother, to save someone ELSE a buck or two?

Sure, if you can give away a purchased style with no more effort than attaching it to an email, you are likely to do it. But if it takes HOURS of your time for each style (have you ever TRIED to recreate a style this way? It is by NO MEANS easy!), what is the incentive?

Look, this isn't the music industry, who are going to produce product even if it IS copied wholesale. This is a tiny industry, and the talented teams that make the ROM styles are NOT going to make any for general release in any quantity when there is so little revenue to be made. It's either this, or the NOTHING we are currently getting. Without protection there ARE no new styles to trade around. With protection, there would be styles available, and a low enough guaranteed price would remove the desire to even TRY to crack it.

You guys are still mired in thinking of this as simple software protection. Once again, I reiterate...

Hardware keyed protection is the toughest nut to crack.

I have been working with computers and technology for years and I can assure you that hardware is NOT the hardest nut to crack, for the simple reason that it doesn’t change, whereas software can continually move the goal posts.
As to your UAD card it is no different the Pulsar II card in that the plug-in will not work without it. (It’s the sound engine)
As an example; if somebody cloned the software in your G70, it would be of no use to them without the Roland sound engine, so there is no point in cloning the software.
Styles are just Midi loops, and so cannot be tied to hardware. (Unless you strive to undo the universal communication that has been continually developed for the last 25 years)

Bill